The Way Ahead for Planning in NSWRecommendations of the NSW Planning System Review
June 2012
Volume 2 – Other Issues
JUNE 2012THE W
AY AHEAD FOR PLANNING IN NSW | RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE NSW
PLANNING SYSTEM REVIEW | VOLUM
E 2
About the Authors
Tim Moore:• AppointedSeniorCommissioneroftheLandand
EnvironmentCourtofNewSouthWaleson12March2009
• CommissioneroftheLandandEnvironmentCourt(appointedNovember2002)
• BachelorofLaws(UNSW)1977• GraduateDiplomainPlanning(UTS)2008• MemberoftheNSWLegislativeAssemblyforthe
ElectorateofGordonbetween1976-1992• NewSouthWalesMinisterfortheEnvironment
1988-1992• ExecutiveDirectoroftheNSWMasterBuilders
Association1992-1993• AssistantSecretary,DepartmentPrimeMinisterand
CabinetandSecretarytotheCouncilforAboriginalReconciliation1993-1996
• Practisedasabarristerintheareasofplanningandenvironmentlaw,commercialandcorporationslawandbuildingdisputes1997-2002
Ron Dyer:• AdmittedasasolicitoroftheNewSouthWales
SupremeCourt1972• DiplomainCriminology1975• MemberoftheNSWLegislativeCouncilbetween
1979and2003• MinisterforCommunityServices,MinisterforAged
ServicesandDisabilityServices1995-1997• MinisterforPublicWorksandServices1997-1999• DeputyLeaderoftheGovernmentintheLegislative
Council1995-1999• Chair,LegislativeCouncilStandingCommitteeonLaw
andJustice1999–2003• MemberoftheBoardoftheMotorAccidentsAuthority
ofNSWsince2006
©CrownCopyright2012NSWGovernmentISBN978-0-7313-3549-7
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSWRecommendations of the NSW Planning System ReviewJune2012Volume 2 – Other Issues
DISCLAIMER
Whileeveryreasonableefforthasbeenmadetoensurethatthisdocumentiscorrectatthetimeofprinting,theStateofNSW,itsagentsandemployees,disclaimanyandallliabilitytoanypersoninrespectofanythingortheconsequencesofanythingdoneoromittedtobedoneinrelianceuponthewholeoranypartofthisdocument.
COPYRIGHTNOTICE
InkeepingwiththeNSWGovernment’scommitmenttoencouragetheavailabilityofinformation,youarewelcometoreproducethematerialthatappearsintheRecommendationsoftheNSWPlanningSystemReview:Volume2–OtherIssuesforpersonal,in-houseornon-commercialusewithoutformalpermissionorcharge.Allotherrightsarereserved.Ifyouwishtoreproduce,alter,storeortransmitmaterialappearingintheRecommendationsoftheNSWPlanningSystemReview:Volume2–OtherIssuesforanyotherpurpose,requestforformalpermissionshouldbedirectedtotheNSWPlanningSystemReview,GPOBox39,SydneyNSW2001.
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 1
Letter to the Minister from Joint Chairs
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 20122
TABLE OF CONTENTSPrologue. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4RecommendationsinVolume2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6PART1–ThePlanningCommission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28Membership. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29Hearingsandprocedure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32Powertodeterminemattersarisingunderotherlegislation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .35AppealsfromPlanningCommissiondecisions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .35ProvisionofinformationaboutthePlanningCommission. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36Othermatters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36
PART2–TheMinister,Director-GeneralandDepartment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .41TheroleoftheMinister . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41TheroleoftheDirector-General. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .42TheroleoftheDepartment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
PART3–FinancialMatters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46Localinfrastructurefunding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46FundingfortheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .50Fundinginformationtechnologyinareformedplanningsystem. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .52FundingthePlanningCommission. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .53Legislativecostshifting–PlanningCommission&JointRegionalPlanningPanels. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .53Developmentapplicationfees. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .54Developmentcontributionsforuniversities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .55
PART4–TheSpatialInformationAct . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56Legislativestructure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56Co-ordinatingcommitteeforspatialinformation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .57Responsibilityforpreparationofthelegislation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .58
PART5–Integrityintheplanningsystem. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .59PART6–TheSustainablePlanningAct–additionalmatters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .67
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67Alternativecommunityconsultationprocesses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .67Alternativedecision-makingprocesses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67Amendmentstodevelopmentproposalsduringassessmentprocesses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .68Architecturalreviewanddesignpanels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .70Assessingdevelopmentproposedbypublicauthorities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .70Assistingelectedcouncillorsindevelopmentdecisionmaking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .72Availabilityofassessmentreports. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .73Bestpracticeguidelinesforplandevelopment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74Certificationofcodeassessabledevelopmentproposals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .74ChangestoLocalLand-UsePlans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .75Conditionsofdevelopmentconsent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .76DefinitionsintheSustainablePlanningAct. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .79Demolition–limitationsondevelopmentapprovals. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .83Determiningdevelopmentproposedbypublicauthorities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84Developmentapplicationswithminorcodenon-compliances. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .86Developmenttofittheexemptandcodeassessableclassifications. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87Existinguses:Changes,expansionorintensification. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .87Incompleteapplications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89IndependentHearingandAssessmentPanels. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .90IndependentHearingandDeterminationPanels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .91JointRegionalPlanningPanels. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .91Landowner’sconsent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .94Modeldelegationsfordevelopmentdecisionmakinginlocalcouncils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .95Modificationstoexistingapproveddevelopment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .95
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 3
Namesforapplicationstoreflectpurpose. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .96PlainEnglishguidetotheclassificationofdevelopment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .96Potentialcrossborderimpacts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .97PreambletotheSustainablePlanningAct?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .98Registerofconsents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99Removing“consistency”asadesigncriterioninassessments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100‘StoptheClock’Provisions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101Verificationofthestateddevelopmentapplicationvalues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
PART7–TheLandandEnvironmentCourt–additionalmatters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103Hearingfromobjectorsduringconciliationprocesses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103Costsorders–applicationamendmentduringtheappealprocess . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104Extensionofordersabletobemadein‘remedyorrestrain’matters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104CommissionersassistingJudgesinClass4matters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105Class4mattersandrelatedcommonlawissues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105Revocationofdevelopmentconsents. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106Challengestovalidityofdevelopmentconsents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107Costsordersincivilenforcementcases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107Compliancecosts/expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
PART8–Councils–additionalmatters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109CouncilOrdermakinggenerally. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109Draftingprecisionfororders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110Strictliabilitypenaltynoticeoffence–falseormisleadinginformation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .111
PART9–Enforcementpolicies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .112PART10–EnvironmentalImpactStatements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114AccreditationforthosepreparinganEISorsupportingstudies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115Carbonaccounting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116Director-General’srequirementsforEnvironmentalImpactStatements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116ReviewsofEnvironmentImpactStatements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
PART11–FormerAboriginalreservesandmissions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119PART12–CommunityEngagement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .122
Assistingwiththe“righttoknow”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .122Precinctcommittees. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122ProjectidentificationontheDepartment’swebsite. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
PART13–Otherreformmeasures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124PlanningintheunincorporatedareaoftheState. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124RevitalisationoftheNewcastleCentralBusinessDistrict . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125Transferabledevelopmentrightstoagriculturalland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126
PART14–Certificationmatters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128Theroleofprivatecertifiers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128Finalandinterimoccupationcertificates. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
PART15–Rejectedmatters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131Mattersoutsidethescopeofourreview. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131Rejectedmatter–Anabsoluterighttodevelop. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131Rejectedmatter–Commercialviabilityofaproposeddevelopment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132Rejectedmatter–Commercialviabilityofexistingbusinesses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132Rejectedmatter–Deemedapprovals. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133Rejectedmatter–Pastperformanceofadevelopmentapplicant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133Rejectedmatter–Propertyvalues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134Rejectedmatter–Useofpublicpositivecovenantsbycouncils. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
Glossary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136Index. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140Appendix1:TermsofReference. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
Note:Referencesto‘Volume1’arereferencesto:TheWayAheadforPlanninginNSW–Recommendations
oftheNSWPlanningSystemReview–Volume1MajorIssues.PublishedMay2012,ISBN978-0-7313-3529-9
Prologue
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 20124
PrologueInVolume1ofourReviewPaper,wesetoutthemajorreformsthatarenecessary,inouropinion,toreshapetheplanningsystemofNewSouthWalestomakeitmoreecologically,economicallyandsociallyresponsive.TheprincipalfocusofVolume1wasthebroadstructureof(andmajorelementsfor)theSustainablePlanningAct.Wealsooutlinedthereasonsfor(andbroadfunctionsof )thetwootherpiecesoflegislationweconsidernecessarytosupportthereformprocess,theyare:
• thePlanning Commission Act–toestablishthemembership,functions,powersandprocessesoftheindependentPlanningCommission
• theSpatial Information Act–tofacilitatea‘wholeofgovernment’approachandfoundationalbasisforallspatialinformationheldacrossgovernmentandlocalgovernment.Itwillpermitexternalprivatesectorservicetointegratedataconcerningtelecommunicationsnetworks,gaspipelinesandthelikeintoacommonspatialdatabase.
Inaddition,thisvolumealsosetsoutarangeofmorespecificmattersweconsiderneedtobeaddressedinthedraftingoftheSustainablePlanningAct,ifitistoprovideacoherentframeworkforareformedplanningsystem.Weshouldnote,atthispoint,thatadealofthemoreminoradministrativeelementsoftheEnvironmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979willneedtobecarriedoverintotheSustainablePlanningActanditssupportingregulations.ThismustbeundertakeninafashionthatdoesnotdetractfromthecoreobjectivediscussedinVolume1ofadoptingbestdraftingpracticeinthepreparationofthislegislation.Suchadoptionisnecessarytoproduceprincipallegislationinassimple,narrativeandreadableformaspossiblewiththenecessarycomplexitiescontainedinschedulesorregulations.AswediscussedinVolume1,thepresentplanninglegislationisacomplexandalmostincomprehensiblealphabetsoupandentirelyinaccessibletoordinaryreaders.
Importantly,thisvolumealsosetsoutthedetaileddiscussiononandrecommendationsfortheeffectiveintegrationofformerAboriginalreservesandmissionsintotheplanningsystem.Weacknowledgethatthisprocesswilltakeaconsiderableperiodoftime.Addressingit,however,inourviewisnotmerelyalanduseplanningissuebutitisalsoanimportantsocialjusticestepalongthepathtoreconciliation.
Wehaveprovidedfurthermaterialonfinancialmatters–assufficientfundingforabroadrangeofreformprocessesisessentialiftheyaretosucceed.Cruciallyinthisregard,ifefficientbutmoreimmediateuseofaccruedlocalinfrastructurecontributionsheldbycouncilscanbetriggered,thereispotentialforasignificantshort-termstimulustotheState’seconomytobeachieved.
InVolume1,wenotedthatwehadmadearangeofrecommendationsaddressingissuesofintegritywithinareformedplanningsystem.WenotedthatwehadreceivedasubmissionfromtheIndependentCommissionAgainstCorruptionthathadmade16specificrecommendationsandthatwewouldsetout,inthisvolume,howwehaverespondedtothem.Part5ofthisvolumesetsoutthoserecommendationsandhowwehavedealtwiththem.
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 5
Althoughawiderangeofmattersconcerningprivatebuildingcertificationwereraisedwithusduringtheconsultationprocess,forthereasonssetoutinVolume1,ithasnotbeenappropriateforustoundertake,aspartofareviewoftheplanningsystem,whatwouldhavebeen,ineffect,areviewoftheentiresystemofregulationofthebuildingindustry.Thereare,however,aquitelimitedrangeofareaswhereprivatecertificationandtheplanningsystemintersectandsomeadditionalmattersconcerningprivatecertificationarethereforedealtwithinthisvolume.
Finally,wehavenotconsidereditappropriatetocanvassallofthemattersthatweresetoutintheIssuesPaper1wereleasedinDecember2011thatwerenotadoptedbyusforareformedplanningsystem.However,wehavefeltitdesirabletosetoutsomebriefcommentsonmattersnotproperlywithinthescopeofourreviewandtoexplainwhyasmallnumberofspecificmattersthathadloomedlargeduringtheconsultationprocesswerespecificallyrejectedbyus.
ConclusionWeconsiderthatthewiderangeofrecommendationswehavemadeinVolumes1and2ofourReviewPaperconstituteanappropriatebasisforreformingtheNewSouthWalesplanningsystemthatwillfreeitfrombeingamajorimpedimenttoeconomicactivityintheStatewhilst,atthesametime,restoringpublicconfidenceintheunderlyingintegrityofthesystem.
1 The way forward for planning in NSW?NSWPlanningSystemReview,December2011–ISBN978-0-7313-3968-6
Recommendations in Volume 2
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 20126
Recommendations in Volume 2The Planning Commission1. TheChairpersonofthePlanningCommissionistobeappointedonafull-timebasis.2. TheChairpersonoftheCommissionistobeaJudgeoftheLandandEnvironment
Court,withtheappointmentofanadditionalJudgetotheCourtandtheimmediatesecondmentofthatJudgetothepositionofChairpersonofthePlanningCommission.
3. TheLand and Environment Court Act 1979istoincorporateaprovisionthatwillpermitanyJudgeoftheCourttobeabletoactastheChairpersonoftheCommission.SuchaprovisionwillprovideadefinedpoolofpersonswhowouldbeabletoactasChairperson,intheeventthatthepermanentlyassignedChairpersontookleaveanditwasdesirabletomakeareplacementduringthatperiodofabsence.
4. TheJudgeselectedtobeappointedandsecondedtothePlanningCommissionmustalsohavethenecessaryskillsandattributestoperformtheroleofaJudgeoftheCourt,aswellasthosenecessarytofulfiltheroleatthePlanningCommission.
5. ResponsibilityforselectionoftheChairpersonofthePlanningCommissionistoliewiththeAttorneyGeneralwiththeconcurrenceoftheMinisterforPlanningandInfrastructure.
6. TheChairpersonofthePlanningCommissionistoexercisethefollowingfunctions:• presideoverdeterminationprocessesforcomplexand/orcontroversialprojects
• determinethecompositionofPanelstohearanddeterminemattersoverwhichtheChairpersondoesnotpreside
• allocateminormatterstosinglemembersoftheCommissionfordetermination,includingmodificationmattersthatcanbedealtwithonthepapers
• runtheselectionprocessforothermembersoftheCommission• runinductiontrainingfornewmembersoftheCommission• establishacontinuingeducationprogrammeformembersoftheCommission• ensurethattheCommission’sprocessesaremanagedtomeetperformancecriteriaestablished(andpublished)fortheefficientdischargeoftheCommission’srole
• undertakeannualperformancereviewsforothermembersoftheCommission• beresponsibleforpreparationoftheCommission’sannualreport• managetheresourcesoftheCommissioninanefficientandcost-effectivefashion.
7. AllofthecostsoftheChairpersonofthePlanningCommission(includingofanyJudgeactingduringanyabsenceoftheChairperson)aretobemetfromitsbudgetandreimbursedtotheDepartmentofAttorneyGeneralandJusticebytheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructure.
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 7
8. TheprocessforselectingCommissionersofthePlanningCommission,whetherfull-timeorpart-time,istobebypublicadvertisementandrecommendationtotheMinisterbyaselectionpanelcomprisingthefollowing:
• theChairpersonoftheCommission• theDirector-GeneraloftheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructure• anindependentpersonnominatedbytheChairperson(withtheconcurrenceoftheMinister).
9. EvenifanexistingCommissionerseeksreappointment,thepositionshouldusuallybesubjecttoacontestableadvertisingprocess.However,iftheChairpersonrecommendsthatadirectreappointmentshouldbemade,thentheMinistermayagreetothis.Full-timeCommissionersshouldholdappointmentforsevenyearsandbeeligibleforasecondtermonly.
10. Part-timeCommissionersaretobeappointedforuptothreeyearswithamaximumperiodofnineyears.
11. ThequalificationsofCommissionersshallremainasprovidedforinSchedule3ofthepresentplanninglegislation.
12. Commissioners(otherthantheChairperson)shouldnotbejudicialofficers.13. ThenumberofpersonsabletobeappointedasCommissionersisnottobelimited.14. ThepowertoappointcasualCommissioners,ifthereisaparticularworkloadissueora
needforhighlyspecialisedexpertise,istoberetained.15. WiththeconcurrenceoftheChiefJudgeandoftheChairperson,aCommissionerof
theLandandEnvironmentCourtistobeabletobeappointedtochairapanelortositonapanelofthePlanningCommission(ifitweretobechairedbytheChairpersonoftheCommission).
16. IfaCommissioneroftheCourtweretotakepartinaPlanningCommissiondeterminationprocess,thecostsoftheCommissioner’sparticipationistocomefromthebudgetofthePlanningCommission.
17. TheChairperson,anyactingChairpersonoranysecondedCommissioneroftheCourtisnottoperformroleofinvestigating,reviewingand/oradvisingtheMinisteronanymatterthattheMinistermighthavereferredtothePlanningCommission.
18. AllmatterstobedealtwithbythePlanningCommissionaretohaveaproperpublichearing.
19. Hearingsarenottobeheldincourtroomsandvenuesshouldbearrangedinasinformalafashionasispossible,consistentwiththescopeofthelikelyparticipationinandpublicattendanceatthehearing.
20. MattersthataretobeconsideredbytheCommissionaretobedealtwithbyapanelthatisselectedbytheChairpersonoftheCommission.
21. PriortoanypublichearingoftheCommissionwherethereislikelytobesignificantpublicparticipationorinvolvetechnicallycomplexmaterial,thereistobeapublicplanningdiscussionwellpriortothedateofthepublichearings.
22. ThepublichearingprocessfortheCommissionistooperateaccordingtopublishedguidelinesthatdonotimposemandatoryrestrictionsortimelimitsonthoseparticipatingbutcontrolofthehearingistoliewiththepanelconductingit.
Recommendations in Volume 2
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 20128
23. ThePlanningCommissionActistoprovidethatthosetakingpartinapublichearingcanonlyberepresentedbyanexternallawyerorpaidagentwiththepermissionofthepanelhearingthematterif,andonlyif,thepanelissatisfiedthatthereissomepublicinterestreasonwhythisshouldbepermitted.
24. Companiesaretobeabletoberepresentedbydirectorsoremployeesofthecompany;theDepartmentbyitsemployees;councilsbycouncillorsorcouncilofficersandindividualsabletospeakontheirownbehalf.
25. Associationsandcommunitygroupsaretobeabletoappointoneoftheirmemberstospeakontheirbehalf.
26. ThePlanningCommission’sprocessesmustremaindistinctlydifferentfromthoseofaCourt:
• Theprocessistobeinquisitorialratherthanadversarial.• Thereistobenocross-examinationprocesses(whetherbylawyersoragents–ifpermitted–orbyanyotherparticipants)ofthosepresentinginformationduringhearings.
• TheCommissionpanelmembersaretoundertakethequestioningofthoseparticipating.
• Therulesofevidencearenottoapply.• Thoseparticipatingarenottobeswornin.• Transcriptsarenotautomaticallytobetakenoftheproceedingsalthough,withpermissionofthepanel,recordingmaybeallowedifthereweresomespecialcircumstancedemonstratedwhythismightbewarranted–ifrecordingweretobepermitted,thecostsofdoingsoshouldbemetbythepersonorentityrequestingpermissionforthistooccur.
27. TheCommissionistogivereasonsforallitsdecisionsexplainingwhythedecisionhasbeenmade.Thedecisionsaretobemadepublicand,ifnotgivenattheendoftheCommissionhearing,aretobenotifiedtoallthosewhoparticipatedinthehearingandpublishedontheCommission’swebsite.
28. Allconcurrencefunctions,nomatterwhatthelegislativeprovisionthatmakestheapprovalnecessary,aretobevestedintheCommissionwhenmakingadecisionaboutadevelopmentproposal.
29. AppealsonquestionsoflawaretobeonthesamebasisasthatwhicharisesintheLandandEnvironmentCourt:
• againstdecisionsmadebyapanelofthePlanningCommissionpresidedoverbytheChairpersonshouldlietotheCourtofAppeal(thisbeingthepositionthatapplieswhenameritappealdeterminationismadebyaJudgeoftheLandandEnvironmentCourt).
• againstdecisionsmadebyanyotherpanelofthePlanningCommissionshouldlietoaJudgeoftheLandandEnvironmentCourt(thisbeingthepositionthatappliesfordecisionsmadebyCommissionersoftheCourt)andthentotheCourtofAppeal.
30. TheCommissionistoprepareandpublishaplainEnglishstep-by-stepguidetoitsprocesses–fromhowamattercomesintoitsremittohowadecisionismade,publicisedanditseffect.
31. AllsecretariatsupportistocontinuetobeprovidedbytheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructure,butbeindependentoftheDepartmentandremaininaseparateoffice.
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 9
32. TheheadoftheCommission’ssecretariatistoberesponsibletotheChairpersonofthePlanningCommissionforhearingprocessmattersandtotherelevantseniorofficeroftheDepartmentforadministrativeandpersonnelmatters.
33. TheMinisterresponsiblefortheSustainablePlanningActistobetheMinisterresponsibleforthePlanningCommissionAct.
34. Generaladministrativesupportforaccounting,payrollandsimilarfunctionsaretocontinuetobeprovidedbytheDepartment.
35. TheGovernmentconsidertheearlyenactmentandcomingintoeffectofthePlanningCommissionActtoenablethestartofreformsthroughthePlanningCommissionprocessindeterminingwhetherornottoapprovemajordevelopmentproposals.
The role of the Minister36. TheMinisteristocontinuetoberesponsiblefortheformalmakingofLocalLand-Use
Plans(asdiscussedinVolume1).However,therewillbealessinterventionistrolefortheMinister(ortheMinister’sdelegates)inthepreparationofamendmentstosuchlocalplans,includingre-zonings.
37. TheMinisteristoretainthepowertoreferprojectsforStatelevelassessmentanddetermination.Themeritsofadecisiontoremoveaprojectfromacouncilwillnotbesubjecttoappeal.
38. WiththeexceptionofthoseprojectsthatweredeclaredbytheMinistertobeStatesignificantinfrastructure,theMinisterisnottomakeanydecisionsaboutwhetheranyprojectshouldbeapproved.DecisionmakingataStatelevelwouldbeundertakenbythePlanningCommission.
39. IftherewerepublicobjectionsduringtheexhibitionstageofaStatesignificantinfrastructureproject,theconditionsproposedbytheMinisterforprojectapprovalareautomaticallytobereferredtothePlanningCommission.TheCommissionistodeterminewhatchanges,ifany,aretobemadetothoseconditions.TheCommissionisnottobepermittedtoconsiderwhethertheprojectshouldbeapproved,ortoimposesuchonerouschangestotheconditionsofapprovalsoastoconstituteconstructiverefusal.
40. TheMinister’sabilitytointervene,generally,intheplanningpowersofacouncilistoremain.
41. TheMinister’spresentpowerstoproposeappointmentstothePlanningCommissionandtheMinister’sroletonominatechairsandstatemembersofJointRegionalPlanningPanelsistoremain.
42. TheMinisteristoretainthepowertogivecouncilsdirectionswithrespecttoDevelopmentControlPlansandthepowertomake,amendorrevokeaDevelopmentControlPlanifthecouncildoesnotimplementtheMinister’sdirection.
43. TheMinister’sgenerallegislativeandregulationmakingfunctionsareotherwisetoremainunchanged.
Recommendations in Volume 2
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201210
The role of the Department 44. TheDepartmentistoestablishaprogrammeforstaffingexchangeswithlargerregional
citycouncils.45. TheDepartmentistosecondstafftosmallerruralcouncilstoassistinstrategicplanning
andforcapacitybuilding.46. TheDepartmentistoestablishanewsub-regionalofficeinWaggaWagga.47. TheDepartmentistoestablishasmall-scaletraineeplannercadetshipschemewitha
cycleoftraineeplacementswithregionalandruralcouncils.48. TheDepartmentistoreviewthetiming,locationandcostsofmeetingsbetween
Departmentalregionalstaffandstaffofregionalandruralcouncils.Thisexaminationistofocusonthenecessityforandaffordabilityofsuchmeetingsandtheuseofalternativeoptionstoeliminatetravelthatcanarisefromtechnologysuchaswebcameras.
The compliance role of the Department
49. TheSustainablePlanningActistoincludeaprovisionpermittingtheimpositionofchargesonprojectsapprovedbytheMinisterand/orthePlanningAssessmentCommissionand/orthePlanningCommissionforthepurposesoffundingDepartmentalcomplianceactivitiesdirectedatthoseclassesofproject.
Financial matters
Local infrastructure funding
Deriving local contributions50. TheSustainablePlanningActistoincludeprovisionsforthethreemethodsfor
derivinglocalinfrastructurecontributionscurrentlyprovidedforinthepresentplanninglegislation.
Accountability and planning agreements51. TheprovisionscontainedintheuncommencedSchedule1Part3tothepresent
planninglegislationrelatingtoPlanningAgreementsaretobeincorporatedintheSustainablePlanningAct.
52. Anyassessingofficerconsideringwhethertorecommendacceptanceofthetermsofavoluntaryplanningagreement,oranydecisionmakingbodydeterminingwhetherornottoenterintosuchanagreement,istoberequiredtoconsideranysubmissionsreceivedduringthenoticeperiodoftheproposedagreement.
Content of Local Infrastructure Plans53. CouncilsaretosubmitdraftLocalInfrastructurePlans(oramendmentstothem)tothe
Director-GeneraloftheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructureforreview.54. TheDirector-Generalmaymodifyanysuchplan.
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 11
55. IftheDirector-Generalmodifiesaplan,thecouncilmayrequesttheproposedmodificationbereferredtothePlanningCommissionfordetermination.
56. APlanningCommissiondeterminationonaLocalInfrastructurePlanistobetreatedaswouldanapplicationforaprojectdetermination.
Accumulated local infrastructure funds57. AreferenceistobegiventotheIndependentPricingandRegulatoryTribunalto
determinehowtoacceleratetheexpenditureofaccumulatedfundsraisedbycouncilsfromlocalinfrastructurecontributions.
58. Councilsarerequiredtopublishthefollowingaspartoftheirannualreporting:• asimplifiedanalysisofsuchmoniescollectedandexpended• infrastructureprovided• anticipatedtimetablingforfutureinfrastructuretobefundedfromtheseinfrastructurecharges.
Contributions appeals to the Land and Environment Court59. TherightofappealtotheLandandEnvironmentCourtinitsClass1jurisdiction
againstthereasonablenessofconditionsimposingacontributionforlocalcommunityinfrastructureistoberetained.
Fitting a Local Infrastructure Plan into the unitary planning document framework60. AlllocalinfrastructurecontributionsplansaretobeconsolidatedintoasingleLocal
InfrastructurePlanandincorporatedintotheDevelopmentControlPlanintheunitaryplanningdocumentforacouncil.
61. ThisconsolidationistotakeplacewhenthecounciltranslatesitsDevelopmentControlPlantothestandardtemplateforsuchplans.
Funding for the Department of Planning and Infrastructure62. Developmentapplicationassessmentfeesformajorprojectsandcontributionstothe
PlanningReformFundaretoberemittedtotheStateTreasury.63. ThebudgetoftheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructureistobebroughtwithin
theconventionalbudgetbiddingandsettingprocessoftheConsolidatedFund.64. ThemoniesraisedasPlanningReformFundleviesaretobeappliedtothreepurposes:
• meetingtheappropriateportionofthebudgetoftheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructure(butexcludingassessmentcostsformajorprojectassessments).
• providingafundfromwhichtheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructurecanmakegrantstocouncilstorolloutcomprehensiveuseofinformationtechnologytosupporte-planninganddataaccuracyandfuturecollection.
• meetingthecostsofthePlanningCommission.
Recommendations in Volume 2
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201212
Funding information technology in a reformed planning system65. Inconsultationwithlocalgovernment,theDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructure
istoestablishaframeworkforassessingcouncilgrantapplicationsforgrantsgiventocouncilstoimprovetheiruseofinformationtechnology,tosupporte-planning,electronicdataaccuracyandfuturecollection.
66. TheDepartment’sbudgetistoincludeanallocation(drawnfrommoniespaidintothePlanningReformFund)forthemakingofsuchgrants.
Funding the Planning Commission67. SufficientbudgetallocationistobemadeforthePlanningCommissiontoenableitto
fulfiltheexpandedroleintendedforit.
Legislative cost shifting – Planning Commission & Joint Regional Planning Panels68. CostrecoveryfromcouncilsisnottobeincludedintheSustainablePlanningActwhen
eitherthePlanningCommissionorJointRegionalPlanningPanelsactasconsentauthoritiesfordevelopmentonlandinacouncil’sarea.
69. TheStateistoforgivedebtsthathaveaccrued(andwillcontinuetoaccrue)undersection23Oofthepresentplanninglegislationuntilitsrepealiseffected.
70. ThepresentprovisionrequiringacounciltomeetthecostofanyIndependentHearingAssessmentPanelthatitmightestablishistoberetained.
71. AsimilarprovisionistobeincorporatedforanyIndependentHearingandDeterminationPaneloranyArchitectural,Designand/orHeritageAssessmentPanel.
Adjustment of development application fees72. AreferenceistobegiventotheIndependentPricingandRegulatoryTribunalto
investigatewhetherdevelopmentapplicationfeescalesforcouncilsshouldbeincreasedtoensurethattheyreflectaproperuserpaysbasisfortheassessmentanddeterminationprocessesfordevelopmentapplications.
73. Theprocessforsettingcouncildevelopmentapplicationfeescalesistoprovidethatthesefeesareadjusted,automaticallyonanannualbasis,bythesamepercentageasthebaseannualincreasepercentageforordinarycouncilraterevenue.
Development contributions for Universities 74. Universitydevelopmentsforstudentaccommodation,teachingandresearchfacilities
arenottobesubjecttodevelopmentcontributionsexceptfordrainageandtrafficmanagementworks(atthedevelopmentsite’sentrance).
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 13
The Spatial Information Act 75. TheSpatialInformationActbeenactedcoveringcertainclassesofspatialinformation
heldinelectronicformbygovernmentagenciesthatrelatetoNewSouthWales(includingthecoastalwatersoftheState).
76. DraftingoftheSpatialInformationActistoberesponsibilityoftheDepartmentofFinanceandServicesassistedbytheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructure.
The Sustainable Planning Act – additional matters
Alternative community consultation processes77. Thebestpracticeguidelinesforplanmaking(strategicplanningandlocalland-use
planning)aretoincludeexplanationsofhowalternativecommunityconsultationprocessesmightbeutilisedinplandevelopment.
Alternative Decision-making processes78. TheSustainablePlanningActistopermitacounciltoadoptanalternativedecision
makingprocess,outsidethescopeofthemandatoryrangeofprocessesprovidedfor,butonlywiththeconcurrenceoftheMinisterforPlanningandInfrastructure.
Amendments to development proposals during assessment processes
79. TheSustainablePlanningActistomakeitclearthatanyamendmentsmadetoaproposedprojectduringtheassessmentprocesscannotaltertheproposalinsuchamajorwaythatitisnolongersubstantiallythesameprojectasthatintheoriginalapplication.
80. Amendmentstocodeassessabledevelopmentaretobepermittedpriortodeterminationoftheapplication.
81. Unless,intheopinionoftheassessingcertifier,theamendmentsareminor,ortheassessingcertifierissatisfiedthattheamendmentsarebeingmadeafterconsultationwiththeownersandoccupiersofallneighbouringpropertiesandareagreedtobythoseowners,anyamendmentstocodeassessableapplicationswillrequirethecounciltoprovideacopyoftheamendmentstotheownersoftheneighbouringpropertieswhoseownershavenotagreedtotheamendments.
82. Formeritandimpactassessabledevelopment,iftheamendmentsarenotminorintheopinionoftheassessingofficer,theamendmentsaretohaveafurthernotificationperiod,orextensionofthenotificationperiodiftheamendmentsaremadeduringtheoriginalnotificationperiod.
83. Formeritassessabledevelopment,theadditionalnotificationperiodistobe5 working days,whilstforimpactassessabledevelopmentitistobe10 working dayseachtimeamendmentsareproposed.
84. Ifextensionsaremadetothenotificationperiod,asimilarextensionistobeappliedautomaticallytothemandatedperiodfordetermination.
Recommendations in Volume 2
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201214
85. Anyamendmentsaretobenotifiedontheassessingbody’swebsite.86. Formeritandimpactassessabledevelopment,thereistobeelectronicnotificationto
anypersonswhohavenotifiedtheassessingbodythattheywishedtobeinformedofanyamendmentsorwhohavealreadylodgedasubmission.
Architectural review and design panels87. Councilsaretobeabletoestablishspecialistlocaladvisorypanelstodealsolelywith
architectural,urbandesignand/orheritagematters.
Assessing development proposed by public authorities 88. Assessmentprocessesforpublicauthorityprojectsaretobeassetoutbelow:
Development Track Assessment Body
Exempt Publicauthority
Prohibited Notapplicable
Codeassessment Publicauthority
Meritassessment Publicauthority
Impactassessment PublicauthorityorDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructure
Assisting elected councillors in development decision making89. Theworkinggroupestablishedtocreateaprofessionaldevelopmentprogramfor
councilandStateGovernmentplannersisalsotoconsiderwaystodevelopanddelivertrainingmaterialsforelectedcouncillorsonplanningpolicyanddevelopmentdecisionmaking.
Availability of assessment reports90. Anyassessmentreportformeritassessableorimpactassessabledevelopment
proposalsistobemadeavailableonthewebsiteoftheassessingbody,atleastoneweekpriortoanydeterminationbeingmadeoranyhearingplanningmeetingofthePlanningCommission.
91. Ifthesubmittershaveregisteredane-mailaddress,theassessingauthorityistoe-mailadvisingoftheavailabilityoftheassessmentreportontheassessingauthority’swebsite.
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 15
Certification of code assessable development proposals92. TheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructureistoconveneaworkinggroupdrawn
frompropertyindustryinterests;localgovernment;therelevantprofessions(planning,architecture,urbandesign,heritageandlaw);andconservationandcommunitygroups[reflectingthecompositionofthePlanningAdvisoryBoard]todevelopdraftguidelinesonbestpracticeoptionsforcommunityengagementintheplandevelopmentprocess.
93. TheguidelinesaretobeconsideredbythePlanningAdvisoryBoardpriortoadoptionbytheMinisterforPlanningandInfrastructure.
Certification of code assessable development proposals
94. Privatecertifiers(includingpartnersinoremployeesofthesameentity)andcouncilstaffarenottobepermittedtoinspectdevelopmentsthattheyhaveapproved.
95. Councilsaretobeabletoseekanexemption,fromtheMinisterforPlanningandInfrastructure,tothisprohibition.
Changes to Local Land-Use Plans96. TheprocessesformakingchangestoLocalLand-UsePlans(otherthanthedevelopment
ofanewplanoraregular,statutorilyrequiredreview)aretobedividedintoseparatestreams,onetodealwithrezoningandonetodealwithotherproposedchanges.
97. Proposalsfornon-rezoningchangestoLocalLand-UsePlans(otherthanminorclericalordraftingcorrectingchanges)aretoincorporatepublicnotificationandconsultationpriortoadoptionofsuchachange.
Conditions of development consent
Categorising the elements of a development consent98. Developmentconsentsaretoberequiredtohavetheirconditionsdividedinto:
• thosethatdefineandauthoriseapermitteduseoftheapproveddevelopment• thosethatdefinetheconditionsthatregulateandcontrolthedevelopmentthatisnecessarytoallowthepermittedusetooperate
• thoseconditionsthathaveanongoingbasisinregulatinghowthepermitteduseoperatesintothefuture.
The use of template or default conditions of development consent99. TheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructureistoconveneaworkinggroupwith
representativesfromlocalgovernment,thedevelopmentindustryandcommunityandenvironmentalnetworkstoidentifydevelopmenttypeswheretemplateormodelconditionsofconsentwouldbedesirable(includingdevelopmenttypeswhereconcurrenceauthoritydelaysarecommon)andtodeveloptemplateormodelconditionsofconsentforthosedevelopmenttypes.
Recommendations in Volume 2
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201216
Trial periods for development consents100. TheSustainablePlanningActistomakeitclearthattrialperiodsfordevelopment
proposalsaretobepermittedbutthatamaximumofthreetrialperiodsencompassingatotalmaximumperiodoffiveyearsistoapply,beforeafinaldetermination(togivepermanentapprovalortorefuseapproval)ismadeontheproposal.
Requiring security bonds as a condition of consent101. ConditionsrequiringsecuritybondsaretobepermittedbytheSustainablePlanning
Actformeritandimpactassessabledevelopmentformattersbroaderthandamagetopublicinfrastructure,butonlytotheextentwhereitcanbedemonstratedthattherewasarealandsubstantialriskofnon-compliancewiththeconditionsofadevelopmentconsentandthatsuchnon-compliancewouldresultinapublicauthorityoraneighbouringlandholderhavingtopayrectification/remediationcoststoremedytheconsequencesofthebreach.
Public interest conditions102. Thereistobeaspecificstatutoryprovisionthatpermitsaconsentauthoritytoimpose
aconditionofdevelopmentconsentfoundedonthepublicinterest,evenifthereisnoimmediatenexusorconnectionwiththeproposeddevelopmentbutwherethenatureoftheconditioncanbeseenasreasonableandasasufficientlygeographicallyproximateresponsetotheproposeddevelopment.
Definitions in the Sustainable Planning Act103. AlldefinitionsintheSustainablePlanningActaretobelocatedinadictionaryatthe
endofthatActandnotlocatedwithinthebodyofthelegislation.104. Adefinitionof‘affordablehousing’istobeincludedinthedictionaryintheSustainable
PlanningAct.105. Studentaccommodationistobeincludedinthedefinitionof‘affordablehousing’.106. Alldefinitionsthatarepresentlyderivedbyreferencingthetermsofadefinition
containedinanotherstatutearetobespeltoutinfullinthedictionarytotheSustainablePlanningAct.
107. Adefinitionof‘sustainabledevelopment’istobeincorporatedinthesametermsastheProtection of Environment Operations Act 1995.
108. Existingdefinitionscontainedinthepresentplanninglegislationaretobebroughtacross,totheextentnecessary,buttheirlanguageistobereviewedtoseeifanyrevisionofanytermisrequired.
109. DefinitionsintheSustainablePlanningActaretoreflectthecategoriesofdevelopmentsetoutinthemodifiedDevelopmentAssessmentForummodeldescribedinVolume1,PartCChapter6.
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 17
Demolition – limitations on development approvals110. Clause136EoftheEnvironmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000istobe
carriedoverintotheSustainablePlanningActforcodeassessabledevelopmentandanoticebeincludedincodeassessableapprovals,preparedbytheDepartmentofInfrastructureandPlanninginconsultationwithrelevantauthorities,thatinformsaboutbondedandfriableasbestos,howtohavesuspectmaterialtestedandthepersonalandcommunityhealthimplicationsfrominhalation.
111. Demolitionofanyitembeinginvestigatedbyacouncilforpossiblelistingasanitemoflocalheritageistobeexcludedfrombeingexemptorcodeassessabledevelopment,iftheowneroftheitemhasbeengivennoticeoftheinvestigation.
112. Thereistobealimitof28daysafterlodgementofanapplicationtodemolishwithinwhichaheritageinvestigationistobefinalised(andtheowneroftheitemtobenotifiedoftheoutcome)astowhetherthecouncilshouldconsiderseekinganamendmenttotheLocalLand-UsePlantolisttheitemasoneoflocalheritagesignificance.
113. Iftheinvestigationprocessrecommendslocallisting,theapplicationistobemeritassessableonthisbasis.
114. Iftheinvestigationdoesnotrecommendlocallistingoriftheinvestigationisnotcompletedandtheownernotifiedoftheoutcomewithintherequired28days,thedemolitionapplicationshallbedeemedtobeapproved.
