2016-12-12 General Committee Agenda

GENERAL COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA                                              12 DECEMBER 2016


J.   Attachment 2 of this report which includes feedback to the Department of Infrastructure,
     Local Government and Planning on the specific issues the Department requested comment
     on;
K.   The ability to opt-out of an information request in the Development Assessment Rules is
     likely to add significant complexity to the development assessment process without adding
     value, as an applicant has multiple options in regard to giving a response to a request for
     further information. It is critical that Councils and state agencies retain the ability to raise
     issues and identify further information that is required in order to fully understand and
     assess development proposals. The opt-out step should be deleted from the Development
     Assessment Rules;
L.   The ability for applicants to determine at what point during the assessment stage public
     notification will occur, including prior to a response to responding to an information request,
     is likely to significantly complicate the development assessment process in contravention of
     the intended outcome. This ‘floating’ public notification will also impact on local
     government systems and process due to inconsistency in regard to when public notification
     will take place. Further the purpose of public notification is to assist community members
     in being informed of the proposed development, yet a ‘floating’ public notification
     undermines certainty and community confidence in understanding the planning processes
     and development proposals. It is critical that the community have all the information about
     a development proposal, including responses to Council’s information request, when
     making submissions to a development application. The public notification should only
     occur after responses to the information request have been received and thus made public.
M.   The removal of existing requirements for notices to be placed in local newspapers is also
     not supported as it may limit the ability for the community to be aware of development
     proposals and engagement in planning and development decisions;
N.   The Planning Bill introduces the ability for costs to be awarded in regard to enforcement
     notice appeals. However it is unclear in the drafting as to the rules when costs would be
     awarded and it is considered that the same criteria as proposed for development
     application appeals should apply to enforcement notice appeals; and
O.   The State Government is to be commended in acknowledging that the planning system
     must be grounded in local communities and for recognising and supporting the central role
     of local government in land use planning and decision making. In addition, the commitment
     the State Government has made to providing time and to consider funding support for local
     governments to manage a transition process to new planning legislation is appreciated.
     Council is also pleased that the former appeal cost provisions of SPA have been returned.


Finance & Risk
A number of options have been reviewed to address the likely impacts of the Planning Act 2016
and Development Assessment Rules such as making use of private certification as envisaged by
the Planning Act 2016, engagement of consultants, reporting by exception/fast tracking etc.
through a Service Review process. A Service Review concluded that these options will not
maintain the current service levels and standards for planning outcomes sought by the Noosa
community and the preferred option is for additional resources to be added to the DA Planning
team.
These additional resources would need to be funded by potentially raising fees and charges for
development applications by 10% or more.




                                                                                     Page 33 of 81