Many VCAT cases involve objections to the demolition of a heritage building or place that is already ‘protected’ by a heritage overlay under the Victorian Planning Scheme. It is often asked at what point is it worth saving a heritage building, when the building is in a poor state of repair?
In previous editions we have discussed the requirements of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 as they relate to planning permit applications, that is, where a Cultural Heritage Management Plan (CHMP) is required prior to a permit being issued.
In February this year we reviewed a number of VCAT decisions concerning constructing dwellings within areas designated as open potable water supply catchments. A recent red dot decision from VCAT
An interesting Red Dot Decision caused Bayside City Council to be censured for over-reaching itself in applying permit conditions. In Forza Capital Pty Ltd v Bayside CC [2013] VCAT 984, the decision of the Responsible Authority was varied and a condition of permit removed.
Clause:1 was recently involved in an appeal before the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) to determine whether a new Cultural Heritage Management Plan (CHMP) was required for a proposed 95 dwelling development, where an archaeological survey had been provided for a similar proposal, years earlier. The site abuts a […]
A recent ‘red dot’ decision (7-Eleven Stores Pty Ltd v Nillumbik SC & Ors [2011] VCAT 2418) came to our attention where a permit holder approached VCAT to amend a permit under Section 87A of the Planning and Environment Act.
