Better Planning Network Presentation at Mona Vale, Tuesday 25th of June, 2013
About 80 attended the Better Planning Network’s Presentation hosted by community group People for Pittwater on Tuesday evening. Those attending heard illuminating insights into the NSW Government’s Department of Planning and Infrastructure’s - White Paper – A new planning system for NSW and associated documents from BPN’s Corinne Fisher and Pittwater Council’s former General Manager Angus Gordon (between 1996 and 2005), a Civil Engineer, was also on hand and spoke equally eloquently.
Corrine Fisher spoke to our Michael Mannington prior to the meeting commencement and stated that “people living locally were very worried about many aspects of the new planning system being proposed by the NSW Government and the impacts it is going to have on local democracy, residents rights, the impact on local development decisions, and the impacts on our environment and heritage.”
MM: what do you think the Better Planning network can do for the people of Pittwater?
CF: the Better Planning Network is an affiliation of over 410 community groups across the state, many of these groups are in the Pittwater area. By working together we are building a very strong campaign to raise community awareness of what is being proposed by government and to show government that we will fight for our rights.
People should feel empowered to both make a submission by the 28th of June and beyond the 28th of June we will encourage people to contact their local representative for NSW Government and also the Minister Brad Hazzard, the Premier and Treasurer and all others in government who are making the decisions to reiterate their own views.
Corrine Fisher BPN
Angus Gordon addressed a range of issues the proposed planning system raises outlining in particular the new proposals addressing developments in already developed areas and those proposed for undeveloped areas. Mr Gordon empathised that most of choose to live in the areas we live in because these areas have a living strategic plan; if someone wants to build in green fields they’ve got to pay the whole amount of government levies for a new development where if they build at ground fields then they don’t. if they did have to pay to increase the infrastructure it would amount to four times their costs.
Mr Gordon: It is much cheaper for developers to build in brown or ground fields than green fields; they can make greater profits; the only problem with this is the assumption that you can crowd more into brown fields is that it is based on the assumption that all of the services or infrastructure is in fact capable of taking the extras on.
This style of development stems from the 1970’s; that if we look at Sydney Water and their water supply system was designed for the sorts of projections for populations of the 1970’s and going into the 1980’s; certainly not for the operations needed today. If you live in an area like mine you may keep wondering why the pipes keep blowing up; the reason is that they have to pressurise them all because they were never designed for what they have to provide today. You may wonder why our sewerage plants have to discharge poorly treated sewerage when it rains; because it was never designed for what has happened, for the amount of people here now. This is not just in this area, this is across Sydney that this is happening. I’m not even going to start on the roads; you all understand what is happening with our roads.
So who’s paying for this; who’s paying to fix this? Well, what’s happening to your power bills, what’s happening to your water bills and sewerage bills; yes; you are paying what the developers should be paying. That’s why I stress we don’t want them going into ground field areas because we are the ones picking up the tab.
The State Government, through what it’s doing here, without separating this, and they could easily separate this Act into two parts, the finances into two parts, what they have done is inflict on all of those in developed areas to pay for the developers profits.
How many times have you heard that NSW’s is broke? How many times have you heard about all this new infrastructure that’s going to be built, not to service new green fields but to overcome the problems of the past?
What they’re really saying is that because of the incompetence of the Department of Planning in the past N.S.W.’s is broke and everybody has got to pay for it.
This is the same organisation that is projecting this forward. This is being pushed onto us to make a smoother cover up for what they’ve done.
Mr Gordon referred to the Strategic Plan for Warriewood Valley that the Director General signed off on a few weeks ago, a strange set of machinations or a blatant prelude of what will come that we outlined in Issue 116 in our article: Is the White Paper: A New Planning System for NSW and the Exposure draft legislation already in place??
Mr Gordon closed with:
I encourage all of you not just now or for our children, but also for our grandchildren, to scrutinise all that is being done at present and really make a stand on this issue.
Three last points we’d like to close this report on, the last emailed to us, the first two found on the BPN and the NSW Government’s Planning and Infrastructure websites while going to Press, should provide more food for thought during the coming weeks as we head towards seeing and hearing what comes next:
__________________________________________
Corruption Risk Remains in NSW Planning Bills Despite ICAC Warning – media release from Better Planning Network, June 27th, 2013
The NSW Government has ignored warnings from the Independent Commission Against Corruption that its new planning system is open to corruption.
Better Planning Network’s Corrine Fisher said “We are deeply concerned that there will be a high risk of corruption occurring under the new laws.''
In its submission on the Planning Green Paper in September 2012, the ICAC identified corruption risk in areas including:
• increased flexibility of the new system;
• the newly created merit assessment stream for non-compliant proposals;
• the wide discretion afforded decisions makers where large windfall gains are possible;
• expansion of appeal rights for proponents (developers) even when they submit a non-compliant proposal, with no similar appeal rights for objectors.
“It is surprising that the ICAC had to remind the Government of these risks when the Green Paper came out because they had already produced a report Anti-Corruption Safeguards and the NSW Planning System seven months earlier. It seems the report was ignored then and there’s no evidence that the Government has acted even now,” said Ms Fisher.
The Better Planning Network has produced an analysis of how the new Planning Bills fail to meet the six corruption safeguards that the ICAC recommended should be integrated into the NSW Planning System to reduce the frequency of corruption. That analysis is attached to this email.
BPN urges the Government to commission the ICAC to audit the planning Bills.
''We want an assurance that the Government will be rigorous in weeding out corruption risks from the new Planning system,” said Ms Fisher. “The corruption risks should be addressed and removed before the legislation is presented to Parliament.”
‘The people of NSW have a right to expect that corruption risk is not an integral part of the State’s planning system and the government has a responsibility to ensure that it is not.”
______________________________________________
RESPONSE GIVEN TO THE SYDNEY MORNING HERALD RE HERITAGE IN THE PLANNING WHITE PAPER – June 29, 2013 from Department of Planning and Infrastructure
On 29 June 2013, an article appeared in the Sydney Morning Herald about heritage issues in the Government’s proposed new planning system. Below is the full response the department gave to the Sydney Morning Herald:
RESPONSE
We’ve told the Heritage Council there would be little change to its role deciding on development applications relating to State heritage items.
The White Paper and supporting draft legislation proposes a far more coordinated approach in regard to decisions or advice by State authorities on development applications. This is in line with recommendations from the Council of Australian Governments to improve integration and reduce delays in this area.
Agencies in 2011-12 took on average 50 days to comment on development applications, up from 47 days in 2010-11.
Under the legislation, the Department of Planning and Infrastructure will have a reserve power to co-ordinate and resolve this feedback from State agencies.
However we’ve made it clear when discussing this issue with the Heritage Council, that it would only be when there are delays or where the Council’s decision conflicts with another agency.
As mentioned above, this means there would be little change.
There will be a protocol with the Heritage Council to implement this approach.
Furthermore, the new planning system will benefit the conservation of heritage by ensuring planning controls are more regularly updated and for heritage issues to be closely scrutinised in this process.
This means heritage will be considered upfront when the planning vision for an area is set, not as an after-thought once a development application has been lodged which is often the case at the present time.
The listing of new State heritage items is not touched at all by the new planning system and is covered under separate NSW legislation, the Heritage Act.
Submissions close on the White Paper - 28 June 2013, (received 4.15p.m) from NSW Department of Planning and Infrastructure
Thank you for your interest regarding the White Paper – A New Planning System for NSW. As you may be aware formal submissions close today. We wish to take this opportunity to thank everyone who attended our discussion sessions and made a submission.
In April 2013 the White Paper was launched for public comment. A comprehensive consultation program has been developed in partnership with the UTS Centre for Local Government.
Our consultation has included 40 forums held for the community and practitioners across the state, with 2,160 people attending the sessions. Department representatives also attended more than 60 other meetings with stakeholders to discuss the reforms and listen to a range of views.
More than 2,000 submissions have already been received. A feedback report on the White Paper and draft legislation will be released following the exhibition period and made available at www.planning.nsw.gov.au/newplanningsystem
The feedback report will outline how the government has responded to comments and submissions, as well as any changes that have been made. We look forward to continuing the conversation as we move towards implementing the new planning system.
_________________________________________
Submissions close on the White Paper - 28 June 2013, (received 4.15p.m) from NSW Department of Planning and Infrastructure
Thank you for your interest regarding the White Paper – A New Planning System for NSW. As you may be aware formal submissions close today. We wish to take this opportunity to thank everyone who attended our discussion sessions and made a submission.
In April 2013 the White Paper was launched for public comment. A comprehensive consultation program has been developed in partnership with the UTS Centre for Local Government.
Our consultation has included 40 forums held for the community and practitioners across the state, with 2,160 people attending the sessions. Department representatives also attended more than 60 other meetings with stakeholders to discuss the reforms and listen to a range of views.
More than 2,000 submissions have already been received. A feedback report on the White Paper and draft legislation will be released following the exhibition period and made available at www.planning.nsw.gov.au/newplanningsystem
The feedback report will outline how the government has responded to comments and submissions, as well as any changes that have been made. We look forward to continuing the conversation as we move towards implementing the new planning system.