News 
 Local News 
 News 
 Politics 
 Council loses unit appeal 

Council loses unit appeal

16 Mar, 2010 11:10 AM
THE Launceston City Council has lost a controversial development appeal at the Resource Management Planning and Appeal Tribunal, but the ultimate cost of defending the case is still to be determined.

In August last year the council unanimously refused a development application from Housing Tasmania to build five units on a 2000 square metre block in Newstead's Wentworth Street.

Aldermen refused the proposal largely on the issue of density, saying five units was excessive.

Housing Tasmania appealed against the decision to the tribunal.

In November, the council resolved to fight the case in the tribunal, despite receiving legal advice that it would probably lose - potentially leaving ratepayers to foot a legal bill of tens of thousands of dollars.

Yesterday, acting general manager Rod Sweetnam said the legal bill for defending the case so far had been estimated at $3500.

However, it is understood the tribunal deferred the final awarding of costs in the case until new condition agreements are signed by both parties.

Mr Sweetnam said the council had recently signed the conditions and was "waiting to hear back" from the tribunal.

It's understood the council has lost three recent tribunal cases on density and has also had costs awarded against it in the past - including a case with legal bills of more than $20,000.

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
The 7 Aldermen who voted to send this matter to the RMPAT on ideological grounds, against their own planning and legal advice, should be made pay the costs from their own allowances. Perhaps then they'd be less flippant about opposing compliant affordable housing at EVERY turn and WASTING resources in the process that local community groups could have used to deliver significant social support. Is this a Council for all, including our poorer community members; or is it exclusively for the loudest and most privileged? These people have to understand that their cheap and dirty politics is causing real and unnecesary suffering to individual homeless people; firstly by delaying a much needed increase in social housing supply, and secondly, by portraying them as second class citizens not fit to live amongst us. In demonising public housing tenants the LCC is walking a slippery, and dangerous slope. History has consistently shown that placing any group outside of the mainstream exposes them to potential abuse.
Posted by fatboy, 16/03/2010 9:45:15 AM, on The Examiner
Fatboy- you really need to get out of your own neighbourhood more and come down off your own your own high horse just for a minute to realise that you don't know what you are talking about. The council did not waste money- they used the ratepayers money(yes mine) approx 20 cents per rate payer probably to represent the people (over 100 in fact) who opposed this development for reasons OTHER than who was building it. The council are there to represent the people and that is exactly what they are doing and what they did. As for your comments about the poorer community members YOU do them an injustice making it about this- You are certainly doing your best to make it an US versus THEM issue when the majority of those against this development did so because of their loss of amenity because of the units, a massive increase in traffic and safety issues.
Posted by B, 16/03/2010 7:47:58 PM, on The Examiner
Come on B, if the 100 people were really opposed to the development on solid planning grounds they would have joined the planning appeal. None of them did. If this was really about planning issues then the development would have been approved as per the advice of Council's planners and later legal advice. Yes the Council are there to represent the people, but when they are acting as a PLANNING AUTHORITY they must make decisions in accordance with the Planning Scheme rather than catering to a small amount of public pressure.
Posted by ned, 17/03/2010 1:30:53 PM, on The Examiner

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.
Rod Sweetnam
Rod Sweetnam

Most popular articles


Download The Examiner iPhone App


The Examiner Newspaper







Weather brought to you by:

Weatherzone

Classifieds

Front Page

Current Issue
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Advertising Terms | Copyright © 2012. Fairfax Media.
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...