WWW.DISSERTATION.XLIBX.INFO
FREE ELECTRONIC LIBRARY - Dissertations, online materials
 
<< HOME
CONTACTS



Pages:     | 1 |   ...   | 7 | 8 || 10 | 11 |   ...   | 26 |

«December 2011 Victorian Planning System Ministerial Advisory Committee Initial Report. Geoff Underwood, Chair. Catherine Heggen, Member. David ...»

-- [ Page 9 ] --

While some submissions are complimentary of the independent role that VCAT plays, other submittors take issue with the adversarial environment, the use of legal practitioners and expert witnesses.

Supporters of VCAT, of which there are many, see VCAT as the only truly independent player in the planning process. For example, Ms Lesley Dalziel (Submission No.

162) expresses support for the operation of VCAT:

“The public right to protest and appeal adverse decisions must not be diminished. The appeal process through VCAT seems fair and is trusted by the community. It is important that the Panel is impartial and above corruption, for the community to maintain its trust. I have had only positive experience with and respect for VCAT and the appeal process.” This opinion is replicated by submission of Friends of Mallacoota Incorporated (Submission No. 159) where the right to be heard and seek enforcement

actions by an independent body is emphasised:

“Third Party rights are essential. Over the years our group and individual members have been involved in planning disputes at VCAT.

It is essential that the public have recourse to bodies such as VCAT to challenge planning applications and decisions and have breaches of planning requirements enforced. It is important that this is not dependent on financial resources, and that there is no possibility of having to pay costs if a challenge is lost. The ability of the public to do this must be retained and strengthened.” There is also support for VCAT and its operations put forward by the Local Government sector with the Victorian Local Governance Association stating (Submission No.

420):

–  –  –

“VCAT has its detractors, but its role as a review body more accessible than the court system is an important enabler of democratic participation and good governance in the planning system”.

This view of support for VCAT is echoed in the submission of Towong Shire

Council (Submission No. 119):

“Council favours the retention of a planning tribunal for planning appeals and enforcement matters rather than a shift to a court based process. This will ensure greater access for all parties with less overall cost.” There were contrary views. In the submission of Hobsons Bay City Council (Submission No. 229), probably more relevant to other aspects of the planning system rather than VCAT per se, it is suggested that too many matters are allowed to proceed to VCAT without appropriate levels of scrutiny or

justification:

“the degree of access to VCAT by objectors and applicants requires revision with consideration of it being reduced. A review of the responsible authority’s decision at VCAT should not be a ‘second role of the dice’, on a discretionary matter. Local government professionals are in a better position than VCAT members to make decisions on locally based discretionary matters.” The view put forward by Hobsons Bay City Council, is reiterated in the submission of the Municipal Association of Victoria (Submission No. 299), in which it seeks to more clearly define the type of matters VCAT should be

involved in:

“VCAT should limit scope of consideration to the application (& plans) at the time of council decision and only the issues that are in dispute.” With the average waiting time for a matter to be heard at VCAT being between six and nine months, a number of submittors observe that the system is in need of either further resourcing or reform.

Mr Pin Zheng of Garden City Developments (Submission No. 270) identifies some of the issues encountered by his firm at VCAT and makes recommendations to improve the process, as well as commenting on the level

of involvement VCAT should have in considering applications:

“The VCAT backlog needs to be addressed. Most VCAT cases we have been involved with do not involve legal issues, usually just traffic, design, privacy and building bulk issues. At VCAT it seems that the industry professionals (lawyers, planners, expert witnesses etc) feel compelled to analyse every issue in great detail. We believe this is unnecessary and a waste of resources for everyone involved. In fact Initial Report - December 2011 59 Victorian Planning System Ministerial Advisory Committee we believe the review process could be conducted without hearings in 90% of cases. Perhaps a higher fee could be charged for those parties insisting on a hearing. Providing the ‘reviewer’ is independent of any of the parties involved, then we believe the development industry would embrace permit decision reviews that did not involve mandatory hearings.” Likewise, the Urbis Consulting Group (Submission No. 216), representing

clients in the development sector noted:

“During the program of consultation we undertook prior to preparing this submission, we heard strong and consistent criticism of delays and lack of timely decision making associated with existing VCAT processes.

Many of our clients had experienced high economic costs associated with listing and decision delays. It was also suggested that preliminary hearings could play more of a role in ascertaining main issues of contention, in order to streamline considerations at the full hearing stage.