Determining development proposed by public authorities115. Determinationprocessesforpublicauthorityprojectsaretobeassetoutbelow:
Development Track Decision Maker
Exempt Publicauthority
Prohibited Notapplicable
Codeassessable Publicauthority
Meritassessable PublicauthorityorJointRegionalPlanningPanel(dependingonscale).JointRegionalPlanningPanelifadispensationfromadevelopmentstandardisrequired.
Impactassessable PlanningCommissionorJointRegionalPlanningPaneldependingonscale
Development applications with minor code non-compliances 116. Ifaminornon-compliancecausesanapplicationtobemeritassessableratherthancode
assessableandtheassessingofficerconsidersthataminoramendmentwouldrendertheapplicationtotallycodeassessable,theassessingofficeristocontacttheproponentandsuggestthattheproponentmaketheminoramendmenttotheproposal.
Recommendations in Volume 2
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201218
117. Ifsuchanamendmentismadebytheproponent,theapplicationwillbedealtwithascodeassessable.
118. Inthealternative,iftheassessingofficerconsidersthatthenon-complianceisminor,theassessingofficercanelecttoconsidertheacceptabilityorotherwiseofthenon-compliantelementwithoutundertakingafullassessmentoftheoverallproject.
Development to fit the exempt and code assessable classifications119. Alldevelopmentnowclassifiedasexemptorcomplyingistobecategorisedasexempt
orcodeassessabledevelopment.120. Asinglesimplifiedlistofthesecategoriesofdevelopmentistobecompiledbyareview
ledbytheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructurewithrepresentationfromlocalgovernmentacrosstherangeoftypesofcouncilsin(urban,semi-urban,ruralandwesternNewSouthWales).
121. TheMinisteristoestablishanongoingprocessforconsiderationoflocalvariationproposalstoclassifydevelopmentasexemptorcodeassessabledevelopmentwithinalocalgovernmentarea.
Existing uses: changes, expansion or intensification122. Onlylandthatissubjecttoachangeofzoningfromanagriculturalzonetoan
environmentalzone,asaconsequenceofthemakingofanewlocalplanpursuanttotheStandardInstrumenttemplate,shallhavearightattachedtoittomakeanapplicationtochangeaspecificanddeclaredexistingnon-conformingagriculturalusetoanewspecificnon-conformingagriculturaluseortoaddanewspecificnon-conformingagriculturalusetothedeclarednon-conformingagriculturaluse.
123. Thisrightistobeavailablefora10yearperiodafterthecommencementoftheSustainablePlanningActoraftersuchachangeofzoningiseffectedbythecomingintooperationofanewlocalplanbasedontheStandardInstrumenttemplate,whicheveristhelaterdate.
124. Therearetobenofurtheropportunitiespermittedtochangeonenon-conformingusetoanothernon-conforminguseafterthe10yearperiodexpires.
125. Applicationstopermitexpansionofanexistingnon-conformingusebeyonditspresentfootprintmaybeapprovedifthereisnoadverseimpactasaconsequenceoftheexpansion.
126. Applicationstointensifyanexistingnon-conformingusearetobepermittedbutaretobemeritassessableorimpactassessable,unlessthatintensificationfallswithinaclassofcodeassessabledevelopment.
127. Applicationsforexpansionofanexistingnon-conformingusearetobepermittedifthereisnoadverseimpactonothersurroundingusesandaretobedeterminedbyeitheraJointRegionalPlanningPanelorthePlanningCommission.
Incomplete applications 128. Applicationsthatarenotcompletepriortothedayuponwhichtheapplicationis
scheduledtobemadeavailable,physicallyorelectronically,forpubliccommentshallberejectedandshallberegardedasnothavingbeenlodged.
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 19
Independent Hearing and Assessment Panels129. IndependentHearingandAssessmentPanelsaretobeprovidedforintheSustainable
PlanningAct.130. ThepresentqualificationsforIndependentHearingandAssessmentPanelsaretobe
retainedwiththeadditionofAboriginalculturalheritageasanareaofexpertise.
Independent Hearing and Determination Panels131. IndependentHearingandDeterminationPanelsaretobeprovidedforinthe
SustainablePlanningAct(withthesamerangeofmembershipqualificationsasrecommendedforIndependentHearingandAssessmentPanels),withcouncilstobeabletodelegatedevelopmentdecisionmakingtosuchaPanel.
Joint Regional Planning Panels132. AlloralsubmissionstoJointRegionalPlanningPanelsaretobeinpublic.133. AllJointRegionalPlanningPanelprocessesaretoincorporatetheopportunityforthe
proponentandsupportersofandobjectorstoaproposaltobeheardbythePanel(withthePaneltosettherulesforsuchpresentations).
134. StatePanelmembersarenottodeterminemattersinthelocalgovernmentareawheretheyreside.
135. WhenaPanelrejectsconclusionsoforvariesrecommendationsintheassessmentreport,thePanelistogivereasonsfordoingso.
136. Wheretheassessmentreportrecommendsapprovalandtherehavebeennosubmissionsopposingthedevelopment,thecouncilistoremaintheconsentauthority.
137. InvokingthejurisdictionofaPanelbyaggregationofprojectsondifferentsitesincommonownershipistobeprohibited.
138. TheCentralSydneyPlanningCommitteeistobebroughtwithinthescopeoftheSustainablePlanningActthroughaseparateprovisioninthatportionofthelegislationdealingwithJointRegionalPlanningPanels.
Land owner’s consent 139. AnydevelopmentapplicationinvolvinganylandownedbyanyNSWCrownentityshall
notbeacceptedbyaconsentauthorityunlessaccompaniedbythewrittenconsentofthelandowningNSWCrownentity.
Model delegations for development decision making in local councils140. TheDepartmentistoconsultwiththeLocalGovernmentandShiresAssociation
todevelopasetofmodeldelegationsfordeterminationbyCouncilstaffofdevelopmentproposals.
141. Thesemodeldelegationsarenottobemandatoryand,ifadoptedingeneralterms,maybemodifiedtoreflectlocalcircumstances.
Recommendations in Volume 2
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201220
Modifications to existing approved development142. Themodificationprocessinthepresentplanninglegislationistobecarriedoverto
theSustainablePlanningAct,withminormodificationstobecodeassessable(ifthereisanapplicablecode)eventhoughtheoriginalapplicationwasmeritassessableorimpactassessable.
Names for applications to reflect purpose143. Applicationsfordevelopmentandforapprovalofconstructionplansaretobeknownas
‘applicationfordevelopmentapproval’and‘applicationforconstructionapproval’.
Plain English guide to the classification of development 144. TheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructure,inconjunctionwiththeLocal
GovernmentandShiresAssociation,istoprepareaplainEnglishguidetothedevelopmentclassification,assessmentanddeterminationprocessesundertheSustainablePlanningAct.
145. PreparationoftheguideistobeunderthesupervisionofthePlanningAdvisoryBoard.
Potential cross border impacts146. Whenaconsentauthorityconsidersthatadevelopmentproposalhasthepotentialto
causeimpactsacrossaStateborderorinanadjoininglocalgovernmentareatothelocalgovernmentareawheretheproposeddevelopmentistobelocated,theconsentauthorityistonotifytherelevantland-useauthorityacrosstheStateborderortheadjoiningcouncil(s)oftheproposeddevelopmentandinvitecommentsonit.
147. Theconsentauthorityfortheproposeddevelopmentistoconsiderandhaveregardtoanycommentsreceivedinresponsetosucharequest.
Preamble to the Sustainable Planning Act?148. TheGovernmentconsiderifthereshouldbeapreambletotheSustainablePlanningAct.
Register of consents149. TheSustainablePlanningActistorequireelectronicregistrationoffuturedevelopment
consentsandpermit(butnotmandate)thedigitalbackcaptureofexistingdevelopmentconsents.
150. Allconsentauthorities(otherthantheLandandEnvironmentCourtandthePlanningCommission)aretoberequiredtoensurethatanyconsentissuediselectronicallyregistered.
151. ForconsentsgivenasaconsequenceofdeterminationsofthePlanningCommission,theDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructureistoberesponsibleforelectronicregistration.
152. ForconsentsgivenasaconsequenceofordersmadeinLandandEnvironmentCourtproceedings,theconsentauthoritywhoserolehasbeenassumedbytheCourtistoberesponsibleforelectronicregistration.
153. Anypersonorentity(otherthanacouncil)istoberequiredtonotifytherelevantcouncil(s)thataconsenthasbeenelectronicallyregistered.
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 21
154. TheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructure,inco-operationwiththeOfficeofLocalGovernment,istodiscusswiththeLocalGovernmentandShiresAssociationacommencementdateforelectronicregistrationofconsents.
155. Theregisteristobetheauthoritativerepositoryofalldevelopmentconsentsissuedonoraftertheoperativedateofelectronicregistration.
156. Foranybackcaptureofconsents,theconsentauthorityistoberelievedoftherequirementtomaintainphysicalrecordsafterpublicationonanelectronicregister.
157. Datacustodianshiparrangements,includingdeterminationofwhetherthereshouldbeacentralregisterorseparateregistersforeachcouncil,istobeundertakenbytheCo-ordinatingcommitteeforspatialinformation.
Removing “consistency” as a design criterion in assessments158. ‘Consistency’or‘non-inconsistency’testsarenottobepermittedforcodeassessable
development,unlesstheproposeddevelopmentthatwouldotherwisebecodeassessableisinanidentifiedlocalheritageconservationareaorintheimmediatevicinityofaStateorlocallyidentifiedheritageobjectorgroupofobjects.
‘Stop the Clock’ Provisions159. Theconsentorconcurrenceauthority,whenundertakingassessmentofmeritand
impactassessableproposals,istobepermittedoneopportunitytorequestfurtherinformationfromtheapplicant,coupledwiththeabilitytonotifytheapplicantthattheassessmentperiodhasstopped.
160. Theassessmentperiod‘clock’istoberestartedonthedateofreceiptiftheapplicantprovidestheinformationtotheconsentorconcurrenceauthorityornotifiestheconsentorconcurrenceauthority(inwriting)thattheinformationwillnotbeprovidedorfailstoprovidetheinformationwithinareasonabletimeperiod.
161. Theapplicantisalsotobepermittedtheabilitytohaltthedecisionmakingperioduponwrittenrequest(thatcanbewithdrawn)inordertoprovidefurtherinformationortomakerepresentationstotheconsentauthorityoraboutaconcurrenceauthority’sresponse.
Verification of the stated development application values162. ForprojectsfallingunderthejurisdictionthresholdofaJointRegionalPlanningPanel,
noquantitysurveyor’scertificaterelatingtoprojectvalueistoberequired.163. ForprojectsabovetheJointRegionalPlanningPaneljurisdictionthreshold,the
proponentistoberequiredtoprovideaquantitysurveyor’scostcertificate,iftheassessingauthoritydisputestheaccuracyofthestatedprojectvalue.
164. Ifthecertificateendorsestheapplicationvalue,thequantitysurveyor’sfeeistobedeductedfromtheapplicationfee.
165. Ifthecertificateshowsanapplication’svaluetobeunderstated,thecorrectfeeshallbepayableandthequantitysurveyor’sfeeisnottobeoffset.
Recommendations in Volume 2
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201222
The Land and Environment Court – additional matters
Hearing from objectors during conciliation processes 166. Duringtheconciliationphaseofconciliation/arbitrationproceedings,submittersareto
beabletoexplaintheirpositionbutnottakeanyotherpartinthisphase.
Requiring concurrence authorities to defend their delay or refusal167. TheLand and Environment Court Act 1979istoprovidespecificallythataconsent
authoritymayapplytotheCourttohaveaconcurrenceauthorityjoinedasarespondenttoameritappeal.
Costs orders – application amendment during the appeal process 168. Thecostsprovisionsofsection97Bofthepresentplanninglegislationaretoberetained
butincorporatedintheLand and Environment Court Act 1979.
Extension of orders able to be made in ‘remedy or restrain’ matters169. TheSustainablePlanningActistogivetotheLandandEnvironmentCourt,incivil
enforcementmatters,powertoenableittoorderpublicationnotificationsofthetypeprovidedintheProtection of the Environment Operations Act 1997.
Commissioners assisting Judges in Class 4 matters170. TheLand and Environment Court Act 1979istobeamendedsothat,inClass4
mattersinvolvingtheSustainablePlanningAct,CommissionersareabletositwithandassistJudges.
171. ConsiderationbegiventoextendingthistoallmattersinClass4oftheCourt’sjurisdiction.
Class 4 matters and related common law issues172. TheLand and Environment Court Act 1979istobeamendedsothat,inmattersarising
intheCourt’sjurisdictionfromtheSustainablePlanningAct,ancillarycommonlawmattersareabletobecommencedintheLandandEnvironmentCourtandbroughtwithintheplanningproceedings.
173. ConsiderationbegiventoextendingthispositiontoallmattersintheCourt’sciviljurisdiction.
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 23
Revocation of development consents174. TheLandandEnvironmentCourtistobegiventheabilitytorevokeadevelopment
consentforuseoflandasadeterrentsentencingoptioninaprosecutionforaTier1offenceforabreachoftheSustainablePlanningActoranyregulationsmadeunderit.
Challenges to validity of development consents175. Therighttochallengethevalidityofaconsentistoberetained(withretentionofthe
presenttimelimitandnotificationrequirements).
Compliance costs/expenses176. Abroadercosts/expensesreimbursementordermakingpowershouldbeavailablein
civilandcriminalenforcementproceedingsbroughtundertheSustainablePlanningActtoenableorderstobemadetorequirethecompliance/investigationcosts/expensesoftheenforcingbodytobereimbursed.
Councils – additional matters
Council Order making generally177. Theessentialelementsforcouncilordermakingpowerscontainedinthepresent
planninglegislationistobecarriedintotheSustainablePlanningAct.Theremainderoftheordermaking,reviewandappealprocessesaretobecontainedinregulations.
178. TheregulationssupportingtheSustainablePlanningActaretoincludethepresenttableoforders(asaninterimmeasure)pendingtherecommendedreview.
179. Consistentwiththerecommendationsconcerningurgentapplicationstoshutdownunapprovedactivities,anadditionalorderistobeincludedinthetablepermittingthemakingoforderstorequiretheimmediatecessationofanyunapprovedactivitywherethereisademonstratedsignificantimpact(orpotentialimpact)onpublicamenity,healthorsafety.
180. TheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructureinconjunctionwithrepresentativesoflocalgovernment,thedevelopmentindustryandcommunityandenvironmentalnetworksaretoreviewtherangeoforderscontainedinthepresentorderstableandrecommendanychangesthatmightbemadetothatexistingtableoforders.
Drafting precision for orders181. TheSustainablePlanningActistoprovidethatanordershallnotbeinvalidif,despite
anydefectsinitsdrafting,theintentionoftheorderisclearfromitsterms.
Strict liability penalty notice offence – false or misleading information182. Anewpenaltynoticeoffenceistobecreatedfortheprovisionoffalseor
inaccurateinformation.183. Thecircumstancesunderwhichsuchpenaltynoticesmaybeissuedaretobesetoutby
theDepartmentandcouncilsintheircomplianceandenforcementpolicies.
Recommendations in Volume 2
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201224
Enforcement policies184. TheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructure’scomplianceandenforcementpolicies
berevisedafterpassageoftheSustainablePlanningAct.185. TherevisionistobeundertakenunderthesupervisionofthePlanningAdvisoryBoard
withimplementationtotakeplaceaftertheMinisterhasconsideredtheBoard’sadviceontheproposedrevisedpolicies.
186. TheMinisterforPlanningandInfrastructurewritetotheMinisterforLocalGovernmentaskingthatMinistertorequestthepanelreviewingtheLocal Government Act 1993toconsiderwhethercouncilsshoulddeveloporrevisecomplianceandenforcementofpoliciesofacomprehensivenature(notmerelyformattersarisingundertheSustainablePlanningAct).
Environmental Impact Statements
Accreditation for those preparing an EIS or supporting studies187. AreferenceistobegiventotheLegislativeCouncilStandingCommitteeonState
Developmenttoinvestigatewhetheranaccreditationsystemshouldbeadoptedforconsultantspreparingenvironmentalstudies(includingthosethatsupportEnvironmentalImpactStatements).
Director-General’s requirements for Environmental Impact Statements188. IssuingofDirector-General’srequirementsforpreparationofEnvironmentalImpact
StatementsistoberetainedintheSustainablePlanningAct.189. Totheextentthatitispossible,theDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructureis
topublishonitswebsiteatemplateoftheDirector-General’srequirementsforthepreparationofanEnvironmentalImpactStatementfordevelopmentproposals.
190. AnyDirector-General’srequirementsissuedforapossibledevelopmentaretobemadepubliclyavailableontheDepartment’swebsitetogetherwithidentificationoftheareaencompassedbythepossibledevelopment.
191. ThereistobearightofappealtotheLandandEnvironmentCourtbyapotentialprojectproponenttochallengetheDirector-General’srequirements.
Reviews of Environment Impact Statements192. Assessingauthoritiesaretobepermittedtorequirepeerreviewingofreportsor
informationprovidedinsupportofanEnvironmentalImpactStatement.193. Peerreviewingcanonlyberequestedononeoccasionbutmayberequestedonmore
thanoneaspectoftheproposal.194. ForproposalsbyassessingauthorityotherthantheDepartmentofInfrastructureand
Planningforpeerreviewing,theconcurrenceoftheDirector-Generalistobeobtained.195. WhentheassessingauthorityistheDepartment,suchrequestshallbereferredtothe
ChairpersonofthePlanningCommissiontobedealtwithonthepapers.
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 25
196. Theassessingbodiesseekingthepeerreviewshallnominatethreeproposedpeerreviewersfromwhichtheprojectproponentcanselectthereviewertobecommissioned.
197. Thepeerreviewingistobeundertakenattheproponent’sexpense.198. Ifpeerreviewingisrequired,anadditionalperiodoffiveworkingdaysshallbeaddedto
thestatutoryassessmentperiodfortheproject.199. Theresultsofanypeerreviewaretobepublishedontheassessingauthority’swebsite.200. Thisprocessistobegiveneffectbyregulationsothatitcanbereviewedaftertheexpiry
of12months.
Former Aboriginal reserves and missions201. TheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructure,theNewSouthWalesAboriginal
LandCouncil(withthisCouncilinvolvingrelevantLocalAboriginalLandCouncilsasitconsidersappropriateforsequencing),andtheLocalGovernmentandShiresAssociation(togetherwithsuchcouncilsastheAssociationconsidersappropriateinthesesequencingdiscussions)aretodevelopanindicativesequencinglistforintegratingAboriginalreservesandmissionsintothenewplanningsystem.
202. IfthesepartiesconsidereditappropriateandtheOfficeofLocalGovernmentindicatedawishtoparticipate,theOfficeofLocalGovernmentisalsotobeinvolvedinthesequencingdiscussions.
203. ForeachformerAboriginalreserveormission,theassessmentprocessistobeundertakenbytherelevantregionalofficeoftheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructure.
204. TheDepartment’sprocessistobefacultativeandincludeidentifyingthenatureoftheinformationrequiredandtheappropriateformthatanapplicationmighttaketoeffectintegrationofthelandsbeingassessedintothenewplanningsystem.
205. WhenanassessmentofanyformerAboriginalreserveormissionhasbeencompleted,thereistobeapublicprocessundertakenbythePlanningCommission,eitherholdingpublichearingsandmakingadeterminationonanyapplicationthatmayhavebeenmadearisingfromtheassessmentprocessorholdingpublichearingsandmakingrecommendationstotheMinisteronhowthatmattershouldproceedfurther.
206. TheDepartmentisnottochargeanyfeeforundertakingthisprocess.
Community Engagement
Assisting with the “right to know”207. ThecontinuingprofessionaldevelopmentworkinggrouprecommendedinVolume1
PartIistoincorporateamoduleonopportunitiesforactivecommunicationwiththecommunityintheprogramthattheydevelop.
Recommendations in Volume 2
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201226
Precinct committees208. TheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructureistoconveneaworkinggroup
comprisingrepresentativesoftheOfficeofLocalGovernmentandtheLocalGovernmentandShiresAssociationandrepresentativesofthosecouncilscurrentlyoperatingaprecinctcommitteesystemwishingtobeinvolvedintheworkinggroup.
209. ThetaskoftheworkinggroupistoproduceaplainEnglishguidetobestpracticeintheestablishment,rolesandoperationofprecinctcommittees.
Project identification on the Department’s website210. TheDepartment’swebsiteistoincludeaninteractivemaptofacilitateaccessto
informationconcerningallprojectsbeingassessedbytheDepartment.
Other reform measures
Planning in the unincorporated area of the State211. TheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructureistoprepareaLocalLand-UsePlanand
DevelopmentControlPlanfortheunincorporatedarea.TheseplansaretobepreparedinconjunctionwiththeWesternLandsCommissionerandinconsultationwiththeWesternLandsAdvisoryCouncil,theNewSouthWalesMineralsCouncil,theNationalParksandWildlifeServiceandanyboardsofmanagementofAboriginal-ownedandjointly-managedNationalParksintheunincorporatedarea.
212. TheconsentauthorityfordevelopmentproposalsintheunincorporatedareaistobetheWesternLandsCommissioner,withthefollowingexceptions:codeassessableCrowndevelopment,developmentthatwillfallwithinthejurisdictionofaJointRegionalPlanningPanelordevelopmentthatwillfallwithinthejurisdictionofthePlanningCommission.
213. TheconsultationprocessforthedevelopmentoftheLand-UsePlanfortheunincorporatedareaistoincludespecificconsultationsabouttherangeofmattersthatcanberegardedascodeassessabledevelopmentswithinthisplanningframework,particularlyonpastoralholdings.
Revitalisation of the Newcastle Central Business District214. TheSustainablePlanningActtoincludeparticularprovisionsfacilitatingestablishment
ofaschemetoencourageredevelopmentofminesubsidenceareasidentifiedwithintheNewcastleCentralBusinessDistrict.Theseprovisionsaretopermitaschemetobeabletobeimplementedtoallowtheproposedredevelopmenttoproceed,withoutowners’consentbeinggivenbyownersofpropertiesadjoininganypropertyproposedtoberedevelopedorwheretheadjoiningpropertieswouldrequiretohavesubsidencepreventionmeasuresundertakenunderthem.
215. AssuchprovisionsmayalsohavewiderapplicationthanmerelyNewcastle,theyaretobedraftedingeneralterms.
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 27
216. TheselegislativeprovisionsarenottocomeintoeffectuntiltheGovernmentissatisfiedthatanappropriateschemefordoingsohasbeendevelopedbytheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructure,inconjunctionwithlandholderinterestsintheidentifiedarea,NewcastleCityCouncilandtheMinesSubsidenceBoard.
Transferable development rights to agricultural land217. AworkingpartyistobeestablishedcomprisingrepresentativesoftheDepartment
ofPlanningandInfrastructure,theLocalGovernmentandShiresAssociationandtheNewSouthWalesFarmersAssociationtoconsiderwhethercreatingtransferabledevelopmentrightsforagriculturallandisfeasibleanddesirableand,ifso,howitshouldbeimplemented.
Certification matters
Final and interim occupation certificates 218. OnlyoneInterimOccupationCertificateistobepermittedforanysingleaspectofa
particularproject.219. InterimOccupationCertificatesaretolapseafterfiveyears.
1 The Planning Commission
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201228
PART 1 – The Planning CommissionIntroductionThecurrentPlanningAssessmentCommissionwasestablishedbyamendments2tothepresentplanninglegislationin2008.FromthetimethecurrentCommissioncommencedoperation3,untilthechangesmadebythepresentMinisterin2011,itsprimaryroleswereto:
• considertheassessmentreportspreparedbytheDepartmentconcerningmajordevelopmentprojectproposals
• makerecommendationsconcerningwhatdecisionsshouldbemadeaboutthoseproposals.
AtthetimeoftherepealofPart3Aofthepresentplanninglegislationin2011,thepresentMinistersaidthefollowingconcerningthefutureroleoftheCommission:
The bill sets out revised functions for the Planning Assessment Commission. This includes any functions delegated to it under the Act and allows the Director General of the Department of Planning and Infrastructure, in addition to the Minister, to request the Planning Assessment Commission to provide advice, to review certain matters or to hold public hearings. The bill also amends schedule 3 to the Act to clarify that the chairperson is a member of the Planning Assessment Commission and that membership of the commission can range from four to nine members, including the chairperson. The bill also includes amendments to the membership of the Planning Assessment Commission so that members may not hold office for more than six years in total to strengthen the independence of the commission. The amendments also include allowing for Planning Assessment Commission members to be appointed on either a full-time or part time basis and allowing the Minister to change the basis of the appointment during the member’s term of office.
With the establishment of State significant development and increased delegation of ministerial determination functions to the Planning Assessment Commission, there is a strong need to ensure that the membership and operation of the commission is optimal for undertaking its heightened role. The provisions relating to the Planning Assessment Commission membership and functions are part of a broader suite of measures to improve the transparency, independence and professional operation of the Planning Assessment Commission. Other measures will include providing more resources to assist the Planning Assessment Commission in carrying out its expanded role. As Minister I will require the commission to publish new operational procedures and protocols which outline how the commission will undertake its day-to-day functions in a more open and transparent way. Meetings where determinations of development applications are made will generally be open to the public to give opportunities to communities, local councils and proponents to address the Planning Assessment Commission directly.
There will also be an increase in Planning Assessment Commission public meetings in rural and regional New South Wales, where there is significant community interest in a proposal. As well as making determinations in public and holding public briefing meetings for contentious proposals, the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure will still be able to direct the Planning Assessment Commission to hold an inquiry into a proposal by way of a full scale public hearing and report back to the Minister with the results of that hearing. In this case the commission
2 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979,Part2A,Division2
3 On3November2008
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 29
will also ask for written submissions from interested parties before asking them to make submissions to the commission in person. Consistent with the current provisions of the Act, if the Planning Assessment Commission determines a development application after conducting a public hearing at the Minister’s request, with an opportunity for the community to make submissions and participate in the investigation of the proposal, there will be no appeal rights for applicants and third parties for applications under part 4 of the Act. This will ensure that the public’s participation in the process cannot be undermined either by an applicant or a third party following the report of the Planning Assessment Commission, merely because they did not agree with the report of the independent umpire.4
Asaconsequence,allsuchproposalsarenowdeterminedbytheCommissionunderdelegationfromtheMinister.TheCommissionalsohasthepowertorequiremodificationtoaproposalbeforeconsentwillbegranted(providedthemodificationfallswithinthegeneralscopeoftheoriginalapplication).MatterstobedeterminedbytheCommissionincludethemodificationofprojectssubjecttoanexistingMinisterialorCommissiondetermination.Applicationstomodifyanapprovedprojectmaybesubjecttofurtherpublicexhibitionandsubmission.DecisionsoftheCommissionmaybeappealedtotheLandandEnvironmentCourtonthemeritsonlyiftheCommissionhasnotheldapublichearingintotheproposal5.Whatconstitutesapublichearingforthesepurposesisdiscussedbelow.DecisionsoftheCommissionmaybeappealedonaquestionoflawtoaJudgeoftheCourt.
TheadditionalrolesofthecurrentCommissionare:• toadviseonplanninganddevelopmentmatters,EnvironmentalPlanningInstrumentsandadministrationorimplementationofthepresentplanninglegislation
• toreviewanyaspectoforpartofadevelopmentoractivity• toholdapublichearingintoanymattersubjectofarevieworpreparationofadvice• toreviewthecreationorabolitionofadevelopmentarea• toundertakefunctionsofaregionalpanelwhereorderedbytheMinister• tocarryoutthefunctionsofaregionalpanelwherenoregionalpanelhasbeenappointed.
MembershipCurrently,theCommissionfunctionswithapart-timeChairpersonandanumberofpart-timeCommissioners–limitedbythepresentplanninglegislationtonineinnumber6.TheseCommissionersaresupplemented,asneedsarise,byusingthechairsoftheJointRegionalPlanningPanelsandotherexpertsascasualCommissioners.TheChairpersonandtheCommissionersareappointedforuptoamaximumthreeyeartermandmaybereappointedtoamaximumofsixyears.
4 HansardTranscript,LegislativeAssembly(16June2011)Hon.BradHazzardMP,MinisterforPlanningandInfrastructurefortheEnvironmentalPlanningandAssessmentAmendment(Part3ARepeal)Bill2011,page2592–seehttp://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/parlment/hansart.nsf/V3Key/LA20110616032?open&refNavID=HA8_1
5 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979,section23F
6 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979,Schedule2,clause2
1 The Planning Commission
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201230
The Chairperson of the Planning CommissionUnderthepresentplanninglegislation,theChairpersoncanbeappointedoneitherafullorpart-timebasis7.GiventhelikelyincreasedworkloadofthePlanningCommission,weconsiderthatitisappropriatethattheChairpersonofthatCommissionbeappointedonafull-timebasis.
TheNSWlegislationestablishingtheWorkersCompensationCommissionandtheAdministrativeDecisionsTribunalprovidethattheheadofeachbodyshouldbeaJudge8.Asaconsequence,forappointmenttoheadeitherofthesebodies,apersonmustfirstbeappointedtojudicialoffice.HoldingjudicialofficeisregardedasanessentialelementindemonstratingindependencefromtheexecutiveGovernment.
WeproposethatthisapplyforthePlanningCommission,withtherelevantofficetobeasaJudgeoftheLandandEnvironmentCourt.ThiswouldnecessitatetheappointmentofanadditionalJudgetotheCourtwithimmediatesecondmentofthatJudgetothepositionofChairpersonofthePlanningCommission.Ifthisweretobethecase,itwouldbeappropriatetoincorporateintheLand and Environment Court Act 1979aprovisionsimilartothatcontainedinthe Supreme Court Act 19709thatwouldpermitanyJudgeoftheLandandEnvironmentCourttobeabletoactastheChairpersonoftheCommission.SuchaprovisionwillprovideadefinedpoolofpersonswhowouldbeabletoactasChairperson,intheeventthatthepermanentlyassignedChairpersontookleaveanditwasdesirabletomakeareplacementduringthatperiodofabsence.
TherearecriticismsthatmembersofthepresentCommissionaretoodependentonMinisterialapprovalforreappointmenttotheirrole–withnochecksandbalances.EstablishingaChairpersonwiththetenureandindependenceofjudicialofficeprovidesanappropriatelymeasuredresponsetothesecriticisms,whencoupledwiththeappointmentprocessforCommissionersdiscussedbelow.
ItwouldalsobepossibletorotatetheJudgesoftheCourtthroughtheroleofChairpersonofthePlanningCommissionatperiodsofthreeorfouryears,subjecttotheconcurrenceofthefollowingpeople:
• theMinisteradministeringtheSustainablePlanningAct• theAttorneyGeneral• theChiefJudgeoftheLandandEnvironmentCourt.
Asrotationmayoccurasdiscussedabove,theJudgeselectedtobeappointedandsecondedtothePlanningCommissionmustalsohavethenecessaryskillsandattributestoperformtheroleofaJudgeoftheCourt,aswellasthosenecessarytofulfiltheroleatthePlanningCommission.ResponsibilityforselectingtheChairpersonofthePlanningCommission,giventhatthispersonwillrequireappointmentasaJudgeoftheCourt,shouldliewiththeAttorneyGeneraltomakearecommendationtoCabinet.ThisrecommendationshouldberequiredtobewiththeconcurrenceoftheMinisterforPlanningandInfrastructure.Itisenvisagedthat,aswithotherappointmentstotheCourt,theAttorneyGeneralwould
7 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979,Schedule2,clause2
8 Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1979,section17andWorkplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998,section369
9 Supreme Court Act 1970,section37B
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 31
consulttheChiefJudgeoftheCourtonanyproposedappointment.ThenormalCabinetandGovernor-in-Councilprocesswouldfollow.
TheChairpersonofthePlanningCommissionwillexercisethefollowingfunctions:• presideoverdeterminationprocessesforcomplexand/orcontroversialprojects• determinethecompositionofPanelstohearanddeterminemattersoverwhichtheChairpersondoesnotpreside
• allocateminormatterstosinglemembersoftheCommissionfordetermination,includingmodificationmattersthatcanbedealtwithonthepapers
• runtheselectionprocessforothermembersoftheCommission• runinductiontrainingfornewmembersoftheCommission• establishacontinuingeducationprogrammeformembersoftheCommission• ensurethattheCommission’sprocessesaremanagedtomeetperformancecriteriaestablished(andpublished)fortheefficientdischargeoftheCommission’srole
• undertakeannualperformancereviewsforothermembersoftheCommission• beresponsibleforpreparationoftheCommission’sannualreport• managetheresourcesoftheCommissioninanefficientandcost-effectivefashion.
AllofthecostsoftheChairpersonofthePlanningCommission(includingofanyJudgeactingduringanyabsenceoftheChairperson)wouldbemetfromitsbudgetandreimbursedtotheDepartmentofAttorneyGeneralandJusticebytheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructure.
CommissionersTheprocessforselectingCommissionersofthePlanningCommission,whetherfull-timeorpart-time,shouldbebypublicadvertisementandrecommendationtotheMinisterbyaselectionpanelcomprisingthefollowing:
• theChairpersonoftheCommission• theDirector-GeneraloftheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructure• anindependentpersonnominatedbytheChairperson(withtheconcurrenceoftheMinister).
EvenifanexistingCommissionerseeksreappointment,thepositionshouldusuallybesubjecttoacontestableadvertisingprocess.However,iftheChairpersonrecommendsthatadirectreappointmentshouldbemade,thentheMinistermayagreetothis.Full-timeCommissionersshouldholdappointmentforsevenyearsandbeeligibleforasecondtermonly.
Part-timeCommissionersshouldbeappointedforuptothreeyearswithexistingCommissionersabletobereappointed.Amaximumperiodofnineyearsshouldapplytopart-timeCommissioners.ThequalificationsofCommissionersshallremainasprovidedforinSchedule3ofthepresentplanninglegislation.ThisgenerallyparallelstheprocessusedfortheappointmentofCommissionersoftheCourt.Commissioners(otherthantheChairperson)shouldnotbejudicialofficers10.
ThenumberofpersonsabletobeappointedasCommissionersshouldnotbelimited,butshouldbedeterminedbytheGovernmentfromtimetotimeafterconsultationbytheMinisterforPlanningandInfrastructureandtheChairpersonofthePlanningCommission.
10 ForthepurposesoftheJudicial Officers Act 1986
1 The Planning Commission
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201232
Currently,itispossibletoappointcasualCommissionersifthereisaparticularworkloadissueoraneedforhighlyspecialisedexpertiseandacasualCommissionermaybeappointedonrecommendationoftheChairperson.Thisshouldremain.
Commissioners of the Court may be members of a Planning Commission panelDecisionsgivenbythePlanningCommissionaretobegenerallyanalogoustothosegivenbyCommissionersoftheCourt–inthattheyarenottobesubjecttoappealonthemerits,butaretoremainsubjecttoappealtoaJudgeoftheCourtonaquestionoflaw.Forthisreason,theremaybeoccasionsonwhichitwouldbeappropriatetoengagetheparticularexpertiseofaCommissioneroftheCourtinahearingofthePlanningCommission.Asaconsequence,withtheconcurrenceoftheChiefJudgeandoftheChairperson,aCommissioneroftheCourtcouldbeappointedtochairapanelortositonapanelofthePlanningCommission(ifitweretobechairedbytheChairpersonoftheCommission).ThisisanalogoustothepositionofJudgesoftheLandandEnvironmentCourtwhocansitasJudgesintheSupremeCourtwiththeconsentoftheChiefJusticeandoftheChiefJudgeoftheCourt.TheLand and Environment Court Act 1979shouldbeamendedtopermitthistooccur.
Itisnotexpectedthatthiswouldoccurfrequently.Ifitweretooccur,asapracticalmatter,itwillbenecessarytogivesufficientadvancenoticeofanyrequesttotheChiefJudgeoftheCourttoensurethattheCourtwouldbeabletoreplacethesecondedCommissionerwithanactingCommissioneroftheCourtduringthesecondment.IfaCommissioneroftheCourtweretotakepartinaPlanningCommissiondeterminationprocess,thecostsoftheCommissioner’sparticipationwouldcomefromthebudgetofthePlanningCommission.ThiswouldensurethatanyreplacementarrangementsbyoneormoreactingCommissionersoftheCourtcouldbeeffectedwithoutadditionalimpactontheCourt’sbudget.
Limit on the role of the Chairperson or seconded Court CommissionersInourview,itisnotappropriateforanymemberofaCourttohavetheroleofinvestigating,reviewingand/oradvisingtheMinisteronanymatterthattheMinistermighthavereferredtothePlanningCommission.Topermitthistooccurwouldbetobreachthedoctrineoftheseparationofpowers11.Therefore,theChairpersonoranysecondedCommissioneroftheCourtshouldnotperformsuchanadvisoryrole.
Hearings and procedureHolding public hearingsPresently,theCommissionoperatesusingproceduresthatarepublishedonitswebsite.TherearethreeseparateprocessesfortheCommissiondealingwithamatter,asfollows:
• determiningthematterwithoutanypublicengagementintheprocess• conductingapublicmeetingwhentherearemorethan25submittersontheproposal• holdingapublichearingwhentheMinisterdirectsthatthisistooccur.
11 ThatunderpinstheWestminsterparliamentarymodel,withinwhichtheCommonwealthandtheAustralianStatesandTerritoriesoperate.
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 33
Ifthematterisdeterminedwithoutapublichearing,ameritappealliestotheLandandEnvironmentCourt.Ifapublichearingisheld,nomeritappealliestotheCourt12.TheCommission’swebsitepublisheswhatitsaysconstitutetheprocessesforholdingapublichearing:
8. Application determined after a Public Hearing directed by the Minister
8.1 Prior to the preparation of the Director General’s Environmental Assessment Report for an application, the Minister may request the Commission to first review the application by conducting a public hearing. In these cases, the Commission will provide a report to the Minister following the public hearing. The Commission’s report is required to be considered in the Director General’s Environmental Assessment Report.
8.2 If a public hearing has been held and the application is subsequently delegated to the Commission for determination, the Commission may determine the application without holding a public meeting. The members of the Commission who determine the application will be different to those who conducted the public hearing.13
ThisprocesspurportstosatisfytherequirementsforholdingapublichearingandremoveanymeritappealtotheCourt.However,therearetwofundamentaldefectsinthisprocess:
• first,the‘hearing’istobeconductedpriortofinalisationoftheassessmentreportoftheproposal.Asaconsequence,thoseconductingthe‘hearing’cannotbeproperlyinformedofthemeritsoftheproposal;thevalidityofanyobjectionsthathavebeenmadetoit;ortheconditionsthatmightbeproposed,ifitweretobeapproved.
• second,thepaneloftheCommissiontodeterminethematteristobeconstituteddifferentlyfromthepanelthatundertooktheinitial‘hearing’.Thisdoesnotconstituteapanel‘hearinganddetermining’.Thosewhohavelodgedsubmissionshavearighttobeheardbythosewhomakethedecisionaboutthemeritsoftheproposal.
However,wedonotproposethatthePlanningCommissionshouldoperateonanypublic meetingbasis,butthatallmattersdealtwitharetohaveaproper public hearing.Ifaproposeddevelopmentisuncontroversial,suchahearingmaybelittlemorethanaformalprocessbut,nonetheless,wouldinvolveanopportunityforthepaneltoaskquestionsabouttheproposedconditionsofconsentandsatisfythemselvesthatitwasappropriatetoapprovetheprojectandtheproposedconditions.
AstoapplicationstomodifyaprojectthathadbeenapprovedbythePlanningCommission,itmaybethatthemodificationsthemselvesarecontroversialandhaveattractedasignificantnumberofsubmissions.Inthatcase,apublichearingshouldbeheld.Inothercasesthatareuncontroversialandonlyinvolveminormodifications,theChairpersonofthePlanningCommissionmayconsiderthatitisappropriatethattheybedealtwithonthepapers,butonlyaftergivingtheassessingbody(theDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructure),therelevantcouncilorcouncilsandtheprojectproponenttherighttobeheardinpublic,beforemakingadetermination,ifanyofthemwishthatthistakeplace.
Hearingsshouldnotbeheldincourtroomsandvenuesshouldbearrangedinasinformalafashionasispossible,consistentwiththescopeofthelikelyparticipationinandpublicattendanceatthehearing.
12 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979,section23F
13 Seehttp://www.pac.nsw.gov.au/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=ddF5xG-8-58%3d&tabid=56
1 The Planning Commission
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201234
Selection of the Planning Commission panel for a matterCurrently,mattersthatareconsideredbythePlanningAssessmentCommissionaredealtwithbyapanelthatisselectedbytheChairpersonoftheCommission.Panelsmaybeofone,twoorthreeCommissioners.ThisprocessshouldberetainedforthePlanningCommission.
Pre-hearing processesTherewillbepublichearingsofthePlanningCommissionwherethereislikelytobesignificantparticipationbecauseofthenumberofobjectorsorsupporterswishingtobeheardorbecauseofthecomplexityofthetechnicalmaterialthatwillneedtobethesubjectofpublicexamination.Inthesecases,thepersondesignatedtopresideovertheparticularpanelshouldholdapublicplanningdiscussion,wellpriortothedateofthepublichearings,tosortouttheorderofpresentationandanyotherprocessmattersthatneedtobeconsidered.
Right to be heardThepublichearingprocessforthePlanningCommissionshouldoperateaccordingtopublishedguidelinesthatdonotimposemandatoryrestrictionsortimelimitsonthoseparticipating.Controlofthehearingshouldliewiththepanelconductingit(includingorganisingthetimingandorderofhearingfromthosewhowishtobeheardandsettinglimitsonspeakingtimessoastoavoidunnecessaryrepetition)whilststillprovidingafairandtransparentdecision-makingprocess.
ThePlanningCommissionActshouldprovidethatthosetakingpartinapublichearingcanonlyberepresentedbyanexternallawyerorpaidagentwiththepermissionofthepanelhearingthematterif,andonlyif,thepanelissatisfiedthatthereissomepublicinterestreasonwhythisshouldbepermitted.Companiesshouldbeabletoberepresentedbydirectorsoremployeesofthecompany;theDepartmentbyitsemployees;councilsbycouncillorsorcouncilofficersandindividualsabletospeakontheirownbehalf.Associationsandcommunitygroupswouldbeabletoappointoneoftheirmemberstospeakontheirbehalf.
The procedure at a Planning Commission hearingThePlanningCommission’sprocessesmustremaindistinctlydifferentfromthoseofaCourt.Firstandforemost,theprocessshouldbeinquisitorialratherthanadversarial14.Thereshouldbenocross-examinationprocesses(whetherbylawyersoragents–ifpermitted–orbyanyotherparticipants)ofthosepresentinginformationduringhearings.ItistobetheroleoftheCommissionpanelmemberstoundertakethequestioningofthoseparticipating.Therulesofevidencearenottoapply.
ThosepresentingtothePlanningCommissionshouldbeabletodosoinaninformalfashionwithouttheconstraintsthatwouldordinarilyariseinaCourtwhereadistinctionisdrawnbetweenevidenceandsubmissions.Thoseparticipatingshouldnotbeswornin.Transcriptsshouldnotbetakenoftheproceedingsalthough,withpermissionofthepanel,recordingmightbeallowedifthereweresomespecialcircumstancedemonstratedwhythismightbewarranted.Ifrecordingweretobepermitted,thecostsofdoingsoshouldbemetbythepersonorentityrequestingpermissionforthistooccur.
14 SeeGlossary
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 35
Giving and publishing reasons for a decisionThePlanningCommissionistogivereasonsforallitsdecisions.AdecisionofthePlanningCommissionshouldprovideproperreasonswhythedecisionhasbeenmade.Thedecisionsshallbemadepublicand,ifnotgivenattheendoftheCommissionhearing,shallbenotifiedtoallthosewhoparticipatedinthehearingandshallbepublishedonitswebsite.Thereasonsforadecisionshallbesufficienttoexplainwhytheconclusionhasbeenreachedandwhyrelevantobjections,ifany,havenotbeensupported.
ThePlanningCommissionshallalsogivereasonswhyanymodificationstotheproposalortoproposedconditionstobeattachedtoithavebeenmadeinthecaseofprojectsormodificationsthatareapproved.Properreasonswhyadevelopmentproposalisrejected(ifthisisthecase)mustalsobegiven.Alldecisionsshouldbeexpectedtobegiveninclearandreadilyunderstoodterms(asisthepositionforLandandEnvironmentCourtmeritappealdecisions).
Power to determine matters arising under other legislationSomedevelopmentproposalsrequireadditionalconsentsunderotherlegislation,includingtheNative Vegetation Act 2003,theRoads Act 1993ortheNational Parks and Wildlife Act 1974.Someofthoseconsentsrequireapprovalbyanominatedconsentauthoritythatisnotacouncil.Insomeinstances,itmaybethatallconcurrencecommentsand/orconditionsfromothergovernmentDepartmentswillnothavebeengivenbythetimeamattercomestobedetermined.Weareoftheviewthatallconcurrencefunctions,nomatterwhatthelegislativeprovisionthatmakestheapprovalnecessary,shouldbevestedinthePlanningCommissionwhenitmakesadecisionaboutadevelopmentproposal.
Appeals from Planning Commission decisionsGiventhatthereistobeaclear,openandtransparentprocessforthePlanningCommission(incorporatingbotharighttobeheardandadutytoprovidereasonsforanydecision),itisunnecessarytoprovideforameritappealdecisionagainstanydecisionsmadebyit.Inthisrespect,thePlanningCommissionoutcomeswillbeanalogoustothoseofameritdeterminationmadebyCommissionerorJudgeoftheLandandEnvironmentCourt.TheCommission’sprocedures(inquisitorialnotadversarial)willstillembodytheappropriaterangeofproceduralprotectionstoensurethatnaturaljusticeanddueprocessrequirementsareobserved.
Asaconsequence,appealsonquestionsoflawshouldbethesamebasisasthatwhicharisesintheLandandEnvironmentCourt:
• againstdecisionsmadebyapanelofthePlanningCommissionpresidedoverbytheChairpersonshouldlietotheCourtofAppeal(thisbeingthepositionthatapplieswhenameritappealdeterminationismadebyaJudgeoftheLandandEnvironmentCourt)15.
15 Land and Environment Court Act 1979,section57A
1 The Planning Commission
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201236
• againstdecisionsmadebyanyotherpanelofthePlanningCommissionshouldlietoaJudgeoftheLandandEnvironmentCourt(thisbeingthepositionthatappliesfordecisionsmadebyCommissionersoftheCourt)andthentotheCourtofAppeal16.
Provision of information about the Planning CommissionCurrently,thePlanningAssessmentCommissionprovidesalimitedrangeofinformationonitswebsitetoassistwithbroadunderstandingofitsprocessesandactivities,including:
• aguideforaccesstoinformation17
• acodeofconduct18formembersoftheCommission• aguidetoprocedurefordecision-making19
• alistofmatters20dealtwithbytheCommissionwithlinkstoinformationaboutthem.
ThereisnocomprehensiveplainEnglishguidetotheactivitiesandprocessesoftheCommission.ThisistobecontrastedwithacomprehensiveguidetotheprocessesoftheformerCommissionersofInquirytitled,“HowTheyWork”21.Inordertoassisttheprocessofrestoringpublicfaithintheplanningsystem,particularlyinregardstomajorprojectdetermination,weconsideritessentialthatthePlanningCommissionprepareandpublishastep-by-stepguidetoitsprocesses–fromhowamattercomesintoitsremittohowadecisionisamade,publicisedanditseffect.
Other matters
Administrative supportThecurrentCommissionissupportedbyasmallindependentsecretariat(alsoservingtheJointRegionalPlanningPanels),comprisingofstaffsecondedfromtheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructure.BecauseitisdesirabletomakeitexpresslyclearthatthePlanningCommissionisnotaCourt,allsecretariatsupportshouldcontinuetobeprovidedbytheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructure,butindependentofitandremaininaseparateoffice.TheheadofthesecretariatshouldberesponsibletotheChairpersonofthePlanningCommissionforhearingprocessmattersandtotherelevantseniorofficeroftheDepartmentforadministrativeandpersonnelmatters(apositionanalogoustothatoftheRegistrarofacourt).TheMinisterresponsiblefortheSustainablePlanningActshouldalsobetheMinisterresponsibleforthePlanningCommissionAct.Generaladministrativesupportforaccounting,payrollandsimilarfunctionsareintegratedwiththesegeneralfunctionswithintheDepartmentandshouldcontinuetobeprovidedbytheDepartmentinthisfashion.
16 Land and Environment Court Act 1979,section56A
17 Seehttp://www.pac.nsw.gov.au/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=9wL7ABHhvzY%3d&tabid=76
18 Seehttp://www.pac.nsw.gov.au/CodeofConduct/tabid/58/Default.aspx
19 Seehttp://www.pac.nsw.gov.au/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=ddF5xG-8-58%3d&tabid=56
20 Seehttp://www.pac.nsw.gov.au/PACRegister/tabid/60/Default.aspx
21 Seehttp://www.coi.nsw.gov.au/pdf/HowTheyWork.pdf
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 37
Timing of introduction of the Planning Commission ActThereisanoptiontotakethePlanningAssessmentCommissionandtransformitintothePlanningCommissionunderitsownlegislationbeforetheotherlegislativeelementsofthereformpackagecomeintooperation.Thiswouldprovidegreatertransparencyandaccountabilityforthedecisionmakingprocessaboutmajorprojectproposalsdealtwithunderthepresentplanninglegislation(pendingitsrepealandreplacementwiththeSustainablePlanningAct).
Recommendations1.TheChairpersonofthePlanningCommissionistobeappointedonafull-timebasis.
2.TheChairpersonoftheCommissionistobeaJudgeoftheLandandEnvironmentCourt,withtheappointmentofanadditionalJudgetotheCourtandtheimmediatesecondmentofthatJudgetothepositionofChairpersonofthePlanningCommission.
3.TheLand and Environment Court Act 1979istoincorporateaprovisionthatwillpermitanyJudgeoftheCourttobeabletoactastheChairpersonoftheCommission.SuchaprovisionwillprovideadefinedpoolofpersonswhowouldbeabletoactasChairperson,intheeventthatthepermanentlyassignedChairpersontookleaveanditwasdesirabletomakeareplacementduringthatperiodofabsence.
4.TheJudgeselectedtobeappointedandsecondedtothePlanningCommissionmustalsohavethenecessaryskillsandattributestoperformtheroleofaJudgeoftheCourt,aswellasthosenecessarytofulfiltheroleatthePlanningCommission.
5.ResponsibilityforselectionoftheChairpersonofthePlanningCommissionistoliewiththeAttorneyGeneralwiththeconcurrenceoftheMinisterforPlanningandInfrastructure.
6.TheChairpersonofthePlanningCommissionistoexercisethefollowingfunctions:• presideoverdeterminationprocessesforcomplexand/orcontroversialprojects• determinethecompositionofPanelstohearanddeterminemattersoverwhichtheChairpersondoesnotpreside
• allocateminormatterstosinglemembersoftheCommissionfordetermination,includingmodificationmattersthatcanbedealtwithonthepapers
• runtheselectionprocessforothermembersoftheCommission• runinductiontrainingfornewmembersoftheCommission• establishacontinuingeducationprogrammeformembersoftheCommission• ensurethattheCommission’sprocessesaremanagedtomeetperformancecriteriaestablished(andpublished)fortheefficientdischargeoftheCommission’srole
• undertakeannualperformancereviewsforothermembersoftheCommission• beresponsibleforpreparationoftheCommission’sannualreport• managetheresourcesoftheCommissioninanefficientandcost-effectivefashion.
1 The Planning Commission
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201238
7.AllofthecostsoftheChairpersonofthePlanningCommission(includingofanyJudgeactingduringanyabsenceoftheChairperson)aretobemetfromitsbudgetandreimbursedtotheDepartmentofAttorneyGeneralandJusticebytheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructure.
8.TheprocessforselectingCommissionersofthePlanningCommission,whetherfull-timeorpart-time,istobebypublicadvertisementandrecommendationtotheMinisterbyaselectionpanelcomprisingthefollowing:• theChairpersonoftheCommission• theDirector-GeneraloftheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructure• anindependentpersonnominatedbytheChairperson(withtheconcurrenceoftheMinister).
9.EvenifanexistingCommissionerseeksreappointment,thepositionshouldusuallybesubjecttoacontestableadvertisingprocess.However,iftheChairpersonrecommendsthatadirectreappointmentshouldbemade,thentheMinistermayagreetothis.Full-timeCommissionersshouldholdappointmentforsevenyearsandbeeligibleforasecondtermonly.
10.Part-timeCommissionersaretobeappointedforuptothreeyearswithamaximumperiodofnineyears.
11.ThequalificationsofCommissionersshallremainasprovidedforinSchedule3ofthepresentplanninglegislation.
12.Commissioners(otherthantheChairperson)shouldnotbejudicialofficers.
13.ThenumberofpersonsabletobeappointedasCommissionersisnottobelimited.
14.ThepowertoappointcasualCommissioners,ifthereisaparticularworkloadissueoraneedforhighlyspecialisedexpertise,istoberetained.
15.WiththeconcurrenceoftheChiefJudgeandoftheChairperson,aCommissioneroftheLandandEnvironmentCourtistobeabletobeappointedtochairapanelortositonapanelofthePlanningCommission(ifitweretobechairedbytheChairpersonoftheCommission).
16.IfaCommissioneroftheCourtweretotakepartinaPlanningCommissiondeterminationprocess,thecostsoftheCommissioner’sparticipationistocomefromthebudgetofthePlanningCommission.
17.TheChairperson,anyactingChairpersonoranysecondedCommissioneroftheCourtisnottoperformroleofinvestigating,reviewingand/oradvisingtheMinisteronanymatterthattheMinistermighthavereferredtothePlanningCommission.
18.AllmatterstobedealtwithbythePlanningCommissionaretohaveaproperpublichearing.
19.Hearingsarenottobeheldincourtroomsandvenuesshouldbearrangedinasinformalafashionasispossible,consistentwiththescopeofthelikelyparticipationinandpublicattendanceatthehearing.
20.MattersthataretobeconsideredbytheCommissionaretobedealtwithbyapanelthatisselectedbytheChairpersonoftheCommission.
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 39
21.PriortoanypublichearingoftheCommissionwherethereislikelytobesignificantpublicparticipationorinvolvetechnicallycomplexmaterial,thereistobeapublicplanningdiscussionwellpriortothedateofthepublichearings.
22.ThepublichearingprocessfortheCommissionistooperateaccordingtopublishedguidelinesthatdonotimposemandatoryrestrictionsortimelimitsonthoseparticipatingbutcontrolofthehearingistoliewiththepanelconductingit.
23.ThePlanningCommissionActistoprovidethatthosetakingpartinapublichearingcanonlyberepresentedbyanexternallawyerorpaidagentwiththepermissionofthepanelhearingthematterif,andonlyif,thepanelissatisfiedthatthereissomepublicinterestreasonwhythisshouldbepermitted.
24.Companiesaretobeabletoberepresentedbydirectorsoremployeesofthecompany;theDepartmentbyitsemployees;councilsbycouncillorsorcouncilofficersandindividualsabletospeakontheirownbehalf.
25.Associationsandcommunitygroupsaretobeabletoappointoneoftheirmemberstospeakontheirbehalf.
26.ThePlanningCommission’sprocessesmustremaindistinctlydifferentfromthoseofaCourt:• Theprocessistobeinquisitorialratherthanadversarial.• Thereistobenocross-examinationprocesses(whetherbylawyersoragents–ifpermitted–orbyanyotherparticipants)ofthosepresentinginformationduringhearings.
• TheCommissionpanelmembersaretoundertakethequestioningofthoseparticipating.
• Therulesofevidencearenottoapply.• Thoseparticipatingarenottobeswornin.
Transcriptsarenotautomaticallytobetakenoftheproceedingsalthough,withpermissionofthepanel,recordingmaybeallowedifthereweresomespecialcircumstancedemonstratedwhythismightbewarranted–ifrecordingweretobepermitted,thecostsofdoingsoshouldbemetbythepersonorentityrequestingpermissionforthistooccur.
27.TheCommissionistogivereasonsforallitsdecisionsexplainingwhythedecisionhasbeenmade.Thedecisionsaretobemadepublicand,ifnotgivenattheendoftheCommissionhearing,aretobenotifiedtoallthosewhoparticipatedinthehearingandpublishedontheCommission’swebsite.
28.Allconcurrencefunctions,nomatterwhatthelegislativeprovisionthatmakestheapprovalnecessary,aretobevestedintheCommissionwhenmakingadecisionaboutadevelopmentproposal.
1 The Planning Commission
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201240
29.AppealsonquestionsoflawaretobeonthesamebasisasthatwhicharisesintheLandandEnvironmentCourt:
• againstdecisionsmadebyapanelofthePlanningCommissionpresidedoverbytheChairpersonshouldlietotheCourtofAppeal(thisbeingthepositionthatapplieswhenameritappealdeterminationismadebyaJudgeoftheLandandEnvironmentCourt).
• againstdecisionsmadebyanyotherpanelofthePlanningCommissionshouldlietoaJudgeoftheLandandEnvironmentCourt(thisbeingthepositionthatappliesfordecisionsmadebyCommissionersoftheCourt)andthentotheCourtofAppeal.
30.TheCommissionistoprepareandpublishaplainEnglishstep-by-stepguidetoitsprocesses–fromhowamattercomesintoitsremittohowadecisionismade,publicisedanditseffect.
31.AllsecretariatsupportistocontinuetobeprovidedbytheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructure,butbeindependentoftheDepartmentandremaininaseparateoffice.
32.TheheadoftheCommission’ssecretariatistoberesponsibletotheChairpersonofthePlanningCommissionforhearingprocessmattersandtotherelevantseniorofficeroftheDepartmentforadministrativeandpersonnelmatters.
33.TheMinisterresponsiblefortheSustainablePlanningActistobetheMinisterresponsibleforthePlanningCommissionAct.
34.Generaladministrativesupportforaccounting,payrollandsimilarfunctionsaretocontinuetobeprovidedbytheDepartment.
35.TheGovernmentconsidertheearlyenactmentandcomingintoeffectofthePlanningCommissionActtoenablethestartofreformsthroughthePlanningCommissionprocessindeterminingwhetherornottoapprovemajordevelopmentproposals.
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 41
PART 2 – The Minister, Director-General and DepartmentThe role of the MinisterCurrently,theMinisterforPlanningandInfrastructure(ortheMinister’sdelegates)actsinarangeofroleswithintheplanningsystem,theyare:
• toapproveLocalEnvironmentalPlansorchangestothem• tointervenein,removeormodifypowersofcouncilsregardingplanningmattersunderthepresentplanninglegislation
• toremoveparticulardevelopmentproposalsfromthejurisdictionofacouncilandreferthemforcentraldeterminationbecauseoftheirsignificancetotheState,whichresultsinthedecisionaboutsuchaprojectbeingmadecentrally
• togiveinstructionsforthepreparationofregulationsandtheircontent,togivedetailedeffecttothelegislation
• ancillarypowers(suchasreferringsomefisheriesprojectstothePlanningAssessmentCommissionforinvestigationandreport22).
Someoftheserolesmightberegardedasuncontroversial.Others,suchasthe‘callin’powerandthepowertoapprovemajorprojects,havedominatedpublicdebateabouttheplanningsysteminrecentyears.However,thisdebatewaslargelydefusedin2011bytherepealofPart3A23ofthepresentplanninglegislationandbythepresentMinisterreferringmatterstothePlanningAssessmentCommissionfordeterminationorreturningprojectstocouncilstodecide.
Recommendations36.TheMinisteristocontinuetoberesponsiblefortheformalmakingofLocalLand-Use
Plans(asdiscussedinVolume1).However,therewillbealessinterventionistrolefortheMinister(ortheMinister’sdelegates)inthepreparationofamendmentstosuchlocalplans,includingre-zonings.
37.TheMinisteristoretainthepowertoreferprojectsforStatelevelassessmentanddetermination.Themeritsofadecisiontoremoveaprojectfromacouncilwillnotbesubjecttoappeal.
38.WiththeexceptionofthoseprojectsthatweredeclaredbytheMinistertobeStatesignificantinfrastructure,theMinisterisnottomakeanydecisionsaboutwhetheranyprojectshouldbeapproved.DecisionmakingataStatelevelwouldbeundertakenbythePlanningCommission.
22 Indeed,thisparticularoneappearstonevertohavebeenused.
23 28September2011bythecommencementoftheEnvironmental Planning and Assessment Amendment (Part 3A Repeal) Act 2011
2 The Minister, Director-General and Department
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201242
39.IftherewerepublicobjectionsduringtheexhibitionstageofaStatesignificantinfrastructureproject,theconditionsproposedbytheMinisterforprojectapprovalareautomaticallytobereferredtothePlanningCommission.TheCommissionistodeterminewhatchanges,ifany,aretobemadetothoseconditions.TheCommissionisnottobepermittedtoconsiderwhethertheprojectshouldbeapproved,ortoimposesuchonerouschangestotheconditionsofapprovalsoastoconstituteconstructiverefusal.
40.TheMinister’sabilitytointervene,generally,intheplanningpowersofacouncilistoremain.
41.TheMinister’spresentpowerstoproposeappointmentstothePlanningCommissionandtheMinister’sroletonominatechairsandstatemembersofJointRegionalPlanningPanelsistoremain.
42.TheMinisteristoretainthepowertogivecouncilsdirectionswithrespecttoDevelopmentControlPlansandthepowertomake,amendorrevokeaDevelopmentControlPlanifthecouncildoesnotimplementtheMinister’sdirection24.
43.TheMinister’sgenerallegislativeandregulationmakingfunctionsareotherwisetoremainunchanged.
The role of the Director-GeneralTheDirector-GeneraloftheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructureperformsthreeimportantfunctionsasthedelegateoftheMinister.TheseshouldbecarriedoverintotheSustainablePlanningAct:
• settingouttherequirementsforthepreparationofLocalEnvironmentalPlans(tobecalledLocalLand-UsePlans),includingfor‘gatewayproposals’torezoneland
• givingdirectionsandestablishingtheframeworkforpreparationofenvironmentalimpactstatements
• givingconcurrencetoanapplicationbyadevelopmentproponenttobeabletobreachadevelopmentstandard.
ThepowersoftheDirector-GeneralareabletobedelegatedtoofficersoftheDepartment.Withtheexceptionofthepower25toagreetoapproveapplicationsforzoneflexibilityinindustrialzones,wedonotproposeremovalofthepowertodelegatetoacouncilthegrantofconcurrencetoanapplicationtobreachadevelopmentstandardcontainedinthelocalplan.
The role of the Department DuringtheconsultationprocessandinsubmissionstotheIssuesPaper,twomajorthemesemergedthatwerecriticaloftheroleoftheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructure:
24 Althoughweunderstandthatthispowerisinvokedrarely,itwasinvokedin2010byHon.TonyKellyMLC,thethenMinisterforPlanning,concerningtheCityofSydney’sLate-NightTradingDevelopmentControlPlan.WeareoftheviewthatthispowershouldberetainedandincorporatedintheSustainablePlanningAct.
25 SeeVolume1atpage55
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 43
• thefirstwasthattheDepartmentismetro-centric.Thiscriticismaroseonaregularbasisduringregionalcommunityconsultationforumsandinregionallybasedsubmissions.
• thesecond,broadercomplaint,wasthattheDepartmentfocusestoomuchonmicro-managementofdetailedplanningprocessesand,byextension,interferesincouncilautonomy.
OthersignificantfunctionsoftheDepartment,includingassessmentprocessesformajorprojects,wereonlysubjecttolimitedcriticisms.Theserelatedtoinformationavailabilityandopenness–anareawhereimprovementscanbeachievedwithlittledifficulty.Overall,therewasscantcriticismoftheprofessionalismorcompetenceofDepartmentalstaff.
Itiscleartousthattheconcernwithmicro-managementisgenuinelyandhonestlyheldonawidespreadbasis.However,thisconcernshouldberesolvedtoaconsiderableextentbyshiftingtheDepartment’sfocustostrategicplanning26.
The Department’s regional rolesTheDepartmentshouldhaveasignificantroleinbuildingplanningcapacitywithinregionalandrurallocalgovernment,intwodistinctways:
• throughsecondmentstoimprovethecapacityofcouncilswhoseownresourcesdonotpermitsufficientseniorstafftomeetpeakplanningdemands(particularlystrategicplanningdemands)
• establishingatrainingprogramforyoungerplanningprofessionalsthatembracescouncils,particularlythoseinruralorregionalareas.
Neitheroftheseprogramsneedstoencompasslargenumbersofeitherqualifiedortraineeplanners.Asaconsequence,thecostshouldbecomparativelymodest,eventakingintoaccountthefactthattherewillbetravelandlivingawayfromhomecostsassociatedwithitsimplementation.
GiventhatweproposeashiftinemphasisintheroleoftheDepartment,itisalsoappropriatetoexaminethespreadoftheDepartment’sregionalpresence.WedonotconsiderthatthereneedstobeamajorexpansioneitherinstaffingorlocationoftheDepartment’sregionaloffices.However,thesinglegapthatwehaveidentifiedthatwarrantsexpansionistheDepartment’spresentmethodforservicingthesouth-westoftheState.Thisshouldberemediedbyopeningasmalloffice(withamaximumoftwoprofessionalstaffandonesupportstaff)basedinWaggaWaggatoservicecouncilstothewestoftheACTandintotheRiverina.ThisofficeshouldbeasatelliteofeithertheDubboorWollongongregionaloffices.
Amatterofconcernisthepresentcosttocouncils,particularlyintheRiverina,totravelviaSydneytoattendmeetingsattheirregionalofficeinDubbo.Itwassuggestedtousthatinsufficientusewasmadeofalternativeweb-basedconferencingprocessesortheoptionofholdingmeetingsinSydney.Greaterutilisationoftelephoneandweb-basedconferencingtoolsinsteadoffacetofacemeetingsshouldassistincostreductions.
26 SeeVolume1,PartC,Chapter4frompage43
2 The Minister, Director-General and Department
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201244
Recommendations44.TheDepartmentistoestablishaprogrammeforstaffingexchangeswithlarger
regionalcitycouncils.
45.TheDepartmentistosecondstafftosmallerruralcouncilstoassistinstrategicplanningandforcapacitybuilding.
46.TheDepartmentistoestablishanewsub-regionalofficeinWaggaWagga.
47.TheDepartmentistoestablishasmall-scaletraineeplannercadetshipschemewithacycleoftraineeplacementswithregionalandruralcouncils.
48.TheDepartmentistoreviewthetiming,locationandcostsofmeetingsbetweenDepartmentalregionalstaffandstaffofregionalandruralcouncils.Thisexaminationistofocusonthenecessityforandaffordabilityofsuchmeetingsandtheuseofalternativeoptionstoeliminatetravelthatcanarisefromtechnologysuchaswebcameras.
The compliance role of the Department Currently,theDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructurehasalimitedcompliancerole27–principallyconfinedtosmallteamslocatedinSydneyandSingleton(toservicetheUpperHunter–establishedrecentlyinresponsetoconcernsaboutthecumulativeimpactsfromopencutcoalmines28).
WeunderstandthattherationaleforthecomplianceactivityintheUpperHunterbeingundertakenbytheDepartment(ratherthanbycouncilsand/ortheEnvironmentProtectionAuthority)isthattheDepartmenthadundertakentheassessmentformanyoftheminesandthattheapprovalsgrantedandconditionsattachingtothemweremadebytheMinister,ratherthanbythelocalcouncil.
Wedonothaveaproperbasisuponwhichwecouldconclude,eitherasamatterofgeneralprincipleorforotherspecificreasons,thattheDepartmentshouldundertakeanexpandedcompliancerole.However,theremaybeanappropriatebasisforthis,particularlyasaconsequenceoffurtherintensificationofmajorprojectapprovalsinotherregions.Wearesatisfiedthatthisisamatterthatcanbeaddressedasamatterofpolicyasrequiredinthefuture.
Becauseofthis,itisdesirablethattheSustainablePlanningActpermittheimpositionofacompliancecostlevyonsuchprojects.Thiswillpermitfuturepolicyconsiderationastowhethertheprovisionshouldbetriggered,includingforthecostsofthepresentSingletonoperation.
27 Seehttp://www.planning.nsw.gov.au/Development/Compliance/tabid/502/language/en-AU/Default.aspx
28 WeunderstandthatthiscompliancefunctionwastohavebeenfundedbycontributionsfromtheminingindustryinthisregionbutthatthishasnoteventuatedandthesestaffarefundedfromtheDepartment’sbudget.
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 45
Recommendation49.TheSustainablePlanningActistoincludeaprovisionpermittingtheimposition
ofchargesonprojectsapprovedbytheMinisterand/orthePlanningAssessmentCommissionand/orthePlanningCommissionforthepurposesoffundingDepartmentalcomplianceactivitiesdirectedatthoseclassesofproject.
3 Financial Matters
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201246
PART 3 – Financial MattersLocal infrastructure funding
Deriving local contributionsWeconsiderthatitisdesirabletoretainthethreepresentmethodsforderivingcontributionstoprovidelocalinfrastructure,asfollows: 1) PlanningAgreements(orVoluntaryPlanningAgreements)29
2) Localinfrastructurecontributions30
• thededicationoflandfreeofcostorthepaymentofamonetarycontribution(orboth)31
• afixeddevelopmentconsentlevy32
3) Specialinfrastructurecontributions33.
Recommendation50.TheSustainablePlanningActistoincludeprovisionsforthethreemethodsfor
derivinglocalinfrastructurecontributionscurrentlyprovidedforinthepresentplanninglegislation.
Accountability and planning agreementsDuringtheconsultationandsubmissionprocess,therewasadegreeofcynicism,expressedacrossthespectrum,aboutwhetherPlanningAgreementsaretruly‘voluntary’andthecostandtransparencyoftheprocessformakingthem.Amendmentstothepresentplanninglegislationin200834thathavenotcomeintoeffectincludedaSchedule35containingprovisionswhichremainanappropriateresponsetotheseconcerns.WerecommendthatthesebeincorporatedintheSustainablePlanningAct.ThisissupportedbytheIndependentCommissionAgainstCorruption36.
Inaddition,weconsideritdesirabletorequireanassessingofficerconsideringwhethertorecommendacceptanceofthetermsofaplanningagreement,oranydecisionmakingbodythatisdeterminingwhetherornottoenterintosuchanagreement,toconsideranysubmissionsreceivedduringthenoticeperiodoftheproposedagreement.
29 Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979,Part4,Division6,Subdivision2
30 Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979,Part4,Division6,Subdivision3
31 Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979,section94
32 Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979,section94A
33 Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979,Part4,Division6,Subdivision4
34 Environmental Planning and Assessment Amendment Act 2008
35 TheuncommencedEnvironmental Planning and Assessment Amendment Act 2008,Schedule1,Part3
36 IndependentCommissionAgainstCorruption,Anti-corruption Safeguards and the NSW Planning System(February2012)atpage6(Recommendation4).Seehttp://www.icac.nsw.gov.au/media-centre/media-releases/article/4023
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 47
Recommendations51.TheprovisionscontainedintheuncommencedSchedule1Part3tothepresent
planninglegislationrelatingtoPlanningAgreementsaretobeincorporatedintheSustainablePlanningAct.
52.Anyassessingofficerconsideringwhethertorecommendacceptanceofthetermsofavoluntaryplanningagreement,oranydecisionmakingbodydeterminingwhetherornottoenterintosuchanagreement,istoberequiredtoconsideranysubmissionsreceivedduringthenoticeperiodoftheproposedagreement.
Content of Local Infrastructure PlansAsdiscussedabove,sections94and94Aofthepresentplanninglegislationenablelocalcouncilsorotherconsentauthoritiestolevycontributionsforpublicamenitiesandpublicservicesrequiredasaconsequenceofdevelopment.TheSustainablePlanningActwillrenamethesecontributionplansasLocalInfrastructurePlanstoreflectmoreaccuratelytheirfunction.SuchplansmaybeinseveralParts(reflectingtheavailableoptionsforsuchfunding),butwillformanelementoftherelevantDevelopmentControlPlanintheunitaryplanningdocumentforthelocalgovernmentarea37(discussedbelow).
IntheirsubmissiontotheIssuesPaper,theIndependentPricingandRegulatoryTribunalproposedthatageneralreferencebegiventoitregardingtheprocessoflistingworksasnecessarylocalinfrastructureincontributionplans(tobecalledLocalInfrastructurePlans),fundedthroughthemechanismswehavedescribedinthisChapter.TheTribunalsaid38:
D96. Should IPART be given a reference to make recommendations about what should be the extent, standard and nature of community infrastructure works that should be included in contributions plans?
Yes, IPART supports the Government giving us a general reference to make recommendations about the extent and standards of community infrastructure that should be included in contributions plans.
The Department of Planning’s 2010 Practice Note specifies an Essential Works List. This list applies when the maximum contributions rate in a plan exceeds the applicable cap, and the council is seeking funding from the PIF or a special rate variation. There is no restriction on the type of facilities within a contributions plan if the contributions rate is below the applicable cap.
The Essential Works List appears to have been established with little discussion or debate. If IPART is given a general reference to make recommendations about the extent and standards of community infrastructure that should be included in contributions plans, our advice would be based on submissions from stakeholders and the general community. We consider this would be best done within the context of a broader review of infrastructure funding.
37 SeeVolume1,PartC,Chapter5atpage51andfurtherdiscussionlaterinthisPart
38 IndependentPricingandRegulatoryTribunal,NSW Planning System Review – IPART Submission on Issues Paper (February2012)at19.Seehttp://planningreview.nsw.gov.au/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=lA08WgGSrpE%3d&tabid=119&mid=569
3 Financial Matters
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201248
TheTribunalundertookadetailedanalysisofthreesuchcontributionplanstoprovideasufficientplatformfortheir2011review.WeaccepttheTribunal’sviewthatitisnotappropriateforittoanalyse,onanongoingbasis,whetherornotitisreasonablefortheplanstoincorporateindividualitems.However,wearesatisfiedthatsomesupervisionisrequired.
Theadoptionofanew,broaderbasisofspreadingfundingofthelocalinfrastructureshortfallacrossthecommunity39meansthattherewillneedtobeadegreeofStatesupervisionofthecontentoftheseplans.TheprocessthatweproposewillrequirecouncilstosubmitdraftLocalInfrastructurePlanstotheDirector-GeneraloftheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructureforreview.WedonotexpectthattheDepartmentwillundertakeadetailedreviewofeachplan,butwillundertakeasampledauditforreasonableness.IftheDirector-Generalconsidersthatanyplanshouldbemodified,thecouncilwhoseplanitismayrequesttheproposedmodificationbereferredtothePlanningCommissionfordetermination.
Recommendations53.CouncilsaretosubmitdraftLocalInfrastructurePlans(oramendmentstothem)to
theDirector-GeneraloftheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructureforreview.
54.TheDirector-Generalmaymodifyanysuchplan.
55.IftheDirector-Generalmodifiesaplan,thecouncilmayrequesttheproposedmodificationbereferredtothePlanningCommissionfordetermination.
56.APlanningCommissiondeterminationonaLocalInfrastructurePlanistobetreatedaswouldanapplicationforaprojectdetermination.
Accumulated local infrastructure fundsAlthoughwearenotabletoprovideaprecisequantificationoftheextenttowhichcouncilsareholdingunspentmoniesfromraisedlocalinfrastructurecontributions,weunderstandanecdotallythatthisislikelytobeasignificantsum,possiblyinexcessof$800million.
Councilshaveadegreeofflexibilityaboutthesequencingofexpenditureandapplicationofmonies,providedthereisproperaccountingforthisacrosstherangeofprojectsforwhichthemoneyhasbeenraised.However,aspartofthereferencetotheTribunal,itshouldbeaskedwhatadditionalprocessesmightaccelerateexpenditureofthisaccumulatedmoney.Ifamoretimelymethodofexpenditureisavailabletobringforwardprojects,significantshorttermstimulustotheState’seconomymayresult.
ItmayalsobeappropriatetoinvolvetheAuditorGeneralinaselectiveprogrammeofexaminingthosecouncilswithsignificantaccumulatedreservescollectedforlocalinfrastructurefunding.ThepurposewouldbetoensurethatanyrecommendationsoftheTribunalaboutmoretimelyexpenditureofaccumulatedfundsarebeingimplementedappropriately.
39 SeeVolume1,PartEatpages117to119
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 49
Further,councilsshouldberequiredtopublishthefollowingaspartoftheirannualreporting:• asimplifiedanalysisofsuchmoniescollectedandexpended• infrastructureprovided• anticipatedtimetablingforfutureinfrastructuretobefundedfromtheseinfrastructurecharges.
TheTribunal’soverallconsiderationwillalsoneedtoconsidertheprocessesbywhichcapsaretobereviewed.Thiswouldbepartofwhatshouldbearegularreviewofthebasisforandamountofthebroadersocialchargetobeleviedtomeetthecostoftheinfrastructureshortfall.
Recommendations57.AreferenceistobegiventotheIndependentPricingandRegulatoryTribunal
todeterminehowtoacceleratetheexpenditureofaccumulatedfundsraisedbycouncilsfromlocalinfrastructurecontributions.
58.Councilsarerequiredtopublishthefollowingaspartoftheirannualreporting:• asimplifiedanalysisofsuchmoniescollectedandexpended• infrastructureprovided• anticipatedtimetablingforfutureinfrastructuretobefundedfromtheseinfrastructurecharges.
Contributions appeals to the Land and Environment CourtPresently,whenaconditionofdevelopmentconsentimposesadevelopercontribution,thereisarightofappealtotheLandandEnvironmentCourtforameritreview40inrelationtothefollowing:
• thereasonablenessofacontributionleviedonadevelopment• thereasonablenessofelementswithinthescheduleofidentifiedworksneededaslocalcommunityinfrastructure.
Recommendation59.TherightofappealtotheLandandEnvironmentCourtinitsClass1jurisdiction
againstthereasonablenessofconditionsimposingacontributionforlocalcommunityinfrastructureistoberetained.
Fitting a Local Infrastructure Plan into the unitary planning document frameworkItisnecessarytoconsiderwhereacouncil’sLocalInfrastructurePlanshouldbefittedwithinthethreeelementsoftheunitaryplanningdocumentthatwehaverecommendedtoestablishthecoherentsingleplanninginformationbaseforeachcouncilarea.
40 Rose Consulting Group v Baulkham Hills Shire Council[2003]NSWCA266
3 Financial Matters
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201250
WedonotproposethatallLocalInfrastructurePlansgothroughastatutoryadoptionprocess,butratherthattheyaresubjecttotheauditingprocessdiscussedabove.Forthisreason,itisnotappropriatethataLocalInfrastructurePlanformpartoftheLocalLand-UsePlan.However,wehaverecommendedinVolume141thattherebeastandardtemplatelayoutforDevelopmentControlPlansandthatthisstandardtemplatelayoutshouldincorporateachapterordivisiontoencompasstheprovisionsofaLocalInfrastructurePlan(thatwouldalsopermitadoptionofaregimeforfixeddevelopmentconsentleviespursuanttosection94Aofthepresentplanninglegislation,ifrequired).
