Community planning services in Glenelg Shire Council : 1998-2005 ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

32 Did the council comply with key legislative, planning scheme and other requirements? CASE STUDY 1: THREE-STOREY BUILDING IN HERITAGE AREA On Friday afternoon on 21 November 2003, the council received a planning application for the construction of a 3-storey building in Portland, comprising shops and residential units. The property was in an area covered by a heritage overlay, indicating that the area was of heritage significance. The permit was issued the following Monday morning. The proposed building: was contemporary in nature, with no concession to heritage sensitivities was only the second 3-storey development to be constructed in Portland (the other is a hotel in a 19 th century heritage-listed bluestone building) was to be constructed along the city foreshore on the most prominent street in Portland abutted an existing hotel-motel and restaurant complex and a medical practice situated in a restored heritage building. A historic church is located across the street. Notwithstanding the size and nature of the proposed building, its close proximity to neighbouring heritage properties and its location within a heritage precinct, there was no public notification of the planning application to owner/occupiers of adjoining properties or the community in general. Council assessed that there was no material detriment to any person. Despite the development being prominent and likely to be sensitive, the council did not at the time query the development or request a formal report from the council’s planning contractor. Based on the requirements of the planning scheme, the proposed development was also required to have 12 parking bays for the occupants and one disabled parking bay. The plans for the development show access to these parking bays via a narrow laneway at the side of the proposed building. However, due to the position of posts supporting the building, the narrow laneway and the proximity of a wall at the end of the laneway, the 2 bays furthest from the street are virtually inaccessible. Three-storey development in Portland. Source: Glenelg Shire Council, Application no. 346/03, 111 Bentinck Street, Portland.
Did the council comply with key legislative, planning scheme and other requirements? 33 Conclusion Providing the community with the opportunity to participate and provide feedback on planning proposals is a critical requirement of both the state’s planning framework and the Act. For the past 2 years, the council has been aware of concerns regarding its application of the material detriment requirements of the Act. Despite this, it was not until June 2004 that the council started to take action to address this situation. Recommendation 2. That the council: develop appropriate guidelines to assist its planning officers to apply the material detriment assessments required by the Planning and Environment Act 1987 ensure its planning application assessments include detailed information of the notice requirements for each application regularly audit assessments to ensure notice requirements are consistently applied. RESPONSE provided by Glenelg Shire Council Recommendation is partially agreed. The decision of material detriment cannot be determined by guidelines. However, guidelines have been established to guide council officers in the process of determining material detriment. The new planning processes adopted by council in July 2004 detail council’s requirements for notification and advertising. In accordance with these processes town planning applications are assessed by the senior planner based on outcomes, objectives of the Act and in accordance with the planning scheme and policies. If no material detriment exists, a recommendation is made to the manager that the application be exempt from advertising. Otherwise, notification and advertising is undertaken in accordance with the Planning Application Notification and Consultation Policy adopted by council in July 2004.
Page 1 and 2: PP No. 162, Session 2003-05 V I C T
Page 3 and 4: The Hon. Monica Gould MP The Hon. J
Page 5 and 6: Contents FOREWORD..................
Page 7 and 8: 1. Executive summary 1
Page 9 and 10: 4 Executive summary 1.2 Overall aud
Page 11 and 12: 6 Executive summary 3. That the cou
Page 13 and 14: 8 Executive summary attempt to res
Page 15 and 16: 10 Executive summary RESPONSE provi
Page 17 and 18: 2.1 Victoria’s planning system Vi
Page 19 and 20: Reform of the planning system Victo
Page 21 and 22: 2.2.1 Council’s planning services
Page 23 and 24: 2.3.1 Conduct of the audit Victoria
Page 25 and 26: Did the council comply with key leg
Page 33: Did the council comply with key leg
Page 79 and 80: 4. Did the council have appropriate
Page 81 and 82: 80 Did the council have appropriate
Page 83 and 84: 82 Did the council have appropriate
Page 85 and 86:
84 Did the council have appropriate
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
5. Did the council effectively mana
Page 103 and 104:
104 Did the council effectively man
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Appendix A. Performance improvement
Page 119 and 120:
122 Appendix A. Performance improve
Page 121 and 122:
Appendix B. Contract for town plann
Page 123 and 124:
128 Appendix B. Contract for town p
Page 125 and 126:
FIGURE C1: AUDIT CASE STUDIES INDEX
Page 127:
Availability of reports Copies of a
show all

Community planning services in Glenelg Shire Council : 1998-2005 ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?