Social media has been busy with the Woolworths’ new plans for Selwyn Street, Elsternwick. As pointed out repeatedly, they have gone directly to the planning minister with a new application that seeks to undermine previous VCAT decisions and restore heights that had been knocked on the head years ago. In other words, if you don’t get what you want, then simply ignore the umpire’s previous decision and have another go via one single individual – the planning minister. Even worse is that such an action effectively sidelines objectors and even council.
This is hypocrisy of the highest level – especially when we consider the Woolworths’ arguments at the second VCAT hearing, which they now clearly have forgotten. At this hearing, their argument was:
The Applicant’s closing submission highlights examples of this and points out a second VCAT hearing should not be about forum shopping and relitigating previously determined matters in the hope of securing a different outcome. The Applicant also highlights that the previous Tribunal comprised experienced legal and planning members and their reasoning was considerable in explaining why particular issues were acceptable.
https://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/vic/VCAT/2022/1025.html
So these ‘experienced legal and planning members’ of VCAT, cannot now be ‘trusted’ to endorse Woolworths’ ambitions. They must be sidestepped and appealed to the planning minister in the hope of a fast tracked permit that is all for seeking a ‘different outcome’.
The only conclusions that can be drawn from these events is that our planning system is an entire mess that invariably favours developers. Council itself has been complicit in these events as its lousy planning over the years and unwillingness to take on major developments have shown – ie with the MRC, with the Virginia Estate, and now with Woolworths. It is residents who literally pay the costs of such folly and craven inaction.
February 24, 2025 at 6:47 PM
What is Woolworths hoping for, Its beyond me.
How did the lane owned by Council play out?
February 24, 2025 at 6:58 PM
If you are referring to the issue of May Street as to whether it is or is not a road, then it would appear that council once again baulked at the prospect of testing this legally. And this after a letter from 2008 surfaced where council’s own lawyers stated that council should declare parts of May St a road!!!! Instead council chose to accept the Woolworths’ lawyers version of the issue as far as we know.
February 24, 2025 at 7:35 PM
Totally gutless response for council, maybe the new councillors would see this under a different light, if provoked.