So far so good with the NSW Government’s review of the planning system. The current planning system was itself the result of a major review by an incoming government, It was introduced in 1979 and at the time was regarded as something close to world best practice. But community expectations have changed and the countless fixes that have been applied over the last 30 years, either to address perceived shortcomings or simply to railroad through the aspirations of the NSW government have resulted in a dog’s breakfast that doesn’t work for developers, doesn’t work for communities and doesn’t work for governments either at state or local level..
The review was one of the promises of the incoming coalition government. The two individuals conducting the review have impeccable credentials. Tim Moore, is a previous coalition government minister and senior commissioner for the Land and Environment Court and Ron Dyer is a previous ALP government minister. At first I was sceptical given the very short timeframe – the intention is to have a green paper of policy options published by the end of April this year and a white paper later on in 2012. My scepticism has turned into optimism now that I have read the issues paper. What has impressed me is that every issue raised in the extensive program of community forums conducted across the state in the last quarter of 2011 has been captured –in the form of 238 questions against which submissions are invited (by February 17)
Many of the issues raised are matters that have been of concern to residents and councillors alike in Mosman. I have been dismayed by the many serious shortcomings of the present system that up until now councils have been powerless to address. Needless to say Mosman Council will be making a comprehensive submission. Some of the issues up for discussion likely to be of interest to Mosman residents are as follows.
A proposed development might meet all the controls but be such an aesthetic disaster that it significantly lowers the value of all properties in the street (so called ‘blight’). Should the quality of a design be a consideration for the approval authority? On the other side if the same coin – what if a development is of such high quality and high environmental performance that it fails to comply with controls that mandate reasonable consistency with the existing streetscape?
How can the private certifier system be made to work. The present system is a disaster. There is a serious conflict of interest in that certifiers are selected and paid for by the person doing the development (there is a similar problem with Environmental impact Statements). Under private certifiers, when construction happens that is contrary to the approval, the process of getting redress is convoluted and difficult, particularly given the fact that a Section 96 application for an amended approval can be submitted after the work has been done.
The issue of the cumulative effect of a particular type of development is being looked at. One brothel may be OK but who would want an area to become brothel central.
Another concept being considered is the ‘amber light’ idea. Rather than approving with conditions or rejecting a proposal outright, the consent authority would have three options, the third being a declaration that the proposed had the potential to be approved should specific matters (which would be spelled out) be addressed.in a re-submission.
I am pleased to see that certain matters that I have raised as a councillor in Mosman are on the agenda. One is giving power to councils to mandate stricter environmental standards than the BASIX. Another is giving councils the authority to negotiate with applicants to ensure that once-off opportunities for advancing the public interest that occur as a result of the development are not lost.
The planning review is also an opportunity for all comers to have their say on whether councillors of an independent professional body (MDAP in Mosman) should be the decision maker. The whole issue of appeals is up for discussion, as is the extent to which a determination needs to give detailed reasons as to why approval has been given despite the submissions of specific objectors.
The real test for the review will be the green paper, The planning system is always going to be a balancing act between giving the community a say and allowing property owners to develop their sites without excessive cost, delay and bureaucracy. It is also a balancing act between the environment and the economy and between a simple uniform system (one size fits all) and allowing for regional difference. I wish Tim Moore and Ron Dyer well in their endeavours
Download the options paper or make a submission