Asaconsequence,notonlywilltheLocalInfrastructurePlanformpartoftheunitary,comprehensiveplanninginformationpackagebutitwillalsobeinacommonformattoassistinpublicaccesstoinformation.Therefore,thetransitiontoLocalInfrastructurePlanswilloccurintandemwiththeuptakeofthestandardtemplateforDevelopmentControlPlans.
Recommendations60.AlllocalinfrastructurecontributionsplansaretobeconsolidatedintoasingleLocal
InfrastructurePlanandincorporatedintotheDevelopmentControlPlanintheunitaryplanningdocumentforacouncil.
61.ThisconsolidationistotakeplacewhenthecounciltranslatesitsDevelopmentControlPlantothestandardtemplateforsuchplans.
Funding for the Department of Planning and InfrastructureToenableproperimplementationofthereforms,itisnecessarytoprovideanappropriatebudgetarybasefortheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructureandfundimplementationofareformedelectronicplanningsystem(incorporatinge-planningandeasypublicaccesstoplanninginformation).For2010-11,theDepartment‘stotalexpenditurewas$130.6M(includinggrantsof$22.5M)leaving$108.1MfortheDepartment’soperatingcosts.
Currently,asignificantelementofthefundingoftheDepartmentcomesfromdevelopmentproposalapplicationfeespaidtotheDepartmentforassessmentofmajorprojectproposals.ThismoneyispaidtotheDepartmentandretainedbyittodefrayoperatingcosts.Thetotalsumreceivedin2010-11frommajorprojectapplicationfeeswas$20.4M.
ThesecondsignificantsourceoffundingfortheordinaryactivitiesoftheDepartmentcomesfromthePlanningReformFund–constitutingalevy42ondevelopmentapplicationswithacapitalinvestmentvalueof$50,000ormore.Themoneyiscollectedbycouncils/consentauthoritiesandremittedtotheDepartmentmonthly.In2010/11,theFundreceived$22.4M.Approximately5%isredistributedtocouncilsasgrantsforimprovingplanningprocesses.ThebalanceoftherevenueisusedforstrategicplanningactivitiesthroughouttheState,includingthecostsofregionalofficesandpreparationofStandardInstrumentLocal
41 AtRecommendation27
42 Thelevyiscurrently0.064%oftheestimatedcapitalinvestmentvalueoftheproject
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 51
EnvironmentalPlansandstrategicplans,suchastheMetropolitan Plan for Sydney 203643andregionalstrategies.
ThebalanceoftheDepartment’s2010/11fundingcamefromtheConsolidatedFund($84.3M)andarangeofother,lessersources($21.5M).Finally,theDepartmentreceived$4.5MindevelopercontributionstoberemittedtobodiessuchasRoadsandMaritimeServicesforworkstobeundertaken.Thesefundsareheldonaconstructivetrustfortherelevantentityandareremittedastheworksarecarriedout.
TheDepartment’srelianceontherevenuestreamfromthePlanningReformFundhasincreasedovertheyearsasaresultofincreasesinDepartmentalresponsibilities.Thereareseveralrisksthatarisefromthisarrangement:
• uncertaintyinbudgetpredictability• thenecessityforincreasingthenon-ConsolidatedFundrevenueinordertoprovideacceptableservicelevelsfromtheDepartment(necessarytofacilitatethegovernmentpolicyofpromotingacceptableeconomicgrowth)
• thepotentialpublicperceptionofconflictofinterestthattheDepartmentneedstopromotemajorprojectdevelopmentproposalsforassessmentpurelytoensureDepartmentalviability.Suchaperceptionwouldfosterpubliccynicismabouttheindependenceandintegrityofmajorprojectassessments,iflevelsofapplicationfeedrivenrevenueimpactonemploymentsecurityforstaffoftheDepartment.
ItisnotappropriateforustobesuggestingwhatshouldbesuitablefundingandstaffinglevelsfortheDepartment,butweconsideritisappropriatetocommentonthewaytheDepartment’sbudgetisderived.Thisisbecausebudgetaryprocessesformpartoftheframeworkthatinformsandinfluencespublicperceptionsoftheintegrityoftheplanningsystemandthusdofallwithinourtermsofreference.
Toprovideadditionalfundingtomeetthecostofthesereforms,weproposed,inVolume1,thatthePlanningReformLevybeincreasedfrom0.064%to0.10%ofthecapitalinvestmentvalueofprojectsandthattheexemptionofprojectswithacapitalinvestmentvalueoflessthan$50,000beremoved44.ThiswouldresultintheincometotheFundincreasingfrom$22.4Mto$35.3M(drawnfrom2010/2011figures).Further,removaloftheexemptionwouldhaveraisedanadditional$200,000in2010/11.
WeconsideritappropriatethattheentireDepartmentalbudgetbebroughtwithintheconventionalbudgetbiddingandsettingprocess.SuchachangewouldnecessarilybeaccompaniedbyarequirementthatdevelopmentapplicationassessmentfeesformajorprojectsandcontributionstothePlanningReformFundshouldbecomepartofthegeneralrevenueoftheStateratherthanbeingallocated,specifically,tosupporttheDepartment’soperations.Anynecessaryadjustment,upordown,intheDepartment’sbudgetwouldthenbecomepartoftheannualbudgetaryprocessforallocationsfromtheConsolidatedFund.Departmentalcostsandaprogramofgrantstocouncilsforplanningreformimplementation,includingelectronicplanning,shouldbedealtwithaspartofthebudgetcyclethroughConsolidatedFundallocation.
43 Seehttp://www.metrostrategy.nsw.gov.au/
44 SeeVolume1,PartEatpage116
3 Financial Matters
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201252
Recommendations62.Developmentapplicationassessmentfeesformajorprojectsandcontributionsto
thePlanningReformFundaretoberemittedtotheStateTreasury.
63.ThebudgetoftheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructureistobebroughtwithintheconventionalbudgetbiddingandsettingprocessoftheConsolidatedFund.
64.ThemoniesraisedasPlanningReformFundleviesaretobeappliedtothreepurposes:• meetingtheappropriateportionofthebudgetoftheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructure(butexcludingassessmentcostsformajorprojectassessments).
• providingafundfromwhichtheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructurecanmakegrantstocouncilstorolloutcomprehensiveuseofinformationtechnologytosupporte-planninganddataaccuracyandfuturecollection.
• meetingthecostsofthePlanningCommission.
Funding information technology in a reformed planning systemInordertoimplementthereformsthatwepropose,informationtechnologywillneedtobeintegratedcomprehensivelyintotheplanningsystem45.Thiswillinvolvetheintroductionofelectronicplanningforthelodgementandassessmentofapplicationsfordevelopmentandongoingdataqualityimprovementsothattheinformationcanbemadeaccessibletothepublicthroughacomprehensiveplanningportal.ThiswillconstituteasignificantadditionalcostfortheDepartmentandcouncilsoverthenextdecade.ItisunreasonabletoexpectthattheseDepartmentalandcouncilcostscouldbemetfromwithinpresentrevenuestreams.Asaconsequence,inadditiontoexaminingthewaytheDepartmentisfunded,itisimportanttoconsiderthewaysinwhichacomprehensiveelectronicplanningsystemcanbefunded.
Recommendations65.Inconsultationwithlocalgovernment,theDepartmentofPlanningand
Infrastructureistoestablishaframeworkforassessingcouncilgrantapplicationsforgrantsgiventocouncilstoimprovetheiruseofinformationtechnology,tosupporte-planning,electronicdataaccuracyandfuturecollection.
66.TheDepartment’sbudgetistoincludeanallocation(drawnfrommoniespaidintothePlanningReformFund)forthemakingofsuchgrants.
45 SeeVolume1,PartGandthisvolume,Part4
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 53
Funding the Planning CommissionIn2010/2011,thePlanningAssessmentCommission’srunningcostswereapproximately$2.9M.AnincreasedworkloadhasalreadyresultedfromthepolicydecisionofthepresentMinisterforPlanningandInfrastructuretodelegatedeterminationofmajorprojectmatterstoit.WeproposepublichearingswillberequiredaspartofallthePlanningCommission’sdeterminationprocesses.ThismeansthattherearelikelytobeincreasesinthecostsofrunningthePlanningCommission,comparedtothepresentPlanningAssessmentCommission.Inaddition,amodestincreaseinbudgetingwillberequiredforthePlanningCommissiontoprovideforafull-timeChairandthepossibilityofoneortwofull-timemembers,alongwiththepotentialneedtoexpandtheskillbaseofthepart-timeCommissioners.
Recommendation67.SufficientbudgetallocationistobemadeforthePlanningCommissiontoenableit
tofulfiltheexpandedroleintendedforit.
Legislative cost shifting – Planning Commission & Joint Regional Planning PanelsWhenthePlanningAssessmentCommissionandJointRegionalPlanningPanelswereincorporatedinthepresentplanninglegislation,aprovision46wasalsoinsertedinthelegislationthatmadetherelevantcouncilresponsibleforthecostoftheiractivities.However,thethengovernmentsubsequentlydecidedthattheStatewouldmeetthecostsofthePlanningAssessmentCommissionandofJointRegionalPlanningPanels.TherehavebeennoMinisterialexemptions47granted.Asaconsequence,technically,councilscurrentlyoweadebttotheStateforthecostsofaPanelortheCommissionactingastheconsentauthorityforanydevelopmentproposedforlandinthatcouncil’sarea.
WehavenoreasontobelievethatthepresentGovernmentproposestostopmeetingthesecosts.Section23OofthepresentplanninglegislationshouldnotbecarriedoverintotheSustainablePlanningAct.TheaccrueddebtsshouldbeforgivenbytheState.
Thesoleprovisioninsection23O48ofthepresentplanninglegislationthathasoperatedistherequirementthatacouncilmeetthecostsofrunninganylocalIndependentHearingandAssessmentPanelappointedbyit.AprovisionrequiringcouncilsmeetingthecostsofIndependentHearingandAssessmentPanels,IndependentHearingandDeterminationPanelsorArchitectural,UrbanDesignand/orHeritageAssessmentPanelsshouldbeintheSustainablePlanningAct.
46 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979,section23O
47 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979,section23O(5)
48 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979,section23O(3)
3 Financial Matters
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201254
Recommendations68.CostrecoveryfromcouncilsisnottobeincludedintheSustainablePlanningAct
wheneitherthePlanningCommissionorJointRegionalPlanningPanelsactasconsentauthoritiesfordevelopmentonlandinacouncil’sarea.
69.TheStateistoforgivedebtsthathaveaccrued(andwillcontinuetoaccrue)undersection23Oofthepresentplanninglegislationuntilitsrepealiseffected.
70.ThepresentprovisionrequiringacounciltomeetthecostofanyIndependentHearingAssessmentPanelthatitmightestablishistoberetained.
71.AsimilarprovisionistobeincorporatedforanyIndependentHearingandDeterminationPaneloranyArchitectural,Designand/orHeritageAssessmentPanel.
Development application fees
Adjustment of development application feesDevelopmentapplicationfeescalespayabletocouncilsaresetbyregulation49.Between2000and2010,somefeeswerenotadjusted,necessitatinganapproximate25percentincreaseinlate201050.Therewasacommoncomplaintfromcouncilsthatdevelopmentapplicationfeesdidnotcoverthecostsofthedevelopmentassessmentanddeterminationprocess,withtheshortfallcomingfromgeneralcouncilrevenue.
Weregardthisasunreasonable,asthesefeesaredesignedtobe‘user-pays’.Equally,wedonotconsiderthatthesefeesshouldbeunregulated,northatcontrolovertheirlevelsshouldberemovedfromtheStategovernment.
Toestablishwhetherthepresentfundingbaseisadequateforthetasksthatitisexpectedtosupport,itisappropriatethattherebeashort,limitedenquirybytheIndependentPricingandRegulatoryTribunalintothepresentfeescales.Thetermsofreferenceshouldbeconfinedtodeterminingwhetherornotthereneedstobeanimmediate,one-offadjustmenttothedevelopmentapplicationfeescaletoprovideaproperbasisforthecouncils’rolesinareformedplanningsystem.
Whileeverageneralratecappingpolicyremains,weconsideritappropriatethatthebaseadjustmentpercentageshouldalsobereflectedindevelopmentapplicationfeescales,asanautomaticpercentageadjustment.Ifthereweretobeachangeinthepresentratecappingadjustmentprocess,analternativemechanismtoprovideannualadjustmentstocouncildevelopmentapplicationfeescaleswouldalsoneedtobeestablished.
49 CurrentlysetbytheEnvironmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000,Part15
50 Environmental Planning and Assessment Further Amendment Regulation 2010.FordetailsontheofficialnotificationseeGovernment Gazette of the State of New South Wales(Friday31December2010)http://www.nsw.gov.au/sites/default/files/Government_Gazette_31_December.pdf
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 55
Recommendations72.AreferenceistobegiventotheIndependentPricingandRegulatoryTribunalto
investigatewhetherdevelopmentapplicationfeescalesforcouncilsshouldbeincreasedtoensurethattheyreflectaproperuserpaysbasisfortheassessmentanddeterminationprocessesfordevelopmentapplications.
73.Theprocessforsettingcouncildevelopmentapplicationfeescalesistoprovidethatthesefeesareadjusted,automaticallyonanannualbasis,bythesamepercentageasthebaseannualincreasepercentageforordinarycouncilraterevenue.
Development contributions for universities Universitiesarenot-for-profitinstitutionsthatarefunded,inthemajority,bygovernment.Thelevyingofdevelopmentcontributionsbyconsentauthoritieswhenuniversitiesareundertakingdevelopmentforthepurposesofprovidingstudentaccommodation,teachingandresearchfacilitiesdivertsfundsfromprovidingneworupgradedfacilities.
Becauseofthis,developmentundertakenbyuniversitiesforstudentaccommodation,teachingandresearchfacilitiesshouldnotbesubjecttodevelopmentcontributions(otherthanfordrainageandtrafficmanagementatthedevelopmentsite’sentrance)asthosefundscouldbeusedtowardstheprovisionofnecessaryinfrastructuretoimproveeducationaloutcomes,attractqualitystudentsandstaffandallowAustralianuniversitiestocompeteintheinternationaleducationmarket.ThisisinlinewithboththeDepartment’sCircularD6of1995andtheDevelopmentContributionsPracticeNoticeof200551.
Recommendation72.Universitydevelopmentsforstudentaccommodation,teachingandresearch
facilitiesarenottobesubjecttodevelopmentcontributionsexceptfordrainageandtrafficmanagementworks(atthedevelopmentsite’sentrance).
51 DepartmentofInfrastructure,Planning&NaturalResources,Development Contributions Practice Notes – July 2005(2005).Seehttp://www.planning.nsw.gov.au/planningsystem/pdf/all_contribution_pns.pdf
4 The Spatial Information Act
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201256
PART 4 – The Spatial Information Act IntroductionCurrently,nocoherentlegislativeframeworkexistsfor:
• thesharingofgovernment-heldspatialinformationbothbetweengovernmentagencies52andbetweenagencies,industryandthecommunity
• improvingthequalityofgovernment-heldspatialdata• reducingtheexistingduplicationassociatedwithmanagingspatialresources• facilitatingpublicaccesstoappropriateclassesofgovernment-heldspatialdata.
Reformoftheplanningsystemnowprovidesacatalystforenactmentoflegislation–theSpatialInformationAct–toresolvetheseproblems53.Oneofthemostimportantfeaturesofaccesstospatialdatadealtwithbythislegislationwillbethecreationofageoportal54wherekeygovernmentspatialdatasetscanbeaccessedbyothergovernmentagenciesandmembersofthepublic.
Legislative structureTheMinisterresponsibleforLandandPropertyInformationshouldberesponsiblefortheSpatialInformationAct.
TheSpatialInformationActneedstocoverthefollowingdefinedclassesofelectronicspatialinformationheldbyNewSouthWalesgovernmentagencies:
• Class1:land-usedata(includingthecadastre55,planningspatialdatasetsandfeaturesofinterest)
• Class2:socialdata(populationprofiles,demographicdata,dataaboutthetypeofgovernmentservicesavailable)
• Class3:economicdata(landandpropertyvaluations,employmentlevels,planningactivityandbuildingdata,licensingandregistrationdata)
• Class4:infrastructuredata(water,gas,electricity,telecommunicationsservices,transport).
• Class5:politicaldata(StateandFederalelectorates,localgovernmentareas)• Class6:environmentaldata(climate,bushfireandflood,threatenedspecies,vegetationcommunities,nationalandStateparkboundaries,riverandstreamclassificationsandheritage).
52 ’Governmentagencies’meanscouncils,stateownedcorporationsandotherbodiesfallingwithinthedefinitionof‘agency’underthe Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009
53 SeeVolume1,PartG
54 SeeGlossary
55 SeeGlossary
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 57
AsdiscussedinVolume156,a‘dutytocooperate’shallbeincludedintheSpatialInformationActtoensurethatdigitaldataheldorcreatedbycouncils,StateownedcorporationsandagenciesoftheState(tobedefinedbyregulation)isconsistent,particularlywithStrategicPlans.
Thesedatasetswillbelinkedtoapubliclyavailablegeoportal.Basicaccesswillbeprovidedfree-of-charge,withmorecomprehensiveaccessviasubscriptionoronauserpaysbasis(asdeterminedbytheMinister).Informationmaybeprovidedinaformatthatpreventsre-useforcommercialpurposes.Further,datasetsthatcontainsensitiveinformation(likethelocationofitemsofAboriginalculturalheritageandthreatenedspecies)willonlybeaccessibleviasubscriptionand/orlicenceagreement.
Non-governmentagencies(includingtheCommonwealthandutilities)thatholdspatialdatasetsfortheclassescoveredbytheSpatialInformationActandthatwishtolinkthemtothegeoportalwillbepermittedtodosowiththeMinister’sapproval.Agencieswillberequiredtomakespatialdatasetsandservicesavailabletootheragenciesforpublicfunctions–coveredbyadisclaimer,licenceagreementormemorandumofunderstanding,ifnecessary.
TheSpatialInformationActwillidentifywhichGovernmentagencywillbethecustodianofaparticularspatialdatasetandtheirduties–notrequirethecreationofnewdatasets.Thiswillincludedeterminingthecustodianshiparrangementsfortheelectronicregister(s)57ofdevelopmentconsents.Governmentagencieswill,however,berequiredtocreatemetadata58forspatialdatasetsandspatialdataservices59withintheircustodianship.
Toensuregovernment-heldspatialdatasetscanbesearchedandcombinedwithotherdatasets,theMinisterwillhavethecapacitytoestablishmetadatarequirementsforspatialdatasetsandspatialdataservicesandtoprescriberequirementsforinteroperabilityandharmonisation.
Implicationsforgovernmentliabilityinnegligenceassociatedwithmakinggovernment-heldspatialdatapubliclyavailableandanycopyrightimplicationsofmakingspatialdatapubliclyavailablewillalsobeconsideredduringthepreparationoftheBill.TheBillwillalsobedraftedtoensureitcomplementstherequirementsoftheGovernment Information (Public Access) Act 2009.
Co-ordinating committee for spatial informationTheSpatialInformationActwillestablishaco-ordinatingcommitteetosubmitrecommendationstotheMinisterforFinanceandServicesoninitiativestopromoteinfrastructureforspatialinformationinNewSouthWalesandtoassisttheMinisterwiththeimplementationanduseoftheseinitiatives.Itwillalsodeterminecustodianshiparrangementsforandthenumberofregister(s)ofdevelopmentconsents.
56 SeeVolume1,PartC,Chapter4atRecommendation9
57 Seethisvolume,Part6–‘Registerofconsents’
58 SeeGlossary
59 SeeGlossary
4 The Spatial Information Act
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201258
Responsibility for preparation of the legislationThepreparationoftheSpatialInformationBillshouldbetheresponsibilityoftheDepartmentofFinanceandServicestoensurethattheSpatialInformationActisconsistentwiththeNSWgovernanceframeworkforSpatialDataInfrastructure.
Recommendations75.TheSpatialInformationActbeenactedcoveringcertainclassesofspatial
informationheldinelectronicformbygovernmentagenciesthatrelatetoNewSouthWales(includingthecoastalwatersoftheState).
76.DraftingoftheSpatialInformationActistoberesponsibilityoftheDepartmentofFinanceandServicesassistedbytheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructure.
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 59
PART 5 – Integrity in the planning systemIntheintroductiontoVolume1,wenotedthebroadlackoftrustinthecommunityintheoperationandintegrityofthepresentplanningsystem.Wenotedthatwehadreceivedasubmission60bytheIndependentCommissionAgainstCorruptioninresponsetotheIssuesPaperthatmadesixteenrecommendationsforimprovingtheintegrityofthesystem.Becauseoftheimportanceofrestoringpublicconfidenceintheplanningsystem,wesetoutbelowhowwehaverespondedtoeachoftheCommission’srecommendations:
ICAC Recommendation 1–ThattheNSWGovernmentensuresthatdiscretionaryplanningdecisionsaremadesubjecttomandatedsetsofcriteriathatarerobustandobjective.
NSW Planning System Review Response • Thepresentmandatoryconsiderationsfordecisionmakersbereviewedforclarityandrelevancy,includinganassessmentofcumulativeimpactsandpublicbenefits.See Volume 1, Part C, Chapter 9 – Recommendations 73 and 75
• AswellasgeneralobjectsfortheSustainablePlanningAct,therewillbeaseparatesetofprocessrelatedobjects.See Volume 1, Part C, Chapter 3 – Recommendation 7
ICAC Recommendation 2–ThattheNSWGovernmentmakesitmandatorythatmajorstrategicpolicydocumentsareconsideredduringthemakingofplanninginstruments.
NSW Planning System Review Response • LocalLand-UsePlansmustbeconsistentwithstrategicplansapplyingtothelandthatisthesubjectoftheLocalLand-UsePlan.Further,theseparateobjectsforthepreparationofLocalLand-UsePlansmustincludethattheplanmustimplementanystrategicplanadoptedcoveringthelocalgovernmentarea.See Volume 1, Part C, Chapter 4 – Recommendation 11
• InordertofacilitatetheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructuretoobtaina‘whole-of-government’approachtostrategicplanning,theSustainablePlanningActwillcontaina‘dutytocooperate’thatwillapplytoallcouncilsandagenciesoftheState(tobedefinedbyregulation)thatareinvolvedininfrastructure,resourcemanagementandserviceprovisionwithintherelevantboundariesoftheplan.See Volume 1, Part C, Chapter 4 – Recommendation 9
60 IndependentCommissionAgainstCorruption,Anti-corruption Safeguards and the NSW Planning System(February2012)atpage6(Recommendation4).Seehttp://www.icac.nsw.gov.au/media-centre/media-releases/article/4023
5 Integrity in the planning system
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201260
ICAC Recommendation 3–ThattheNSWGovernmentcontinuestoensurethatadequateoversightsafeguardsareinplacefortheassessmentanddeterminationofdevelopmentapplicationsthatproposeprohibiteduses.
NSW Planning System Review Response • Prohibiteduses’intheland-usetableofaLocalLand-UsePlanwillnotbeabletobeapprovedwithoutarezoningapplication–withtheexceptionofindustrialzones.TheprocessforspotrezoningapplicationswillreferthoseapplicationstothePlanningCommissionfordetermination.See Volume 1, Part C, Chapter 7 – Recommendation 41
• Prohibitedusesinindustrialzonesaretobeassessedontheirmeritswithapositiverequirementfortheproponenttodemonstrateapositive‘publicinterest’inpermittingsuchdevelopment.AnyapprovalpursuanttothislimitedexceptionistorequiretheconcurrenceoftheDirector-GeneraloftheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructure.See Volume 1, Part C, Chapter 5 – Recommendation 21
• Thedistinctionbetweena‘prohibition’anda‘developmentcontrol’willberemovedandasaresulttheonly‘prohibitions’willexistintheland-usetableinLocalLand-UsePlans.See Volume 1, Part C, Chapter 5 – Recommendation 22
• TheMinisterforPlanningandInfrastructurewillnotmakeanymeritdecisionsregardingindividualdevelopmentproposals,exceptforStatesignificantinfrastructure.TheMinistermaydecidethatamattershouldbedeterminedbythePlanningCommissionbutthisisaprocess–notamerit–matter.See Volume 1, Part C, Chapter 10
ICAC Recommendation 4–ThattheNSWGovernmentintroduceschangestovoluntaryplanningagreementsthatareconsistentwiththoseproposedintheyet-to-commenceprovisionssetoutinSchedule3oftheEnvironmental Planning and Assessment Amendment Act 2008.
NSW Planning System Review Response • TheSustainablePlanningActwillincorporatetheprovisionsintheyet-to-becommencedSchedule3Environmental Planning and Assessment Amendment Act 2008,relatingtovoluntaryplanningagreements.See Volume 2, Part 3
ICAC Recommendation 5–ThattheNSWGovernmentintroducesasystemofcontinuingprofessionaldevelopmentforgovernmentplanningpractitioners.
NSW Planning System Review Response • Aschemeforcontinuingprofessionaldevelopmentisproposedforallpersonsofanyprofessionaldisciplinecarryingoutplanningfunctionsandemployedbycouncils,theDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructureandotherStateGovernmentdepartmentsandinstrumentalities.
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 61
• Aworkingpartywillbeestablished,ledbytheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructure,withmembersfromlocalgovernment,thePlanningInstituteofAustralia(NewSouthWales),thedevelopmentindustry,conservationgroupsandtertiaryeducationproviders,todesignaframeworkforandtheminimumannualrequirementtoundertakecontinuingprofessionaldevelopmenteducationforplanners.See Volume 1, Part I – Recommendations 143 – 147
ICAC Recommendation 6–ThattheNSWGovernmentensuresthatthenewplanninglegislationclearlyarticulatesitsobjectivesandprovidesguidanceonthepriority(ifany)tobegiventocompetingobjectives.
NSW Planning System Review Response • TheSustainablePlanningActwillincludeanoverarchingobjectaswellasprocessobjectivesandincorporateobjectsforstrategicplanningaswellasforthemakingforLocalLand-Useplans.See Volume 1, Part C, Chapter 3 – Recommendation 6
• WedonotproposeanyprioritiesfortherangeofobjectsforstrategicplanningorforthemakingforLocalLand-Useplans.See Volume 1, Part C, Chapter 4 – Recommendation 8
ICAC Recommendation 7–ThattheNSWGovernmentensuresthatitssystemforassessingandapprovingdevelopmentsofstatesignificanceprovidesadequateopportunitiesforcompetingpublicintereststobeconsidered.
NSW Planning System Review Response • AlldevelopmentproposalsforStatesignificantdevelopmentandPublicbenefitinfrastructurewillbedeterminedbythePlanningCommission–establishedunderthePlanningCommissionActtomandateproceduresensuringthatthereareadequateopportunitiesforcompetingintereststobeconsideredandforopenprocessesandgivingreasonsfordecisions.See Volume 1, Part F
• ThePlanningCommissionwillexercisedeterminativefunctionswithrespecttothefollowingrangeofmatters:
• Statesignificantdevelopment61
• Statesignificantinfrastructure(butlimitedtoconsiderationofconditionsofconsentforprojectsdeterminedbytheMinister)
• PublicbenefitinfrastructureprojectsreferredbytheMinistertotheCommissionfordetermination
• AnyotherdevelopmentproposalsreferredbytheMinistertotheCommissionfordetermination.
• See Volume 1, Part F
61 Inthiscontext,wenotethatwehaveearlierproposedthatresidentialdevelopmentproposals,whethergreenfieldorurbaninfill,thathaveaprojectedyieldof500ormoredwellingsshouldbeclassifiedasStatesignificantdevelopmentandthusfallwithinthedeterminedfunctionofthePlanningCommission.
5 Integrity in the planning system
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201262
ICAC Recommendation 8–ThattheNSWMinisterforPlanningandInfrastructureconsidersadoptingaprotocoltodealwithsituationswheretheMinisterdisagreeswithadepartmentalrecommendationconcerningaplanningmatter.TheprotocolshouldensurethatanydecisionbytheMinistertoadoptanalternativeapproach,andthereasonsforsuchadecision,areclearlydocumentedandmadepubliclyavailable.
NSW Planning System Review Response • ThereformedplanningsystemwillessentiallyremovealldecisionmakingaboutdevelopmentproposalsfromtheMinisterforPlanningandInfrastructureandtransfersittoanindependent,openandparticipativeprocess–thePlanningCommission.TheexceptionisStatesignificantinfrastructure,buttheconditionsforanysuchprojectdeterminedbytheMinistermayhavetheirappropriatenessconsideredbythePlanningCommission.See Volume 1, Part F
• Asaconsequence,MinisterialdisagreementwiththeDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructurewillbelimitedtopolicymattersordeterminationsaboutStatesignificantinfrastructure.Thequestionofwhetheraprotocolshouldbeadopted(assuggested),aspartofthesemorelimiteddecisionmakingrolesoftheMinister,isamatterforpoliticalconsiderationratherthanourrecommendation.However,weconsiderthatthereformedplanningsystemwehaveproposedlargelysatisfactorilyresolvestheCommission’sconcerns.See Volume 1, Part D and Volume 2, Part 2
ICAC Recommendation 9–ThattheNSWDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructureproducesandmaintainsacommunityguidedealingwithdevelopmentprocesses.
NSW Planning System Review Response • TheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructure,inconjunctionwiththeLocalGovernmentandShiresAssociation,prepareaplainEnglishguidetotheclassification,assessmentanddeterminationprocessesfordevelopmentproposalsundertheSustainablePlanningAct.PreparationoftheguideistobeunderthesupervisionofthePlanningAdvisoryBoard.See Volume 1, Part H – Recommendation 141
• PlainEnglishexplanatorymaterials,suchasabestpracticeguidetoplanmakingandaguideforcouncillorsabouttheirdevelopmentdecisionmakingrole,willbeprepared.See Volume 2, Part 6 – Recommendation 89
ICAC Recommendation 10–ThattheNSWGovernmenttakesstepstoreducethecomplexityoftheplanningsystem,includingrationalisingthenumberofcontroldocumentsapplyingtoasingleparcelofland.
NSW Planning System Review Response • Allinformationconcerninganyparceloflandwillbeconsolidatedintoanelectronicallyaccessible,unitaryplanningdocument.
• AllStateEnvironmentalPlanningPolicieswillbereviewedforrelevanceandthencollapsedintoone,well-indexeddocument(seeresponsetoRecommendation13below).See Volume 1, Part C, Chapter 5 – Recommendation 14
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 63
• Electronicaccesstothewidestpossiblerangeofplanninginformation–particularlyasmappeddisplaysviaapubliclyavailablegeoportalwillbeavailable.See Volume 1, Part G and Volume 2, Part 4
ICAC Recommendation 11–ThattheNSWGovernmentrequirescommunityconsultationtobeundertakenandpublicsubmissionstobegivendueconsiderationbeforethereleaseofamajorstrategicplanningdocument.
NSW Planning System Review Response • CommunityconsultationforstrategicplanningwillbeundertakeninamannersimilartothatrecentlyundertakenintheNewEnglandNorthWestandtheUpperHunterregions,aspartofaStrategicRegionalLandUseplanningprocess.Weenvisagethattheinitialdevelopmentofstrategicplansbeundertakeninmodulestobuildtheoverallplan.Acommunityandstakeholderconsultationprocesswillthenfollowtodevelopeachmoduleasabuildingblockfortheoverallplan.Thisshouldbefollowedbyseekingresponsestotheaggregateddraftoutcomesfromtheinitialprocess.See Volume 1, Part C, Chapter 4
• Therewillbethemaximumuseofelectronicmediatoenablethewidestandearliestopportunitiesforpublicandotherstakeholderengagementwiththenewplanningsystem(includingfacilitatingpublicengagementinstrategicplandevelopment).See Volume 1, Part H
ICAC Recommendation 12–ThattheNSWGovernmentmandatesthatpublicsubmissionsaretobeconsideredbyaplanningauthorityfollowingtheexhibitionofadraftvoluntaryplanningagreement.
NSW Planning System Review Response • InadditiontothepresentlegislativerequirementthataPlanningAgreementbesubjecttoa28daynoticeperiod,anysubmissionsreceivedduringthatnoticeperiodwillberequiredtobeconsideredbyanyassessingofficerconsideringwhethertorecommendacceptanceofthetermsofthePlanningAgreementoranydecisionmakingbodydeterminingwhetherornottoenterintosuchanagreement.See Volume 2, Part 3 – Recommendation 52
ICAC Recommendation 13–ThattheNSWGovernmentrequiresplanninginstrumentsofstatesignificancetobesubjecttocommunityconsultation,exceptwherethereareadverseenvironmental,socialoreconomicimpactsandwheretheseadverseimpactsoutweighthebenefitsofcommunityconsultation.Wherecommunityconsultationhasnotbeenundertaken,thenthespecificreasonsfornotundertakingcommunityconsultationshouldbemadepubliclyavailablewhentheplanninginstrumentismade.
NSW Planning System Review Response • EachcurrentlyoperableStateEnvironmentalPlanningPolicyistobereviewedtodeterminewhetheritneedstoberetainedand,ifso,whetherthepolicyapproachneedsrevision.Wehaverecommendedthat,oncecompleted,allremainingStateEnvironmentalPlanningPoliciesarecollapsedintoasingle,well-indexeddocumenttobeknownastheStatecontrols–formingpartofaunitaryplanninginstrumentforeachlocalgovernmentarea.See Volume 1, Part C, Chapter 5 – Recommendation 15
5 Integrity in the planning system
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201264
• TheintroductionofnewStatecontrolsoramendmentstoStatecontrolswillbesubjecttoacompulsorypublicconsultationprocess.TheonlyexceptiontothisisforchangestotheStatecontrolswhichareofanadministrativeorminornature.See Volume 1, Part C, Chapter 5
• TheMinisterwillhavetheopportunitytorefernewStatecontrolsoramendmentstoStatecontrolstothePlanningAdvisoryBoardforcomment–whichmayalsocommentonnewStatecontrolsoramendmentstoStatecontrolssubjecttopublicconsultation.See Volume 1, Part K
ICAC Recommendation 14–Thatthestandardcommunityconsultationrequirementsfordraftlocalenvironmentalplansbegivenstatutorybacking.
NSW Planning System Review Response • TheprocessesformakingchangestoLocalLand-UsePlans(otherthanthedevelopmentofanewplanoraregular,statutorilyrequiredreview)shouldbedividedintotwoseparatestreams:onefordealingwithrezoningproposals,theotherdealingwithproposedchanges(otherthanminorclericalordraftingcorrections).See Volume 2, Part 6 – Recommendations 96 and 97
• Proposalsdealingwiththere-zoningoflandareablebeconsideredbytheJointRegionalPlanningPanelorthePlanningCommission(dependingonscaleoftheproposedchangeorthestageoftheprocessbeingundertaken)whichwillbeatransparentprocess,includingcommunityconsultationandarighttobeheard.See Volume 1, Part C, Chapter 7 – Recommendations 40 and 41 and Volume 2, Part 6
• Proposalsfornon-rezoningchangestoLocalLand-UsePlansofasubstantialnaturewillbedealtwiththroughaprocessthatincorporatespublicnotificationandconsultationpriortoanyadoptionofsuchachange.See Volume 2, Part 6 – Recommendation 97
ICAC Recommendation 15–ThattheNSWGovernmentensuresthatplanningauthoritiesarerequiredtoprovideregularinformationandupdatestothepublicaboutdevelopmentapplicationsunderassessment,includinganysignificantchangesmadetoanapplication.
NSW Planning System Review Response • Wehavemadeaseriesofrecommendationsfortheprocedureforconsultationforamendmentstodevelopmentapplicationsasfollows:
• Forcodeassessabledevelopment,unlessitistheopinionoftheassessingcertifierthattheamendmentsareminorortheassessingcertifierissatisfiedthattheamendmentsarebeingmadeafterconsultationwiththeneighbouringownerand/oroccupierandagreedtobythem,anyamendmentswillonlyrequireacopyoftheamendmentstobeprovidedtotheoccupantsofneighbouringproperties(therebeingnorightofobjectionforcodeassessabledevelopment).
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 65
• Formeritassessableandimpactassessabledevelopment,iftheamendmentsarenotminoramendmentsintheopinionoftheassessingofficer,theamendmentsaretobesubjecttoafurthernotificationperiodorextensionofthenotificationperiodiftheamendmentsaremadeduringtheoriginalnotificationperiod.Amendmentsmayonlybepermittediftheprojectwillremainsubstantiallythesameasthatforwhichtheapplicationwasoriginallymade.
• Formeritassessabledevelopment,theadditionalnotificationperiodwillbeoneweekwhilstforimpactassessabledevelopmentitwillbetwoweeks.Ifextensionsaremadetothenotificationperiod,asimilarextensionistobeappliedautomaticallytothemandatedperiodfordetermination.
• Anyamendmentsaretobenotifiedontheassessingbody’swebsitetogetherwithelectronicnotificationtoanypersonswhohavenotifiedtheassessingbodythattheywishedtobeinformedofanyamendments.See Volume 2, Part 6 – Recommendations 80 – 86
• IfaChristmas/NewYearholidayperiodfallswithintheassessment/determinationperiods(discussedabove),anadditional10 working daysistobeadded.Similarly,iftheEasterholidayperiodfallswithintheassessment/determinationperiod,anadditional5 working daysistobeadded.See Volume 1, Part C, Chapter 9 – Recommendation 64
• Publiccommunicationofprocessesforproposeddevelopmentscannotbelefttomethodsusingestablishedmedia,suchaspublicnoticesanddisplayincouncilchambersorpubliclibraries.Eventhetraditionalmediumofsendinglettersis,formany,nowanoutmodedmethodofcommunication.TheabilitytoaccessemailsorTwitter®feedsonmobiledatadevices–coupledwiththeabilitytoopenalinktodataalmostinstantaneously–needstobeembracedasasignificantand,potentiallyovertime,dominantmethodofcommunicatingaboutplanningmatters.See Volume 1, Part H
• TheDepartment’swebsitewillincludeaninteractivemaptofacilitateaccesstoinformationaboutmajorprojectsbeingassessedbytheDepartment.See Volume 2, Part 12 – Recommendation 210
5 Integrity in the planning system
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201266
ICAC Recommendation 15–ThattheNSWGovernmentconsidersexpandingthecategoriesofdevelopmentsubjecttothirdpartymeritappealstoincludeprivatesectordevelopmentthat: • issignificantandcontroversial, • representsasignificantdeparturefromexistingdevelopmentstandards,and • isthesubjectofavoluntaryplanningagreement.
NSW Planning System Review Response • Wehaverejectedopenstandingmeritappealrightsforthirdparties.WeareawarethatthebroadthirdpartymeritappealrightswhichareavailableundertheQueenslandplanningsystemhasleadtocommerciallybasedlitigationbetweencompetitors.WearenotpreparedtoopenthisavenueforcostlylitigationinNSW.However,wehaverecommendedthatathirdpartymeritappealrightshouldexistforanobjectorwhocandemonstrateadirectadverseeffectbythegrantingofadispensationfromanexistingdevelopmentstandard.See Volume 1, Part C, Chapter 12
• Theopenstandingprovisionsofsection123ofthepresentplanninglegislationwillbemaintained.See Volume 1, Part C, Chapter 13 – Recommendation 120
• PublicparticipationandtherighttobeheardaretobeestablishedformallyintheJointRegionalPlanningPanelandPlanningCommissionprocesses–toensurethattheconcernsofthirdpartiesareconsideredinthedeterminationofdevelopment.See Volume 2, Part 1 and Part 6
• JointRegionalPlanningPanelswillberequiredtogivereasonsfordecisionsthatdisagreewiththerecommendationofanassessmentreport.ThePlanningCommissionwillberequiredtogiveandpublishreasonsforitsdecisions.See Volume 2, Part 1 – Recommendation 27 and Volume 2, Part 6 – Recommendation 135
Thesemeasures,inouropinion,provideappropriateprotectionfortherightsofthirdparties.WeconsiderthatgoingfurthermerelyrunsthesignificantriskofcostlylitigationintheCourtwithoutsufficientbenefitstocounterbalancethis.