We also consider that there is a lack of certainty around VCAT timeframes, particularly with the removal of dedicated funding from the Major Cases List. We firmly believe the Major Cases List funding should be re implemented. It allowed a greater degree of clarity around timeframes for significant projects (worth $5M+), by enabling industry to bank on the timing certainty of a 16 week process. Based on the current waiting times, and uncertainty for large developments, the overwhelming majority of our major clients stated that they would support a ‘User pays’ VCAT system, provided that there is certainty around dates and timeframes for this service. We agree that a user pays system, if implemented correctly, could be an excellent alternative to the current VCAT system.

We are also strongly in favour of the retention of mediation services.

The informal and cost effective service the mediation system plays is considered to be a huge asset to the system in terms of dispute resolution. VCAT mediation is an important service that should not be lost.” While both of these submissions highlighted some of the issues associated with VCAT and its associated processes, there is strong support for the retention of VCAT as an independent decision making authority within the planning system provided it is adequately resourced. This point is made clear in the City of

Greater Geelong submission (No. 102):

“VCAT works well but needs better funding to use all members and avoid delays.” Initial Report - December 2011 60 Victorian Planning System Ministerial Advisory Committee The Victorian Planning and Environmental Law Association (Submission No.

541) suggests that the recent piloting of the Major Cases List delivered significant efficiencies to the system. The association would appear to agree with the allocating of additional resources to VCAT to improve efficiency across

the matters the Tribunal deals with:

“The Tribunal serves all of these functions with apparent resource constraints and when one considers the amount of money associated with the disputes come before VCAT; the Association suggests that the Advisory Committee consider whether additional resources should be allocated to VCAT. The Association suggests that if additional resources were given to VCAT, that criticisms associated with delay and the need for lists like Major Cases list would largely be overcome.” The Committee considers that VCAT should be adequately resourced for the work it is required to undertake. However, the better way to relieve the congestion caused by long waiting times at VCAT is to relieve it of as much of its workload as is possible. In this regard, initiatives such as the introduction of a Code Assessment tool and identifying those uses and developments that should not require a planning permit has the potential to reduce the number of applications that are referred to the Tribunal. Similarly, the streaming of planning applications (discussed in Part 10.1.1 of this Report) should also remove part of the current ‘failure to decide’ workload of the Tribunal.

KEY FINDINGS The Role of VCAT

The Committee considers:

The role of an independent umpire is an essential part of the planning system;

VCAT should be adequately resourced to reduce the current waiting time for all matters in the Planning and Environment List; and Action in response to other findings set out in this report (such as the proposal that seeks to stream permit applications) should result in fewer matters being referred to VCAT for determination.

7.6 The Role of Planning Panels Victoria This section focuses on the role of Planning Panels Victoria rather than the planning scheme amendment process, which is dealt with in Part 10.2 of this report.

The role of PPV, the conduct of hearings and the way that PPV go about their tasks were the subject of many favourable submissions.

–  –  –

The Environment Defenders Office (Victoria) summed up the sentiment of

most submissions. It states:

“People generally report a good experience of planning panels (open, consultative, expert based)...”.

Submissions from councils as well as individuals and groups compliment the relatively informal way that hearings are conducted and how comprehensively subject matter is dealt with by panels.

Negative comments are few among the 100 or so submissions that refer to the operation of PPV. The submissions that were critical are largely based on personal circumstances where the outcome was unfavourable to their

position. However, one submittor (Submission No. 371) writes:

“At PPV we were made to feel as interlopers into what presented as an old boys club of planners.”

Submission 21 from another individual makes a similar comment:

“It is difficult for local residents who appear at a planning panel, representing themselves, when the Planning panel Chairperson and the Developers representative seem to know each other extremely well.” The Committee notes that some submissions conveying critical comments do

not develop a line of argument to substantiate the proposition. These include:

Residents 3000 Incorporated (Submission No. 210) argue that panel decisions should not override the responsible authority;

Planning Backlash Inc (Submission No. 427) consider that panels and Planning Committees should be scrapped;

The Eaglemont Neighbourhood Conservation Association Inc. (Submission No. 421) urge the ‘scrapping of undemocratic Panels and planning committees’.

Many municipalities, especially country councils, comment on the cost of panels, saying that costs are too high. Such comments came from Alpine Shire Council, La Trobe City Council, Campaspe Shire Council, Moorabool Shire Council, Mansfield Shire Council and Baw Baw Shire Council. Councils

submitted a number of ways of reducing the costs of panels. They include:

Having hearings ‘on the papers’ (that is, for PPV to consider submissions and report on a case without the need for a hearing with attendances of parties, including expensive advisors and so save);

Requiring parties to focus their submissions, including expert evidence, and to pre circulate material;

Initial Report - December 2011 62 Victorian Planning System Ministerial Advisory Committee The conduct of practice day hearings, through which PPV should identify the key issues to be addressed and direct timelines in which submissions will be received; and Panels to have the right to disregard submissions not based on planning grounds or submissions made for a commercial or vexatious motive.

Moorabool Shire Council states:

“The compulsory requirement to conduct a planning panel, even when the submissions have no planning merit is onerous, time consuming and can be a financial block for the completion of planning scheme amendments. The planning panel process should be streamlined so that Councils have the ability to move through the amendment processes where submissions have no relevance to the Planning and Environment Act 1987 or where there are only a minimal number of submitters. State Government should enable local Councils to pursue planning scheme amendment which have received submissions but are of clear strategic relevance. Moorabool recommends that a process be put in place where a body such as Panels Victoria review the merit of an objection and determine whether a panel is required. Where doubt exists, the Panel should be empowered to dismiss an objection at a directions hearing for instance.” The DLA Piper submission advocates for more a proactive approach from PPV

ahead of a full hearing:

“...Panels taking a stronger role in sorting out issues in the lead up to hearings. Directions hearings are frequently mechanical procedures with no attempt to sort out the issues and force submitters to focus on the key issues. Panels should take a stronger role, if necessary with the Act being changed to make it clear that they have this role.” Engaging PPV early in the amendment process would require legislative change to Part 8 of the Act which regulates the conduct of panels and to those sections of the Act in Part 3 that currently direct the responsibilities and activities of planning authorities.

Submissions noted that some proposed planning scheme amendments ignore previous panel reports and advice. Such instances raise the question whether participants in the planning system take sufficient note of the recommendations of PPV, especially in relation to policy development at the

broad level. On this subject, one submittor (Submission No. 371) states:

“VCAT and Planning Panels Victoria must be required to have regard for relevant precedent.

The fact that decision making at these bodies is so inconsistent as to be a lottery severely diminishes the regard with which they are held.”

–  –  –



Pages:     | 1 |   ...   | 7 | 8 || 10 | 11 |   ...   | 26 |


Similar works:

«A Critical Analysis of Haggling Encounters between Commuters and Drivers in Dhaka Md. Muntashir Raquib 2013-1-92-003 A Critical Analysis of Haggling Encounters between Commuters and Drivers in Dhaka Md. Muntashir Raquib Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for Degree of Masters of Arts in English Department of English EAST WEST UNIVERSITY August 2014 A Critical Analysis of Haggling Encounters between Commuters and Drivers in Dhaka Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of...»

«iOS Auto Layout Demystified Erica Sadun Upper Saddle River, NJ • Boston • Indianapolis • San Francisco New York • Toronto • Montreal • London • Munich • Paris • Madrid Cape Town • Sydney • Tokyo • Singapore • Mexico City Many of the designations used by manufacturers and sellers to distinguish their products Editor-in-Chief are claimed as trademarks. Where those designations appear in this book, and the pubMark Taub lisher was aware of a trademark claim, the...»

«LA PASSION (CHARLES PEGUY) ( Extraits des Mystères de la charité de Jeanne d'Arc) Si le Fils de l'homme à son heure suprême Cria plus qu'un damné l'épouvantable angoisse, Clameur qui sonna faux comme un divin blasphème, C'est que le Fils de Dieu savait. On se demande pourquoi Il aurait poussé cet effroyable cri; Tous les textes sont formels, Il a poussé à ce moment un cri effroyable. Alors on se demande pourquoi Il aurait poussé, à ce moment-là, un cri effroyable. Tout cela se...»

«Victorian Certificate of Education 2008 THEATRE STUDIES Written examination Monday 17 November 2008 Reading time: 9.00 am to 9.15 am (15 minutes) Writing time: 9.15 am to 10.45 am (1 hour 30 minutes) QUESTION BOOK Structure of book Number of Number of questions Number of questions to be answered marks 4 4 50 • Students are permitted to bring into the examination room: pens, lead and coloured pencils, water-based pens and markers, highlighters, erasers, sharpeners, rulers, protractors,...»

