Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal|2009-10-30

For the reasons set out above, I conclude that it is appropriate to affirm Council's decision and direct that a permit be granted.

[1] At the hearing I requested Mr Dowdle to advise of the AHD level of the roof of the dwelling at 840 The Esplanade. He subsequently advised that this information was not available from Council files.

[6] Part of a View Analysis Plan prepared by Peninsula Survey Group P/L dated 21 September 2009 and provided by Mr Umbers at the hearing.

[7] These properties are respectively covered under HO87, HO78 and HO79 in the Mornington Peninsula Planning Scheme.

[8] At clause 54.04-2 of the Mornington Peninsula Planning Scheme.

[9] The existing vegetation plan shows only five trees to be retained in this area. Clarification of this matter in final plans should be required but does not alter my findings.

Environment Act 1987

Santamaria & Anor v Mornington Peninsula SC [2009] VCAT 2311 (30 October 2009)

Santamaria & Anor v Mornington Peninsula SC [2009] VCAT 2311

At a glance

Court

Decision date

Source

Judgment (7 paragraphs)

Parties

Legislation Cited (1)

Cases Cited (1)

Santamaria & Anor v Mornington Peninsula SC [2009] VCAT 2311 (30 October 2009)