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 67
PART 6 – The Sustainable Planning Act – additional matters IntroductionInVolume1,wesetoutthebroadframeworkfortheSustainablePlanningAct.Thefollowingsetsoutfurthermattersthatrelatetothelegislation.
Alternative community consultation processesItisimportantthatthoseundertakingbothstrategicanddetailedland-useplanningseektoengagethecommunityinthedevelopmentofplans,ratherthanmerelyconsultingthemaboutadraftplanoralimitedrangeofoptionsforaplan.Arangeoffurtherpossiblemethodscanbeusedduringconsultationprocessesbothforthedevelopmentofplansandforseekingpublicresponsetodraftsofthem.Potentialoptionstogobeyondmostcommonlyusedcurrentconsultationmeasuresincludetechniquessuchas:
• charettes(acollaborativeapproachtodesigningdrafts)• citizenjuries• professionallyconductedfocusgroups(usingpropersamplingtechniques).
Recommendation77.Thebestpracticeguidelines62forplanmaking(strategicplanningandlocalland-use
planning)aretoincludeexplanationsofhowalternativecommunityconsultationprocessesmightbeutilisedinplandevelopment.
Alternative decision-making processesInthecontextofdevelopmentproposalassessmentanddetermination,wehaverecommendedarangeofprocessesthatwouldpermitlocalconsentauthoritiestodelegatesomeoralldecisionmakingpowerstoalocalexpertpanel63.Werecommended,inVolume164,thatcouncilshavetherighttobeabletorefercontentiousmatterstoaJointRegionalPlanningPanelfordetermination.Ithasalsobeenproposedtousthatalternativedecision-makingprocesses,suchascitizenjuries,mighthavearoleindevelopmentdeterminationprocesses.Inthiscontext,wehaveconsideredwhethertheremightbeaplaceforsuchmoreexperimentaldecision-makingprocessesintheSustainablePlanningAct.Weareoftheopinionthatcouncilswishingtoexperimentwithalternativedecision-makingmodelsshouldhavetheabilitytodoso.
62 See‘Bestpracticeguidelinesforplandevelopment’inthisvolumeatPart6
63 SeePart6ofthisvolume
64 SeeVolume1,PartC,Chapter10atpage97
6 The Sustainable Planning Act – additional matters
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201268
Useofdifferentdecision-makingprocessesmay,overtime,improvepublicconfidenceintheintegrityofdevelopmentdecision-making.However,althoughweconsiderthattheabilitytobroadendecision-makingshouldbepermitted,ifused,itmustbesubjecttoreview.Thisshouldapplybothtothedecision-makingprocessproposedandtheprojectunderconsideration.
TheSustainablePlanningActshouldmakeprovisiontoallowalternativedecision-makingprocessestobeproposedbyacouncil.However,theconcurrenceoftheMinisterforPlanningandInfrastructureshouldberequired,atleastuntilthereisabodyofpracticalexperience(andpositiveoutcomes)withinthenewplanningsystemwithsuchalternatives.ThecouncilshouldadvisetheMinisterofwhatprocessisproposedtobeadoptedandthenatureoftheproject.AnysuchapplicationtotheMinistershallincludetheapplicant’sviewsontheproposalthatthisistooccur.
Recommendation78.TheSustainablePlanningActistopermitacounciltoadoptanalternativedecision
makingprocess,outsidethescopeofthemandatoryrangeofprocessesprovidedfor,butonlywiththeconcurrenceoftheMinisterforPlanningandInfrastructure.
Amendments to development proposals during assessment processesClearly,itisdesirablethatadevelopmentproposalisabletobeamendedduringtheassessmentprocessinordertorespondtomattersofconcern.Wehaveproposedthe‘amberlightapproach’toencouragethoseundertakingassessmentstosuggestamendmentsthatwouldrenderaproposalacceptable65.However,thenature,extentandtimingofamendmentsareofconsiderableimportancefordevelopmentthatfallswithinmeritorimpactassessabledevelopment.Toalesserextent,amendmentstocodeassessabledevelopmentrequireconsideration,asdiscussedbelow.
Thepresentplanningsystemimposessomerestrictionsonthescopeofamendmentsthatarepermissible.TheSustainablePlanningActshouldcontainprovisionstoclarifytheamendmentprocess–thetestbeingthatwhichcurrentlyappliestoapplicationstomodifyanexistingdevelopmentconsent66.
Recommendation79.TheSustainablePlanningActistomakeitclearthatanyamendmentsmadetoa
proposedprojectduringtheassessmentprocesscannotaltertheproposalinsuchamajorwaythatitisnolongersubstantiallythesameprojectasthatintheoriginalapplication.
65 SeeVolume1,PartC,Chapter9atpage82
66 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979,sections96and96AA
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 69
Amendments to code assessable developmentForcodeassessabledevelopment,wehaverecommendedthattheapplicationmustbeprovidedtoneighbouringpropertyownerand/oroccupierspriortotheapplicationbeingmade.Asaconsequence,anyamendmentstoacodeassessableapplicationwillrequireacopyoftheamendmentstobeprovidedtotheoccupantsofneighbouringpropertiesunless:
• intheopinionoftheassessingcertifier,theamendmentsareminor,or• theassessingcertifierissatisfiedthattheamendmentsarebeingmadeafterconsultingwiththeownersand/oroccupiersofneighbouringpropertiesandobtainingtheiragreement.
Amendments to merit assessable and impact assessable developmentFormeritassessableandimpactassessabledevelopmentproposals,thedegreeofamendmentwillalsoinfluencetheprocess.Theamendmentsmaynotbeminoramendmentsintheopinionoftheassessingofficer.Inthiscase,theywillberequiredtobesubjecttoafurthernotificationperiod(oranextensiontothenotificationperiodiftheamendmentsaremadeduringtheoriginalnotificationperiod)topermitpublicparticipationwithrespecttothoseamendments.
Astheextentoftheamendmentsthatareabletobemadeislimitedbythetestthatwehaverecommendedabove,wedonotconsiderthattheoriginalnotificationprocesswillneedtoberepeated,requiringextensiveadditionaltime.Formeritassessabledevelopment,weconsiderthatanadditional5 working dayswouldbeappropriatewhilst,forimpactassessabledevelopment,anadditional10 working dayswouldbeappropriateeachtimeamendmentsareproposed.
Whereamendmentsresultinextensionstothenotificationperiod,asimilarextensionshouldautomaticallybeapplytothemandatedperiodfordetermination.
Recommendations80.Amendmentstocodeassessabledevelopmentaretobepermittedpriorto
determinationoftheapplication.
81.Unless,intheopinionoftheassessingcertifier,theamendmentsareminor,ortheassessingcertifierissatisfiedthattheamendmentsarebeingmadeafterconsultationwiththeownersandoccupiersofallneighbouringpropertiesandareagreedtobythoseowners,anyamendmentstocodeassessableapplicationswillrequirethecounciltoprovideacopyoftheamendmentstotheownersoftheneighbouringpropertieswhoseownershavenotagreedtotheamendments.
82.Formeritandimpactassessabledevelopment,iftheamendmentsarenotminorintheopinionoftheassessingofficer,theamendmentsaretohaveafurthernotificationperiod,orextensionofthenotificationperiodiftheamendmentsaremadeduringtheoriginalnotificationperiod.
6 The Sustainable Planning Act – additional matters
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201270
83.Formeritassessabledevelopment,theadditionalnotificationperiodistobe5 working days,whilstforimpactassessabledevelopmentitistobe10 working dayseachtimeamendmentsareproposed.
84.Ifextensionsaremadetothenotificationperiod,asimilarextensionistobeappliedautomaticallytothemandatedperiodfordetermination.
85.Anyamendmentsaretobenotifiedontheassessingbody’swebsite.
86.Formeritandimpactassessabledevelopment,thereistobeelectronicnotificationtoanypersonswhohavenotifiedtheassessingbodythattheywishedtobeinformedofanyamendmentsorwhohavealreadylodgedasubmission.
Architectural review and design panelsThepresentplanninglegislationpermitstheestablishmentofanIndependentHearingandAssessmentPanelconstitutedbyarchitecture,heritageorurbandesignexperts.However,thereisnospecificprovisioninthepresentplanninglegislationpermittingestablishmentofanyadvisorybodiestoconsiderbroaderpolicymattersofthisnature.Thereshouldbetheabilityforacounciltoestablishsuchbroader-scopedadvisorybodies.
Recommendation87.Councilsaretobeabletoestablishspecialistlocaladvisorypanelstodealsolelywith
architectural,urbandesignand/orheritagematters.
Assessing development proposed by public authorities Areformedplanningsystemneedstoensurethatdevelopmentundertakenbyoronbehalfofapublicauthorityforpublicpurposesisappropriatelyassessedanddetermined.
Currently,aseparatePart67ofthepresentplanninglegislationappliestosomedevelopmentundertakenbypublicauthorities.ThesebodiesincludeStategovernmentdepartmentsandinstrumentalities,localgovernment,Stateownedcorporationsorotherstatutorilycreatedbodiessuchasuniversities.ThisPartallowsthesebodiestoundertakeself-assessmentanddeterminationofproposeddevelopments.Thishasmeantthat,inpractice,theseactivitieshavebeenlargelyoutsidethescrutinyofdevelopmentproposalassessmentanddeterminationrequirementsofPart4ofthepresentplanninglegislation.Therangeofdevelopmentsundertakenbypublicauthoritiesisverywide.Itrangesfrommaintenanceactivitiesforexistingfacilitiesthroughtolargescaleprojectssuchasnewhospitals,schoolsandroadprojects.
Forsmallerscaleprojects,thepresentprocesshasgenerallybeenuncontroversial.Forlargerscaleprojects,however,councilsandcommunityorganisationshaveargued
67 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979,Part5
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 71
thatseparateassessmentanddeterminationhasmeantthatdifferent(andlesser)standardshavebeenappliedtosomeprojects,suchasparkingspacesforpublicauthorityprojectsbeingsignificantlyfewerthanwouldhavebeenrequiredhadthedevelopmentbeenundertakenprivately.
However,publicauthoritiesthatcurrentlybenefitfromtheseexistingprovisionsstronglysupportcontinuingself-assessmentanddeterminationforpublicprojects.Indeed,itwassuggestedtousbyonesuchauthoritythatthatbodyshouldbegivenadditionalpowerstoactastheassessingandconsentauthorityforprivatedevelopmentproposedtobeundertakenonlanditownedorcontrolled.
Weproposethatassessmentanddeterminationofallpermitteddevelopmentshouldfallwithinourfourrecommendedcategories68fordevelopment.Thereisnoreasonwhydevelopmentproposedtobeundertakenbyoronbehalfofapublicauthorityshouldbeexemptfrombeingcategorisedinthesamefashionasprivatedevelopment.Thecriticalquestionforsuchdevelopmentistowhatextentshouldthisdevelopmentbesubjecttoaself-assessmentprocess?
Atheoreticallypuremodelmightrequireidenticalprocessestoapplytopublicauthorityandprivatedevelopment.However,thehistoryandlackofcontroversyforsmallerscalepublicdevelopmentspersuadesusthat,forthemostpart,itisappropriatetoretainaself-assessmentprocess.
WeproposethatalldevelopmentproposedbyapublicauthorityexceptdevelopmentwithinthescopeofStatesignificantinfrastructureandPublicbenefitinfrastructureistobeassessedbythepublicauthority.Further,developmentswhichfallwithinStatesignificantinfrastructureorPublicbenefitinfrastructureistobeassessedthoughanindependentprocesswithintheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructure.
Recommendation88.Assessmentprocessesforpublicauthorityprojectsaretobeassetoutbelow:
Development Track Assessment Body
Exempt Publicauthority
Prohibited Notapplicable
Codeassessment Publicauthority
Meritassessment Publicauthority
Impactassessment PublicauthorityorDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructure
68 SeeVolume1,PartC,Chapter6
6 The Sustainable Planning Act – additional matters
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201272
Assisting elected councillors in development decision makingItisessentialthatcouncillorsunderstandtheirpolicy-settingrole.Itisarolethatcanreflectphilosophicandideologicalmattersrelatingtodevelopmentpatternswithintheirlocalgovernmentarea,providedtheyareconsistentwithstrategicplans,StatecontrolsandtheLocalLand-UsePlan.Decisionsaboutindividualdevelopmentproposalsmustbemadeinaproperfashionwithinthatframeworkandnotonapurelypopulistorpoliticalbasis,unsupportedbysuchaframework.
Three‘NIM’factorshavebeendescribedashavingapervasivelynegativeculturalimpactonlocaldecisions.Theyare:
• NIMBY–‘notinmybackyard’• NIMCA–‘notinmycouncilarea’,and• NIMTOO–‘notinmytermofoffice’
–namesgivenfortherejectionofproposeddevelopmentswithoutproperplanningreasonsfordoingso.
Decisionsmadewithoutaproperplanningfoundationhavethreesignificantnegativeimpacts:• ItisoftenclearthataprojectwillbeappealedtotheCourtandinevitablethatitwillbeapprovedonappeal.TheeffectisexpensiveblameshiftingtotheCourt.Thisexposesthecouncilanditsratepayerstosignificantlegalcostsdefendingthecouncildecision.Indeed,insomecases,acostsordermaybemadeinfavourofasuccessfulproponent.Theremayalsobeasignificantadditionalcostincurredforanexternalconsultantplanner(andpossiblyotherexperts)whoarepreparedtoprovideevidenceinsupportoftheelectedcouncil’spositionwhereitiscontrarytothepositiontakenbythecouncil’sprofessionalstaff.
• Itcanhaveasignificantimpactonthecultureoftheplanningstaffofthecouncil.Itmaycausecouncilstafftofeelasenseoffrustrationthattheirprofessionalrecommendationsarerejected.Equallydamaging,itmayencouragestafftowriteassessmentreportstojustifytheanticipateddesiredpoliticaloutcome,ratherthantakeaproperplanningapproachtotheproposeddevelopment.
• Themorefrequentlythatelectedcouncilsdepartfromproperplanningdecisionmaking,themorelikelyitistobecomeaself-reinforcingprocess.Anexpectationiscreatedinthecouncil’sconstituencythatdecisionsoncontroversialmatterswillbemadeinresponsetocommunitysentimentratherthanonaproperplanningbasis.
Itisnotonlyratepayerswhoareexposedtosignificantlegalexpenseinthesesituations.Developmentproponentsareexposed,notonlytothesignificantexpensesoflitigation,butalsotothelikelihoodofadditionalholdingcostsoccasionedbythedelay.Thesecostsactasasignificanteconomicdragontheconstructionanddevelopmentindustry.
Althoughtherearerisksingivingelectedcouncillorstherighttochoosetobeinvolvedindevelopmentdecision-making,wehaveconcluded,onbalance,thatitisnotappropriatetoremovethatrole.However,itisessentialthatcouncillorshaveaproperunderstandingofthelegislativeframeworkoftheplanningsystem.Itisalsovitalthattheyareawareoftheconfinedandappropriatebasesonwhichtheyareentitledtomakedecisionsaboutdevelopmentproposals.
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 73
Trainingmaterialsareneededinordertoexplaintocouncillorswhatistheirproperroleindeterminingdevelopmentproposals.Thesematerialsshouldbeincorporatedintoinductionprocessesfornewlyelectedcouncillors,andshouldbemadeavailabletocouncillorselectedatby-electionsduringtheelectioncycle.Thematerialshouldnotonlyencompassdecision-makingaboutdevelopmentproposals,butshouldalsoencompasstheirbroaderrolesinthedevelopmentoftheplanningframework.
ThequestionofwhetherthereshouldbesomeformofmandatoryinductioncourseforelectedcouncillorsisfarbroaderthanthemattersthatweneedtotraverseinthisReviewPaper.However,thepreparationofmaterialwerecommendaboutthereformedplanningsystemwouldbeavailableforcouncillorinductionifthatweretoarisefromtheseparatereviewbeingundertakenoftheLocal Government Act 1993.
Recommendation89.Theworkinggroupestablishedtocreateaprofessionaldevelopmentprogram
forcouncilandStateGovernmentplannersisalsotoconsiderwaystodevelopanddelivertrainingmaterialsforelectedcouncillorsonplanningpolicyanddevelopmentdecisionmaking.
Availability of assessment reportsCurrently,thepracticeofcouncilsmakingavailableassessmentreportsondevelopmentproposalsvarieswidely.Theonlystatutoryrequirementisthatsuchreportshavetobeavailableonrequest70.Weconsiderthatthisisanunsatisfactoryposition.
Weareawareofthepossibilitythatimposingamandatorytimeperiodformakingsuchreportsavailablemayextenddecision-makingtimesbut,wheretherehavebeenpublicsubmissionsobjectingtothedevelopmentproposal,wethinkthatthisisnotunreasonable.
Weconsideritappropriatethat,iftherehavebeenpublicobjectionslodgedtoameritassessableorimpactassessabledevelopmentproposal,theassessingbodyshouldbeobligedtomaketheassessmentreportavailableonitswebsiteatleastoneweekpriortoanydeterminationbeingmadeabouttheproposal.Ifsubmittershaveregisteredane-mailaddressforelectroniccontact,theassessingauthorityshouldbeobligedtoe-mailthemadvisingthatthereportisavailable.
69 SeeVolume1,PartIatRecommendation143
70 Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009,section8orPart3
6 The Sustainable Planning Act – additional matters
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201274
Recommendations90.Anyassessmentreportformeritassessableorimpactassessabledevelopment
proposalsistobemadeavailableonthewebsiteoftheassessingbody,atleastoneweekpriortoanydeterminationbeingmadeoranyhearingplanningmeetingofthePlanningCommission.
91.Ifthesubmittershaveregisteredane-mailaddress,theassessingauthorityistoe-mailadvisingoftheavailabilityoftheassessmentreportontheassessingauthority’swebsite.
Best practice guidelines for plan developmentAwide-spreadcommunitycomplaintwasthatpastandcurrentplandevelopmentprocesseswereusually“topdown”.AsweobservedintheprologuetoVolume171,strategicplanningistobea“bottomup”process.AsimilarpositionmustalsoapplytodevelopmentofLocalLand-UsePlansandDevelopmentControlPlans.Topromotethissignificantshiftinemphasis,guidanceonwhatarethebestpracticeoptionsforcommunityengagementattheearliestopportunityintheplandevelopmentprocess(ofwhatevertypeofplan)isessential.
Recommendations92.TheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructureistoconveneaworkinggroup
drawnfrompropertyindustryinterests;localgovernment;therelevantprofessions(planning,architecture,urbandesign,heritageandlaw);andconservationandcommunitygroups[reflectingthecompositionofthePlanningAdvisoryBoard]todevelopdraftguidelinesonbestpracticeoptionsforcommunityengagementintheplandevelopmentprocess.
93.TheguidelinesaretobeconsideredbythePlanningAdvisoryBoardpriortoadoptionbytheMinisterforPlanningandInfrastructure.
Certification of code assessable development proposalsAprivatecertifiercangrantconsenttoacodeassessabledevelopmentproposal,subjecttodesignatedconditions.Oneofthemajorcriticismsoftheprivatecertificationprocessarisingduringthecommunityforumswasthattherewasanincentiveforaprivatecertifiertoapprovesuchanapplicationbecauseofthebenefitsthatwouldflowfromundertakingsubsequentcertificationinspections.Weareoftheviewthatthereisasignificantriskofagenuineperceivedconflictofinterest(orapprehensionofbias)72inthiscircumstance.Topreventthis,aprivatecertifier(whograntssuchaconsent)shouldbeprohibitedfrom
71 SeeVolume1,Prologueatpage7
72 Ebner v Official Trustee in Bankruptcy[2000]HCA63;205CLR337;176ALR644;75ALJR277
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 75
beingthecertifierforsubsequentsiteinspections.Suchaprohibitionshouldextendtocertifierpartnershipsorincorporatedentitiessothatapprovalandinspectionprocessesareseparated.
Thisprohibitionisnotnecessarywhencertificationandinspectionactivitiesareundertakenbyacouncilastherenoperceptionofanypecuniaryinterestarisingfromthetworoles.However,forequallyobviousperceptionreasons,wedonotconsideritappropriatethatacouncilofficerwhograntsconsenttoacodeassessabledevelopmentshouldalsoactastheofficerundertakinginspectionsifthecouncilisalsoappointedasthePrincipalCertifyingAuthorityforthedevelopment.
Weappreciatethatitispossiblethatinsomeruralareasthismaycausedifficulties,giventhecomparativelysmallstaffinglevelsinsomecouncils.Asaconsequence,wealsoconsideritappropriatethat,insuchcircumstances,theMinistershouldbegivenauthoritytograntanexemptionfromthisrequirementtosuchacouncil.
Recommendations94.Privatecertifiers(includingpartnersinoremployeesofthesameentity)andcouncil
staffarenottobepermittedtoinspectdevelopmentsthattheyhaveapproved.
95.Councilsaretobeabletoseekanexemption,fromtheMinisterforPlanningandInfrastructure,tothisprohibition.
Changes to Local Land-Use PlansCurrently,allproposedchangestolocalplansareknownas‘planningproposals’–whethertheyrelatetochangesinzoningoflandorchangestootherdetailsoflocalplans(suchasamendingcontrolsintheplanorlistinganewitemoflocalheritagesignificance).Itisnecessarythatstatutoryimplementationofasimplifiedsystemforrezoning73shouldbeseparatedfromotherprocessesforchanginglocalplans.Therezoningprocess,particularlysite-specificrezoningprocesseswhichmayresultinanintensificationofdevelopment,aresignificantlydifferentfromproposalsthatchangeotherdetailsinalocalplan.OurrezoningprocesswillencompassaJointRegionalPlanningPanelprocessandmakeprovisionforpublicinvolvementinandarighttobeheardonanysuchproposal.
Otherchangesshouldbeseparatedfromthisrezoningprocess.Whilstitshouldbepossibleforcouncilstoinitiateminornon-rezoningchangestolocalplansthroughasimplifiedprocess,thisalsoneedstoembodyarightforthelocalcommunitytobeheardontheproposedchanges(exceptthosethatarepurelyclericalorcorrectiveofdraftingdefects74).
73 SeeVolume1,PartC,Chapter7
74 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979,section73A
6 The Sustainable Planning Act – additional matters
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201276
Recommendations96.TheprocessesformakingchangestoLocalLand-UsePlans(otherthanthe
developmentofanewplanoraregular,statutorilyrequiredreview)aretobedividedintoseparatestreams,onetodealwithrezoningandonetodealwithotherproposedchanges.
97.Proposalsfornon-rezoningchangestoLocalLand-UsePlans(otherthanminorclericalordraftingcorrectingchanges)aretoincorporatepublicnotificationandconsultationpriortoadoptionofsuchachange.
Conditions of development consent
Categorising the elements of a development consentSomeconditionsapplyingtodevelopmentconsentsrelatetorightsandobligationsthatareenduring.Some,however,imposetemporaryobligationsthatonlyapplyduringconstructionfortheproposeddevelopment.Conditionsgenerallyfallintothreecategories:
• conditionsthatapproveuseofland• conditionsthatregulateconstructionorpreparationactivitiesthatarenecessarytopermittheusetobeundertaken
• conditionsnecessarytoregulateongoingactivitiesassociatedwiththepermitteduse.
Wehaverecommendedestablishmentofanonlineregisterofdevelopmentconsents75.Thiswillmeanthat,overtime,adevelopmenthistorycanaccrueforaparcelofland.Toassistthis,thereneedstobeastandardlayoutforgroupingconditionsofdevelopmentconsentintothesethreecategories.
Recommendation98.Developmentconsentsaretoberequiredtohavetheirconditionsdividedinto:
• thosethatdefineandauthoriseapermitteduseoftheapproveddevelopment• thosethatdefinetheconditionsthatregulateandcontrolthedevelopmentthatisnecessarytoallowthepermittedusetooperate
• thoseconditionsthathaveanongoingbasisinregulatinghowthepermitteduseoperatesintothefuture.
75 See‘Registerofconsents’inthisPartbelow
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 77
The use of template or default conditions of development consentDevelopingtemplateormodelconditionsofconsentmeansthattheycanbeadaptedtoapplytoarangeofdevelopmentclasses,asfollows:
• conditionsofconsentforcodeassessabledevelopment• minimumordefaultconditionsforwhenadevelopmentproposalisreferredtoaconcurrenceauthorityforcommentsand/ordraftconditionsofconsentandatimelyresponseisnotprovided
• conditionsformajorprojectsthatcanbeadaptedtothecircumstancesoftheindividualproject.
WeareawarethattheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructurehasrecentlypublishedsomedraftmodelconditionsforprojectsfallinginthefinalcategoryabove.
Recommendation99.TheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructureistoconveneaworkinggroupwith
representativesfromlocalgovernment,thedevelopmentindustryandcommunityandenvironmentalnetworkstoidentifydevelopmenttypeswheretemplateormodelconditionsofconsentwouldbedesirable(includingdevelopmenttypeswhereconcurrenceauthoritydelaysarecommon)andtodeveloptemplateormodelconditionsofconsentforthosedevelopmenttypes.
Trial periods for development consentsCurrently,itisnotunusual(particularlyforlicensedpremisesand/orentertainmentvenues)tohaveatrialperiodimposedasaconditionofconsent.Thisisnotgenerallycontroversial,ifmatterssuchasthelocationorcurrentamenityimpactsmakeitdesirable.Thetrialmayrelatetotheusegenerallyortoaparticularaspect,suchashoursofoperation.However,someplans76appeartoenvisageanopenendedrollingseriesoftrialperiods,withoutafinaldeterminationbeingmadeabouttheappropriatenessoftheapplicationorthetrialledaspectsofit,iftheapplicationrelatestotradinghoursorthelike.
Weconsideritappropriatethatapointoffinalityshouldbereachedintheconsiderationofanydevelopment.Developmentapprovalsareimportantpropertyrightsthatrunwiththelandandanapplicantisentitled,eventually,tohaveafinaldeterminationmadeaboutaproposeddevelopment.Althoughthereshouldbethepossibilityofanumberofextensionstotrialperiods(totakeintoaccountcircumstancesthataroseduringthecourseoftheoriginaltrial)thenumberofoccasionsforwhichthiscanberequiredandthemaximumperiodoftimeforwhichtrialperiodscanberequiredshouldbefixed.Aftertheexpiryofthatmaximumperiod,theconsentauthorityshouldmakeafinaldeterminationthatis,ifnecessary,abletobeappealedintheLandandEnvironmentCourt.
76 Forexample,asappearstobeenvisagedbytheDraftSydneyDevelopmentControlPlan2010at2.16–LateNightTradingManagement
6 The Sustainable Planning Act – additional matters
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201278
Recommendation100.TheSustainablePlanningActistomakeitclearthattrialperiodsfordevelopment
proposalsaretobepermittedbutthatamaximumofthreetrialperiodsencompassingatotalmaximumperiodoffiveyearsistoapply,beforeafinaldetermination(togivepermanentapprovalortorefuseapproval)ismadeontheproposal.
Requiring security bonds as a condition of consentThepresentplanninglegislationpermitsconsentauthoritiestorequiresecuritybondstoensurethatanydamagecausedtopublicinfrastructureasaresultofdevelopmentwillbepaidforbythedevelopmentproponent.TheLandandEnvironmentCourthasheld77thataconsentauthoritymaynotrequireasecuritybondforanyotherpurpose.
However,inourview,itisdesirableforconsentauthoritiestobeabletoimposesecuritybondsforotherpurposes.Similarbondsareimposedinspheresofdevelopmentactivitythatareregulatedbyotherlegislation,forexample,undertheMining Act 1992securitybondscanbeimposedforrehabilitationcosts.
Anextendedabilitytoimposebondsshouldnotbepermittedforcodeassessabledevelopmentorforotherminordevelopments.Ifconditionsaretobeimposedthatrequiresecuritytobeprovided,thepowerneedstobeclearlydefinedandlimited.Weenvisagethatthispowerwouldonlybepermittedwherefailingtocomplywithdevelopmentconsentwouldresultinapublicauthorityoraneighbouringlandholderhavingtopayforrectification/remediationcosts.Theconsentauthoritymustbeabletodemonstratethatthereisarealandsubstantialriskofnon-compliancebeforeitwouldbepossibletoimposesuchacondition.
Recommendation101.ConditionsrequiringsecuritybondsaretobepermittedbytheSustainable
PlanningActformeritandimpactassessabledevelopmentformattersbroaderthandamagetopublicinfrastructure,butonlytotheextentwhereitcanbedemonstratedthattherewasarealandsubstantialriskofnon-compliancewiththeconditionsofadevelopmentconsentandthatsuchnon-compliancewouldresultinapublicauthorityoraneighbouringlandholderhavingtopayrectification/remediationcoststoremedytheconsequencesofthebreach.
77 Forexample,thedecisionofLloyd J in Charalambous v Ku-ring-gai Council(2007)155LGERA352;[2007]NSWLEC510whereheconfirmedthatthescopeofsection80limitedthepowerofaconsentauthoritytoimposefinancialsuretiesanddidnotpermitfinancialsuretiestobeimposedforotherpurposes,suchaslandscapemaintenanceasrequiredbytheconditionsofadevelopmentconsent.
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 79
Public interest conditionsWesetoutinVolume178thethreetests(knownastheNewburytest)thatapplytodeterminewhetheraproposedconditionofconsentcanvalidlybeappliedtoaproposeddevelopment.Thesecondtestrequiresthattherebeanexusbetweenthedevelopmentandthecondition.
InourIssuesPaper,wecanvassedthepossibilitythattheremightbeaneedforbroaderpublicinterestconditionsimposedonaparticulardevelopmentdespitethesecondNewburytestnexusrequirement.Anexampleofthismight(andweonlypostulatemight)betheimpositionofaconditionofconsentonawindfarmthatrequiresacommunitycompensationschemetoprovidefacilitiesforabroader(butstilllocal)community.Weareawareofanumberofcaseswheresuchaconditionhasbeenacceptedbythewindfarmprojectproponent.
Inordertoremoveanypossibilityofdoubtthatsuchconditionscanbeimposed,weconsiderthatitisdesirabletoprovidealegislativebasistomakesuchpublicinterestconditionspermissible.Whilstweexpectthattherangeofmatterswhereitwouldbeappropriatetoimposesuchaconditionwillbesmall(andwewouldexpectthattheappropriatenessofdoingsowouldbeself-evident).Providingforthisisasmallbutdesirablereform.
Recommendation102.Thereistobeaspecificstatutoryprovisionthatpermitsaconsentauthorityto
imposeaconditionofdevelopmentconsentfoundedonthepublicinterest,evenifthereisnoimmediatenexusorconnectionwiththeproposeddevelopmentbutwherethenatureoftheconditioncanbeseenasreasonableandasasufficientlygeographicallyproximateresponsetotheproposeddevelopment.
Definitions in the Sustainable Planning Act
IntroductionOneoftheaspectsoftheStandardTemplateinstrumentprocessthatwasthesubjectofwide,favourablecommentduringthecommunityconsultationprocesswastheuseofadictionarywithuniformlydefinedterms.This,itwasfelt,hadthepotentialtolimitopportunitiesforlitigationonsuchissues.Further,littlecomplaintwasmadeinsubmissionsinresponsetotheIssuesPaperexpressingdissatisfactionwiththedefinitionsinthepresentplanninglegislation.
78 SeeVolume1,PartC,IntroductiontoChapter11
6 The Sustainable Planning Act – additional matters
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201280
InVolume179,wesetouttheninemattersaboutdefinitionsthatwefeltrequiredconsideration.Two80majoronesweredealtwithinVolume1.TheremainderweredeferredtothisVolume.Theyare: 1. Shouldtherebeadefinitionof‘thepublicinterest’? 2. Shouldtherebeadefinitionof‘sustainabledevelopment’? 3. Doesthedefinitionof‘development’inthepresentplanninglegislationneed
toberevised? 4. Shouldtherebeadefinitionof‘affordablehousing’andwhetherstudenthousing
shouldbeincluded 5. Theneedtodefineeachofthenewclassificationsintowhichadevelopment
proposalmightfall 6. Thebringingtogetherofalldefinitionsintoadictionary 7. Theneedforcross-referencingofdefinitionscontainedinotherpiecesoflegislation.
‘The public interest’AsaconsequenceofthedecisionoftheCourtofAppealinTerrace Tower Holdings Pty Limited v Sutherland Shire Council81,therangeofmattersthatmaybetakenintoaccountinconsidering‘thepublicinterest’whenassessingordeterminingadevelopmentproposalisverywide.However,itisalsoclearthatthescopeofmattersthatmaybetakenintoaccountinconsidering‘thepublicinterest’isbroadbutisstillnotentirelyunconfined–inthattherewouldhavetobeprovidedaproperlyenunciatedbasisuponwhichaparticularfactorwastakenintoaccount.
Weareoftheviewthattoattempttodefine‘thepublicinterest’inafashionthatsoughttocodifytherangeofsourcesortypesofdocumentsabletobeconsideredwouldbetoimposeanirresponsiblerestrictiononanassessingordeterminingauthority.Bywayofexample,anydefinitionof‘thepublicinterest’draftedinthe1950’s(butstillapplicable30yearslater–thatbeingthelifespanofthepresentplanninglegislation)mightwellhaveexcludedasbestos-relatedimpactsbecausethestateofknowledgeinthe1950’s.Asimilarpositionmightwellhaveariseninthe1970’saboutthepublichealthimpactsofpassiveinhalationoftobaccosmoke.
Itisinevitablethatsimilarcircumstancesarelikelytoariseinthefutureifweattempttocodifywhatconstitutes‘thepublicinterest’forassessingordeterminingadevelopmentproposal.Asaconsequence,wehavedecidedthatitisnotappropriatetodoso,astheassessingbodyneedstoconsiderthisissueagainstthethencurrentsocietalnormsandthestateofscientificknowledgeattherelevanttime.
‘Sustainable development’Therehasbeenabroadbutnotuniversalconsensusthatareformedplanningsystemshouldincorporateproperregardfortheprinciplesof‘sustainabledevelopment’.Inthiscontext,therehasalsobeensignificantsupportforincorporatingadefinitionof‘sustainable
79 Volume1,PartC,Chapter14
80 Shouldtherebedefinitionsof‘minor’andof‘physicalcommencement’
81 Terrace Tower Holdings Pty Limited v Sutherland Shire Council [2003]NSWCA289;(2003)129LGERA195perMasonPatpara81
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 81
development’inthereforminglegislation.Whilewehaverecommended82thatthesingleoverarchingobjectfortheSustainablePlanningActshouldreflectthedesirabilityof‘triplebottomline’83outcomes,nonethelesstheconceptof‘sustainabledevelopment’isonetowhichitisappropriatetohaveregardinthestrategicplanning,localland-useplanninganddevelopmentassessmentprocesses.Asaconsequence,wearesatisfiedthatthetermshouldbedefinedintheSustainablePlanningAct.
Itisdesirablethataconsistentapproachbetakentothedefinitionof‘sustainabledevelopment’.Asaresult,thedefinitionadoptedinthepresentplanninglegislationshouldberetained,asthesamedefinitionisusedintheProtection of the Environment Operations Act 1995.Wewouldalsoobserve,however,thatifthereweretobeanyrevisionofthatdefinition,asimilarrevisionshouldbemadetothedefinitioncontainedintheSustainablePlanningAct.
‘Development’Thepresentplanninglegislationcontainsadefinitionof‘development’84.Thisdefinitionhasbeenbroadlysupportedinthesubmissionsandweseenoreasontoalterit.
‘Affordable housing’Theplanningsystemneedstorecogniseproperlythedesirabilityofprovidingaffordablehousingasitisanimportantpartofthesocialaspectofatriplebottomlineoutcome.ThiswasreflectedinanumberofsubmissionsinboththeconsultationprocessandtotheIssuesPaper.Consequently,‘affordablehousing’mustbedefinedtoreflectthecontextinwhichitisprovidedandreflectavarietyofhousingtypessothatthewidespectrumofneedsforsuchaccommodationcanalsobeconsidered.
‘Student accommodation’AspecificquestionwasraisedbytheViceChancellors’Committee85astowhetherornotcampusservingand/orcampus-basedstudentaccommodationfortertiaryeducationinstitutionsshouldberegardedas‘affordablehousing’.Thissubmissionsuggestedthatitbeacknowledgedassuchbecauseoftheimportantcontributionthatitmakestotheaffordabilityofeducation.Italsosuggestedthatthepotentialimpactsofsuchhousingonmattersofdevelopmentassessmentconcerns(suchasparkingdemand)waslikelytobecomparabletothatofconventionalaffordablehousing,becauseoftherestrictedeconomiccircumstancesofthoseresidinginsuchaccommodation.
Wearealsopersuadedthat,becauseofthesignificantvalueofthehumancapitalforoursocietythatisproducedbytheeducationprocessandthesignificanteconomicbenefitstotheStateeconomyofinboundoverseasstudents,suchaccommodationshouldbedefinedas‘affordablehousing’.Inaddition,recognisingstudentaccommodationas‘affordablehousing’mayresultinlessdemandbystudentsforaccommodationincomplexesthatareunapprovedmultipleoccupancies.
82 SeeVolume1,PartC,Chapter3
83 Triplebottomlineoutcomesarethosewhichareecologically,economicallyandsociallysustainable
84 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979,section4
85 NewSouthWalesVice-Chancellors’Committee,Submission in Response to the Issues Paper of the NSW Planning System Review(29February2012).Seehttp://planningreview.nsw.gov.au/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=6947tSfH2As%3d&tabid=119&mid=569
6 The Sustainable Planning Act – additional matters
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201282
Defining development classificationsTheadoptionofamodifiedversionoftheDevelopmentAssessmentForummodel86ofclassificationsofdevelopmentmeansthatthesedevelopmenttypeswillneedtobedefinedintheSustainablePlanningAct.
A dictionary in the new legislationThepresentplanninglegislationincorporatesmoststatutorydefinitionsinaclauseatthebeginningofthelegislation87;however,otherdefinitionsarescatteredthroughoutit.Contemporarydraftingpracticeplacesalldefinitionsinadictionaryattheendoflegislation.ThisisasensibleapproachandshouldbeadoptedintheSustainablePlanningAct.
Cross-referencing definitions contained in other pieces of legislationAnumberofthedefinitionsinthepresentplanninglegislationmerelyadoptdefinitionsthatarefoundinotherActs.Forexample,thedefinitionof‘owner’istobefoundbyreferencingthedefinitionof‘owner’containedintheLocal Government Act 1993.IfthedefinitioninthisActischanged,thedefinitioninthepresentplanninglegislationalsochanges.
Currently,electroniccross-referencingfromthedefinitionof‘owner’inthepresentplanninglegislationmerelytakesthereadertothecontentspageoftheLocal Government Act 1993.Thereaderisthenlefttonavigatearoundthatlegislation;findthedictionarywhichislocatedattheendofthatAct;andthenfindthedefinitionof‘owner’inthatdictionary.Thisisnotauser-friendlymethod.Giventheadventofmoderntechnology,changingadefinitionsharedbymorethanonepieceoflegislation,ifreproducedinfullineachenactment(ratherthanbycross-referencing),isnotadifficultprocess.
AsthemajorityofuseoftheSustainablePlanningActislikelytobeelectronic,thereisnoreasonwhyalldefinitionscontainedinthedictionarytothenewlegislationshouldnotbespeltoutinfull.Ifany“parent”definitionwerechanged,thiscouldautomaticallybemadeintheSustainablePlanningAct.
Recommendations103.AlldefinitionsintheSustainablePlanningActaretobelocatedinadictionaryatthe
endofthatActandnotlocatedwithinthebodyofthelegislation.
