A new rule for Sydney councils could make development harder and cost ratepayers more
FROM tomorrow, as few as 10 people could stop or delay a development going ahead under new statewide reforms — and it could also cost ratepayers more money.
Manly
Don't miss out on the headlines from Manly. Followed categories will be added to My News.
AS FEW as 10 people could stop or delay a development going ahead under new statewide reforms meaning more applications would go to an independent panel for assessment.
The changes, coming into effect tomorrow, are based on the independent Hearing Assessment Panel (IHAP) model now used by 15 councils, including Northern Beaches.
But, unlike the IHAP, the local planning panels — which will be in place for all metropolitan councils — would scrutinise development applications worth more than $2 million or which have received 10 or more objections.
“Two million dollars is a small fee these days, believe it or not,” Mayor Michael Regan said. “It is just going to add considerably more applications to the panel, which adds more cost to the ratepayers.”
He said the cost to ratepayers “are enormous and can’t be underestimated”.
Previously the council’s IHAP met 10 to 12 times a year. Under the new system, local planning panels could meet up to 37 times, costing $237,000 more just in fees for panel members.
“The government has the right intention, however there is not enough flexibility within the legislation to allow current delegations by staff,” Cr Regan said.
A report scheduled for last night’s council meeting said under the new laws at least 51 DAs council staff dealt with between October and December last year would now be deferred.
“If this is going to be the standard, you are talking hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not millions, in additional costs to the ratepayer for something which could have been done by staff or internal panels in our model which has been successful,” Cr Regan said. “It has potential to slow the most basic DAs down.”
There is also more chance for serial complainers to disrupt the process.
“It has the potential to be manipulated, for objectors to manipulate a DA and have it go through a panel which costs more money and slows the process down,” he said.
“During my time on council, I have seen some interesting submissions.
‘There are sometimes very targeted objections at an individual, not necessarily a planning issue, which could be construed as vindictive.”
Planning Minister Anthony Roberts told the Manly Daily that was not the case.
“That just adds another level of protection for communities,” he said. He said it did not open up the possibility of small groups manipulating the process “any more than any process that is currently used”.
“In some councils one person can turn around and go to the council and an item is called up for discussion for no reason other than a councillor wants it called up.”
Mr Roberts said the changes would save money.
“Yes, there is a cost, but it has been proven that these are more efficient once up and running from an administrative point of view as well as a legal point of view,” he said.
The former Pittwater council did not approve the IHAP process but ratepayers were forced into it through mergers. Previously, contentious DAs were referred to a council meeting in Pittwater.
“This will be change for the better ... we want our councillors to be concentrating on getting the local environment plans (LEPs) and development control plans (DCPs) right,” Mr Roberts said.
“We want them looking at the strategic side of things, and frankly councillors should have better things to do than decide whether someone is allowed to build a pergola in their backyard.”
From tomorrow any development over $30 million will be referred to the larger Sydney North Planning Panel, down from $50 million.
The local panel will be led by former Land and Environment Court judge Peter Biscoe.
The council’s chief executive officer Mark Ferguson said there would be five people on the panel. The remaining spots would consist of a selection of six community members who would rotate in and out of the panel.
“It is a fairer way of doing things. It provides a higher level of assessment on the applications and there is more independence in the process,” Mr Ferguson said.