© 2026 Zoe. All rights reserved.
Zoe is a legal information platform. Always consult the Federal Register of Legislation for authoritative text.
[2010] VCAT 1849
Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal
2010-08-31
Original judgment source is linked above.
[1] The calculation of height is addressed later in the decision.
[2] We have considered all submissions presented by the parties although we do not recite all of the contents in these reasons.
[4] Pursuant to an order made by Deputy President Dwyer under P1418/2010 Stockland Developments Pty Ltd v Stonnington CC dated 21 June 2010 (unreported).
[5] Amendment C58 to the Stonnington Planning Scheme gazetted 25 June 2009.
[6] We acknowledge Mr O'Farrell's submission that the development does not comprise separate towers. However there are two linked elements on the north and south side of a central feature in the building that can be usefully termed 'towers' for ease of reference.
[7] Stonnington Planning Scheme Amendment C58 Forrest Hill Structure Plan Panel Report November 2008 page 56
[8] Approved in The Capitol (Vic) Pty Ltd v Stonnington CC & Ors [2009] VCAT 1227
[10] Dated 21 January 2010 and provided at the hearing by Mr Connor.
[11] As corrected in Stockland Developments Pty Ltd v Stonnington CC (Correction) [2009] VCAT 2758
[13] Mr Connor provided a copy of a council resolution to adopt this rate dated 7 June 2010.
[15] In Table 8 on page 54 of the Forrest Hill Structure Plan December 2005.
[16] At page 22 of the Forrest Hill Structure Plan December 2005.
[18] Acknowledging that the mix of dwelling types has changed between proposals.
[19] A brochure on this policy, dated September 2008, was provided at the hearing.
Stockland Development Pty Ltd
Stonnington CC [2010] VCAT 1849
Stockland Developments Pty Ltd v Stonnington CC [2009] VCAT 2179
Stockland Developments Pty Ltd v Stonnington CC (Correction) [2009] VCAT 2758