104.Adefinitionof‘affordablehousing’istobeincludedinthedictionaryintheSustainablePlanningAct.
105.Studentaccommodationistobeincludedinthedefinitionof‘affordablehousing’.
106.AlldefinitionsthatarepresentlyderivedbyreferencingthetermsofadefinitioncontainedinanotherstatutearetobespeltoutinfullinthedictionarytotheSustainablePlanningAct.
86 SeeVolume1,PartC,Chapter6
87 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979,section4
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 83
107.Adefinitionof‘sustainabledevelopment’istobeincorporatedinthesametermsastheProtection of Environment Operations Act 1995.
108.Existingdefinitionscontainedinthepresentplanninglegislationaretobebroughtacross,totheextentnecessary,buttheirlanguageistobereviewedtoseeifanyrevisionofanytermisrequired.
109.DefinitionsintheSustainablePlanningActaretoreflectthecategoriesofdevelopmentsetoutinthemodifiedDevelopmentAssessmentForummodeldescribedinVolume1,PartCChapter6.
Demolition – limitations on development approvalsDuringthecommunityforumsandinsubmissionstotheIssuesPaper,concernswereraisedabouttheextentofdemolitionpermittedunderwhatiscurrentlycomplyingdevelopment.Weconsiderthatmostmattersofwhatshouldbeincludedasexemptorcomplyingdevelopmentshouldbedealtwithaspartoftherecommendedbroadreview88ofexemptorcomplyingdevelopment.However,wedoproposetwospecificchanges:
• Currently,clause136Eoftheregulation89tothepresentplanninglegislationincludemandatoryconditionsforbondedandfriableasbestosremoval,whichrequiresitssafehandlingandremovalbyalicensedcontractorundertheOccupation Health and Safety Regulation 2001andinaccordancewiththeapplicableAustralianStandard.ThisshouldbecarriedoverintotheSustainablePlanningAct.However,oftenpeoplewiththebenefitofanapprovalunderwhatiscurrentlycomplyingdevelopmentdonotknowoftheexistenceofasbestosuntildemolitioncommences.Becauseofthis,weproposethatanoticebeincludedinallcodeassessabledevelopmentapprovals,preparedbytheDepartmentofInfrastructureandPlanninginconsultationwithrelevantauthorities,thatinformsaboutbondedandfriableasbestos,howtohavesuspectmaterialtestedandthepersonalandcommunityhealthimplicationsfrominhalation.
• Demolitionofitemsbeingassessedbycouncilforlocalheritagesignificancearetobemeritassessable,iftheowneroftheitemhasbeengivenwrittennoticeoftheinvestigation.
88 SeeRecommendationsbelow
89 Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000,clause136E
6 The Sustainable Planning Act – additional matters
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201284
Recommendations110.Clause136EoftheEnvironmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 istobe
carriedoverintotheSustainablePlanningActforcodeassessabledevelopmentandanoticebeincludedincodeassessableapprovals,preparedbytheDepartmentofInfrastructureandPlanninginconsultationwithrelevantauthorities,thatinformsaboutbondedandfriableasbestos,howtohavesuspectmaterialtestedandthepersonalandcommunityhealthimplicationsfrominhalation.
111.Demolitionofanyitembeinginvestigatedbyacouncilforpossiblelistingasanitemoflocalheritageistobeexcludedfrombeingexemptorcodeassessabledevelopment,iftheowneroftheitemhasbeengivennoticeoftheinvestigation.
112.Thereistobealimitof28daysafterlodgementofanapplicationtodemolishwithinwhichaheritageinvestigationistobefinalised(andtheowneroftheitemtobenotifiedoftheoutcome)astowhetherthecouncilshouldconsiderseekinganamendmenttotheLocalLand-UsePlantolisttheitemasoneoflocalheritagesignificance.
113.Iftheinvestigationprocessrecommendslocallisting,theapplicationistobemeritassessableonthisbasis.
114.Iftheinvestigationdoesnotrecommendlocallistingoriftheinvestigationisnotcompletedandtheownernotifiedoftheoutcomewithintherequired28days,thedemolitionapplicationshallbedeemedtobeapproved.
Determining development proposed by public authorities
Smaller scale developments Smallerscalecodeassessabledevelopmentistobeself-determinedbyapublicauthority.Nothird-partymeritreviewrightsaretoapply.Anyapprovalofthistypewillberequiredtobeincludedintheregisterofdevelopmentconsents.
Small-scalemeritassessabledevelopmentthatrequiresdispensationfromadevelopmentstandardshouldbedeterminedbyaJointRegionalPlanningPanel.Thesamelimitedthirdpartyappealrightswouldapplyasforanyotherdispensationtoadevelopmentstandard.
Intermediate scale public authority projects NodistinctionbetweenapublicauthorityandtheprivatesectorshouldapplytodevelopmentdeterminedbyaJointRegionalPlanningPanel.
However,forsuchintermediatescaleprojects:• thenotification,displayandassessmentprocessesshouldremaininthehandsoftheproposingentity
• conditionsofapprovalshouldbedrafted,butnotdeterminedbyinternalprocesses.
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 85
Wearesatisfiedthatthisstrikesanappropriatebalancebetweenthedesirabilityofprovidingpublicinfrastructureontheonehand,andensuringpublicconfidenceindevelopmentdecision-makingontheother.
Intermediate scale public authority projects crossing council boundariesIfintermediatescaleprojectscrosslocalconsentauthorityboundaries,then:
• localrepresentationonanyJointRegionalPlanningPanelmustincluderepresentativesfrombothcouncils(iftwoareinvolved)orrepresentativesfromdifferentcouncilssettledbyallcouncilsinvolved(iftherearemorethantwo)
• ifthereisdisagreement,allthecouncilsshouldberequiredtonominatetheirproposedparticipantfortheconveningofsuchapanel.TheMinisterforPlanningshouldselectthetwowhoaretoformthelocalrepresentativecomponentonthepanel.
Large scale public authority projects Somedevelopmentproposedbypublicauthoritieswillappropriatelybecategorisedasimpactassessabledevelopment.Modestly90scaleddevelopmentofthisnatureshouldremainwiththepublicauthorityforassessment.However,itshouldbesubjecttothesamepublicnotificationandcommentprocessthatwouldapplytoprivatedevelopment.Theseprojectsare,however,tobedeterminedthroughtheJointRegionalPlanningPanelprocess.
Projectsofamajorscaleshouldbesubjecttothesameindependentscrutinyasprivatedevelopmentsofasimilarscale.Anypublicproject91thatfallswithinStatesignificantinfrastructurewillbeassessedbytheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructureanddeterminedbytheMinister.However,theseprojectswillthenbereferredtothePlanningCommissionfortheirconditionsofconsenttobereviewed.
Finally,theremaybeproposalsbysuchentitieswheretheMinisterconsidersthattheprojectisofsufficientsignificancethatbroaderStatemattersneedtobeconsidered.Insuchcircumstances,theMinisterwillbeabletorefersuchprojectstothePlanningCommissionfordetermination.
Internal approvals and the register of consentsWheredevelopmentapprovalisinternallydetermined,theapprovalandconditionsattachingtosuchdevelopmentshouldbetreatedasadevelopmentconsentinordertoensurethatitisavailablepubliclyonaregisterofdevelopmentconsents92.Inaddition,therelevantlocalconsentauthority(ies)istobenotifiedthattheconsenthasbeenplacedontheelectronicregister.
90 HowthisissetistobedeterminedbyconsultationbetweentheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructureandsuchpublicbodiesandprescribedinaregulation
91 Inthiscontext,‘publicproject’includespublic/privatepartnerships,BOOT(build,own,operate,transferprojects)andothermodelsforfinancingordeliveringpublicinfrastructureprojects
92 Seerecommendationsconcerning‘Registerofconsents’below
6 The Sustainable Planning Act – additional matters
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201286
Recommendation115.Determinationprocessesforpublicauthorityprojectsaretobeassetoutbelow:
Development Track Decision Maker
Exempt Publicauthority
Prohibited Notapplicable
Codeassessable Publicauthority
Meritassessable PublicauthorityorJointRegionalPlanningPanel(dependingonscale).JointRegionalPlanningPanelifadispensationfromadevelopmentstandardisrequired.
Impactassessable PlanningCommissionorJointRegionalPlanningPaneldependingonscale
Development applications with minor code non-compliances Therearelikelytobeinstanceswhenadevelopmentproposalhassomeminoraspectsofnon-compliancewithacodethatwillnotpermitittobedealtwithascodeassessable.Insuchcases,iftheassessingofficerconsidersthatthedeparturesareminor,themattercanbeexpeditedbybeingdealtwithinoneoftwoways(asconsideredappropriatebytheassessingofficer):
• first,ifthenon-complianceisreadilyabletoberemediedbyaminoramendmentthatwouldrendertheproposalabletobecodeassessed,theassessingofficershouldcontacttheproponentandsuggestamendmentoftheproposalinafashiontomakeitcompliant.
• second,theassessingofficershouldsimplyconsidertheacceptabilityorotherwiseoftheelementthatisnon-compliant,ratherthanassessingtheoverallnatureoftheproposal.
Recommendations116.Ifaminornon-compliancecausesanapplicationtobemeritassessablerather
thancodeassessableandtheassessingofficerconsidersthataminoramendmentwouldrendertheapplicationtotallycodeassessable,theassessingofficeristocontacttheproponentandsuggestthattheproponentmaketheminoramendmenttotheproposal.
117.Ifsuchanamendmentismadebytheproponent,theapplicationwillbedealtwithascodeassessable.
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 87
118.Inthealternative,iftheassessingofficerconsidersthatthenon-complianceisminor,theassessingofficercanelecttoconsidertheacceptabilityorotherwiseofthenon-compliantelementwithoutundertakingafullassessmentoftheoverallproject.
Development to fit the exempt and code assessable classificationsCurrently,‘simplestream’developmentproposalsareclassifiedas‘exempt’or‘complying’development.ThetypesofdevelopmentthatarecontainedineachcategoryaresetoutinseveralStateEnvironmentalPlanningPolicies.Simplifyingthelistofexemptandcomplyingdevelopmentandpermittinglocalvariationstoitisdesirable.Itwillbenecessarytodevelopaconsolidatedlistofsuchdevelopmenttypesbycategorisingthemintothetwoclassesofexemptandcodeassessabledevelopmenttypesinthenewdevelopmentclassificationmodelthatwehaverecommended.WerecommendthisbeachievedbyareviewundertakenbytheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructurewithrepresentationfromlocalgovernmentacrosstherangeoftypesofcouncilsin(urban,semi-urban,ruralandwesternNewSouthWales).DevelopmentinthesecategoriesistobelistedasanappendixtotherelevantLocalLand-UsePlan.Localvariationstoclassificationsasexemptorcodeassessabledevelopmentaretobepermitted.
Recommendations119.Alldevelopmentnowclassifiedasexemptorcomplyingistobecategorisedas
exemptorcodeassessabledevelopment.
120.AsinglesimplifiedlistofthesecategoriesofdevelopmentistobecompiledbyareviewledbytheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructurewithrepresentationfromlocalgovernmentacrosstherangeoftypesofcouncilsin(urban,semi-urban,ruralandwesternNewSouthWales).
121.TheMinisteristoestablishanongoingprocessforconsiderationoflocalvariationproposalstoclassifydevelopmentasexemptorcodeassessabledevelopmentwithinalocalgovernmentarea.
Existing uses: Changes, expansion or intensificationUsesoflandcanbenon-conforming,eitherforhistoricalreasonsorbecauseofchangesinzoning,and,therefore,relyonexistinguserightsfortheircontinuation.Thissectiondealswith:
• whetherchangesshouldbepermittedtothenatureofanexistinguse• whetherthereshouldbearighttointensifyanexistingusewithinitsfootprint• whetheritshouldbepossibletoexpandanexistinguserightbeyonditsfootprint.
6 The Sustainable Planning Act – additional matters
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201288
Changes to the permitted nature of an existing use rightBroadly,wedonotbelievethatthereshouldbeanabilitytochangeoneexistingnon-conformingusetoanothernon-conforminguse.Thesoleexceptionconcernsthesignificantareasoflandwhicharetobe(orhavebeen)rezonedfromanagriculturalzonetoanenvironmentalzone,particularlyontheNorthandSouthCoasts.Theprecisenatureoftheexistingagriculturalusesshouldbedefinedwithprecisioninanydeclaration93ofexistinguserights.Wheretherehasbeenadeclarationforagriculturallandsthathavebeensorezonedtoanenvironmentalzone,thereshouldbea10yearperiodaftertheSustainablePlanningActcomesintoeffect,duringwhichitshouldbepossibletoapplytoeither:
• changeoneagriculturaluseforanother,or• addanagriculturalusetobeincorporatedwithintheexistingagriculturaluse,asanexpandednon-conforminguse.
Fortheselimitedclassesoflands,itwouldbeappropriatetopermitmultipleapplicationstobemadeduringthistenyearperiod.However,ifanapplicationhadnotbeenmadebytheendofthatperiod,thereshouldbenofurtheropportunitytodoso.Applicationsofthistypearegenerallytobemeritassessable.However,wealsonotethattheremaybecircumstancesinwhichanapplicationmightberegardedasimpactassessable,suchassomeintensivelivestockproposals.
Intensifying development within an existing footprint Weconsiderthatitshouldbepossibletomakeanapplicationtointensifyanexistingnon-conformingusewithinitspresentfootprint.Thisintensifieduseshouldbeclassifiedasmeritorimpactassessabledevelopment,asappropriate,unlessitfallsexpresslywithinaclassofcodeassessabledevelopment.However,itisintendedthatthemajorityofapplicationsforanintensificationofanexistingusewillbeclassifiedasmeritorimpactassessabledevelopment.
Expanding an existing use beyond its current footprint Wenowturntothequestionofwhetherexistinguserightsshouldbepermittedtoexpandbeyondtheirpresentfootprint.Theremaybecircumstancesinwhichitwouldbeacceptabletopermitsuchanexpansion.However,anyapplicationseekingtodososhouldnotbetreatedasaconventionalone,butshouldhaveahigherassessmentthreshold–namely,thatthereisnoadverseimpactonothersurroundinguses.WeconsiderthatanyapplicationofthisnatureshouldbedealtwithbytheJointRegionalPlanningPanel,unlessthescopeoftheapplicationissuchthatitwarrantsreferraltoanddeterminationbythePlanningCommission.Inaddition,thegeneralpoweroftheMinistertorefermatterstothePlanningCommissionwouldalsoapplytoanyproposalofthisnature.
93 SeeVolume1,PartC,Chapter7
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 89
Recommendations122.Onlylandthatissubjecttoachangeofzoningfromanagriculturalzonetoan
environmentalzone,asaconsequenceofthemakingofanewlocalplanpursuanttotheStandardInstrumenttemplate,shallhavearightattachedtoittomakeanapplicationtochangeaspecificanddeclaredexistingnon-conformingagriculturalusetoanewspecificnon-conformingagriculturaluseortoaddanewspecificnon-conformingagriculturalusetothedeclarednon-conformingagriculturaluse.
123.Thisrightistobeavailablefora10yearperiodafterthecommencementoftheSustainablePlanningActoraftersuchachangeofzoningiseffectedbythecomingintooperationofanewlocalplanbasedontheStandardInstrumenttemplate,whicheveristhelaterdate.
124.Therearetobenofurtheropportunitiespermittedtochangeonenon-conformingusetoanothernon-conforminguseafterthe10yearperiodexpires.
125.Applicationstopermitexpansionofanexistingnon-conformingusebeyonditspresentfootprintmaybeapprovedifthereisnoadverseimpactasaconsequenceoftheexpansion.
126.Applicationstointensifyanexistingnon-conformingusearetobepermittedbutaretobemeritassessableorimpactassessable,unlessthatintensificationfallswithinaclassofcodeassessabledevelopment.
127.Applicationsforexpansionofanexistingnon-conformingusearetobepermittedifthereisnoadverseimpactonothersurroundingusesandaretobedeterminedbyeitheraJointRegionalPlanningPanelorthePlanningCommission.
Incomplete applications OneofthemattersraisedduringourconsultationprocessanddiscussedinseveralsubmissionstotheIssuesPaperistherejectionbyaconsentauthority,primarilybyacouncil,ofadevelopmentapplicationbecauseinadequatedocumentationhasbeensupplied.
Somehavesuggestedthatincompleteapplicationsshouldbeautomaticallyrejected,whilstothershavesuggestedthatsuchapplicationsbeaccepted,butwithapracticeadoptedthattheinadequaciesbeidentifiedandtheapplicantgiventheopportunitytorectifythedeficiency.
Wenotethatamendments94tothepresentplanninglegislationprovidedarightofreviewofadecisiontorejectanapplication.WeconsideritappropriatethatthisrightofreviewbeintheSustainablePlanningAct.However,ifanapplicationisforeithermeritassessableorimpactassessabledevelopment,itisinappropriateforanapplicationtobeacceptedwheretheconsentauthorityknowsthatthedocumentationprovidedisincomplete.
94 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979,section82B–thatcameintoeffectinearly2011
6 The Sustainable Planning Act – additional matters
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201290
Wereachedthisconclusionfortworeasons:• First,weareconfidentthat,overtime,thereislikelytobeagreateradherencetothebenchmarktimesforassessmentanddeterminationofproperlycompleteapplicationsthanispresentlythecase.Weconsiderthatthisislikelyformeritassessableandimpactaccessibledevelopmentbecauseoftheseparationoutofsimplerformsofdevelopment.
• Second,asthesetwoclassesofdevelopmentproposalarethosethatwillbesubjecttonotificationandpublicsubmissions,itisnotappropriatethatanapplicationthatisinadequate(inanymaterialrespect)shouldbeexhibitedforpubliccommentinaccordwithstatutorytimeframeswhenfullinformationwasnotavailable.Thisisfundamentallycontrarytothebroad‘righttoknow’positionthatwehaveadoptedthroughouttherecommendationsthatwehavemade.
Asaconsequence,weareoftheviewthatitshouldbemandatoryforaconsentauthoritytorejectanyapplicationformeritassessableorimpactaccessibledevelopmentthatisdeficientinanymaterialrespect.Wearealsooftheviewthat,ifsuchaninadequateapplicationisacceptedandgoesthroughapublicnotificationperiodwhilstdeficient,thenthelegislationshouldmakeitexpresslyclearthatanysuchpurportedapplicationisvoid,notmerelyvoidableasamatterofdiscretion.However,iftherearedeficienciesinanapplicationasoriginallypresented,anapplicantshouldbeabletorectifythosedeficienciesupto,butnolaterthan,thedayuponwhichtheapplicationismadeavailable(physicallyorelectronically)forpubliccomment.
Recommendation128.Applicationsthatarenotcompletepriortothedayuponwhichtheapplicationis
scheduledtobemadeavailable,physicallyorelectronically,forpubliccommentshallberejectedandshallberegardedasnothavingbeenlodged.
Independent Hearing and Assessment PanelsUnderthepresentplanninglegislation,councilsmaychoosetoestablishapanelofexpertsknownasanIndependentHearingandAssessmentPanel95.Thispanelmayassessadevelopmentapplicationoranyotherplanningmatter,withtheexceptionofmattersthatwouldfallwithinthefunctionsofaJointRegionalPlanningPanel.Therangeofareasofexpertisefromwhichmembersofthepanelaretobedrawnissetoutinthepresentplanninglegislation96.Theroleofapanelistosubmitareporttothecouncilwithinatimespecifiedbythecouncil.Thepresentplanninglegislationdoesnotexpresslygivethesepanelsaroleindeterminingdevelopmentproposalsthatarewithinthecouncil’scompetence.Nosignificantcriticismhasbeenlevelledattheroleofsuchpanels,andthepresentprovisionsaretobeincorporatedintheSustainablePlanningAct.WeconsiderthatthestatutoryrangeofmembershipshouldhaveAboriginalculturalheritageaddedasitisappropriatethatthisareaofexpertiseisavailable,ifrequired.
95 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979,section23I
96 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979,section23I(3)
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 91
Recommendations129.IndependentHearingandAssessmentPanelsaretobeprovidedforinthe
SustainablePlanningAct.
130.ThepresentqualificationsforIndependentHearingandAssessmentPanelsaretoberetainedwiththeadditionofAboriginalculturalheritageasanareaofexpertise.
Independent Hearing and Determination PanelsIthasbeensuggestedthatitshouldbepossibletodelegatedecision-makingpowersaboutspecificdevelopmentproposals(orclassesofdevelopmentproposal)topanelsbasedontheIndependentHearingandAssessmentPanelmodel97.WerecommendthattheSustainablePlanningActexpresslypermitIndependentHearingandAssessmentPanelstohavedeterminativefunctions.Inthiscase,theywouldbeknownasIndependentHearingandDeterminationPanels.
Currently,asweunderstandit,somecouncilsusegeneralpowerstodelegateundersections355and377oftheLocal Government Act 199398toprovideanIndependentHearingandAssessmentPanel(establishedunderthepresentplanninglegislation)withdeterminativefunctions.However,thepresentplanninglegislationappearstoimplythattheyonlyhaveassessmentfunctions99.IfthereareanyconcernsthatsuchdeterminativedelegationsmadeundertheLocal Government Act 1993areinvalid(becauseofthelackofexpressdeterminativepowersforthemunderthepresentplanninglegislation)thentheyshouldberetrospectivelyvalidated.
Recommendation131.IndependentHearingandDeterminationPanelsaretobeprovidedforinthe
SustainablePlanningAct(withthesamerangeofmembershipqualificationsasrecommendedforIndependentHearingandAssessmentPanels),withcouncilstobeabletodelegatedevelopmentdecisionmakingtosuchaPanel.
Joint Regional Planning PanelsInVolume1,wesetoutwhyJointRegionalPlanningPanelsshouldberetained.However,thereareanumberofdesirable,minorchangestotheoperationofPanelsfortheirincorporationintotheSustainablePlanningActto:
• increasepublicconfidenceindecision-makingprocesses• giveanelectedcounciltheabilitytoputitsviewstothePanel,independentlyoftheopinionofthecouncil’sstaffassessmentreport.
97 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979,section23I
98 Local Government Act 1993,sections355and357
99 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979,section23I(1)and(2)
6 The Sustainable Planning Act – additional matters
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201292
Wealsonotethat,atthetimeofwritingthisReviewPaper,therearereviseddraftOperationalProcedures,CodeofConductandComplaintsHandlingPolicyonexhibition100forJointRegionalPlanningPanels.Ifadopted,thesechangeswillimprovetheprocessesofthesePanels.
Guarding against conflicts of interestJointRegionalPlanningPanelsaresubjecttoaCodeofConduct101requiringthatamembershouldnottakepartinanyprocesswherethereisanactualorperceivedconflictofinterest.CompliancewiththeCodeistheresponsibilityofeachPanelmember.TheissueofPanelmembersdeterminingmattersinthelocalgovernmentareaswheretheyresidewasspecificallyraised–particularlyinregionalandruralareas–asthereisagreaterlikelihoodthattherewouldbeaperceivedconflictofinterest102.Becauseofthis,itisnotdesirablethatStatePanelmembersbeinvolvedindecidingapplicationsintheirownlocalgovernmentarea.ThisconclusionisdrawnknowingthatalternatemembersareavailableforStateparticipantsinaPanel.
Transparency in decision makingWeconsiderthatthereshouldbeastatutoryobligationonaPaneltogivereasonsforitsdecisionwhenitrejectsconclusionsoforvariesrecommendationscontainedintheassessmentreport,includingvariationstoconditionsthatmightbeproposedforadevelopmentproposal.Givingreasons,inthesecases,willincreasepublicconfidenceinthedecision-makingprocess.
Jurisdiction issue – uncontroversial applicationsIntheIssuesPaper,wenotedthatsomedevelopmentproposalswithinthejurisdictionofaJointRegionalPlanningPanelwerereturnedtothecouncilfordeterminationbecausetherewasnothingtobedetermined–theassessmentreportrecommendedapproval,theproposalwasuncontroversialandnoobjectionswerereceived.MandatoryreferraltothePanel,insuchcircumstances,causedunnecessarydelay.ItisthereforedesirabletoremovePanelsincaseswhereaprojectisassessedaswarrantingapprovalandwheretherearenoobjections.
Jurisdiction issue – aggregation of projectsInoneinstanceofwhichweareaware,anapplicantwaspermittedtoaggregateseveralseparatedevelopmentproposals,atdifferentsitesownedbythesameproponent,tobringthetotalvalueoftheaggregatedprojectswithinthejurisdictionofaPanel.Asweunderstandtheposition,therewasnocommonimpactonthesurroundinglocalityand,apartfromjointownership,theproposalsweredistinctlydifferent.Suchaggregationshouldnotbepermitted.
100 Seehttp://www.planning.nsw.gov.au/tabid/205/ctl/View/mid/1081/ID/67/language/en-AU/Default.aspx
101 Seehttp://jrpp.nsw.gov.au/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=AXEQtH35je4%3d&tabid=90&mid=453&language=en-AU
102Ebner v Official Trustee in Bankruptcy[2000]HCA63;205CLR337;176ALR644;75ALJR277
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 93
Public participation and a right to be heardEnshriningarightforthepublictobeinvolvedinandheardduringproceedingsoftheJointRegionalPlanningPanelsisnecessaryintheSustainablePlanningActasitconstitutesarelevantelementofour‘righttoknow’approach103.Assuch,thisrightshouldextendtofacilitatingtheinvolvementoftheproponentandthosepotentiallyaffectedbyorinterestedinadecision,includingtheabilityforanelectedcouncillortoputforwardaviewtothePanelindependentlyoftheopinionofthecouncil’sstaffassessmentreport.SucharightwillincreasepublicconfidenceintheJointRegionalPlanningPanelsdecision-makingprocesses.
The Central Sydney Planning CommitteeAuniquequestionarisesconcerningthestatusoftheCentralSydneyPlanningCommittee,whichiseffectivelyavariantonaJointRegionalPlanningPanel.ItwasestablishedundertheCity of Sydney Act 1988,althoughitsfunctionsareentirelyrelatedtothoserequiredtobeexercisedunderplanninglegislation.
InourconsultationwiththeLordMayorandseniorstaffoftheCounciloftheCityofSydney,thepositionwasadvanced(andreflectedinthecity’ssubsequentsubmission104)thattheCentralSydneyPlanningCommitteeshouldbeestablishedunderplanninglegislationandcreatedasaspecial,uniqueversionofaJointRegionalPlanningPanel.WeconsiderthatthisisanentirelyreasonablepropositionthatshouldbeincorporatedintheSustainablePlanningAct.
Recommendations132.AlloralsubmissionstoJointRegionalPlanningPanelsaretobeinpublic.
133.AllJointRegionalPlanningPanelprocessesaretoincorporatetheopportunityfortheproponentandsupportersofandobjectorstoaproposaltobeheardbythePanel(withthePaneltosettherulesforsuchpresentations).
134.StatePanelmembersarenottodeterminemattersinthelocalgovernmentareawheretheyreside.
135.WhenaPanelrejectsconclusionsoforvariesrecommendationsintheassessmentreport,thePanelistogivereasonsfordoingso.
136.Wheretheassessmentreportrecommendsapprovalandtherehavebeennosubmissionsopposingthedevelopment,thecouncilistoremaintheconsentauthority.
137.InvokingthejurisdictionofaPanelbyaggregationofprojectsondifferentsitesincommonownershipistobeprohibited.
138.TheCentralSydneyPlanningCommitteeistobebroughtwithinthescopeoftheSustainablePlanningActthroughaseparateprovisioninthatportionofthelegislationdealingwithJointRegionalPlanningPanels.
103 SimilartothatprovidedbytheLocal Government Act 1993,Chapter4,Part1–regardingpublicaccesstomeetingsandinformation
104 Seehttp://planningreview.nsw.gov.au/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=kcu3h438Gmg%3d&tabid=119&mid=569
6 The Sustainable Planning Act – additional matters
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201294
Land owner’s consent Currently,althoughdeterminationofanapplicationforapprovalofadevelopmentcannotresultindevelopmentconsentbeinggivenunlesstheconsentofallthelandholdersinvolvedhasbeenprovidedinwriting,assessmentcanbeundertakenprovidedowners’consentisreceivedbytheconsentauthoritypriortodeterminationoftheapplication105.ThispracticecausesparticularproblemsforthoseadministeringCrownLands,astherearecertainrequiredprocessestofollowwhenconsideringwhetherornottogivelandowners’consent.Developmentproposalsthatpresumethegrantingofowners’consentcreateproblemsforthoseadministeringsuchlands.Thefollowingsubmission,inresponsetotheIssuesPaper,onthistopicbyNSWTrade&Investment106said:
‘Strengthened legal provisions requiring the written consent of the land owner prior to lodgement of a development application should be introduced. Development applications should not be able to be accepted without evidence of the written consent of the land owner. Presently cl50(1)(a) of the EP&A Regulation 2000 requires that a development application must contain the information listed at Schedule 1 which includes evidence of the consent of the land owner to the proposed development, however case law has in practice defined this to mean that a development application may not be determined but can be accepted and assessed without the written consent of the land owner. This anomaly is a significant issue for the DPI in its capacity as land owner of Crown land. Many situations have arisen where an applicant has gone to considerable expense to prepare a development application involving Crown land and significant time has elapsed in assessment of that development application by a consent authority without first ascertaining and confirming whether occupation of the Crown land for that development will be permitted. The resulting situation is that the DPI is involved at the final stage of the process, and faces significant pressure to give a speedy and favourable response to the applicants request for land owners consent so that an application can be determined. However, processes under the Crown Lands Act can be lengthy (land status checks, resolution of any Aboriginal Land Claims, land assessment requirements etc) and the proposal may not be acceptable on Crown land even if it has been assessed favourably against the planning controls.
A legal requirement that development applications cannot be accepted without evidence of the consent of the land owner would circumvent this situation, and force applicants of proposed developments to liaise early with the DPI to prevent unrealistic expectations and wasted resources.’
WearesatisfiedthatthereshouldbearequirementforthewrittenconsentofanyNSWCrownentitylandholdertoadevelopmentapplicationasanessentialprerequisitetoitsacceptanceforlodgementbytherelevantconsentauthority.
Weconsiderthat,inanyothercircumstances,anydevelopmentapplicationthatisnotaccompaniedbythewrittenconsentofallrelevantlandholdersshouldbetreatedasanapplicationwithacurabledefect.Inthiscase,theapplicationshouldbeacceptedontheunderstandingthatiftheproposeddevelopmentislikelytobeapproved,allrelevantlandholders’consentmustbeprovidedpriortodeterminationoftheapplication.ItshouldbemandatoryforaconsentauthoritytorejectanypurportedapplicationthatisnotaccompaniedbyanyCrownlandholders’consentforrelevantparcelsoflandencompassedbytheapplicationandownedbyanyNSWCrownentity.
105 Botany Bay Council v Remath Investments No 6 Pty Ltd[2000]NSWCA364;(2000)50NSWLR312;(2000)111LGERA446perSteinJAatpara7
106 NSWTrade&Investment(4March2012)atp16http://planningreview.nsw.gov.au/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=4mEnABIN21Q%3d&tabid=119&mid=569
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 95
Recommendation139.AnydevelopmentapplicationinvolvinganylandownedbyanyNSWCrownentity
shallnotbeacceptedbyaconsentauthorityunlessaccompaniedbythewrittenconsentofthelandowningNSWCrownentity.
Model delegations for development decision making in local councilsItisdesirable,inourview,topromoteconsistencyinthedelegationofdevelopmentdecisionstotheprofessionalstaffofcouncils.Wehadsomereservationsaboutcanvassingthistopicbecausethescaleandnatureofdevelopmentdeterminationvarieswidelyacrossaspectrum–fromsmallerruralcouncilstolargermetropolitanones.Certainly,mandatorydelegationswouldbecontrarytothe‘onesizedoesnotfitall’sentimentoftenputtousduringthecommunityforums.However,theDepartmentmightprovideguidancebyatemplatesetofdelegationsthatcouncillorscouldadopt,whetherinmodifiedformornot.
Recommendations140.TheDepartmentistoconsultwiththeLocalGovernmentandShiresAssociation
todevelopasetofmodeldelegationsfordeterminationbyCouncilstaffofdevelopmentproposals.
141.Thesemodeldelegationsarenottobemandatoryand,ifadoptedingeneralterms,maybemodifiedtoreflectlocalcircumstances.
Modifications to existing approved developmentThepresentplanninglegislation107permitsapplicationstobemadetomodifyanapproveddevelopment.Currently,an‘applicationtomodify’canbemadetoseekretrospectiveapprovalforunapprovedbutcompletedmodification108.Thiswasamatterofsomeconcernduringthecommunityforumsasmanyopposedgivingretrospectiveapprovalforworksdonecontrarytoanapproval.
Whileweacknowledgetheethicaluneasethatunderliesthesecomments,wedonotseethatthereisanyotherpracticalalternativetoretainingthepresentmodificationprocess.Thisincludesretainingthe‘substantiallythesamedevelopmentaswasoriginallyapproved’testandthelineofdecisionsintheLandandEnvironmentCourtastohowthattestshouldbeapplied.Presently,iftherearemultipleapplicationstomodifyanapprovedproject,theaccumulationofthosemodificationsmustnotpermitthemodifiedprojecttocrossthatlimit.ItisdesirablethatthestatutoryprovisionintheSustainablePlanningActmakesthisexpresslyclear.
107Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979,sections96and96AA
108Windy Dropdown Pty Ltd v Warringah Council [2000]NSWLEC240
6 The Sustainable Planning Act – additional matters
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201296
Allmodificationapplicationsconcerningmeritassessableorimpactassessabledevelopment,otherthanminormodifications,aretobesubjecttothesamenotificationandassessmentprocessasforanoriginalapplicationforsuchdevelopment.Minormodificationapplicationsshouldbeabletobedealtwithonacodeassessablebasis(butonlyifthereisanapplicablecode),eventhoughtheoriginalapplicationwasforeithermeritassessableorimpactassessabledevelopment.
However,beforesucharelaxationshouldbepermitted,themodificationproponentshouldberequiredtoprovideastatementsettingoutwhytheproposedmodificationisminorandwouldnothaveanyimpactoutsidethesiteoftheproposeddevelopmentandhowtheproposedmodificationcomplieswiththerelevantcode.Theconsentauthoritymustbesatisfiedthatthisiscorrectbeforesuchamodificationapplicationcanbetreatedascodeassessable.
Recommendation142.Themodificationprocessinthepresentplanninglegislationistobecarriedover
totheSustainablePlanningAct,withminormodificationstobecodeassessable(ifthereisanapplicablecode)eventhoughtheoriginalapplicationwasmeritassessableorimpactassessable.
Names for applications to reflect purposeThepresenttitlesof‘developmentapplication’and‘constructioncertificateapplication’donotappropriatelyreflectthenatureoftheseapplications–nameswhichbetterreflecttheirrealpurposeshouldbeused.Asaconsequence,weconsiderthatthefirststageapplicationshouldbeknownasan‘applicationfordevelopmentapproval’;whilethesecondstageapplicationshouldbeknownasan‘applicationforconstructionapproval’.Theplansthatareapprovedatthe‘applicationforconstructionapproval’stageshouldbeknownasthe‘approvedconstructionplans’,ratherthan‘constructioncertificateplans’,astheyarenowknown.
Recommendation143.Applicationsfordevelopmentandforapprovalofconstructionplansareto
beknownas‘applicationfordevelopmentapproval’and‘applicationforconstructionapproval’.
Plain English guide to the classification of development Aspartofthesuiteofmeasuresdesignedtopromotepublicinformationaboutandengagementwithareformedplanningsystem,itisessentialthattherebeplainEnglishmaterialpreparedthatexplainsthenewclassificationsystem109fordevelopmentproposals.
109 SeeVolume1,PartC,Chapter6
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 97
Preparationandwidedisseminationofsuchaguide,inhardcopyandelectronically,isanimportantelementincommunityengagementandtherestorationofpublictrustintheState’splanningsystem.
Recommendations144.TheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructure,inconjunctionwiththeLocal
GovernmentandShiresAssociation,istoprepareaplainEnglishguidetothedevelopmentclassification,assessmentanddeterminationprocessesundertheSustainablePlanningAct.
145.PreparationoftheguideistobeunderthesupervisionofthePlanningAdvisoryBoard.
Potential cross border impactsManydevelopmentproposalshavethepotentialtoimpactacrosslocalgovernmentboundariesoracrossthebordersoftheState.Inthislatterinstance,therehasrecentlybeenlitigationconcerningthepotentialcrossborderimpactsofaresidentialdevelopmentinNewSouthWalesonthefutureoptionsforCanberraairport110.Whilecross-stateborderimpactsarelikelytooccurwithfarlessfrequencythanthosepotentiallyimpactingacrosscouncilboundaries,commonconcernsarisetoensurethatsuchimpactsareproperlyconsidered.Itisdesirabletoensurethattheneighbouringcouncilorland-useauthorityacrosstheStateborderisprovidedwithanopportunitytocommentbeforeanysuchpotentiallyimpactingdevelopmentproposalisapproved.Sucharegimewouldrequirethattheconsentauthorityfortheproposeddevelopmenthaveregardtoanycommentsthatmightbeoffered.Wedonotproposethattherebemandatorytimesforresponseoranyabilitytodelaytheprocess.Ifcommentswerenotreceivedfromtheadjacentcouncil/land-useauthoritywithintheordinarystatutorytimeframefordeterminingadevelopmentproposal,itshouldsimplybedeterminedbytheconsentauthority.
Recommendations146.Whenaconsentauthorityconsidersthatadevelopmentproposalhasthepotential
tocauseimpactsacrossaStateborderorinanadjoininglocalgovernmentareatothelocalgovernmentareawheretheproposeddevelopmentistobelocated,theconsentauthorityistonotifytherelevantland-useauthorityacrosstheStateborderortheadjoiningcouncil(s)oftheproposeddevelopmentandinvitecommentsonit.
147.Theconsentauthorityfortheproposeddevelopmentistoconsiderandhaveregardtoanycommentsreceivedinresponsetosucharequest.
110Capital Airport Group Pty Ltd v Director-General of the NSW Department of Planning(No2)[2011]NSWLEC83
6 The Sustainable Planning Act – additional matters
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 201298
Preamble to the Sustainable Planning Act?InVolume1111,wenotedthatseveralsubmissionssuggestedthatanynewlegislationshouldcontainapreambleorbroadphilosophicalstatementofpurposethatdidnotformpartofanystatutoryobjectsofit.ThepresentplanninglegislationinQueensland(knownastheSustainable Planning Act 2009)containsthreeprovisions112settingoutthepurposesofthelegislation.Theseprovisions,however,arewhatwouldberegardedastheobjectsoftheseActswhencomparedtothestructureofourEnvironmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.
Weobservethat,ifthereweretobesuchapreambleorstatement,itshouldmakeclearthereasonsforthelegislationanditspurpose,butnotcompromisetheoverarchingobjectwehaveproposedfortheSustainablePlanningAct113.Wemakenorecommendationastowhetherornotthereshouldbesuchapreamble–thatisamattermoreappropriatetobeconsideredbytheGovernment.However,basedonthebroadsentimentsoflastyear’sconsultationprocess,wehavedraftedanexamplebelowofhowsuchapreamblemightread:
The land and waters that comprise the State of New South Wales have had Aboriginal peoples and, more recently, people from diverse cultural backgrounds as the custodians.
The land and waters incorporate a rich diversity of landforms and plant and animal life. The landscapes are diverse and beautiful and include landscapes of cultural significance to Aboriginal peoples. The land and waters have provided food, shelter and other material support to their custodians throughout human occupation. That occupation and use has modified and had an impact on a wide range of those natural values.
