Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 03 JUNE 2009

The Development Plan Catch 22

In Saunders v Frankston City Council (Red Dot) [2009] VCAT 114 (19 February 2009), the Tribunal commented on the necessity for notice for permit applications subject to a Development Plan Overlay (DPO).

AustraliaReal Estate and Construction
Kim Piskuric
Kim Piskuric

In Saunders v Frankston City Council (Red Dot) [2009] VCAT 114 (19 February 2009), the Tribunal commented on the necessity for notice for permit applications subject to a Development Plan Overlay (DPO). Deputy President Helen Gibson clarified a DPO operates to exempt applications from notice requirements and review.

Deputy President Gibson made clear that when an application is subject to a development plan, the ordinary notice provisions in the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (Vic) (P&E Act) have no application. She said that if the application is accepted as being generally in accordance with the development plan, then it is exempt from notice provisions under clause 43.04-2 of the planning scheme and the notice provisions in the P&E Act do not apply. If such an application is refused, then it does not have to comply with notice requirements anyway.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from