Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal|2016-03-03

The Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) allowed the removal of a Spotted Gum tree from Champ Street, Coburg, which was in a Heritage Overlay protecting street trees. The tree needed to be removed to build a road connecting the Pentridge Estate development to Champ Street. While the Heritage Overlay specifically identified River Red Gums and Canary Island Date Palms as significant, the Tribunal found that removing the Spotted Gum would not unacceptably harm the heritage value because the remaining trees would still dominate the streetscape, the tree spacing was already irregular, and Council's own 2006 landscape plan had contemplated removing spotted gums. The Tribunal also found that road works near other significant trees could proceed with proper protection plans. The Council's condition about paying for 'amenity loss' was changed to a specific requirement to replace the tree with a River Red Gum. The permit was granted with conditions to protect other trees during construction.

For the reasons explained above, the decision of the Responsible Authority is varied. A permit is issued subject to conditions.

Although my order does not include the 'Notes' suggested by the Council, such advisory information may be included in the permit that the Council is directed to issue.

Removal of a tree and road works in a Heritage Overlay in accordance with the endorsed plans.

Before the development commences, amended plans to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the plans will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions and three copies must be provided. The plans must be generally in accordance with the plans advertised 13 April 2015 but modified to show:
- (a) Modify functional layout plan by extending the kerb extensions at each intersection to remove the parking bays in Champ Street within 10 metres of each new intersection, in accordance with Road Rule 170.

(b) Plans annotated, or otherwise, to clearly show and delineate the works approved by planning permit 2014/003336 issued by the Minister of Planning, the works approved by Heritage Victoria permit P20564 and the works approved in this permit.

The development as shown on the endorsed plans must not be altered without the written consent of the Responsible Authority.
The removal of the street tree must be carried out by Moreland City Council.
Prior to the commencement of the development, the permit holder must pay to Moreland City Council a fee for the removal and replacement of the tree with a Eucalyptus camaldulensis (River Red Gum) in a location in Champ Street to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
Prior to the commencement of works, a Tree Protection Plan prepared by a suitably qualified arborist must be submitted to the Responsible Authority having regard to the Arboricultural Construction Assessment prepared by Greenwood Consulting Pty Ltd and dated 10 February 2014. The Tree Protection Plan must contain recommendations to manage and supervise the road works associated with the three new crossovers on the eastern side of Champ Street to protect the condition and health of the Eucalyptus camaldulensis (River Red Gums) identified as Trees 3, 4, 6 and 7.
This permit will expire if one of the following circumstances applies:

(b) The development is not started within two years of the issued date of this permit.

(c) The development is not completed within four years of the issued date of this permit.

In accordance with Section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, an application may be submitted to the Responsible Authority for an extension of the periods referred to in this condition.

[1] I have considered the submissions of all the parties that appeared, all the written and oral evidence, all the exhibits tendered by the parties, and all the statements of grounds filed. I do not recite or refer to all of the contents of those documents in these reasons.

[2] The Tribunal received two items of correspondence after the conclusion of the hearing. The Tribunal is unable to give consideration to these items of correspondence as they were not received in response to a direction of the Tribunal and the authors are not parties to this proceeding.

[3] City of Moreland Heritage Review. Allom Lovell and Associates for Moreland City Council. Volumes 1-5, January 1999.

[4] City of Moreland. Pentridge Streetscapes Concept Design. May 2006.

[5] Shayher Group. Pentridge Coburg Design Guidelines and Masterplan. February 2014. (Incorporated Document C154 at the Schedule to Clause 81.01 and a Reference Document at Clause 21.04 of the Moreland Planning Scheme).

[6] Greenwood Consulting Pty Ltd. Pentridge Piazza Project Champ Road Coburg Arboricultural Construction Impact Assessment. February 2014.

Environment Act 1987

de Cata v Moreland CC [2016] VCAT 319 (3 March 2016)

Outcomeappellant

Disposition:

The decision of the Responsible Authority (Moreland City Council) was varied. A permit was granted and directed to be issued for the removal of Tree 5 (Corymbia maculata) and road works in Heritage Overlay HO287, subject to amended conditions including: (1) modified plans showing kerb extensions and delineation of approved works; (2) no alteration without consent; (3) Council to remove tree; (4) payment for removal and replacement with Eucalyptus camaldulensis (River Red Gum); (5) submission of Tree Protection Plan for Trees 3, 4, 6 and 7; and (6) expiry provisions.

de Cata v Moreland CC [2016] VCAT 319

At a glance

Result

Key principles

Issues before the court

Plain English Summary

Judgment (14 paragraphs)

Cited legislation

Parties

Legislation Cited (1)

Cases Cited (1)

de Cata v Moreland CC [2016] VCAT 319 (3 March 2016)

AI Analysis