Population density has increased the potential for those impacts. In recent times, laws have been put in place to regulate and control human impacts on the State’s natural values. These laws have sought to regulate, amongst other purposes, the planning for and control of land-use across the State. Past legislation had become complex and unwieldy – not appropriately performing the roles that were necessary.
A new planning system is needed to ensure that the impact of humans on the land and waters of New South Wales and on the health and general well-being of its people is regulated. This will ensure that permitted development is planned for, as well as being sustainable, in the following ways:
• ecologically sustainable – in its impacts on the people, animals, plants, air, water and soils of the State
• economically sustainable, providing the facilities and services to support responsible economic growth
• socially sustainable, to ensure the health, amenity and general well-being of its citizens.
This planning system should promote transparent, simple and efficient processes while encouraging cultural change by planners and engagement by the people of the State in the planning for and regulation of development. It is for these purposes that this legislation has been enacted.
111 PartC,Chapter2
112Sustainable Planning Act 2009 (QLD),sections3,4and5
113 SeeVolume1,PartC,Chapter3
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 99
Recommendation148.TheGovernmentconsiderifthereshouldbeapreambletotheSustainable
PlanningAct.
Register of consentsItisimportantinanelectronicallyintegratedandaccessibleplanningsystemtobeabletoaccessthedevelopmenthistoryofasite,includingitsexistingandpastdevelopmentconsentsand,particularly,anyongoingconditions.Whilstitwillnotbepractical,forreasonsoftimeandcost,tomandatedigitalbackcaptureofanysignificancefrompaperrecords,itisnonethelessessentialthatdevelopmentconsentsarekeptelectronicallyinanongoing,easilysearchablefashion.Thiswillreplacekeepingaphysical,accessiblepaperregisterofdevelopmentconsents,asiscurrentlyrequiredofeachcouncil114.Theabilitytosearchforparticulardevelopmentconsentsandtermswithinthoseconsentsviatheplanningportalisessential.Electronicrecordsofconsentstoreplacepaperregisterscanbekeptfromacommencementdateagreedwithlocalgovernment.
Establishingelectronicregistrationwillmeanthataprivatecertifierapprovingcodeassessabledevelopmentwillneedtoprovideanelectroniccopyoftheconsentanditsconditionsforuploadingtotheregister.Thosegovernmententitieswhicharepermittedtoundertakeselfassessmentanddeterminationprocesseswillalsoberequiredtoprovideanelectroniccopyoftheconsentanditsconditionsforuploadingtotheregister.Electroniccopies(ornotification–dependingonwhetherornotthereisasingle,centralregisterandwhatuploadingarrangementsareset115)willneedtobeprovidedtotherelevantcouncilforitsrecords.
Twoothersourcesofdevelopmentconsentrequireconsiderationintheestablishmentoftheregister.TheseareconsentsgrantedthroughordersmadeinLandandEnvironmentCourtproceedingsandthosegivenasaconsequenceofdeterminationsofthePlanningCommission.ForconsentsgivenasaconsequenceofordersmadeinLandandEnvironmentCourtproceedings,theconsentauthoritywhoserolehasbeenassumedbytheCourtshouldberesponsibleforputtinganyconsentontheregister.Inthelatterinstance,theassessmentoftheproposalwillhavebeenundertakenbytheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructureandtheDepartmentshouldberesponsibleforputtinganyconsentontheregister.
Overtime,comprehensiveelectronicavailabilityofdevelopmentconsentswillevolve.Whilesomecouncilsmaywishtocompletedigitalbackcapture(andthestatutoryprovisionsshouldfacilitatethis),backcaptureshouldnotbemandatory.However,ifbackcaptureweretobeundertaken,physicalrecordswouldnotneedtobeheld,asthestatutoryprovisionswillrendertheelectronicallyregisteredconsentastheauthoritativerecordofthedevelopmentanditsconditions.
114Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000,clause264
115DatacustodianshiparrangementsaretobedeterminedasdiscussedinPart4ofthisvolume.Thiswillincludedeterminingwhetherthereshouldbeacentralregisterorseparateregistersforeachcouncil.
6 The Sustainable Planning Act – additional matters
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012100
Recommendations149.TheSustainablePlanningActistorequireelectronicregistrationoffuture
developmentconsentsandpermit(butnotmandate)thedigitalbackcaptureofexistingdevelopmentconsents.
150.Allconsentauthorities(otherthantheLandandEnvironmentCourtandthePlanningCommission)aretoberequiredtoensurethatanyconsentissuediselectronicallyregistered.
151.ForconsentsgivenasaconsequenceofdeterminationsofthePlanningCommission,theDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructureistoberesponsibleforelectronicregistration.
152.ForconsentsgivenasaconsequenceofordersmadeinLandandEnvironmentCourtproceedings,theconsentauthoritywhoserolehasbeenassumedbytheCourtistoberesponsibleforelectronicregistration.
153.Anypersonorentity(otherthanacouncil)istoberequiredtonotifytherelevantcouncil(s)thataconsenthasbeenelectronicallyregistered.
154.TheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructure,inco-operationwiththeOfficeofLocalGovernment,istodiscusswiththeLocalGovernmentandShiresAssociationacommencementdateforelectronicregistrationofconsents.
155.Theregisteristobetheauthoritativerepositoryofalldevelopmentconsentsissuedonoraftertheoperativedateofelectronicregistration.
156.Foranybackcaptureofconsents,theconsentauthorityistoberelievedoftherequirementtomaintainphysicalrecordsafterpublicationonanelectronicregister.
157.Datacustodianshiparrangements,includingdeterminationofwhetherthereshouldbeacentralregisterorseparateregistersforeachcouncil,istobeundertakenbytheCo-ordinatingcommitteeforspatialinformation.
Removing “consistency” as a design criterion in assessmentsWeareawareofsomelocalcontrolsthatrequireadevelopmentproposaltobeconsistentwiththestreetscapeordevelopmentpatterninthelocalityoftheproposeddevelopment.Sometimesthetestisputasa‘notinconsistentwith’testratherthanoneof‘consistency’.
SucharequirementisentirelyindependentofconventionalnumericalcontrolsinaDevelopmentControlPlanorthematicdesignprinciplesdepictedindiagramsorsketches.Wedonotbelievethatbroaderconsistencytypetestsofthisnaturecanco-existwithacodeassessmentprocess.Asaconsequence,‘consistency’or‘non-inconsistency’testsarenotappropriatetoberetainedforcodeassessabledevelopment,exceptwheretheproposeddevelopmentisinanidentifiedlocalheritageconservationareaorisintheimmediatevicinityofaStateorlocallyidentifiedheritageobjectorgroupofobjects.
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 101
Recommendation158.‘Consistency’or‘non-inconsistency’testsarenottobepermittedforcodeassessable
development,unlesstheproposeddevelopmentthatwouldotherwisebecodeassessableisinanidentifiedlocalheritageconservationareaorintheimmediatevicinityofaStateorlocallyidentifiedheritageobjectorgroupofobjects.
‘Stop the Clock’ ProvisionsTheSustainablePlanningActmustbalancetheneedforaproperandthoroughbuttimelyassessmentofapplications.Currently,assessmentperiods,beingthetimewithinwhichadevelopmentapplicationmustbeassessed,aresetbyregulation116.Thecommencementoftheassessmentperiodistwodaysafterthedevelopmentapplicationislodged117.Applicationsaretakentoberefusedifaconsentauthorityhasnotdeterminedtheapplicationwithintheassessmentperiod118.Afterthattime,theapplicantmayappealtotheLandandEnvironmentCourtonthebasisofa‘deemedrefusal’119.TheCourtthenundertakesameritassessmentanddeterminestheapplication.However,incertaincircumstances,aconsentorconcurrenceauthoritymayrequestadditionalinformationfromtheapplicantand,duringthisphase,theassessmentperiodistakentohavestopped120.
Allowingthe‘clock’tobestoppedbyaconsentauthoritywhenundertakingassessmentofmeritandimpactassessableproposalstopermitarequestforfurtherinformationprovidesforproperdecisionmaking,whilenotundulyholdingupthedecisionmakingperiod.Provisionstopermitthisshouldbecontinued,butlimitedtoonerequestonly.
Theassessmentperiod‘clocks’shouldberestartediftheapplicantprovidestheinformationtotheconsentauthority,notifiestheconsentauthoritythattheinformationwillnotbeprovidedorfailstoprovidetheinformationwithinareasonabletimeperiod.Thedevelopmentapplicationshouldbetakentoberefused,ifaconsentauthorityhasnotdeterminedtheapplicationwithintheextendedassessmentperiod.
Inaddition,theassessmentperiodshouldbeabletobestoppedattheapplicant’srequestforthepurposeofprovidingfurtherinformationtotheconsentorconcurrenceauthorityortomakerepresentationstoaconsentorconcurrenceauthorityatanytimebeforethedecisionismade.
116 Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000,clause113–40daysforgeneraldevelopment,60daysfordesignateddevelopmentandintegrateddevelopmentor90daysforStatesignificantdevelopment
117Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000,clause107
118Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979,section82
119Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979,section97(1)
120Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000,clauses54,60and112
6 The Sustainable Planning Act – additional matters
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012102
Recommendations159.Theconsentorconcurrenceauthority,whenundertakingassessmentofmeritand
impactassessableproposals,istobepermittedoneopportunitytorequestfurtherinformationfromtheapplicant,coupledwiththeabilitytonotifytheapplicantthattheassessmentperiodhasstopped.
160.Theassessmentperiod‘clock’istoberestartedonthedateofreceiptiftheapplicantprovidestheinformationtotheconsentorconcurrenceauthorityornotifiestheconsentorconcurrenceauthority(inwriting)thattheinformationwillnotbeprovidedorfailstoprovidetheinformationwithinareasonabletimeperiod.
161.Theapplicantisalsotobepermittedtheabilitytohaltthedecisionmakingperioduponwrittenrequest(thatcanbewithdrawn)inordertoprovidefurtherinformationortomakerepresentationstotheconsentauthorityoraboutaconcurrenceauthority’sresponse.
Verification of the stated development application valuesDuringcommunityforums,councilstaffinformedustheysuspectedthatthedeclaredprojectvalueindevelopmentapplicationswasoftenunderstatedtoreducetheapplicationfeepayable,particularlyforlargerscaledevelopments.Becauseofthis,aquantitysurveyor’scostcertificateshouldberequiredfordevelopmentwithaprojectvalueabovethejurisdictionthresholdofJointRegionalPlanningPanelsiftheassessingauthoritydisputestheprojectvalueestimate.
Recommendations162.ForprojectsfallingunderthejurisdictionthresholdofaJointRegionalPlanning
Panel,noquantitysurveyor’scertificaterelatingtoprojectvalueistoberequired.
163.ForprojectsabovetheJointRegionalPlanningPaneljurisdictionthreshold,theproponentistoberequiredtoprovideaquantitysurveyor’scostcertificate,iftheassessingauthoritydisputestheaccuracyofthestatedprojectvalue.
164.Ifthecertificateendorsestheapplicationvalue,thequantitysurveyor’sfeeistobedeductedfromtheapplicationfee.
165.Ifthecertificateshowsanapplication’svaluetobeunderstated,thecorrectfeeshallbepayableandthequantitysurveyor’sfeeisnottobeoffset.
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 103
PART 7 – The Land and Environment Court – additional mattersHearing from objectors during conciliation processes Duringtheconciliationphaseofthepresentconciliation/arbitrationmodel121,thereisnoentitlementforsubmitterstobeabletoexplaintheirposition.Theconciliationphaseshouldincorporatearightforthosewhomightobjectto(orsupport)aproposeddevelopmenttoexplaintheirreasons,ifrelevant,totheCommissionerduringtheconciliationprocess.Otherthanthisexplanatoryopportunity,objectorsorsupportersshouldnothaveanyrighttoparticipatein(butmayobserve)theconciliationphase.
Recommendation166.Duringtheconciliationphaseofconciliation/arbitrationproceedings,submittersare
tobeabletoexplaintheirpositionbutnottakeanyotherpartinthisphase.
Requiring concurrence authorities to defend their delay or refusalDuringthecourseofthecommunityforums,weweretoldonseveraloccasionsofinstanceswhereacouncilwishedtogivetimelyapprovaltoaproposeddevelopmentbutwasunabletodosobecauseofaninordinatedelayinreceivingcommentsand/orconditionsfromaconcurrenceauthority.Inanumberofinstancescited,thecouncilwasthenlefttodefendadeemedrefusalappealintheCourt.Insomeinstances,littleornoassistancewasprovidedbytheconcurrenceauthority,apartfromwhateveradvicehadbeengiven(iftherewasanactualrejectionoftheproposal).Inthesecases,thecouncilswereobligedtomeetanycostsofdefendingtheappeal,evenifonlythroughtheinitialproceduralstages.
Wherethenecessitytoincurlegalexpensesindefendingadeemedrefusalarisesfromeitherinactionbyaconcurrenceauthorityoritsdecisionnottograntaconcurrence,thereisjustificationforenablingtheconsentauthoritytoapplytotheCourttohavetherecalcitrantconcurrenceauthorityjoinedasarespondenttotheproceedings.Iftheconcurrenceauthorityweretobejoined,theconsentauthoritywouldbefreetodecidewhetheritwishedtocontestthesubstantiveissues.Joinderwouldleaveopportunitiesopen,ifappropriate,foreithertheapplicantortheconsentauthoritytoseekcostsordersiftheythoughtthatanyofthetestsenunciatedbyPrestonCJinKiama Council v Grant122weresatisfied,sothatitwasfairandreasonablefortheCourttomakesuchacostsorder.
Itisourviewthatthisprocesswouldbelocated,appropriately,intheLand and Environment Court Act 1979ratherthanintheSustainablePlanningAct.
121 Land and Environment Court Act 1979,section34AA
122Kiama Council v Grant (2006)143LGERA441
7 The Land and Environment Court – additional matters
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012104
Recommendation167.TheLand and Environment Court Act 1979istoprovidespecificallythataconsent
authoritymayapplytotheCourttohaveaconcurrenceauthorityjoinedasarespondenttoameritappeal.
Costs orders – application amendment during the appeal process Currently,ifaproponentwhohascommencedameritappealintheCourtseekstoamendtheirapplication,theCourtisrequired123tomakeacostsorder(infavouroftheconsentauthority)iftheamendmentsareotherthanminoramendments.Theorderistocompensatetheconsentauthorityfortheadditionalcoststhatare“thrownaway”bypermittingtheproposedamendments.
Priortoearly2011,amoreonerousmandatorycostsorderwasrequired–thatallcostsoftheconsentauthoritybepaiduptothetimeofgrantingleavetoamend.Thecurrentformoforderprovidesabalancedapproachtodealingwiththesematters–essentiallyreplicatingtheformerpracticeoftheCourttograntleavetoamendonlyifanundertakingwasgivenbytheapplicantthattheadditionalcostsoftheconsentauthorityinrespondingtotheamendmentswouldbemetbytheapplicant(eitheronanopenbasisorintermsofanagreedsum).Weconsiderthatthepresentcostsorderprovisionshouldberetained,withtheCourttodetermineonlyiftheamendmentsare‘minor’.
Recommendation168.Thecostsprovisionsofsection97Bofthepresentplanninglegislationaretobe
retainedbutincorporatedintheLand and Environment Court Act 1979.
Extension of orders able to be made in ‘remedy or restrain’ mattersCurrently,whentheLandandEnvironmentCourtissatisfiedthatabreachofthepresentplanninglegislationhasorwillbecommitted,thentheCourthasthepower124tomakeorderstoremedyorrestrainthebreach.IntheSustainablePlanningAct,theCourtshouldalsobegiventheexpresspowertomakeordersrequiring‘nameandshame’notificationsofthetypeprovidedforintheProtection of the Environment Operations Act 1997125.
123Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979,section97B
124Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979,section124
125Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997,section250(1)(a)and(b)
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 105
Recommendation169.TheSustainablePlanningActistogivetheLandandEnvironmentCourt,incivil
enforcementmatters,powertoenableittoorderpublicationnotificationsofthetypeprovidedinthe Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997.
Commissioners assisting Judges in Class 4 mattersCurrently,aJudgewhoishearingamatterinClasses1,2or3oftheCourt’sjurisdictioncanbeassistedbyaCommissionertoprovidetechnicaladvicetotheJudge,ifrequested.TheCommissionerperformsnoadjudicativefunction.SuchadvicemayalsobeusefultoaJudgedealingwithplanningmattersinClass4oftheCourt’sjurisdiction.TheChiefJudgeshouldbeabletoallocateaCommissionertoundertakethisroleinClass4mattersinvolvingtheSustainablePlanningAct.Further,thisreformmaybedesirableacrossallClass4matters.
Recommendations170.TheLand and Environment Court Act 1979istobeamendedsothat,inClass4
mattersinvolvingtheSustainablePlanningAct,CommissionersareabletositwithandassistJudges.
171.ConsiderationbegiventoextendingthistoallmattersinClass4oftheCourt’sjurisdiction.
Class 4 matters and related common law issues Arecentcase126intheLandandEnvironmentCourtinvolvedacombinationofissuesrelatingtothesamefactsandcircumstances.Theyconcernedbothsitecontaminationandcommonlawissues127.TheprimarymattersfellwithintheCourt’sClass1jurisdiction;however,itwasappropriateforaJudgeoftheCourttobeabletodealwiththeassociatedcommonlawissuesifitwererequired.Todothis,itwasnecessarytocommenceproceedingsintheSupremeCourtandtransferthemtotheLandandEnvironmentCourt.Althoughthesecircumstancesarerare,itisnotimpossiblethattheywillariseinthefutureinaplanningcontext.Inourview,ancillarycommonlawmattersrelatingtoplanningmattersintheCourt’sjurisdictionshouldbecommenceddirectlyintheLandandEnvironmentCourt.
ThiswouldavoidtheexpenseandcomplexityofcommencingcommonlawactionintheSupremeCourtandthentransferringittotheLandandEnvironmentCourttobringallrelevantmatterswithinonesetofproceedings.Ifthisrecommendationisacceptedforplanningmatters,itwouldalsoseemsensibletoconsideritsadoptionacrosstheCourt’sjurisdictiongenerally.
126 Jeffman Pty Ltd and Lawrence Dry Cleaners Pty Ltd v Environment Protection Authority of NSW, Sydney Water Corporation and Douglas and Hilary Hutchinson[2011]NSWLEC89atpara40
127 Forexample,anallegationofnuisance
7 The Land and Environment Court – additional matters
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012106
Recommendations172.TheLandandEnvironmentCourtAct1979istobeamendedsothat,inmatters
arisingintheCourt’sjurisdictionfromtheSustainablePlanningAct,ancillarycommonlawmattersareabletobecommencedintheLandandEnvironmentCourtandbroughtwithintheplanningproceedings.
173.ConsiderationbegiventoextendingthispositiontoallmattersintheCourt’sciviljurisdiction.
Revocation of development consentsCurrently,developmentconsentcanberevokedonalimitedrangeofgrounds,suchascorruptionoranapplicationtotheDirector-Generaldemonstratinggoodreasonwhytheconsentshouldnotbepermittedtocontinueinoperation128.Theyhavebeenrarelyinvokedandtherewerenoproposalsofsubstanceadvocatingthatthesepresentprovisionsberemoved.
However,itwassuggestedthatcouncilsshouldhaveanunlimitedrighttorevokeadevelopmentconsent,providedthatappropriatecompensationwaspaidtoreflectthelossoftheconsent.Thissuggestionaroseasaconsequenceofconcernthatacouncilshouldbeabletochangeitsmindabouttheacceptabilityorotherwiseofadevelopmentproposal–notjustonthebasisofsomeirregularity.Thus,itwouldactasanopportunityforthecounciltoreconsiderwhetherornotitwishedtoapprovetheparticulardevelopment,andallowittorescind(takeback)theapproval.
Toadoptsuchanopen-endedpropositionwouldimposeasignificantandunacceptableadditionaluncertaintyforlandwithadevelopmentconsent.Itwouldbecontrarytotheprincipleoffinalityindecisionmakingand,forthisreason,werejectit.
Althoughwedoconsiderthatitisappropriate,inextremecircumstances,fortheLandandEnvironmentCourttobeabletorevokeadevelopmentconsentasapenaltyarisingfromaprosecutionforaTier1offence.
Furthertotheabove,animportantelementofsentencingtheoryisthatitshouldprovidethewidestpossibleappropriaterangeofmethodsfordeterringunlawfulconduct.Whilstweacknowledgethatadevelopmentconsentrunswiththeland,inextremecircumstances,theCourtshouldhavearighttorevokeit.Weareoftheviewthatthisshouldonlyapplytoauseoftheland,ratherthanrevokingthelawfulnessofanystructuralworksthatmayhavebeenconstructedaccordingtothedevelopmentconsent.
Anexampleofcircumstancesthatmightgiverisetosucharevocationwouldbeiftherewereaconsenttousepremisesforthepurposesoftherapeuticmassageand,inthecourseofaprosecution,itwasestablishedthattheywerebeingusedhabituallyasabrothel,contrarytoconditionsofconsentforbiddingsuchause.Revocationofthedevelopmentconsentfortheusemightwellbeanappropriatedeterrentmessagetobesentinsuchcircumstances.
128Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979,section96A
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 107
Recommendation174.TheLandandEnvironmentCourtistobegiventheabilitytorevokeadevelopment
consentforuseoflandasadeterrentsentencingoptioninaprosecutionforaTier1offenceforabreachoftheSustainablePlanningActoranyregulationsmadeunderit.
Challenges to validity of development consentsThepresentplanninglegislationstatesthatachallengetothevalidityofdevelopmentconsentmustcommencebeforetheexpirationof3monthsfromthedateonwhichpublicnoticewasgiveninaccordancewiththeregulations129.However,itisestablishedthatthestructureofsection101ofthepresentplanninglegislationwillnotexcludeallchallengesafterthreemonths.Examplesarewhereproceedingstochallengeadevelopmentconsentoutsidethethreemonthtimelimitinclude,butarenotlimitedto,whereadecisionmakerhasexceededitsjurisdiction130orwheretherehasbeenadenialofproceduralfairness131.However,theLandandEnvironmentCourthaswidediscretion132astowhat(ifanything)shouldflowfromasuccessfulchallenge.
Recommendation175.Therighttochallengethevalidityofaconsentistoberetained(withretentionof
thepresenttimelimitandnotificationrequirements).
Costs orders in civil enforcement casesCurrently,theordinary‘costsfollowtheevent’ruleapplieswhenconsideringcosts,incasestakeninClass4oftheCourt’sjurisdiction133.ThisruleappliesunlesstheCourtissatisfiedthatthelitigationshouldbeconsidered‘publicinterest’litigation134,andisimportantenoughtowarrantavariationtotheordinaryrule.Conservationstakeholdershavesuggestedtousthatweshouldalterthebasisuponwhichcostsareconsideredinthesecases.
ThepresentChiefJudgeoftheCourthassetout135athreesteptestforconsideringwhethertheordinaryruleoncostsshouldbesetasideforthistypeoflitigation,andwhetheralessonerousornocostsordershouldbemade.
129 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979,section101andHoxton Park Residents Action Group Inc v Liverpool City Council[2011]NSWCA349;(2011)184LGERA104
130 R v Hickman; Ex Parte Fox(1945)70CLR589;Association for Berowra Creek Inc v The Minister for Planning & Anor [2003]NSWLEC38
131 Lesnewski v Mosman Municipal Council [2005]NSWCA99
132 Land and Environment Court Act 1979,section25B
133 Atpresent,costsareconsideredpursuanttotheopenstandingprovisionsinthepresentplanninglegislation(whichwehaverecommendedshouldberetained–seeVolume1atpage108).
134 Oshlack v Richmond River (1998)193CLR72
135 Caroona Coal Action Group Inc v Coal Mines Australia Pty Limited and Minister for Mineral Resources (No 3)[2010]NSWLEC59;(2010)173LGERA280
7 The Land and Environment Court – additional matters
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012108
Wedonotseeanynecessitytomandatechangetowhatis,inourview,anappropriatediscretionbeingconsideredinaproperlystructuredfashion,astheChiefJudgehasdescribed.Forthisreason,wedonotproposetorecommendanyalterationtothisposition.
Compliance costs/expensesCompliancecostsandexpensesareoneareathatwasofconcerntocouncils.Specifically,theyexpressedconcernaboutthecostsofundertakingcomplianceactivitieswherenofeeshadbeenpaidtofundsuchactivitiesandthattherewasnorecoveryavailabletothem.
ItispossiblefortheLandandEnvironmentCourttoorderwiderfinancialreimbursementthanmerelylegalcostsundertheprovisionsoftheProtection of the Environment Operations Act 1995whentherehasbeensuccessfulcomplianceactiontakenunderthatAct.TheCourtispermittedtomakeacosts/expensesorder136,infavouroftheenforcingbody,tocoverinvestigation/complianceexpensesincurredpriortotheinitiationoftheCourtaction.
Weconsiderthatthisbroaderscopetoorderreimbursementofcompliancecosts/expensesshouldbeprovidedforintheSustainablePlanningActforbothcivilandcriminalenforcement.TheavailabilityofthispowerwouldgivetherelevantCourtabroaderdiscretiontocompensatetheenforcementbodyforthefullrangeofcosts/expensesincurredbyit.
Recommendation176.Abroadercosts/expensesreimbursementordermakingpowershouldbeavailable
incivilandcriminalenforcementproceedingsbroughtundertheSustainablePlanningActtoenableorderstobemadetorequirethecompliance/investigationcosts/expensesoftheenforcingbodytobereimbursed.
136Protection of the Environment Operation Act 1997,section248
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 109109
PART 8 – Councils – additional mattersCouncil Order making generallyCurrently,councilshavethepowerunderthepresentplanninglegislationtoissuearangeofordersforcomplianceorcommunityprotection.Inordertodoso,thecouncilmustgivenoticeoftheintentiontoissueanorderandofthetermsoftheproposedorder.
Apersonorentityreceivingthisnotificationhastherighttomakesubmissionstothecouncilabout:
• whytheordershouldnotbemade• why,iftheorderismade,itshouldbemadeindifferenttermstothoseproposed.
Ifthecouncilthenmakesanorder,thereisarightofappealtotheLandandEnvironmentCourtwhichhaswidediscretionarypowerstoconfirmorvarytheorderortodischargeit.
Ingeneralterms,wedonotconsiderthatthereisanyneedtodepartfromthismodel.However,wemakethefollowingcomments:
• First,alltheordermakingprocessiscurrentlysetoutwithinthepresentplanninglegislation.Therefore,tomodifyoraddtotherangeofordersitisnecessarytoamendthelegislation–atimeconsumingprocess.TheneedforthiscouldbeavoidedifthetableoforderswerecontainedinregulationstotheSustainablePlanningAct(writteninaplaindrafting,narrativeform),whichwouldnotremoveParliamentaryscrutinyorpublicaccountability.OnlynecessaryelementsoftheordermakingpowershouldbeintheActitself,alsoinplaindrafting,narrativeform.
• Second,anumberofsuggestionsweremadeaboutadditionalordersthatshouldbeavailable.Someproposalswouldinvolvesignificantphilosophicshifts,suchasanabilitytoordercompletionofadevelopmentwhenitappearedtothecouncilthattherewasnoreasonableprobabilitythatthiswouldotherwiseoccur.Givingacouncilthepowertodosowouldbearadicalshiftandwedonotconsideritappropriate.Thisisbecausewehaveproposedachangetothetestfordeterminingwhetherornotadevelopmentconsenthaslapsedaftertheexpiryofsevenyears137whichprovidesasufficientresponsetothedesiretoensurethatdevelopment,oncecommenced,iscompleted.
• Third,othersuggestionsmerelyrecommendedchangesintheemphasisormodestexpansionofthescopeofthepresentorders–forexample,abroaderpowertoorderthecleanupofunsightlyproperty.Wedonotproposetocanvassthesesuggestionsindetail;however,itisdesirablethattherebeafocusedanddetailedreviewofalloftheorderscontainedinthepresentplanninglegislationtoensurethatthelanguageremainsrelevantandthatnoadditionalordersshouldbeadded.Thisreviewmustinvolvelocalgovernment,industryandthecommunity,butnotneedtobecompletedpriortothecomingintoeffectoftheSustainablePlanningActanditssupportingregulations(giventhelikelyheavyworkloadoftheDepartmenttoimplementtheplanningreform)asthepresenttablecanbeusedintheinterim.
137 SeeVolume1,PartC,Chapter14atpage113
8 Councils – additional matters
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012110
Recommendations177.Theessentialelementsforcouncilordermakingpowerscontainedinthepresent
planninglegislationistobecarriedintotheSustainablePlanningAct.Theremainderoftheordermaking,reviewandappealprocessesaretobecontainedinregulations.
178.TheregulationssupportingtheSustainablePlanningActaretoincludethepresenttableoforders(asaninterimmeasure)pendingtherecommendedreview.
179.Consistentwiththerecommendationsconcerningurgentapplicationstoshutdownunapprovedactivities,anadditionalorderistobeincludedinthetablepermittingthemakingoforderstorequiretheimmediatecessationofanyunapprovedactivitywherethereisademonstratedsignificantimpact(orpotentialimpact)onpublicamenity,healthorsafety.
180.TheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructureinconjunctionwithrepresentativesoflocalgovernment,thedevelopmentindustryandcommunityandenvironmentalnetworksaretoreviewtherangeoforderscontainedinthepresentorderstableandrecommendanychangesthatmightbemadetothatexistingtableoforders.
Drafting precision for ordersAfurthermatterthataroseduringtheconsultationprocessrelatedtothetechnicalaspectsofdraftingorders.Itwassuggestedtous,onanumberofoccasions,thatcouncilsfeltthenecessitytoconsulttheirsolicitorsonthedraftingofanorderpriortoissuingit.Evenso,whensuchcheckinghadoccurred,councilsstillfacedlegalchallenges.Itwassuggestedtousthatnewlegislationshouldmakespecificprovisionforanordertobevalidprovideditsintentionwasclear.Thiswouldensurethatchallengestoordersweredealtwithonthesubstantivemerits,ratherthanontechnicalitiesofdrafting.Althoughsuchaprovisionmightbeoflimitedutility,ifithadsomeeffectinreducinglitigationandlegalism,thiswouldbeadesirableoutcome.WethereforeproposethatsuchaprovisionbeincludedintheSustainablePlanningAct.
Recommendation181.TheSustainablePlanningActistoprovidethatanordershallnotbeinvalidif,
despiteanydefectsinitsdrafting,theintentionoftheorderisclearfromitsterms.
138 SeeVolume1,PartC,Chapter13atpage108
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 111
Strict liability penalty notice offence – false or misleading informationThepresentplanninglegislationincludesoffencesthatarisewhereapersonknowinglyprovidesfalseormisleadinginformation139ormakesfalseormisleadingstatements140.Suchoffencesrequirethattherequisitestateofmindmustbeprovedmakingasuccessfulprosecutiondifficult.
WeconsiderthattheseoffencesshouldremainasoffencesundertheSustainablePlanningActandshouldbecapable,inextremecases,ofbeingdealtwithasTier1offencesintheprosecutionregimewehaverecommended141.
However,wealsoconsideritappropriatethattherebealesserpenaltyabletobeimposedfortheprovisionoffalseorinaccurateinformationviaastrictliabilitypenaltynoticeoffencewithanappropriatepenalty.
Wedonotconsiderthatthereshouldbesuchastrictliabilitypenaltynoticeoffenceformisleadinginformation,aswhatmayormaynotbemisleadingcanbeasubjectivequestion,whereasaccuracyisdeterminedbyanempiricaltrue/falseanalyticalprocess.
Recommendations182.Anewpenaltynoticeoffenceistobecreatedfortheprovisionoffalseor
inaccurateinformation.
183.ThecircumstancesunderwhichsuchpenaltynoticesmaybeissuedaretobesetoutbytheDepartmentandcouncilsintheircomplianceandenforcementpolicies.
139Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979,section118N(1)(c)
140Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979,section122T(2)
141 SeeVolume1,PartC,Chapter13–Recommendation122
9 Enforcement policies
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012112
PART 9 – Enforcement policiesItisinevitablethatthoseresponsibleforenforcementundertheSustainablePlanningAct,whetheratthelocalorStatelevel,willneedtomakedecisionsaboutwhetherornotenforcementactionshouldbetaken.Thosedecisionswillreflectdaytodaydiscretions,atacomparativelylowlevel(bycouncilorDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructurecomplianceofficers)throughtomoresignificantdecisionsofwhetherornottocommenceaprosecutionineithertheLocalCourtortheLandandEnvironmentCourt.
ParticularlywithrespecttoprosecutionsintheLandandEnvironmentCourt,decisionsastowhetherornottoinitiateaprosecutionareofpotentialsignificancenotonlytothepotentialdefendantbutalsotothecommunity.Giventhattherewillalwaysbediscretionsexercisedindecisionsastowhetherornottoprosecuteorwhetherornottoundertakeenforcementbytheissuingofaninfringementnotice,itisdesirablethatthisprocessbepredictableandtransparent.TheonlywaythatthiscanoccurisifthereareclearandpubliclyavailableguidelinesthatsetparametersforexercisingenforcementdiscretionsthatcoverthespectrumfromwhetherapenaltynoticeshouldbeissuedthroughtowhetheraprosecutionforaTier1offenceshouldbecommenced.
Therefore,councilsandtheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructureshouldberequiredtoreviseexistingordevelopnewcompliance/enforcementpolicieswithamandatorypubliccommentperiodonthese.TheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructure’srevisedcompliance/enforcementpoliciesaretobesubjecttoMinisterialapprovalafteradviceisprovidedbythePlanningAdvisoryBoardontheirproposedterms.
Itislikely,forcouncils,thattherewouldbelocalvariationsinenforcementpolicies.However,itisdesirablefortheretobeasetofmodelguidelinesthatcouncilscouldconsiderandadapt.Inthisregard,theenforcementroleofcouncilsgoesbeyondmattersintheSustainablePlanningActandanyregulationsmadepursuanttoit.
Therefore,weproposethattheMinisterforPlanningandInfrastructurewritetotheMinisterforLocalGovernmentaskingthatthepanelreviewingtheLocal Government Act 1993 considerthatcouncilsmightdevelopacomprehensiveenforcementpolicycoveringthetotalityoftheirenforcementactivitiesratherthanmerelyrelatingtotheSustainablePlanningAct.Ifthisweretobethecase,itwouldbedesirablethatanymodelpolicyonthistopicbedevelopedonaco-operativebasisbetweentheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructure,theDivisionofLocalGovernmentandtheLocalGovernmentandShiresAssociationwithcommentstobesoughtfromappropriateindustryandconservationinterestsand,whenadraftwasavailable,fromthePlanningAdvisoryBoard.
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 113
Recommendations184.TheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructure’scomplianceandenforcement
policiesberevisedafterpassageoftheSustainablePlanningAct.
185.TherevisionistobeundertakenunderthesupervisionofthePlanningAdvisoryBoardwithimplementationtotakeplaceaftertheMinisterhasconsideredtheBoard’sadviceontheproposedrevisedpolicies.
186.TheMinisterforPlanningandInfrastructurewritetotheMinisterforLocalGovernmentaskingthatMinistertorequestthepanelreviewingtheLocal Government Act 1993toconsiderwhethercouncilsshoulddeveloporrevisecomplianceandenforcementofpoliciesofacomprehensivenature(notmerelyformattersarisingundertheSustainablePlanningAct).
10 Environmental Impact Statements
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012114
PART 10 – Environmental Impact StatementsIntroductionAnumberofparticipantsintheconsultationprocessexpressedconcernthatEnvironmentalImpactStatementsarepreparedbyconsultantswhoareselected,retainedandpaidbydevelopmentproponents.Assuch,itwassaidthatconsultantsactas‘hiredguns’andarenotindependent.
TheIssuesPapersetoutanumberofproposalsadvancedforaddressingtheseconcernsincluding:
• establishinganaccreditationsystemforconsultants• requiringafundingsystemtopermitcouncilsorcommunitygroupstoengageanexpertreviewer
• stipulatingthattheconsentauthoritymustengagetheconsultants,ratherthantheapplicant
• stipulatingthatallreportsmustbepeerreviewedbyexternallynominatedreviewers.
InsubmissionsrespondingtotheIssuesPaper,thosewhowere(orwerelikelytobe)proponentsofdevelopmentthatwouldrequireanEnvironmentalImpactStatement(ororganisationsrepresentingthem)resistedanychangetothepresentsystem.ThispositionwasalsotakenbythosewhoundertakethepreparationofexpertreportsforEnvironmentalImpactStatements.Thiswasnotonlybasedonunnecessaryadditionalcostanddelay,butalsoonwhatwassaidtobeanunjustifiedcriticismoftheprofessionalismandindependenceofthoseundertakingsuchinvestigationandreportingactivities.Unsurprisingly,councilandcommunityperspectivesreflectedadegreeofcynicismabouttheindependenceofandadequacyofworkdonebysuchconsultants.
Atpresent,ifitappearssufficientlyserioustowarrantsodoing,anassessingbody,whetheraCouncilortheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructureorsomeotherinstrumentality,cancommissionandpayfortheirownstudies.Exercisingthisoptionhappensonamodestlyfrequent,butbynomeansuniversalbasis.Muchmorerarely,butstilloccasionally,acommunitygroupwillengageanexperttoexaminesomeaspectofanEnvironmentalImpactStatementofconcerntothatgroup.Nothinginthenewlegislativeframeworkshouldrestricttheseoptions.
Requiringthattheconsentauthorityengagetheconsultantsornominatewhowouldbeacceptableconsultants,inourview,fundamentallymisunderstandsthenatureoftheprocessbeingundertaken.ItmaywellbethatanEnvironmentalImpactStatementprocesscouldleadtoadecisionnottomakeanapplication.Similarly,theprojectmaybesignificantlymodifiedasaconsequenceofstudiesbeingundertakenpriortothefinalisationoftheEnvironmentalImpactStatementprocess.Veryrealissuesofcommercialconfidentialityalsoariseifthefirstofthesecircumstancesoccursandnoprojectapplicationisactuallylodged.
Wearealsonotattractedtoestablishingafundingpoolcreatedbyalevyonprojectproponentstofundexternalexpertreviewersengagedbytheconsentauthorityor
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 115
communitygroups.Thereareinherentdifficultiesinestablishingsuchaschemewithsufficientfundingorestablishinganopenandtransparentprocessforselectingwhowouldhaveaccesstothatfundingpool.WearealsopersuadedthatthesignificantcostofpreparinganEnvironmentalImpactStatementforamajorproject(costthathasincreasedsignificantlysincethepresentplanninglegislationcameintoeffect,largelyasaresultofbetterscientificknowledgeofpotentialissuesthatrequireaddressing),wouldmakesuchalevyaneconomicdisincentivetoprojectproposals.Havingmadealloftheseessentiallynegativecomments,weshouldmakeitclearthatsomeimprovementonthepresentprocessisbothnecessaryanddesirableinordertoassistrestorepublicconfidenceinassessingmajorprojects.
Accreditation for those preparing an EIS or supporting studiesWehavereceivedawiderangeofsubmissionsproposingamandatoryaccreditationorcertificationsystemforconsultantspreparingEnvironmentalImpactStatements.Submissionsalsoopposedtotheintroductionofsuchasystem.Inthiscontext,weparticularlynotethecommentscontainedinthesubmissionfromtheNSWTreasury142onthistopic:
Section 3.2.9 Environmental Impact Statements
Environmental Impact Statements give consent authorities information and evidence on the environmental implications of a development. Information provided in the Statements includes impacts on water, threatened species, heritage and bushfires.
Information requirements should be streamlined where possible to minimise the regulatory burden on applicants. To improve the confidence of the system, planning reports should be provided by consultants or bodies that are pre-approved or certified by the Government.
Recommendation Seventeen: Consultants that provide Environmental Impact Statements should be chosen from an accredited panel, and required to meet certain standards regarding the impartiality and quality of their work.
