Urban planning community

+ Reply to thread
Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Retrospective (retroactive) planning approval

  1. #1
    BWharrie's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Cross Country Skiing, Australia
    Posts
    74

    Retrospective (retroactive) planning approval

    Can anybody advise me of the options for a possible retrospective approval of a development in your neck of the woods? Notwithstanding the usual letter requesting an explanation, a penalty infringement notice, and the development is both structurally sound and does not impact significantly upon the environment or the surrounding properties.

    "If everyone skied there would be no wars"

    (Dan) Changed the title to reflect North American plannerese. Don't be afraid to use Aussie plannerese, though ... we Yanks and Canucks should learn it.

  2. #2
    You are probably going to have to be a little more specific BWharrie. Is this a legal, non-conforming use and or structure? Or is it a use/structure built under the radar that meets all development and use requirements for the district in which it is located?
    On pitching to Stan Musial:
    "Once he timed your fastball, your infielders were in jeopardy."
    Warren Spahn

  3. #3
    Cyburbian Emeritus Chet's avatar
    Registered
    Aug 2001
    Location
    South Milwaukee
    Posts
    8,935
    What do you mean by 'retrospective approval'? I am not familiar with that term....

  4. #4
    Cyburbian
    Registered
    Aug 2002
    Location
    On the dark side and feeling divine!
    Posts
    202
    Quote Originally posted by Chet
    What do you mean by 'retrospective approval'? I am not familiar with that term....
    I'm guessing this is the "better to ask forgiveness later than permission first" approach to development.

  5. #5
    Cyburbian GeogPlanner's avatar
    Registered
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Capital Region, NY
    Posts
    1,429
    I belive that we would just have the applicant apply for approval as though it wasn't developed...and the developer has to hope they get the "OK." Assuming of course that I am interpreting "retrospective" correctly...I'm not familiar with that either. Maybe "retrotactive"?
    Information necessitating a change of design will be conveyed to the designer after and only after the design is complete. (Often called the 'Now They Tell Us' Law) - Fyfe's First Law of Revision

    We don't believe in planners and deciders making the decisions on behalf of Americans. -- George W. Bush , Scranton, PA -- 09/06/2000

  6. #6

    Registered
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Solano County, California
    Posts
    6,468
    We have them submit anyway.Have to get our pound of flesh (development review fees).

    There is actually a big issue with this in my place of employment. A local neighborhood association just decided to change all their entry monuments (they were unpainted, now they will be somewhat brightly painted). Because this is one of the areas in town with quite stringent design review (established because of a court settlement) we have to review this kind of stuff.

    Another neighbor (the kind of guy who calls the Planning Director-repeatedly-because his neighbors are...horrors...posting lost puppy and garage sale signs CONTRARY TO THE LAW, OH NO!) was the orginal complainant, We approved it retroactively, and the complainant is now appealing it to the Planning commission. Which means, the pillars are sitting there half painted in bright white primer-and we can't get it on an agenda until late May

  7. #7
    BWharrie's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Cross Country Skiing, Australia
    Posts
    74

    Retrospective Approval

    Sorry for the misinterpretation of the word "Retrospective". These things happen over the Pacific. By definition "Retroactive" may be the more correct word but it is not used to my knowledge in Australia.

    Unfortunately it seems our State legislation act - Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (see http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/n.../epaaa1979389/ )does not have the capability of approving a structure that was built without approval but required approval under same Act.
    Thus the interest is in how does your statute handle the approval of illegally erected structures that are considered to be safe under your relevant building codes and the structure would not signifacantly impact upon anyone or the environment.

  8. #8
    Cyburbian Rem's avatar
    Registered
    Jun 2003
    Location
    NSW, Australia
    Posts
    1,530
    In our experience, the best you do is issue a building certificate (S149B).

    It can be hard to convince people this is all we can do because until BA's were removed from the LG Act to the EP&A Act (in about 1998 I think), retrospective DA's were common.

  9. #9
    BWharrie's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Cross Country Skiing, Australia
    Posts
    74

    149B Cert

    Thanks REM, that's what I thought. Just a pity there is no other avenue for development approval. We found illegal land use approval under s109 but structures unapproved is ridiculous. Why get approval? Hit them with a PIN and then what? Why use orders if the structure is structurally sound with 149B?

  10. #10
    BWharrie's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Cross Country Skiing, Australia
    Posts
    74
    Quote Originally posted by Rem
    In our experience, the best you do is issue a building certificate (S149B).

    It can be hard to convince people this is all we can do because until BA's were removed from the LG Act to the EP&A Act (in about 1998 I think), retrospective DA's were common.
    Cobber on PIA forum pointed out an interesting temporary retrospective approval by the LEC. see http://pia.vizability.com.au/communi...;f=30;t=000019

+ Reply to thread

More at Cyburbia

  1. Replies: 2
    Last post: 10 Jun 2011, 10:32 AM
  2. Forced approval
    Career Development and Advice
    Replies: 13
    Last post: 14 May 2010, 6:05 PM
  3. Replies: 12
    Last post: 16 Nov 2004, 12:29 PM
  4. Neighbor approval
    Land Use and Zoning
    Replies: 3
    Last post: 04 May 2001, 9:59 AM