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

74 Did the council comply with key legislative, planning scheme and other requirements?
Councillors were not actively involved. The planning contractor submitted
detailed reports to the council meetings about some applications for
planning permits. However, most of the applications that have been the
subject of VCAT appeals were not discussed by councillors before a
decision was made to grant the permit.
Most VCAT decisions on council planning matters over the past 5 years were
made against council. Although the number of council planning matters
brought before VCAT was not significant when compared with the total
number of applications received (an overall average of 1.3 per cent), 62
per cent of the decisions made by VCAT were against the council32 . At
August 2005, 9 planning matters were before VCAT.
Dissatisfaction with planning decisions. There was a considerable level of
dissatisfaction with many of the council’s planning decisions by the
Department of Sustainability and Environment, Heritage Victoria and
the local heritage committee.
Conclusion
The lack of supporting documentation, extraordinarily quick processing
time and low refusal rate for planning permit applications indicate that
these applications are more than likely not to have been adequately
assessed.
Furthermore, our investigation of specific planning decisions, VCAT
rulings and the dissatisfaction of other government agencies with many of
the council’s planning decisions, indicate that a number of the planning
applications approved by the council were inappropriate.
Had councillors had a greater involvement in overseeing the council’s
planning function many of these problems may have been overcome. See
comments in section 5.3.3 of this report.
32 This figure does not include one action at VCAT where the council sought to cancel a permit it
issued. VCAT agreed that there had been a material mistake in issuing the permit and agreed that
the permit be cancelled.