2015-10-13 Planning & Organisation Committee Agenda

PLANNING & ORGANISATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA                                              13 OCTOBER 2015


PLANNING & INFRASTRUCTURE DEPARTMENT REPORTS
(Planning & Development Sections only)

Planning & Environment
1                        STATE PLANNING REFORM - DRAFT PLANNING BILLS
DOCUMENT INFORM AT ION




Author                              Manager, Planning & Environment, Kerri Coyle
                                    Principal Strategic Planner, Rebecca Britton
                                    Infrastructure Assessment Coordinator, Oddbjorn Ludvigsen
                                    Planning & Infrastructure Department

Index                               ECM/Subject/Planning Instruments/State Planning

Attachments                         1.    Comments on Infrastructure Charges Provisions
                                    2.    Table of Feedback Sought on Proposed Options


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Not Applicable

RECOMMENDATION
That Council note the report by the Manager, Planning & Environment, Principal Strategic
Planner and Infrastructure Assessment Coordinator to the Planning & Organisation
Committee Meeting dated 13 October 2015 and make a submission to the Department of
Infrastructure, Local Government and Planning on the draft Planning Bills in accordance
with the following:
A.                        The Planning & Development Bill and Planning & Development Regulations are not
                          clear in the decision rules, particularly for those applications which conflict with the
                          planning scheme. It is considered that where an application conflicts with the
                          planning scheme, the onus of proof should be on the applicant to prove the merits of
                          the proposal and justify any inconsistencies. Further, clear grounds and/or reasons
                          should be required to be provided as part of the decision in order to ensure a
                          transparent, accountable development assessment system for the community;
B.                        The definition of material change of use should not be limited to only increases in
                          scale and density of the premises, as there are circumstances where reducing the
                          scale of the development does materially change the site’s use. This is particularly
                          relevant for developments which include an important community use or the like. For
                          example removing the nursing home component from a retirement village may have
                          a significant social impact on an area;
C.                        Case law on the SPA definition of ‘use’ makes it clear that secondary uses forming
                          part of a primary use must not only be incidental, but also necessarily associated
                          such that it would be impossible for the primary use to be carried out in the absence
                          of the incidental use. The definition proposed in the Bill related to ‘use’ fundamentally
                          expands the activities that may be carried out because secondary activities need not
                          be necessarily associated with the primary use to be considered part of that use and
                          as a result, lawful. The regulation and enforcement of activities that were not
                          contemplated as part of a development approval (although ancillary) may prove
                          problematic for councils and undermine local communities’ understanding of the
                          development process;




                                                                                                    Page 3 of 110