«Getting Started with PROBLEM SOLVING: A Trio of Friendly Problems By Mary Fay-Zenk Editing assistance from Tom Davis, Katy Early, and Jim Tanton Graphics by Tom Davis Overview The three problems presented for this extended lesson have both individual and cluster appeal. The Handshake Problem is a natural opener for the beginning of the school year, but could easily be presented to students at any time. It’s a situation-friendly and simple question: Suppose you walk down to the corner some...»

«FACTA UNIVERSITATIS Series: Physical Education and Sport Vol. 11, No 3, 2013, pp. 247 253 Original research article ANALYSIS OF GOALS IN SOCCER WORLD CUPS AND THE DETERMINATION OF THE CRITICAL PHASE OF THE GAME  UDC 796.332.6 Werlayne Stuart Soares Leite Secretariat of Education of the State of Ceará – SEDUC Secretariat of Education of Fortaleza – SME Brazil Abstract. The aim of this study was to analyze and quantify, in absolute and percentage terms, the incidence of goals in games of...»

«Max-Planck-Institut für MPI-BGC Biogeochemie Jena TECHNICAL REPORTS 7 (c) CO2 conference 2005, Boulder, USA Constraints of Satellite Derived CO2 on Carbon Sources and Sinks by Yogesh Kumar Tiwari ISSN 1615-7400 Technical Reports Max-Planck-Institut für Biogeochemie 7, 2006 Max-Planck-Institut für Biogeochemie P.O.Box 10 01 64 07701 Jena/Germany phone: +49 3641 576-0 fax: + 49 3641 577300 http://www.bgc-jena.mpg.de Technical Reports Max-Planck-Institut für Biogeochemie 7, 2006 Constraints of...»

«LUGANO 14 17 settembre Lobo Swiss Sagl 2017 c/o ICAM & PARTNER Via Nassa, 15 -6900 Lugano CH www.wopart.eu Centro Esposizioni wopart Correggio RE 22/d Viale V. Veneto 42015 Correggio RE Italy Luigi Belluzzi +39 335281903 +41 765872382 www.wopart.eu luigi.belluzzi@wopart.eu GENERAL CONDITIONS OF PARTICIPATION IN THE EXHIBITION PLEASE NOTE “LoboSuiss sagl” or “Organizer” refers to “LoboSwiss sagl”, whose registered office is situated c/o ICAM & PARTNER, Via Nassa, 15, Lugano CH...»

«Case: 12-16202 Date Filed: 03/11/2014 Page: 1 of 11 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No. 12-16202 Non-Argument Calendar D.C. Docket No. 1:95-cr-00481-CMA-8 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus LUIS H. CANO, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida (March 11, 2014) Before WILSON, MARTIN, and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Luis Cano, a federal prisoner proceeding...»

«INQUISIÇÃO EM ÁFRICA Sorcerers and folkhealers: africans and the Inquisition in Portugal (1680-1800)1 Introduction What emerges is a picture of Inquisition This study is based on a survey of twenty-seven Porjurisprudence being used to reinforce both tuguese Inquisition processos (trials) concluded against the institution of slavery Luso-Africans in continental Portugal between 1690 and and the idea of the social superiority of whites over 1784. All were mágicos — persons accused of...»

«MIDDLE-EARTH: DARK MINIONS TM This insert provides explanation rules and clarifications for use with all Middle-earth Collectable Card GameTM(MECCG) products. Note: For a copy of these rules in larger type with more examples send a request and a self-addressed, stamped envelope to ICE, P.O. Box 1605, Charlottesvile, VA, 22903. Alternatively, visit our home page on the WWW (http://www.ironcrown.com). Contents Minion Cards (Clarification) 1 Permanent-events (Clarification) 2 Placement of cards...»

«Crèche « Les Diablotins » REGLEMENT PARASCOLAIRE I. GENERALITES Le Parascolaire de la crèche « Les Diablotins » est une institution privée gérée par l’Association Les Diablotins.  Ce secteur est subventionné par la Commune du Locle et par l’Etat de Neuchâtel. Notre  Parascolaire  bénéficie  d’une  autorisation  d’exploiter  délivrée  par  l’Office  de  l’Accueil  Extra­Familial  du  Canton  de  Neuchâtel,  qui ...»





 
<<  HOME   |    CONTACTS
2016 www.dissertation.xlibx.info - Dissertations, online materials

Materials of this site are available for review, all rights belong to their respective owners.
If you do not agree with the fact that your material is placed on this site, please, email us, we will within 1-2 business days delete him.