Clematis Park Road, except for the section south of Leighton Avenue, has not been included in the scheme because of the Rural zoned land on its west side. The property on the south-east corner of Clematis Park Road and Woodlands Avenue is included with the sideage to Woodlands Avenue only being constructed.

1. Mr J Pippey, Solicitor of P H Pippey and Son, Solicitors.
2. Mr R Nunn

Mr J Cicero, Solicitor of Best Hooper Solicitors, with Mr J McCartney, Consulting Engineer.

1. These were applications under Section 185 of the Local Government Act 1989 ("the Act") for review of the decision by the Cardinia Shire Council to impose a special charge.
2. My order, dated Thursday 15 February 2007, reads as follows:

It is ordered, pursuant to Section 163(3)(c) of the Local Government Act 1989 that these applications are dismissed, and the Special Charge is confirmed.

1. The council, by letter to the Tribunal dated 6 December 2007, advises:

We have now almost completed construction of the works and one of the appellants is adamant that your decision included a requirement that the Shire construct both frontages of his corner property on the south east corner of Clematis Park Road and Woodlands Avenue.

The basis for this claim is that the last sentence of Paragraph 8 under "Criteria for Decision" in your report states - "Clematis Park Road has not been included in the Scheme, except for the property on the south east corner with Woodlands Avenue, because of the Rural zoned land on its west side." The landowner believes you made your decision on this basis and as such the Shire must seal the section of Clematis Park road on the south east corner of Woodlands Road.

The Scheme plans tabled at the hearing clearly show the works terminating at the end of Woodlands Avenue with this section of Clematis Park Road remaining unconstructed. Both properties on the Woodlands Avenue/Clematis Park Road Tee-intersection were also levied a reduced contribution reflecting a lesser benefit from only having one abuttal sealed. Your decision clearly states that the applications were dismissed and the Special Charge was confirmed.

It would seem that the sentence in Paragraph 8 has caused some confusion as the section of Clematis Park Road included in the Scheme is that section south of Leighton Avenue which is the next road to the south from Woodlands Ave. The properties in Clematis Park Road included in the scheme are those on the south-east corner of Leighton Avenue and the one directly opposite in Clematis Park Road. Also included are the two properties on the south east and north east corners of Woodlands Avenue and Clematis Park Road.

It would be appreciated if you could please clarify your understanding of the extent of works at the Woodlands Avenue/Clematis Park Road intersection. The Shire's position is that the works terminate at the intersection of Woodlands Avenue and Clematis Park Road in accordance with the plans and the appellant Mr A Hildebrand of 15 Clematis Park Road is refusing to accept the Shire's advice.

1. I considered the applications as set out in my Reasons and this led to my Order set out above at paragraph 2 above.
2. The reference in the last sentence of paragraph 8, which reads "except for the property on the south-east corner with Woodlands Avenue" reflected the fact that this property was included in the scheme with respect to construction of the sideage with Woodlands Avenue. It does not reflect any intention on my part to order that the frontage to Clematis Park Road be constructed. My reasons do not indicate that this was my intention. My Order followed accordingly. I must say that whilst this attempt to have part of Clematis Park Drive constructed might seem imaginative it is in reality quite mischievous.
3. I consider it appropriate to re-draft the last sentence of paragraph 8 of my Reasons to remove any uncertainty and to reflect my intention.
4. I will make a correcting Order accordingly.