by Ashley Thompson, Clause 1 Town Planning Consultants

To detail or not to detail

By Ashley Thompson, Director, Clause 1 Town Planning Consultants

Regular permit applicants will be familiar with the conundrum of how to describe projects on planning permit application forms. Is the application for: ‘a dual-occupancy’; ‘development of land with two or more dwellings’; ‘a new dwelling behind an existing dwelling’; and the list goes on.

Similarly, another application could be described as: “a fivestorey apartment complex”; “an apartment complex, associated car park dispensation, removal of native vegetation tree, partial demolition and alterations to a heritage building”; “multiple dwellings on a lot”; or anything similar.

Permit applicants have their own individual preferences. So, too, do Municipal Councils. Some prefer accurate but simple descriptions. Others prefer each individual permit trigger to be listed on the application form.

So, what is the best way to describe your application?

Both the VCAT and Supreme Court have previously provided guidance on this issue. In Nelco Holdings Pty Ltd v Yarra Ranges SC [2006] VCAT 148 the tribunal held that:

“To require each relevant permission under the scheme to be identified in the application form in fulfilment of the requirement to state clearly the use, development or other matter for which a permit is required is inconsistent with authority, contrary to the text of the requirement, and contrary to policy.”

Similarly, in Sweetvale Pty Ltd v Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal [2001] VSC 426 the Supreme Court noted:

“The application is not to be construed technically or strictly as one might a statute or a deed. As Tadgell J observed in Marock Pty Ltd v Billjoy Pty Ltd [1981] VicRp 41; [1981] VR 413 at p 418: “The question is what it would fairly convey to those for whose information it is required to be prepared.”

With the above considerations in mind, we recommend that you do not seek to list all the permit triggers on your application form or provide a technical description of your proposal. Rather, we recommend applicants use a layman’s description of what is being proposed, with just enough detail to make the proposal clearly understood. However, we also recommend that ‘all permit triggers’ are identified in the ‘planning report’ accompanying your application, so that it is clear to Council that you have turned your mind to ‘all’ the relevant planning issues.

To avoid the possibility of your planning application lapsing, Clause 1 recommends permit applicants include the following (or similar) at the bottom of all RFI responses to Council:

Avoid a lapse of your planning application

We trust the above and attached information, along with that previously supplied, is sufficient for Council to now determine the application. Should, for whatever reason, Council conclude that the provided information is not sufficient, we request a 30-day extension to the application lapse date, for any such matters to be resolved.

For more details on Victorian planning issues, visit clause1.com.au.