We will write a custom Assessment on Hotel Windsor Holdings vs. Minister for Planning specifically for you
301 certified writers online
The Proposal: Hotel Windsor Holdings Vs Minister for Planning
The case brought to the court for the hearing and decision-making on 19 August of the year 2014, entailed complaints regarding the issuance of a permit for the expansion of an important historical building known as the Windsor Hotel (Hotel Windsor Holdings Pty Ltd v Minister for Planning  VCAT 1203). In the year 2010, the Minister for Planning Ms. Susan Brennan carried out her mandate and issued a permit to approve the revitalization of the Windsor Hotel. The permit consented for the fractional demolition of the Windsor Hotel and a renovation of a fresh 26-tower Windsor Hotel, and the expansion of the north wing. The Windsor Hotel was time-constrained and wanted to request a time extension in the permit ( VCAT 1203).
The Parties involved in the Hearing
The plaintiff or the complainant to the court was Mr. Chris Canavan, who represented the Windsor Hotel in the case hearing. Allied to the complainant in the case hearing, were the case witnesses of Mr. Chris Canavan ( VCAT 1203) They included Mr. Glenn Coupar, the incumbent Development Manager of the Halim Construction Group, the Chief Executive Officer of the Windsor Hotel Mr. David Perry, and Mr. Stuart McGurn, who was the incumbent town planner ( VCAT 1203). The defendants were Ms. Susan Brennan and Mr. Ian Munt, who were responsible for the council of environmental planning. They represented the Ministry of Planning in the case hearing ( VCAT 1203).
Description and Summary of the Main Arguments
The case that the Hotel Windsor presented to the VCAT for the hearing involved the permission for the extension of the deadline on the permit that the Minister of Planning issued to the Hotel for its reconstruction ( VCAT 1203). The permit allowed for the partial demolition of the Hotel to allow for a reconstruction of a new Windsor Hotel made of a 26-meter story building, and a partial extension of the north wing of the hotel ( VCAT 1203).
The hotel owners argued that the timeframe stipulated in the permit was inadequate and they doubted the timely completion of the reconstruction with the stated time ( VCAT 1203). The permit issuance was controversial in many circumstances.
Firstly, the fixed building height of any tower structure is 23 meters within the Bourke Hill District ( VCAT 1203). Hence, the 26 meters had surpassed the prescribed limit. Secondly, if the construction had not begun, the permit was to expire on 4 November 2012, and if the constructors failed to complete the building, the permit was to expire on 4 November 2014 ( VCAT 1203). Thirdly, in 2012, the VCAT favored the Windsor Hotel and extended the time limit for the construction to begin on 10 January 2015, and end on 10 January 2017 ( VCAT 1203). The Winsor Hotel had laxity and sought the intervention of the tribunal in the deadline extension from 3 September 2016, to 3 September 2018.
Although the Deputy President of the VCAT presiding over the case noticed some political motivation, and some land planning lapses, in this case, the case verdict favored the defendant ( VCAT 1203). The VCAT Deputy President Mrs. Helen Gibson ruled the case in favor of the defendant, under section 85 (1), subsection (f), of the regulations of the Planning and Environment Act 1987. She refuted the extension of the time in the permit, by considering the flawed issuance of the permit, the conditions that favored revocation of the permit, and the conditions of the permit deadline extension, reached in the ruling on the case of Kantor vs. Murrindindi SC (1997)18 AATR 285 ( VCAT 1203).
Hotel Windsor Holdings Pty Ltd v Minister for Planning (2012) VCAT 1203.