call outs and transparent decision making

report from the roundtable – 25 feb

At the last meeting of council I happened to ask about an application as we’d received a petition objection to the application that night. I was concerned about the length of time it was taking for the application to come back to council as it was, for all intents and purposes, a repeat application with revised acoustic treatment (for a Go Kart facility in Chirnside Park). 

It was advised that the application had been ‘called out’ by the Ward Councillor, Cr Andy Witlox, meaning that the application would not come before council for a decision and the decision would be made by planning officers who through the call out had been given the ‘delegated authority’ to make the decision.

Given 11 households were represented on the petition I went on to ask whether objectors would be notified that the application had been called out and wouldn’t be coming to council for a decision as per the expectations of the objectors. Usually any application with more than 5 objections would come to council for a decision. It was confirmed that objectors would only be notified once a decision had been made and would have appeal rights through VCAT. 

I went on to ask if objectors had been notified or were aware of the call out. This could not be confirmed.

This is of concern to me, in terms of being in the spirit of open and transparent decision making. I’ve also discussed call in/call out powers with councillors from other councils and it seems that different councils approach delegations in many different ways, some not having any ability to call out planning applications at all.

Next time council reviews its delegations and call in/call out powers I’ll be suggesting some policy changes to ensure we have a more open and transparent process that both considers the needs of the applicant and the objectors. 

Here’s an extract of our minutes from the night:

12. ITEMS RAISED THROUGH THE CHAIR

12.1 Petition - Objection to Planning Permit YR-2013/1026, 238-240 Maroondah Hwy (Part Lot 1 LP88498) Chirnside Park.

Cr Dunn referenced a petition received by Council objecting to a go kart application in Chirnside Park. Cr Dunn asked the following questions to Andrew Paxton, Director Planning Building & Health:

When will the application be brought back to Council?

Andrew Paxton advised that the application had been called out by the Ward Councillor for a delegated decision. 

Will the objectors listed in the petition be notified of the application coming to Council as part of the planning process?

Andrew Paxton advised that the 11 objectors to the application would not be advised of the callout of the application by the Councillor, but would be notified of the decision and would have 21 days to appeal the decision. 

Had there been any meetings or correspondence with objectors in relation to the call out?

Andrew Paxton advised that he did not know the answer but would be able to obtain the information and advise Cr Dunn.

samantha in the press - planning

Chirnside block plan rejected

Yarra Ranges Weekly

by Melissa Cunningham

13 Mar 2012

samantha in the press - planning

What would you like to see built at Chirnside Park's big hole?
Lilydale Leader
by Emily Webb
26 November 2010

samantha in the press - pokies

Shire stands firm on club plan
Yarra Ranges weekly
by Elisa Miller
16 Nov 2010

samantha in the press - pokies

Magpies lose bid for pokies in Chirnside Park
Leader Newspapers
by Emily Webb
15 Nov 10

pokies in chirnside – no thanks

The Shire of Yarra Ranges recently had to provide a submission to the Victorian Commission for Gambling Regulation about the proposed relocation of 70 pokie machines to a new venue on a significant corner in Chirnside Park.

An application has been lodged to construct a hotel, function centre and recreation facility at 266 Maroondah Highway. It is a prominent, gateway location to the Shire of Yarra Ranges and the Yarra Valley. It is adjacent to the Chirnside Park Shopping Centre and is a completely inappropriate siting for such a facility.

I am opposed the move based on some serious concerns about the suitability of the site for gambling and the impact on our local economy and families in the region.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Part of the application includes the proposal to install 70 pokie machines which would be relocated from the Lilydale International site, which is being converted into retirement accommodation.

It is well know that pokies attract patrons from disadvantaged areas well beyond the borders of Chirnside Park. Our local economy loses millions of dollars to pokies, the last thing we’d support is greater financial strain on families as well as intensifying problem gambling in our community.

Yarra Ranges sees losses of $35million per annum in the Shire, this money would be far better spent in our local economies, rather than through the slot of a pokie machine. The cumulative losses since 1992, in today’s dollars, equals $500million, this is a massive hole in terms of money that could be spent elsewhere.

We know that problem gambling has significant negative health and wellbeing outcomes for families. It is a major determinant of ill health and the associated anti-social behaviour of problem gamblers has a significant negative impact on community well being.

And worst of all, the applicant has not even consulted with the community so community members haven’t even had the opportunity to voice their concerns to the regulator.

The Shire of Yarra Ranges council has always had strong concerns about the negative impact of gambling and has developed a responsible gambling strategy aimed at reducing the incidence of problem gambling.

The social costs are enormous, not to mention the economic impact to small business and employment. I will always be opposed to any additional pokie venues or machines, they are a blight on our community and take money from people who can least afford it.