New cattery at Boronia to go ahead after VCAT rejects bid to have permit overturned

OPPONENTS of a Boronia cattery have taken their scrap to the state’s peak tribunal, arguing a building full of cats will be too loud and smelly and will irritate people allergic to them.

Paul Legg and a group of neighbouring businesses say the industrial area around Kalman Drive, Boronia, is inappropriate for a cattery. Picture: Steve Tanner

OPPONENTS of a Boronia cattery have taken their scrap to the state’s peak tribunal, arguing a building full of cats will be too loud and smelly and will irritate people allergic to them.

A group of business owners claimed the cattery, at 51 Kalman Drive, was “incompatible” with the surrounding industrial park.

But the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal dismissed their objections, with a recent decision upholding the cattery’s planning permit.

Knox Council approved the cattery in December last year, allowing it to be used as a boarding house for up to 50 cats or kittens.

That prompted the claws to come out from several Kalman Drive neighbours, who raised a long list of complaints, saying “the proposed use will create adverse impacts in terms of amenity, health, odour, waste and noise”.

Kingsley McRae, who owns the site next door, said 14 businesses chipped in to cover the $12,000 legal costs to take their case to the tribunal.

He said their biggest concern was traffic and parking.

“You’ll have parents pulling up, their kids get a bit excited and they’ll be running past trucks and mess in the area,” he said.

“We just didn’t think it was the right thing for this precinct.”

Mr McRae said the group accepted the tribunal’s decision but added it would be “interesting” to see how the cattery fit into the area.

“We’ve got no hard feelings toward them. At the end of the day you’ve got to accept the decision of the umpire,” he said.

In a decision that was published on the tribunal’s website, member Tracey Bilston-McGillen said “there was no evidence regarding parking or traffic issues”.

“As to issues between tenants and owners and ongoing parking issues, this is not a forum to resolve existing problems,” she said.

In response to concerns of people being allergic to cats, she said “the issue that people in the adjoining building have cat allergies is not within my ambit of discretion”.

She said she could find no valid reason to overturn the permit.

“I find that as council’s conditions have addressed each of the issues raised by the objectors, I am persuaded that a permit should issue subject to conditions,” she said.

Council city development director Angelo Kourambas said the council respected the tribunal’s ruling and granted the permit.

The applicant, listed in the tribunal decision as D Gayton, couldn’t be reached for comment.