The City of Ballarat has found itself at odds with councillors over its planning permit process, having dismissed council's call to restore its pre-pandemic model which prioritised mediations as the norm for resolving disputes between developers and residents.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
or signup to continue reading
City of Ballarat mayor Daniel Moloney said he and other councillors had been requesting planning officers return to pre-pandemic arrangements for some time.
"I understand why we had to change things when we went into lockdowns, but just because we're not required [by law] to go through a mediation process doesn't mean we shouldn't - we had a good model prior to the pandemic," he said.
"I've seen around 80 per cent of issues get taken care of through mediation - nothing works better than face-to-face meetings."
It comes as groups of residents opposed to discrete development proposals in Brown Hill, Mount Clear and Mount Pleasant have separately complained of a distinct lack of clarity around council planning processes and procedural fairness to objectors.
"It's about as clear as mud," said Mount Clear resident Marisha Jarecki last week, adding that resident opposition to a 28-lot subdivision next to the Woowookarung Regional Park, lodged in March, had unnecessarily devolved into a "David versus Goliath" situation.
"We've heard nothing and we're really infuriated. It shouldn't be up to us to chase council - they have a duty of care to residents."
It was view shared by Mount Pleasant resident Doug Main, who - like a dozen other residents - had lodged an objection against a 19-lot subdivision proposal next to the Peady Street and Gladstone Street reserves, only to have City of Ballarat recently approve the application without consulting residents.
"The process has been very poor; the developer ignored our objections and council just okayed the proposal without consulting us," he said. "That non-response is just arrogant."
"There really should be a duty of care from council; it shouldn't be up to us to figure out an unclear process."
Objections to the Mount Pleasant proposal, situated at 420 Gladstone Street, primarily turned on the ecological consequences carried by the removal of some 400 trees, comprising mainly pines and two different species of native wattle trees.
"It's a wildlife corridor for yellow-tailed black cockatoos, kookaburras, parrots, magpies, as well as the endangered brown toadlet," Mr Main said.
"But the developer's application discusses none of that - it completely ignores the biodiversity issues and falsely claims there are only non-native trees there, which is just nonsense."
Other concerns went to safety considerations, such as the apparent lack of any traffic impact study on the area as well as the failure to consider the long-abandoned open gold mine on the property, which runs a kilometre underground.
"None of us are against development of the land; what we'd like is something sympathetic to the area - that's all," Mr Main said.
Speaking on the condition of anonymity, three town planners have told The Courier that the pre-pandemic model was a much fairer one for residents, describing City of Ballarat's current approach as tantamount to a "box-ticking" or "paper-pushing" exercise that favours developers.
At present, there exists no guidance as to the circumstances in which a mediation or referral to the council chamber may be triggered. And, anecdotally at least, it appears residents are commonly invited to remove their objections or otherwise have their objections ignored by the developer.
When asked, City of Ballarat director of development and growth Natalie Robertson did not explain the reasoning behind the City of Ballarat's decision not to reinstate its pre-pandemic model of assessment.
"The statutory planning team communicates broadly with a range of stakeholders," she said.
"Objectors and other interested stakeholders are invited to speak with the assessing officer during the assessment process."
A number of residents, however, said they were never advised of this arrangement.
"At no point was I informed that that was an option," said Mount Pleasant resident Michelle Feltham. "I didn't hear anything from council after submitting my objection, only that it had been received."
"I feel let down and frustrated with council at their lack of consultation and commitment to find a mutually agreeable resolution."
In a statement, Ms Robertson told The Courier that the City of Ballarat was assisting the Victorian government on its planning and building approvals process review, which she said would - once complete - see the "planning process exceed [pre-pandemic] processes".
That particular inquiry commenced in March 2019, one year before the beginning of pandemic restrictions, and was prompted by concerns from developers that the planning process was in need of streamlining.
It's therefore unclear why the City of Ballarat cannot return to its pre-pandemic model until that inquiry is complete.
Though asked, Ms Robertson also did not explain how the new process would, in her view, improve on the pre-pandemic model, much less whether those improvements would primarily benefit developers or residents.
Mr Main has lodged a VCAT appeal against the City of Ballarat's decision to approve the planning application with respect to 420 Gladstone Street. Interested residents can contact Mr Main at dpgpmain@gmail.com.
Now just one tap with our new app. Digital subscribers now have the convenience of faster news, right at your fingertips with The Courier. See how to download it below:
