Do Planning Objections Lead to More Refusals? Unveiling the Role of Objections in Planning Applications.

Introduction:

When it comes to planning applications, objections often bring a sense of uncertainty and concern. Nobody wants to invest time and effort into a proposal only to face rejection. In Victoria, Australia, where approximately 42,000 planning permit determinations were made between July 2022 and June 2023, it was found that roughly 17% of applications were refused (source: Planning Permit Activity Reporting, Victorian State Government). In this blog post, we will explore the relationship between planning objections and refusals, shedding light on their impact and potential implications.

The Lengthy and Uncertain Path to Approval:

If you're looking to build a new house, undertake a multi-unit development, or even an extension, the average processing time for a planning application in Victoria is around 211 days—equivalent to seven months. Within this timeframe, there is a possibility of falling within the unfortunate 17% of applicants who face refusal.

Objections and Appeals:

Among those who receive a refusal, approximately half choose to lodge an appeal with the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT). On the other hand, if you're fortunate enough to obtain approval, statistics from the State Government reveal that just over 30% of approved projects may still face objections from concerned parties who take the matter to VCAT.

Source: Source: Planning Permit Activity Reporting, Victorian State Government.

The Consequences of Refusals:

When a planning application is refused, it signifies that the applicant has invested time, money, and effort without achieving the desired outcome. Moreover, it often indicates a breakdown in productive conversations with external project stakeholders, including residents and the council. Consequently, designs may need to be redone, leading to additional expenses and delays.

Differentiating Between Valid Objections and Unwarranted Refusals:

While it is crucial to consider valid objections that highlight genuine planning concerns, it is equally important to acknowledge that refusals should not be based on personal preferences or resistance to change. Innovative and well-designed proposals should not be dismissed solely because they deviate from the norm. The decision-making authority, typically the council, should focus on the planning merits of an application to ensure fair and objective assessments. 

In most cases, planning applications are granted under "delegated authority" by a planning officer. However, in certain circumstances, when the number of objections exceeds a specific threshold, the decision may be transferred to the Councillors or a Planning Committee. Here, the decision-making process becomes intricate as political factors and public opinions can potentially sway the outcome, disregarding the sole consideration of planning merits.

Even if a well-planned application faces refusal due to political reasons, strong planning merits can still lead to approval at VCAT. Therefore, objections that do not focus on planning merits often serve as a delay rather than a definitive rejection. It is crucial for submissions to the council, both in support or objection, to focus on the planning merits of the proposal. For example, how the development it aligns with ResCode objectives and standards, zoning requirements as well as the requirements of relevant overlays. 

Constructive Engagement and Dialogue:

When objecting to a planning application, it is essential to provide recommendations for improving the development. By engaging in a constructive dialogue with the council and the applicant, objections can be transformed into opportunities for collaboration. It is important to remember that the choice of a specific location for development indicates its potential for improvement. Instead of simply opposing a project, working towards ensuring a development enhances the area can yield better outcomes for everyone involved.

Applicant Responsiveness and Early Engagement:

For applicants, listening to community concerns and engaging in early dialogue is highly recommended, even if not statutorily required. By incorporating community feedback into the design process, multiple rounds of rework can be avoided, leading to a smoother planning application journey and potentially reduced costs. 

Conclusion:

While objections in planning applications can create uncertainty and potential roadblocks, they do not necessarily lead to refusals. The decision-making authority should focus on the planning merits of an application and base their judgments on sound principles rather than personal opinions or political considerations. Objectors should concentrate on the planning concerns and provide constructive recommendations for improvement. By fostering productive engagement and dialogue between all stakeholders, the planning process can lead to better-designed projects that benefit the community as a whole.

Submittee offers support in objecting to all manner of planning applications. If you would like to consult with the services of an expert for a flat fee of $479 (inc GST), Why not get in touch for a no obligation review today?