Star St: why

Margot Giblin

This begs the question for the reasons for Council’s initial refusal of Anglicare’s application which can be seen in the minutes for the meeting of April 24 2006 at www.hobartcity.com.au. At that meeting a proposal that the applicant come back to Council with more detailed plans was rejected.

Hobart City Council

Grounds for Star St Appeal and 07/08 Budget Estimates

AS expected the Hobart City Council’s statement, below, on the reasons for appealing the Supreme Court decision on Star St maintains that they are confined to legal matters.

The Council does not make any public statements on legal action it may have instituted. Save to say that Council does not institute any legal action without first considering any qualified advice and taking into account all factors relevant to such action.

It is unfortunate that this issue has arisen in the context of affordable housing. There are, however, some significant planning implications with regard to process that the Council believes need to be resolved, regardless of the nature of development applications that may be appealed in the future. The Council reasonably believes it has no alternative other than to have these matters clarified by the Full Court.

This begs the question for the reasons for Council’s initial refusal of Anglicare’s application which can be seen in the minutes for the meeting of April 24 2006 at www.hobartcity.com.au

At that meeting a proposal that the applicant come back to Council with more detailed plans was rejected.

At this week’s DESC meeting a similar offer was made to an applicant in relation to a proposed extension to a property which will enable an ageing resident to continue to live there in greater warmth and comfort.

Alderman Darlene Haigh chaired this meeting and expressed her desire that the matter be dealt with on the spot, given the unarguable need for a warmer room in the house which she knew well, having been in it ‘many times’.

Both Aldermen Ruzicka and Burnet were concerned about the effects of the extension on the street-scape and asked that the applicant take this into consideration in revised application.

The Special Open Joint Meeting of Council Committees was held on Tuesday 19 July at 5.30p.m. The 2007/08 Budget Estimates and Annual Plan were presented and approved for presentation at the Council meeting on June 25.

The report presented with these included:

At 4.1 The major item impacting on the 07/08 Estimates is the indexation of property assessed Annual Values (AAVs).

At 5.12 A total rate income is forecast of 4.7%. Due to AAV indexation and the consequent shift in the rate base, the impact on individual ratepayers will vary.

At 5.13 Due to AAV indexation, and the consequent shift in the rate base, the impact on individual ratepayers will vary.

Approximately 12,000 residential ratepayers, being all residential, excepting Battery Point and Sandy Bay, will receive a rate increase of approximately 10%
Battery Point and Sandy Bay residential ratepayers (approx. 5,000) will receive increases of approximately 2%.
Vacant land of all classes to receive very large rate increases ranging from approx. 40% to 148%
Commercial and industrial properties (approx. 2,500) to receive rate decreases in the order of 2% to 6%.

5.15 It is important to remember that property valuation is a process independent of councils. The statutory responsibility resides with the Valuer-General.

5.16 It is also important to remember that these adjusted values do not increase the total amount of rates raised by Council. However, the shift in the rate base does affect the distribution of the rate burden.

5.18 At face value it could be asserted that the outcomes are unfair on some ratepayers given the quantum of the changes. However, a more considered view is that the indexation process enables council rate assessments to be more closely aligned to the current market value of a property. It has thus increased the fairness and equity of the rate burden, notwithstanding the significant effects on some ratepayers.

Aldermen present at this meeting were:
Valentine (Chair) Ruzicka, Haigh, Burnett, Christie, Sexton, Briscoe, Hayes and Cocker.
Leave of Absence: Zucco and Freeman.
Apologies: None.

In relation to rates, Briscoe expressed concern at the potential for perceived inequities between suburbs and also the likely difficulty of individual ratepayers faced with large increases.
Hayes was particularly concerned that it be made clear that responsibility for rises was the result of decisions by the Valuer General and Valentine stressed that Council, overall, was not about to receive a windfall.

On the Council plan generally, Cocker expressed the need for a more aggressive campaign in relation to environmentally sustainable buildings and to education related to the misconception that water is plentiful and its delivery inexpensive in Hobart.

While many questions were asked in relation to other budget and plan details none managed to expose flaws that will prevent either the Budget Estimates or the Annual Plan being presented as they stand to Council on June 25.