[Max Carnage]

Quote

Fear of coastal swamping leads to unprecedented ruling on property
Stephen McMahon From: Herald Sun August 05, 2010 12:00AM 71 comments

FEARS Victoria's coastline will be swamped by rising sea levels have led to an unprecedented ruling that ended a family's dream beachside development.

The ruling, blocking plans for eight townhouses in Lakes Entrance, could undermine coastal development worth millions.

The VCAT decision is the first time a small-scale development has been blocked.

It means all new developments or subdivisions on land less than 80cm above sea level are threatened.

Areas designated as potential hot spots for flooding are Warrnambool, Port Fairy, Portland, Lakes Entrance, the Gippsland Lakes, Patterson Lakes and Werribee.

A federal government report last year warned that up to 44,600 homes along Victoria's coast could be destroyed or damaged by rising sea levels over the next century.

The VCAT ruling left Gippsland locals Frank and Mary Strini shattered.

After a four-year battle for planning permission to build the Lakes Entrance townhouses close to the town centre, they have been left with broken dreams and a major financial headache. They had planned to keep some of the homes for themselves and sell the others.

"We meet all the criteria put in front of us and VCAT knocked us back," Mr Strini said. "We have invested $1 million and this has turned into a nightmare. Our dreams have been shattered."

In his ruling, VCAT's Ian Potts said the Strini case had brought into focus climate change planning issues, and a cautious approach was needed.

But business operators and politicians warned the ruling would scare investors away from coastal areas.

http://www.heraldsun...x-1225901323695

[Max Carnage]

More from 3AW talk radio:
http://www.3aw.com.a...0805-11gm6.html

[Mr Medved]

1. When push comes to shove VCAT have no authority, it's just that most people don't know this and/or don't know how to lawfully tell them to piss off.

2. Are we so moronic or non-industrious that we cannot replicate some of the techniques the Dutch have used - for centuries?

People who understand their property rights and are willing to stand up to defend them may make a killing out of firesale coastal properties.

[Max Carnage]

Mr Medved, on 05 August 2010 - 03:57 AM, said:

1. When push comes to shove VCAT have no authority, it's just that most people don't know this and/or don't know how to lawfully tell them to piss off.

I don't know about that.

The authority is with the CMA. Local council would have (apparently) approved the planning application (which has legal weight under the Planning & Environment Act) except that the CMA referral and approval (/no objection) is required/mandatory. CMA opposed the development. As I understand it the Shire then encouraged the applicants to appeal the CMA decision via VCAT because as things stood there was uncertainty over future developments and they wanted a precedent.

They got one, but the wrong one. So the Shire can't approve the application.

I thought there was still scope for a supreme court challenge but my wife doesn't think so except on a point of law (she's a reformed planner so I'll defer to her!).

I'm sure there will be opportunities for profit like you said. I can't see all development in the area halted for the next 100+ years. Trust me though, Lakes Entrance is not a place you want to get stuck with property. We call it 'Moe by the sea' for a reason! Plus there are so many empty speculators' houses there that copper-rats have lately been breaking into them and removing pipes, wiring & water heaters...

[Sean]

Max Carnage, on 05 August 2010 - 04:22 AM, said:

Trust me though, Lakes Entrance is not a place you want to get stuck with property. We call it 'Moe by the sea' for a reason!

Can you explain further for the non-Victorians? What's wrong with Moe?

[staringclown]

Apart from it's obvious trouble. (it's named after one of the three stooges) Moe (pron. Mo-ee) is a town perennially down on it's luck. It's always been "en route" to somewhere else. Even when gold was discovered it wasn't in Moe. Never a destination in it's own right.

linky

[Mr Medved]

Max Carnage, on 05 August 2010 - 04:22 AM, said:

I don't know about that.

The authority is with the CMA. Local council would have (apparently) approved the planning application (which has legal weight under the Planning & Environment Act) except that the CMA referral and approval (/no objection) is required/mandatory. CMA opposed the development. As I understand it the Shire then encouraged the applicants to appeal the CMA decision via VCAT because as things stood there was uncertainty over future developments and they wanted a precedent.

They got one, but the wrong one. So the Shire can't approve the application.

I thought there was still scope for a supreme court challenge but my wife doesn't think so except on a point of law (she's a reformed planner so I'll defer to her!).

I'm sure there will be opportunities for profit like you said. I can't see all development in the area halted for the next 100+ years. Trust me though, Lakes Entrance is not a place you want to get stuck with property. We call it 'Moe by the sea' for a reason! Plus there are so many empty speculators' houses there that copper-rats have lately been breaking into them and removing pipes, wiring & water heaters...

VCAT - I know a guy who challenged VCAT (or assisted someone with a dispute). He presented a legal maxim - I can't recall the latin phrase, but it was along the lines of 'show me your authority', or 'on what authority'. They had no answer as they didn't have authority. They don't have any authority under law unless you give them authority.

Local governments - null and void. The Local Government Act 1989 conflicts with the constitution so is null and void as per the Acts Interpretation Act 1901 and the constitution itself. In 1988 Australians rejected local governments in a referendum so they are unconstitutional (only the Commonwealth and States are recognised). You just need to make sure you don't have any contracts with the council - after all they are companies and under the Trade Practices Act 1974 are operating businesses (as are all government departments).

Planning & Environment Act - It is highly questionable that any legislation since the passing of the Australia Act 1986 is valid, but that would require a challenge to the High Court. I'm not familiar with the legislation but it may also be in conflict with imperial laws (e.g. related to property rights) that are precedent and cannot be repealed without a referendum.

My knowledge is still a little sketchy so I probably wouldn't be in a position of confidence to challenge such a ruling for another few years... but it can be done.

[Max Carnage]

I'll take your word for that Mr Medved!

[RumpledElf]

I live about 400m above sea level and we're in a deep valley! If sea levels rise THAT much (there isn't enough water to do that, but who lets facts stand in the way of a good story) I'll just move up under the wind farms on top of the 900m high ridge down the road

This thread does go to show that they really aren't making any more land. In fact, if they are zoning off low-level land for fear it will disappear, they're actually making less of the stuff. Land prices to the moon!

[Max Carnage]

710cm gets me lake frontage. I'm hoping to see that during my lifetime, because I'm a selfish sonofabitch.

Here's a great sea-level rise simulator so you can check out your part of the world:
http://flood.firetree.net/

[Max Carnage]

This story was on the 7.30 report last night:

Transcript:
http://www.abc.net.a...10/s3018158.htm

Video:
http://www.abc.net.a...968_4466010.asx

Whatever you think, the humor of the owners cannot be denied (see their new sign).

[Turkey]

Max Carnage, on 05 August 2010 - 11:52 PM, said:

710cm gets me lake frontage. I'm hoping to see that during my lifetime, because I'm a selfish sonofabitch.

Here's a great sea-level rise simulator so you can check out your part of the world:
http://flood.firetree.net/

4 metres means that I get my snorkel and goggles on, fortunately the current pace (or even a doubling or tripling) of rise means that I should be safe in my lifetime.

[itching]

Turkey, on 22 September 2010 - 02:26 AM, said:

4 metres means that I get my snorkel and goggles on, fortunately the current pace (or even a doubling or tripling) of rise means that I should be safe in my lifetime.

I read a book that says sea levels double every 7 to 10 years.