NewsBite

Launceston Council reveals how much it has spent defending planning decisions in 2022/23

While only 1.8 per cent of planning applications end up in court, it has resulted in ratepayers copping a bill worth hundreds of thousands of dollars. Breaking down the cost >>

M3 on a Van Diemen Light Railway Society excursion from Launceston to Scottsdale in 9172, at Lilydale on the return. Picture: TED LIDSTER North East Tasmania rail trail
M3 on a Van Diemen Light Railway Society excursion from Launceston to Scottsdale in 9172, at Lilydale on the return. Picture: TED LIDSTER North East Tasmania rail trail

The City of Launceston Council has spent $294,797.45 of ratepayer funds over two years to defend their planning decision in an administrative tribunal.

The council revealed the cost of being taken to the Tasmanian Civil and Administrative Tribunal in its latest agenda.

In total, 18 planning decisions had been taken to TASCAT over 24 months.

Three of those decisions taken to court were made contrary to planning officer recommendations.

Elected City of Launceston councillor, businessman Joe Pentridge. Picture: City of Launceston
Elected City of Launceston councillor, businessman Joe Pentridge. Picture: City of Launceston

The most costly TASCAT appeal was the rail trail at Golconda Rd, which was approved by the council and upheld by TASCAT with altered conditions.

That divisive decision came at a cost of $68,942.60.

Meanwhile, the Gorge Hotel development and a subdivision at 112 Tamar St both cost the council more than $30,000.

Council officer Kelsey Hartland, who prepared the report answering councillor Joe Pentridge’s question on notice, reported that a total of 1267 development applications had been approved in the municipality over the same period.

“The number of appeals taken to Tascat (18) as a proportion of approved DAs (1267) over 2022 and 2023 was 1.4 per cent of all approved DAs,” the report said.

Councils are now required to pay for legal representation, historically that was at their discretion.

The report also noted the costs associated with appeals were higher in cases where the council decision differs from the officer’s recommendation, which was the case for 112 Tamar St.

In the scenario that the council’s decision was against planner’s advice, the report said an external expert was required.

Add your comment to this story

To join the conversation, please Don't have an account? Register

Join the conversation, you are commenting as Logout

Original URL: https://www.themercury.com.au/news/launceston/launceston-council-reveals-how-much-it-has-spent-defending-planning-decisions-in-202223/news-story/497ca9b3e926be387b1b47707239bf35