{"id":2733,"date":"2020-04-19T23:11:23","date_gmt":"2020-04-19T13:11:23","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/sos.asn.au\/vic\/?page_id=2733"},"modified":"2020-04-20T02:58:52","modified_gmt":"2020-04-19T16:58:52","slug":"help-for-residents-to-argue-on-rescode-guidelines-at-vcat-2","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/sos.asn.au\/vic\/faqs\/help-for-residents-to-argue-on-rescode-guidelines-at-vcat-2\/","title":{"rendered":"Help for residents to argue on Rescode guidelines at VCAT"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

by Ian Wood, SOS President & Member of PIA (Planning Institute of Australia)<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

NOTE 1:\u00a0 \u00a0 Under “Requirements” at the start of Rescode <\/a>(Clauses 54 & 55) the Preamble states that if a Schedule to a Zone or Overlay specifies a different standard (ie, a “local variation”) to the one set out in the Rescode clause, then the “requirement under that zone or overlay applies”.\u00a0 The text avoids using the verbs “should” or “must” but the intention is clear – in this situation, local policy should take preference over state controls.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

NOTE 2:    Since this SOS advice was written on the\ninterpretation of Rescode objectives, standards and guidelines, this issue has\nbecome a hot topic of debate among VCAT members. There are at least 6 relevant\nVCAT references to it, including some with conflicting views. It will pay you\nto read them carefully in preparing your case.  <\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

NOTE 3:    However, none of the arguments in the cases\nlisted below changes one particular relevant situation:  the fact that\nPerforated Metal Screening with a regular pattern of small-diameter holes does\nNOT in practice meet the objective of “limiting\noverlooking”, despite technically meeting the standard (see last\npart of advice below).<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

RELEVANT CASES<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Li\nChak Lai v Whitehorse CC (No.1) [2005] VCAT 1274 (30 June 2005)<\/a>
\nRussell Byard, Senior Member    Operation of\nRescode: Para 27-37<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Li\nChak Lai v Whitehorse CC (no.2) [2005] VCAT 1438 (18 July 2005)<\/a>
\nRussell Byard, Senior Member (correction)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Lamaro\nv Hume CC & Anor (Summary)(Red Dot) [2013] VCAT 957 (13 June\n2013)    <\/a>Rachel Naylor, Member   Para 11-16<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Red\nStar Beaumaris Pty Ltd v Bayside CC [2015] VCAT 305 (17 March\n2015)    <\/a>Russell Byard, Senior Member   \nResCode: standards and objectives; para 198-210<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ye\nv Boroondara CC [2015] VCAT 1051 (10 July 2015)<\/a>
\nMary-Anne Taranto, Member    ResCode compliance: para\n49-56<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Belokozovski\nv Port Phillip CC [2015] VCAT 1046 (16 July 2015)<\/a>
\nRussell Byard, Senior Member    ResCode ground of\nrefusal: objectives and standards:   para 69-88<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

NB: Belokozovski also refers to  Victorian Planning Reports,\nVCAT Vol 2 No 13:   <\/strong>1. <\/strong><\/em>Enough is\nEnough: Time for Clarity on ResCode Standards and Objectives    <\/em><\/strong>http:\/\/www.vprs.com.au\/382-editorials\/vcat\/1468-vcat-volume-2-no-13<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

SOS ADVICE<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Rescode specifies objectives, standards and decision guidelines for\ndevelopment application assessments. The objectives describe the desired\noutcomes that must be achieved, the standards specify the requirements to meet\nthose objectives, and the guidelines cite the issues Council must consider in\ndeciding if an application meets the objectives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But is an objective automatically met just because the corresponding\nstandard is met?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

VCAT\u2019s interpretation in Chak Lai Li v\nWhitehorse CC (Red Dot) [2005] VCAT 1274 (30 June 2005)<\/a> was that\nbecause standards contain requirements to meet the objective, meeting a\nstandard must mean that the corresponding objective has been met.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, the 2004 Department of Infrastructure practice note \u201cUnderstanding\nthe Residential Development Standards\u201d argues the opposite \u2013 if the particular\nfeatures of a site or neighbourhood mean that applying a standard wouldn\u2019t meet\nthe corresponding objective, an alternative design solution to meet the\nobjective is required.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

That DOI interpretation was upheld by VCAT in Lamaro\nv Hume CC & Anor [2013] VCAT 957<\/a> where the Member said: \u201cChak Lai Li\n\u2026.. contains no discussion or interpretation about where the decision\nguidelines fit in or the use of the words \u201cshould\u201d and \u201cmust\u201d at the beginning\nof clause 55 under the headings \u2018operation\u2019 and \u2018requirements\u2019.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Under \u201cRequirements\u201d, Rescode says development MUST meet all objectives. The\ndecision guidelines must also be considered, and they apply to both the\nquantitative and qualitative parts of an objective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The purposes of Clauses 54 & 55 include encouraging residential\ndevelopment which is responsive to the site and the neighbourhood and provides\nreasonable standards of amenity for existing and new residents.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As the Tribunal in Lamaro concluded, mere application of quantitative\nstandards doesn\u2019t necessarily achieve the purpose of clause 55, because a\nqualitative judgment must be made in each neighbourhood and site context.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Read this decision carefully because it could help objectors understand how\nto argue more effectively at VCAT (and with councils) for stronger Rescode\nrequirements against inappropriate designs that fail to adequately consider\nlocal character and site context.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

NOTE:           \nPerforated Metal Screening with its regular pattern of closely-spaced\nround holes is one example where a standard can be technically met but where\nthe objective isn\u2019t. Perforated metal screening is occasionally used in\nresidential developments to reduce overlooking. Most types technically meet the\nRescode overlooking standard of 25% or less openings, but are effectively\ntransparent when viewed from more than a few metres away because of the\ndiffraction effect created by the rows of regularly-spaced spherical holes.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Thus occupants have an unimpeded view during the day through a\nwindow or balcony fitted with perforated metal screening, while the reverse is\ntrue at night. Maximum transparency occurs when viewing from a dark area to a\nmore brightly lit one.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Consequently, perforated metal screening is used mostly for the screening of\nlarge facilities like multi-storey car parks, where light and air can enter\nwhile the interior is partially screened from view.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

SO ALWAYS ARGUE AT COUNCIL OR VCAT FOR EFFECTIVE SCREENING TECHNIQUES SUCH\nAS OPAQUE GLASS OR SLATTED SCREENS, OR PERFORATED SCREENING WITHOUT REGULAR\nCIRCULAR HOLES<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For more detail on the diffraction effect of perforated metal\nscreening, see:  www.sos.asn.au\/files\/APP.2-PMS.pdf<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

by Ian Wood, SOS President & Member of PIA (Planning Institute of Australia) NOTE 1:\u00a0 \u00a0 Under “Requirements” at the start of Rescode (Clauses 54 & 55) the Preamble states that if a Schedule to a Zone or Overlay specifies a different standard (ie, a “local variation”) to the one set out in the Rescode clause, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":2032,"menu_order":5,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"nf_dc_page":"","footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-2733","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/sos.asn.au\/vic\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/2733","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/sos.asn.au\/vic\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/sos.asn.au\/vic\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sos.asn.au\/vic\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sos.asn.au\/vic\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2733"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/sos.asn.au\/vic\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/2733\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2756,"href":"https:\/\/sos.asn.au\/vic\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/2733\/revisions\/2756"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sos.asn.au\/vic\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/2032"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/sos.asn.au\/vic\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2733"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}