Media response - VCAT decision
Published on 09 July 2024
Approach from The Age
Questions received regarding a VCAT decision about a proposed childcare centre in Glen Waverley.
- What is Monash Council's response to the VCAT decision?
- Will the council appeal the VCAT decision?
- Does the council still consider the site inappropriate for a childcare centre? Why/why not?
- The council has expressed several concerns with the application, most worryingly around potential site contamination and impacts to children's health and amenity from neighbouring industrial activity. Monash's planner David De Giovanni told VCAT that children, who use outdoor play areas, may be affected by noise and odour. Does Monash stand by this concern?
- Is the council satisfied with the judgment that the report from Environmental Earth Sciences that the "low risk" of contamination means the site permit could be granted?
- Can you confirm was the Enviro Earth Sciences report commissioned by the council or the applicant?
- Giovanni submitted to VCAT that on his inspection of the site, there was a strong odour likely from the use of strong adhesives. The VCAT member decided: "Whilst the users of the centre will be exposed to chemicals, particularly when using the outdoor play spaces, I am satisfied based on the evidence that the level of exposure is highly unlikely to be harmful to their health. Odours will be able to be observed by the users of the childcare facility particularly when the neighbouring industrial uses are operating, and the operators of the childcare centre may wish to alter activities accordingly, such as limiting the use of the outdoor spaces if the odour is particularly strong.". Is the council satisfied with this?
- Does the council believe that the local community's need for more childcare services could be met in another location?
Response
What is Monash Council's response to the VCAT decision?
Council is disappointed with the Tribunal’s decision; our position remains that industrial land is not appropriate location for the establishment of a childcare centre.
The decision ignores a raft of state economic and amenity policy including State policy on Amenity and Human Health as set out at Clause 13.7 of all Victorian planning schemes. In particular, the Clause states:
- Avoid locating incompatible uses in areas that may be impacted by adverse off-site impacts from commercial, industrial and other uses.
- Protect commercial, industrial and other employment generating uses from encroachment by use or development that would compromise the ability of those uses to function safely and effectively.
Will the council appeal the VCAT decision?
VCAT decisions can only be appealed on a question of law.
As it does not appear that VCAT made a mistake in the way it applied the law, there are no grounds for Council to appeal this decision.
Does the council still consider the site inappropriate for a childcare centre? Why/why not?
This proposal represents a poor land use outcome.
The land is zoned Industrial, contains a range of different industrial uses, and is an important location for local employment and industry. A childcare centre use is not compatible with the surrounding industrial land use.
It will negatively impact future expansion of existing industrial uses within the area and will detract future industrial business because of this approval of a sensitive use in an industrial zone.
The council has expressed several concerns with the application, most worryingly around potential site contamination and impacts to children's health and amenity from neighbouring industrial activity. Monash's planner David De Giovanni told VCAT that children, who use outdoor play areas, may be affected by noise and odour. Does Monash stand by this concern?
This concern remains, as odour was observed by all parties at the accompanied inspection. The odour appeared to be coming from the adjoining industrial premises undertaking their normal business practices.
While the Tribunal’s decision suggested that the operators of the childcare centre may wish to alter activities and limit the use of outdoor space if the odour is particularly strong, there are no implementation plans to ensure this will happen.
Various industrial uses in the area may result in noise impacts for the childcare centre, now or in the future. Previous Council experience suggests that sensitives uses, such as childcare centres establish in employment areas, cause complaints about noise and odour to increase.
This has the potential to negatively impact on existing, long-term businesses.
Is the council satisfied with the judgment that the report from Environmental Earth Sciences that the "low risk" of contamination means the site permit could be granted?
Can you confirm was the Enviro Earth Sciences report commissioned by the council or the applicant?
A preliminary site investigation was prepared by Environmental Health Sciences which concluded that the site has a moderate potential for contamination. For a sensitive use such as childcare on site, further assessment is required including a Preliminary Risk Screening Assessment or an Environmental Audit Statement.
A detailed site investigation comprising an intrusive soil sampling program is recommended during the process of investigation, to understand the potential Audit pathway, before commencement of any development.
Permit Condition 11 requires a site investigation report to be submitted.
The report was submitted by the Permit Applicant in response to Council’s request.
Giovanni submitted to VCAT that on his inspection of the site, there was a strong odour likely from the use of strong adhesives. The VCAT member decided: "Whilst the users of the centre will be exposed to chemicals, particularly when using the outdoor play spaces, I am satisfied based on the evidence that the level of exposure is highly unlikely to be harmful to their health. Odours will be able to be observed by the users of the childcare facility particularly when the neighbouring industrial uses are operating, and the operators of the childcare centre may wish to alter activities accordingly, such as limiting the use of the outdoor spaces if the odour is particularly strong.". Is the council satisfied with this?
This is the most disappointing and naive statement in the VCAT decision.
It clearly shows how the location is inappropriate for a childcare centre and implies that the childcare centre will keep the children inside if odour is present outside.
This is extremely unlikely to occur and potential poses operational constraints on existing businesses in the industrial area. Council expects complaints from the childcare centre operator and parents if the centre goes ahead.
Council does not believe this is an appropriate measure to address the concerns of odour and potential impacts to children. There are no measures to ensure the childcare operator is aware of the odour level, and how to limit the use of outdoor space. It highlights the incompatibility of the sensitive use in an industrial area.
Does the council believe that the local community's need for more childcare services could be met in another location?
Childcare centres are best located out of industrial zones and close to main roads to provide better access. Residential land provides fewer potential impacts to the use of adjoining properties, and less impacts to the childcare users.
Issued: 8 July
To: The Age
Quoting: A mix of quoted information and background information for inclusion but not attribution, media please email sean.ross@monash.vic.gov.au for more information.