Althoughthereareattractionstoit,suchanaccreditationsystemwouldhaveconsequenceswellbeyondmerelytheplanningsystem.Aswiththebuildingindustry143,itisbeyondthescopeofthisReviewtosuggestthenatureofsuchanaccreditationscheme(ifitweretobeestablished);whatbodyshouldundertaketheaccreditationprocess;andhowshouldthesystembemaintained(includingissuessuchasprofessionalindemnityinsurance,mandatorycontinuingprofessionaldevelopmentprograms,disciplinaryproceduresandthelike).
However,thesupportgiventoaccreditationbytheNSWTreasuryrendersitanideaworthyoffurtherexploration.Becauseofthis,wehaveconcludedthatitisappropriatetorecommendareferencebemadetotheLegislativeCouncilStandingCommitteeonStateDevelopmenttoinvestigatethismatter.
142 Seehttp://planningreview.nsw.gov.au/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=s0S5qGGKwiM%3d&tabid=119&mid=569
143 SeeVolume1,PartN
10 Environmental Impact Statements
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012116
Recommendation187.AreferenceistobegiventotheLegislativeCouncilStandingCommitteeonState
Developmenttoinvestigatewhetheranaccreditationsystemshouldbeadoptedforconsultantspreparingenvironmentalstudies(includingthosethatsupportEnvironmentalImpactStatements).
Carbon accountingIntheIssuesPaper,weasked144whethercarbonaccountingshouldhavearoleintheassessmentrequirementsfordevelopmentproposals.WehaveconcludedthatitisnotappropriatetospecifywhencarbonaccountingneedstobeaddressedinanEnvironmentalImpactStatement.Clearly,sucharequirementshouldonlybeincorporatediftherearesignificantpotentialgreenhousegasemissionissuesarisingfromtheprojectactivities(bothScope1and2),ratherthanfromjustdownstreamimpacts(Scope3)145.Wehavealsoconsideredwhetheritwouldbepossibletoprovidesomeguidanceonwhatmightbesucharequirement,butitisclearfromtheinformationavailablefromtheAustralianDepartmentofClimateChangeandEnergyEfficiencythatthecomplexityoftheprocessinvolvedisnotamenabletosimpleexplanation.Wehave,therefore,notattemptedtoprovideadefinitionbutsimplynotethatsucharequirementmay,fromtimetotime,beincorporatedinEnvironmentImpactStatementrequirementssetbytheDirector-GeneraloftheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructureforaproposedproject.
Director-General’s requirements for Environmental Impact StatementsCurrently,theDirector-GeneraloftheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructureissuesrequirementsforEnvironmentalImpactStatements.Ourrecommendeddevelopmentclassifications146meansthattheDirector-Generalwillneedtocontinuetoissuerequirementsforthepreparationofsuchstatementsforall‘impactassessable’developmentproposals.
Asweunderstandit,thereisasignificantdegreeofcommonalityinthestructureandcontentofsuchrequirements(althoughtherequirementsmayincorporatespecificmattersrelatingtotheproposal).ItisthereforepossibletopublishontheDepartment’swebsiteabroadtemplateofthosemattersoflikelystandardEnvironmentalImpactStatementelementsforvariousclassesofdevelopment.
Althoughweaccept,asdiscussedabove,thatitisnotappropriatetoremoveresponsibilityforthepreparationofEnvironmentalImpactStatementsfromprojectproponents(inpartforreasonsofcommercialconfidentiality),wedonotconsiderthattheissuingofDirector-General’srequirementsforthepreparationofanEnvironmentalImpactStatementraises
144QuestionD45atpage67
145 Seehttp://www.climatechange.gov.au/government/initiatives/national-greenhouse-energy-reporting/publication-of-data/understanding-nger-data.aspx
146 SeeVolume1,PartC,Chapter6
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 117
thesameconfidentialityissues.Asaconsequence,whentheDirector-GeneralissuesrequirementsforthepreparationofanEnvironmentalImpactStatement,thoserequirementsshouldbemadepublic.Thisconstitutesarelevantelementofour‘righttoknow’approach.
Finally,weconsiderthatthereshouldbearightofappealtotheLandandEnvironmentCourtagainsttheserequirements,ifthepotentialdevelopmentapplicantconsidersthattheyareinappropriate.
Recommendations188.IssuingofDirector-General’srequirementsforpreparationofEnvironmentalImpact
StatementsistoberetainedintheSustainablePlanningAct.
189.Totheextentthatitispossible,theDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructureistopublishonitswebsiteatemplateoftheDirector-General’srequirementsforthepreparationofanEnvironmentalImpactStatementfordevelopmentproposals.
190.AnyDirector-General’srequirementsissuedforapossibledevelopmentaretobemadepubliclyavailableontheDepartment’swebsitetogetherwithidentificationoftheareaencompassedbythepossibledevelopment.
191.ThereistobearightofappealtotheLandandEnvironmentCourtbyapotentialprojectproponenttochallengetheDirector-General’srequirements.
Reviews of Environment Impact StatementsWeconsideritappropriatethattherebeanopportunityforanauthorityassessinganEnvironmentalImpactStatementtorequireapeerreviewofanyfacetofthesubmittedmaterial,attheproponent’sexpense.Theprocessfornominatingwhoistoconductthepeerreviewistobebytheassessingauthoritynominatingapanelofthreepeerreviewers,andtheproponentacceptingoneofthose.Thepeerreviewingroleistobeanalogoustotheroleofasingleparty’sexpertinCourtproceedings,whereallcommunicationwiththepeerreviewerbyeithertheassessingbodyortheproponentistobedisclosedtotheother.Thepeerreviewer’sreportistobeavailabletobothandpublishedontheassessingbody’swebsite.
Thisprocessshouldnotbeestablishedasanopen-endedonetopermitassessingauthoritiesautomaticallyrequiringeveryreporttobepeerreviewedand,ineffect,obtainingasecondopinionabouteverything.Toprovidepropercontrol,theDirector-General’sconsentistoberequired.AnyproposalforapeerreviewduringanyDepartmentalassessmentistobereferredtotheChairpersonofthePlanningCommissiontobeconsideredonthepapers.
Wedonotenvisagethatanypeerreviewwillinvolveadditionalfieldwork.Itistobeconfined,simply,toareviewofthedocumentation,withthepeerrevieweraccessingoriginalfielddataifnecessary.
Wedonotconsiderthatanysignificantextensionshouldbemadetothepermittedassessmentperiodsfordevelopmentswherethisprovisionmightbetriggered,butanadditionalperiodof five working daysshouldbeadded.Peerreviewingshouldonlybeabletobeinvokedonce(althoughmaybeabletobeinvokedconcerningmorethanoneaspectoftheapplicationoritssupportingmaterial)sothatthereisonlyasingleextensionoftimetotheassessmentperiod.
10 Environmental Impact Statements
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012118
Wearealsomindfulofthefactthatthisisanentirelynewstepintheprocessesthatwillbeavailable,formally,withintheassessmentprocessformajorprojects.Asaconsequence,weconsiderthatthisreformneedstobeapproachedwithsomecautiontoensurethatitisnotoverusedandcausessignificantunnecessaryworkorexpenseforproponents.Asaconsequence,thisreformistobeimplementedbyregulation,reviewedafter12monthsandfinetuned,ifrequired.
Recommendations192.Assessingauthoritiesaretobepermittedtorequirepeerreviewingofreportsor
informationprovidedinsupportofanEnvironmentalImpactStatement.
193.Peerreviewingcanonlyberequestedononeoccasionbutmayberequestedonmorethanoneaspectoftheproposal.
194.ForproposalsbyassessingauthorityotherthantheDepartmentofInfrastructureandPlanningforpeerreviewing,theconcurrenceoftheDirector-Generalistobeobtained.
195.WhentheassessingauthorityistheDepartment,suchrequestshallbereferredtotheChairpersonofthePlanningCommissiontobedealtwithonthepapers.
196.Theassessingbodiesseekingthepeerreviewshallnominatethreeproposedpeerreviewersfromwhichtheprojectproponentcanselectthereviewertobecommissioned.
197.Thepeerreviewingistobeundertakenattheproponent’sexpense.
198.Ifpeerreviewingisrequired,anadditionalperiodoffiveworkingdaysshallbeaddedtothestatutoryassessmentperiodfortheproject.
199.Theresultsofanypeerreviewaretobepublishedontheassessingauthority’swebsite.
200.Thisprocessistobegiveneffectbyregulationsothatitcanbereviewedaftertheexpiryof12months.
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 119
PART 11– Former Aboriginal reserves and missionsInVolume1147,wenotedthat59formerAboriginalreservesandmissionsthroughouttheStatehavenotbeenbroughtappropriatelywithinthepresentplanningsystem.WeconsiderthatdealingwiththesereservesandmissionsisafundamentalissueofsocialjusticefortheAboriginalpeoplegenerallyandfortheAboriginalcommunitieslivingonorassociatedwiththesesitesinparticular.Itmay,however,takesomeconsiderabletimetofinalisethelastofthemthroughtheprocessthatweenvisage.
Thisissuehasbeencanvassedwithusintwosubmissions148fromtheNewSouthWalesAboriginalLandCouncil.Thesesubmissionsidentifyanumberofissuesconcerningthesereservesandmissionsandtheirpresentexclusionfromtheordinaryprocessesthatmightbeexpectedtohavebeenappliedthroughthepresentplanninglegislation.Thesedifferentlytreatedparcelsoflandremain,infact,relicsofthecolonialera-treatmentofAboriginalpeople.Asaconsequence,weconsiderthatthisdefectwarrantsrectification.TheNewSouthWalesLandCouncilmadethefollowingfiverecommendationsinitssecondsubmission149:
• A new planning system must recognise and acknowledge the historical existence and cultural significance of Aboriginal settlements on former reserves and missions as a standalone type of development.
• A planning approvals process should be established that acknowledges the state significance of these sites in order to overcome the current barriers that are hindering these sites from becoming recognised as part of the NSW planning system, and re-integrate these sites into the NSW planning system without undue expense.
• A specific state-level approval process and consent authority for development proposals should be established relating to former reserves and missions to ensure a coordinated approach.
• Any proposed programs or legislative mechanisms to address former Aboriginal reserves and missions should be developed in partnership and close consultation with NSWALC and affected Local Aboriginal Land Councils.
• Timelines must be negotiated with NSWALC and relevant LALCs to allow enough time for genuine consultation to occur, and ensure that any potential adverse impacts are minimised (e.g. other operational requirements of LALCs; timeframes related to social housing schemes imposed by the Housing Office; funding from external sources).
Wehaveconsidered,notmerelythesefiverecommendations,butalsomorebroadlyhowtheseissuesshouldbedealtwithwithinareformedplanningsystem.WetakethefourthandfifthoftheNewSouthWalesLandCouncil’srecommendations,beforeturningtoconsiderhowthedecision-makingprocesseswilldealwiththeseparcelsofland.
147 Volume1,PartJ,page135
148 Seehttp://planningreview.nsw.gov.au/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=-PKqycR35oQ%3d&tabid=105&mid=516andhttp://planningreview.nsw.gov.au/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=xNLWc_oTltg%3d&tabid=119&mid=569
149 Seehttp://planningreview.nsw.gov.au/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=xNLWc_oTltg%3d&tabid=119&mid=569
11 Former Aboriginal reserves and missions
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012120
ItisclearthattheremustbesignificantconsultationwiththeNewSouthWalesLandCouncil,eachrelevantLocalAboriginalLandCouncilandthelocalgovernmentcouncilwithinwhoseareaeachformerAboriginalreserveormissionislocated.IntegrationmustbeachievedinafashionthatrealisticallyrecognisestheirpresentusesandtheaspirationsoftheAboriginalcommunitiesthatliveonorareassociatedwiththesesites.Itisonlyifthereisanagreedconsultationprocess,includingsufficienttimeforaffectedcommunities–bothAboriginalandnon-indigenous–tocommentonandparticipateintheprocess,thatthereisanyrealisticprospectofsignificantprogressbeingmadeinintegratingthesesitesintotheconventionalland-useplanningsystem.
Itisequallycleartousthatitmustbeameasuredapproach,stagedovertime,sothatitisabletobeaccommodatedwithintheprocesseswerecommendbelowandwithintheresourcesavailabletothosebodiesandcommunitieswhichneedtobeinvolved.Inrecognitionofthis,anindicativesequencinglistshouldbenegotiatedfortheproposedintegrationprocessesbythefollowingbodies:
• theDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructure• theNewSouthWalesAboriginalLandCouncil(withthisCouncilinvolvingrelevantLocalAboriginalLandCouncilsasitconsidersappropriateforsequencing)
• theLocalGovernmentandShiresAssociation(togetherwithsuchcouncilsastheAssociationconsidersappropriateinthesesequencingdiscussions).
ItmayalsobeappropriatetoinvolvetheOfficeofLocalGovernment–giventhatissuesrelatingtowhetherornottheoutcomesoftheprocessmightrequirearevisitingoftherelevantprovisions150relatingtocouncilratesonlandownedbyaLocalAboriginalLandCounciland,ifso,underwhatcircumstances.
Historically,theissuesarelegaciesoftheactionorinactionofStategovernmentsratherthanoflocalgovernments.Asaconsequence,whenaworkplanemergesfromthesequencingdiscussions,theassessmentprocessestobeundertakenshouldbeprojectsfortherelevantregionalofficeoftheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructure.Giventhenatureoftheseissuesandtheirhistorystretchingbacktothe19thcentury,wedonotconsideritappropriatethattheDepartmentchargesanyapplicationfeesforundertakingthisprocess.TheDepartment’sprocessshouldbeonethatisfacultativewithaninitialconsultationprocesstodevelopaworkprogramthatidentifiesthefollowing:
• thenatureoftheinformationrequired• thenatureofanyapplicationappropriatetoproceedtothePlanningCommission.
Whenanassessmenthasbeenundertaken,thepointshouldbereachedwheretherecanbesomeformofpublicprocessundertakenbythePlanningCommissionholdingpublichearingsandmakingadeterminationaboutanapplicationormakingrecommendationstotheMinisteronhowamattershouldproceedfurther.
150Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983,Part2Division5andAboriginal Land Rights Regulation 2002,Part2clause7
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 121
Recommendations201.TheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructure,theNewSouthWalesAboriginal
LandCouncil(withthisCouncilinvolvingrelevantLocalAboriginalLandCouncilsasitconsidersappropriateforsequencing),andtheLocalGovernmentandShiresAssociation(togetherwithsuchcouncilsastheAssociationconsidersappropriateinthesesequencingdiscussions)aretodevelopanindicativesequencinglistforintegratingAboriginalreservesandmissionsintothenewplanningsystem.
202.IfthesepartiesconsidereditappropriateandtheOfficeofLocalGovernmentindicatedawishtoparticipate,theOfficeofLocalGovernmentisalsotobeinvolvedinthesequencingdiscussions.
203.ForeachformerAboriginalreserveormission,theassessmentprocessistobeundertakenbytherelevantregionalofficeoftheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructure.
204.TheDepartment’sprocessistobefacultativeandincludeidentifyingthenatureoftheinformationrequiredandtheappropriateformthatanapplicationmighttaketoeffectintegrationofthelandsbeingassessedintothenewplanningsystem.
205.WhenanassessmentofanyformerAboriginalreserveormissionhasbeencompleted,thereistobeapublicprocessundertakenbythePlanningCommission,eitherholdingpublichearingsandmakingadeterminationonanyapplicationthatmayhavebeenmadearisingfromtheassessmentprocessorholdingpublichearingsandmakingrecommendationstotheMinisteronhowthatmattershouldproceedfurther.
206.TheDepartmentisnottochargeanyfeeforundertakingthisprocess.
12 Community Engagement
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012122
PART 12 – Community EngagementThisPartdiscussessomeadditionalmatterswherewethinkthatgreaterengagementofthecommunitywiththeplanningsystemcanbefacilitated.
Assisting with the “right to know”InVolume1,wehavediscussed151theopportunitiestousenewelectronicmedianotifications,drawingtheattentionofthosewhohaveexpressedinterestinaparticulartopictothefactthatnewmaterialmayhavebecomeavailable.Fundamentally,theplanningsystemshouldnotregardinformingthecommunityasapassiveprocess–itneedstobeanactiveanddynamiconereachingoutratherthanrelyingonthosewhoareinterestedtohuntforandfindinformationontopicswithwhichtheywishtobeengaged.
WealsorecommendedinVolume1152thattherebeacontinuingprofessionaldevelopmentprogramforthoseinvolvedinland-useplanningintheStateandlocalgovernmentsectors.Weconsiderthatasignificantelementinthateducationmustinvolveuseofevolvingcommunicationtechnologiesandhowthesecanbeusedtocommunicatewiththecommunity.
Recommendation207.ThecontinuingprofessionaldevelopmentworkinggrouprecommendedinVolume
1PartIistoincorporateamoduleonopportunitiesforactivecommunicationwiththecommunityintheprogramthattheydevelop.
Precinct committeesAnumberofurbancouncilshaveestablishedprecinctcommitteesforinterestedcommunitygroupsorindividualsinanidentifiedlocalitytoprovideguidanceonissuesaffectingalocalityoronbroaderpolicyissues.Theirroleisrelevantforstrategicplanning,localland-useplanning,localiseddevelopmentcontrolpreparation,anddevelopmentproposalassessmentactivitiesofacouncil.Althoughweacknowledgethevaluableroleofthesecommittees,wedonotconsideritappropriatetocontemplateanyformofstatutoryrecognitionintheSustainablePlanningActforthesebodies.
Weconsiderthatcouncils,particularlyinurbanareaswhereprecinctcommitteeshavenotbeenestablished,shouldbeencouragedtoconsidersuchastructure.Toassistinthisprocess,itisdesirableaplainEnglish,bestpracticeguidebepreparedontheestablishment,rolesandoperationofprecinctcommitteesandprovidedtourbancouncilsorprovincialcitycouncils.Obviously,inthepreparationofsuchaguide,thosecouncilspresentlyoperatingsuchcommitteescanprovidevaluableassistance,aswouldboththeOfficeofLocalGovernmentandtheLocalGovernmentandShiresAssociation.
151 SeeVolume1,PartHatpages130-10
152 SeeVolume1,PartIatpage133
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 123
Recommendations208.TheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructureistoconveneaworkinggroup
comprisingrepresentativesoftheOfficeofLocalGovernmentandtheLocalGovernmentandShiresAssociationandrepresentativesofthosecouncilscurrentlyoperatingaprecinctcommitteesystemwishingtobeinvolvedintheworkinggroup.
209.ThetaskoftheworkinggroupistoproduceaplainEnglishguidetobestpracticeintheestablishment,rolesandoperationofprecinctcommittees.
Project identification on the Department’s websiteCurrently,informationregardingmajorprojectsismadeavailableontheDepartment’swebsite(calledtheMajorProjectsRegister)153.Unfortunately,findinginformationonaprojectrequirestextsearches–notbyusingvisualoptionssuchasmapsorimages.Inordertoadvancethe‘righttoknow’,informationshouldbeaccessedviabothtextsearchesandinteractivevisualmeans(suchasusedbyusduringourconsultationprocess154).Azoom-infunctionwouldberequiredintheSydneymetropolitanareaortheHunterValley,wheretheremightbeanumberofprojectsincloseproximity.
Recommendation210.TheDepartment’swebsiteistoincludeaninteractivemaptofacilitateaccessto
informationconcerningallprojectsbeingassessedbytheDepartment.
153 Seehttp://majorprojects.planning.nsw.gov.au/page/
154 Seehttp://planningreview.nsw.gov.au/ConsultationProcess/CommunityForumMap/tabid/89/Default.aspx
13 Other reform measures
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012124
PART 13 – Other reform measuresInVolume1155,weproposedtwoothermajormeasurestoreformtheplanningsystem(establishingaPlanningAdvisoryBoardandaddressingcopyrightissues).Thefollowingarethreeotherareasofreformthataredesirable.
Planning in the unincorporated area of the StateTheunincorporatedareaofNewSouthWalescomprisesapproximately29percentoftheState.Currently,theWesternLandsCommissionerhaslimitedsupervisoryresponsibilityforplanninginthisarea,withsignificantprojects,triggeredbyStateEnvironmentalPlanningPolicies,fallingwithinthejurisdictionoftherelevantJointRegionalPlanningPanel.
Wehaverecommendedthataunitaryplanningdocument156applyinallareaswherethereisarelevantlocalgovernmentbodyresponsibleforlocalplanningmatters.Currently,thereisnodocumentrelatingtotheunincorporatedareathatwouldcompriseeitherofthesecondandthirdelements157ofsuchunitaryplanningdocument.AlthoughmanagementofSilverton,forexample,isvestedinatrust,thereisnoenvironmentalplanninginstrumentthatsetstheframeworkforanyplanningactivitiesthatmightbeappropriateforthatvillage.
Muchofthedevelopmentthatwilltakeplaceinthevillagesintheunincorporatedareawouldfallwithinwhatwillordinarilybecategorisedasexemptorcodeassessabledevelopment.Developmentonagricultural/pastoralholdingswouldbesimilar–aslongascareistakeninsituatingthemrelativetoephemeralwatercourses,vegetationandpermanentwaterstorages.
Nonetheless,thereshouldbeaLand-UsePlanfortheunincorporatedareatogetherwithanaccompanyingDevelopmentControlPlan.BoththesedocumentsmaybeofcomparativelymodestscopebutmustprovideappropriateguidancetothoselivingorundertakingactivitieswithinthisvastareaoftheState.TheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructureshouldtakeresponsibilityforthepreparationofthesetwodocumentsinconjunctionwiththeWesternLandsCommissionerandinconsultationwiththeWesternLandsAdvisoryCouncilandotherbodieswithaninterestinthisarea.
Recommendations211.TheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructureistoprepareaLocalLand-UsePlan
andDevelopmentControlPlanfortheunincorporatedarea.TheseplansaretobepreparedinconjunctionwiththeWesternLandsCommissionerandinconsultationwiththeWesternLandsAdvisoryCouncil,theNewSouthWalesMineralsCouncil,theNationalParksandWildlifeServiceandanyboardsofmanagementofAboriginal-ownedandjointly-managedNationalParksintheunincorporatedarea.
155 SeeVolume1,PartKfrompage136
156 SeeVolume1,PartC,Chapter5atpage51
157ALocalLand-UsePlanandaDevelopmentControlPlan
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 125
212.TheconsentauthorityfordevelopmentproposalsintheunincorporatedareaistobetheWesternLandsCommissioner,withthefollowingexceptions:codeassessableCrowndevelopment,developmentthatwillfallwithinthejurisdictionofaJointRegionalPlanningPanelordevelopmentthatwillfallwithinthejurisdictionofthePlanningCommission.
213.TheconsultationprocessforthedevelopmentoftheLand-UsePlanfortheunincorporatedareaistoincludespecificconsultationsabouttherangeofmattersthatcanberegardedascodeassessabledevelopmentswithinthisplanningframework,particularlyonpastoralholdings.
Revitalisation of the Newcastle Central Business DistrictTheissueofminesubsidencerisksanditactingasabarriertoredevelopmentoftheNewcastleCentralBusinessDistrictwasaspecificissueraisedwithusduringtheconsultationprocess.TheIssuesPapersetthisoutat18.5 Aggregated developments in mine subsidence areas.Weasked:
D130. Is it appropriate to consider, in legislation for a new planning system, providing a statutory basis for spreading the cost of a necessary rehabilitation or stabilisation measure across all property ownerships benefited by such a measure?
Wehaveconsideredcarefullywhetherweshouldaddressthistopic,asitisaveryspecificplanningissue.However,wehaveconcludedthatweshoulddosobecauseoftheeconomicimportanceofNewcastleasthenorthernendofwhatisincreasinglybecomingtheintegratedconurbationofNewcastle,SydneyandWollongonganditsroleasgatewaytotheHunterValley.
Indoingso,wenotethatNewcastleCityCouncil’ssubmissionsupportedthepropositionthatthereshouldbeastatutorybasisforrecoveringthecostofnecessaryrehabilitationandstabilisationmeasuresfromallbenefitedpropertyowners.Itseems,attheleast,thatitisnecessarythatsuchaschemeoperatebyacombinationofmeasurestoidentifytheplanningandgeographiccontextforfundingpreventativeworks,viatheMinesSubsidenceBoard,soastoencouragea‘first-moving’re-developmentprojectwithinthescheme’sarea.
Asaconsequence,weproposethattheSustainablePlanningActpermitidentificationoftheareawithinwhichsuchaschemecanoperate;theplanningprocessforthepotentialminesubsidenceconsequencesthatwouldneedtobeaddressedforsucharedevelopment;andtheextenttowhichthoseworkswouldneedtoextendwithintheboundariesofadjacentproperties,whetherpubliclyorprivatelyowned.Worksthatextendedunderadjacentpropertiesinprivateownershipwouldneedtobeabletobeundertaken(ifowners’consentwerenotgivenforthoseworks)byremovaloftherequirementforowners’consentbeingrequired.Asthisispotentiallycontroversial,weproposethatanysuchschemenotcomeintoeffectuntilafteranextensiveconsultationprocessisundertakenwithpropertyownersintheareaidentifiedforsuchascheme.
13 Other reform measures
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012126
Itwillalsobenecessarytofundthoseelementsoftheworksfortheredevelopmentofanyparticularsitethatfalloutsidetheboundariesofasite.TheonlypossiblesourceoffundingthatweareabletoidentifyisfromtheMinesSubsidenceBoardwiththeBoardrecoupingthefundsfromotherbenefitedprivatelandholdersatthetimeofredevelopment.
Althoughthepossibilityofestablishingsuchaschemeraisescomplexissues,weconsideritdesirablethataframeworkbeestablishedintheSustainablePlanningAct.However,wedonotenvisagethattheschemewouldbecomeoperationaluntiltherehadbeencloseconsultationwithpropertyowners,theMinesSubsidenceBoardandNewcastleCityCounciltoidentifyanyareathatwouldbeencompassedandhow,inapracticalsense,itwouldoperate.
InadditiontoincorporationoftheaboveproposedfacultativeprovisionsintheSustainablePlanningAct,amendmentsmayneedtobemadetotheMinesSubsidencelegislation,atafuturetime,topermitaschemetobecomeoperational.Thismaywellprovideanappropriatefurtherbasisforgovernmentconsiderationofsuchaproposalpriortoitsimplementation.
Recommendations214.TheSustainablePlanningActtoincludeparticularprovisionsfacilitating
establishmentofaschemetoencourageredevelopmentofminesubsidenceareasidentifiedwithintheNewcastleCentralBusinessDistrict.Theseprovisionsaretopermitaschemetobeabletobeimplementedtoallowtheproposedredevelopmenttoproceed,withoutowners’consentbeinggivenbyownersofpropertiesadjoininganypropertyproposedtoberedevelopedorwheretheadjoiningpropertieswouldrequiretohavesubsidencepreventionmeasuresundertakenunderthem.
215.AssuchprovisionsmayalsohavewiderapplicationthanmerelyNewcastle,theyaretobedraftedingeneralterms.
216.TheselegislativeprovisionsarenottocomeintoeffectuntiltheGovernmentissatisfiedthatanappropriateschemefordoingsohasbeendevelopedbytheDepartmentofPlanningandInfrastructure,inconjunctionwithlandholderinterestsintheidentifiedarea,NewcastleCityCouncilandtheMinesSubsidenceBoard.
Transferable development rights to agricultural landIntheIssuesPaper,weposedquestions158relatingtotransferabledevelopmentrightsforagriculturalland.Discussionduringournon-metropolitancommunityforumsonthistopiccentredontheabilityoffarmerstoaccessthevalueoftheirfarm(astheirsuperannuation)andretirefromfarmingbypassingthefarmtoafuturegenerationofthesamefamily.
158 InSectionD2.5atpage55
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 127
Oneproposalconcernedexistingagriculturalholdingswithmorethanoneexistingorpotentialdwellingentitlement.Theproposalwasthatitshouldbepossibletorealisethevalueofextradwellingentitlementswithoutfragmentingthelandholdingbydoingthefollowing:
• transferringtheadditionaldwellingentitlementtoanexistingallotmentatanotherlocation
• extinguishingthatdwellingentitlementontheagriculturallandholding.
This,itwassuggested,hadtwopotentialbenefitstoexistingrurallandholders:• landholderswhowishtoretirecouldtransferadwellingentitlementtoanallotmentwithoutoneclosertoanearbytownship.Thiswouldmakeitmoreeconomicallyefficient,asitwouldcostsignificantlylesstoacquirethenewallotment.
• existinglandholderscouldselladwellingentitlementtotheownerofanallotmentthatdidnothaveone.Thiswouldpotentiallyprovideacashbenefittotheexistinglandholders,whichcouldeithersupportongoingagriculturalactivitiesorprovideafinancialbasisfortheoldergenerationtomoveoffthelandholdingandtransferittoanewgenerationinthesamefamily.
ThisconceptwouldneedconsiderablefurtherdevelopmentbeforeitcouldbeconsideredforincorporationintotheSustainablePlanningAct.Thelegislativeamendmentsthatmightneedtobemadetootherstatutes(suchastheReal Property Act 1900)arepotentiallycomplex.Equally,difficultissuescouldariseforcouncilswhenassessingthecompetingvaluesthatwouldrequireconsideration.
Asaconsequence,atthepresenttime,wedonotrecommendthatsuchrightsshouldbecreated.However,wedoconsiderthatfurtherworkiswarranted.Tothisend,werecommendthataworkingpartyshouldexplorethismatterfurtherandmakerecommendationstotheMinisterforPlanningandInfrastructureastowhetheranyfurtherlegislativechangesarerequired.
Recommendation217.AworkingpartyistobeestablishedcomprisingrepresentativesoftheDepartment
ofPlanningandInfrastructure,theLocalGovernmentandShiresAssociationandtheNewSouthWalesFarmersAssociationtoconsiderwhethercreatingtransferabledevelopmentrightsforagriculturallandisfeasibleanddesirableand,ifso,howitshouldbeimplemented.
14 Certification matters
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012128
PART 14 – Certification mattersThe role of private certifiers
IntroductionAspartofearlierchangestothewaydevelopmentisinspectedforconformitywithbuildingstandardsandforcompliancewiththedevelopmentforwhichanapprovalhadbeengiven,theexclusivevestingofcompliancecertificationwasremovedfromcouncils.Asystemestablishingcertificationbyprivateprofessionals(contractedonaprojectbyprojectbasis)wasestablished.Thisprivatecertificationoptionrunsinparallelwiththecouncil-basedsystem.Anelectionismadebythoseundertakingthedevelopmentofwhethertheywishtoappointaprivateprofessionalcertifierorretainthecounciltoundertaketherole(ineithercaseknownasthe‘principalcertifyingauthority’).Inaddition,aclassofdevelopment,presentlyknownascomplyingdevelopment,isabletobeapprovedbyanon-council,privatecertifier.
Widespreaddistrustwasexpressedaboutprivatecertificationduringthecourseofthecommunityforumsandinanumberofsubmissions.Wehavenowayofevaluating,accurately,theextenttowhichtheremightbevalidityinthesecomplaints.Ithasnotbeenappropriateforustomakebroadrecommendationsaboutregulationofthebuildingindustryortheregulationofanddisciplinaryproceduresforcertifiers.Thereare,however,somemattersconcerningtheroleofcertifiers,bothprivateandcouncil,whereitisappropriateforustomakerecommendations.
Consistency of construction plans with development approvalWheredevelopmentisbeingundertakeninaccordancewithadevelopmentconsent,theprincipalcertifyingauthorityisrequiredtocertifythatthedetailedworkingplans(pursuanttowhichconstructionistobeundertaken)arenotinconsistentwiththedevelopmentconsent159grantedbytheconsentauthority.ThesearecurrentlyknownastheConstructionCertificatePlans.TheseareaccompaniedbyaConstructionCertificateauthorisingthecarryingoutoftheworksshowninthoseplans.
Thismeansthatacertifieroughtnotpermitanyvariation,savewhatmightberegardedasminorandnon-impacting,fromtheplansforwhichdevelopmentconsentwasgrantedbythecouncil.InVolume1,werecommended160thattheonlychangestobepermittedtoconstructionplans(whencomparedtotheplansforwhichdevelopmentconsentwasgiven)aretobespecifiedasbeingminorchanges(withthisrequirementtobecontainedintheSustainablePlanningAct).
Thischangewilladdressthevalidconcernthatasmallminorityofcertifierspermitvariationsthatareotherwiseimpermissible.Restatingthetestinamorerestrictedfashionshouldprovidegreatercertaintyforensuringcompliance.
159 Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000,clause145(1)(a)
160 Volume1,PartC,Chapter14atpage112
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 129
Separation of granting consent and certification during constructionEarlierinthisVolume161,werecommendedthattherolesofgrantinganapprovalforcodeassessabledevelopmentfornewfreestandingordualoccupancyresidentialdwellingsshouldbeseparatedfromandnotabletobeperformedbythesamepersonwhoperformstheconstructioninspection(orapartnerofthatpersonoranybodyemployedbythesamecommercialentity).
Wehaverestrictedthistonewfreestandingordualoccupancyresidentialdwellingsasthiswasthedominantareaofcomplaint.Ifthereistobeawiderreviewofthebuildingindustry,thequestionofwhetherthisrestrictionshouldbeexpandedmightbeconsideredbythatreview.
Thisisanappropriateandmeasuredresponse,weconsider,totheperceptionthatthereisanincentiveforaprivatecertifiertoapproveaprojectinordertohavethebenefitofthesubsequentconstructionphaseinspectionwork.Theproblemsdonotariseforcouncilstaffastheyhavenopotentialeconomicincentivetograntanapproval.
Code assessment of master or concept plan elementsFinally,inordertoensurethatthereisproperaccountabilityforindividualdevelopmentelementsarisingoutofapprovedmasterorconceptplanproposals,wehaverecommended162thatitshouldbemandatorythatthecodeassessmentprocessfortheindividualelementsshouldbeundertakenbytheconsentauthoritythatgrantedtheconsentfortheconceptplanormasterplanandshouldnotbeabletobedealtwithascodeassessablebyaprivatecertifier.
Final and interim occupation certificatesCertificationalsoincludesgivingpermissiontousethewholeorpartofadevelopmentbyissuingeitheranInterimoraFinalOccupationCertificate.InterimOccupationCertificatesdonothaveanexpirydate.TheconsequenceofthisisthatsomedevelopmentsmaybeusedpursuanttoInterimCertificateswithoutaFinalOccupationCertificateeverbeingissuedtofinalisethedevelopment.
FinalOccupationCertificatescertifythatthedevelopmentisappropriatetobeused,onapermanentbasis,butdonotamounttocertificationthatthedevelopmenthasbeencarriedoutgenerallyinaccordancewiththeoriginaldevelopmentapproval.
Aprivatecertifierisobligedtoinformthecouncilatvaryingstagesofadevelopmentoftheprogressofthatdevelopment,includingtheinitialissuingofanyoccupationcertificate(interimorfinal).
Thebroadquestionofwhetherornotthecertifier,whethercouncilorprivate,whoissuesaFinalOccupationCertificateshouldberequiredtocertifythatthedevelopmenthasbeencompletedinaccordancewiththeconstructionapprovalandthattheonlyvariations
161 SeePart6ofthisvolume
162 SeePart6ofthisvolume
14 Certification matters
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012130
betweenthedevelopmentconsentandtheconstructionapprovalplansasexecutedareminorones,is,inourview,amatterthatmustawaitanybroaderexaminationofthebuildingindustry.WehavereachedthisconclusionbecauserequiringsuchcertificationasanelementoftheFinalOccupationCertificatemaywellinvolveanecessityforadditionalinspectionsandincuradditionalcosts–coststhatmightwellbeentirelydisproportionateforprojectsofmodestscale.
AdifferentpositionariseswithrespecttoanInterimOccupationCertificate,whichcanbeused,effectively,topostponeindefinitelythecompletionofaproject,whilsthavingthebenefitofutilisingtheelementsforwhichsuchanInterimOccupationCertificatehasbeengiven.
Wedonotthinkthatthispositionisappropriatebecausetheconceptofsomethingbeing‘interim’contemplatesthatfinalitywillbeachieved.WethereforeproposethatanInterimOccupationCertificateshouldhaveamaximumlifeoffiveyearsandthat,aftertheexpiryofthatperiod,thecertificateshouldlapse.OnlyoneInterimOccupationCertificateistobepermitted for any single aspectofaparticularproject,whetherworksorauseofland.ShouldanInterimOccupationCertificatelapse,therewillnolongerbeanentitlementtooccupyorusetheelementofthedevelopmentcoveredbythecertificate,soacouncilwouldbeable,ifitchosetodoso,toordercessation,ascontinuedoccupationwouldconstituteanunapprovedactivityafterthelapsingoftheInterimOccupationCertificate.
Recommendations218.OnlyoneInterimOccupationCertificateistobepermittedfor any single aspectof
aparticularproject.
219.InterimOccupationCertificatesaretolapseafterfiveyears.
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 131
PART 15 – Rejected mattersMatters outside the scope of our reviewAnumberofotherpolicyareaswereraisedwithusthatareentirelyoutsidethescopeofourreview.Twoexamplesoftheseillustratethispoint:
• Itwassuggestedthatweshouldrecommendthebanningofcoalseamgasexplorationandextraction.WhetherornotthatisdesirableisforpolicyconsiderationbytheGovernment.Itissufficientforustoacknowledgethatwehaveneitherthemandate,northetechnicalexpertisetoconsidersuchanissue.
• Somesuggestedthatweshouldproposepopulationpolicymeasures,includingpopulationlimits.Onesubmissionsaidthat,formanyofourcities,permanentlegislatedlimitstogrowthmustbeimplemented.OtherssuggestedthatweshouldmakestipulationsrelatingtotheGreaterSydneymetropolitanarea,includingthedesiredmaximumpopulationfortheregionorthegeographicouterlimitsofitsfootprint.These,too,arepolicyissuesentirelyoutsideourmandate.
Finally,weshouldobservethattherehavebeenalimitednumberofsuggestionsrelatingtothefundamentalbasisoftheplanningsystem.Specifically,thatitshouldpermittheunregulatedandunlimitedrightofapropertyownertoundertakeanydevelopment.WerejectthisfundamentalistpropertyrightsviewbecauseitisantisocialandcontrarytotheoverarchingobjectiveoftheSustainablePlanningAct163.
Rejected matter – An absolute right to developWedonotacceptthatzoningshouldbethesoledeterminantastowhetheritisappropriatetoapproveadevelopmentonaparticularsite.ThepropositiondiscussedbyMcClellanCJinBGP Properties Pty Ltd v Lake Macquarie City Council164isthatthereisapresumptionthatapropertymaybesodeveloped,butthatthereisnosuchabsoluteright.
Itisimportanttonotethatourproposaltostreamdevelopmentapplicationsandtheirassessmentprocessesrenderstheconsiderationofthistopicunnecessary,toalargeextent.Exemptandcodeassessabledevelopmentembodydevelopmentproposalsthatmightberegardedasembodyingarighttodevelop.Ourproposedclassificationprocesswill,however,reservegreaterscrutinyformeritandimpactassessmentdevelopmentproposalswheresucharightshouldnotexist.
163 SeeVolume1,PartC,Chapter3atpage37
164BGP Properties Pty Ltd v Lake Macquarie City Council [2004]NSWLEC399atpara117
15 Rejected matters
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012132
Rejected matter – Commercial viability of a proposed developmentIntheIssuesPaper,weaskedthequestion:
D39. Should the economic viability of a development proposal be taken into account, in deciding whether the proposal should be approved or in the conditions of approval?
Therewasnearuniversaloppositiontothispropositiondespitethefactthat,duringtheconsultationprocessleadinguptothereleaseoftheIssuesPaper,thisquestionwasraisedonanumberofoccasions.
Althoughoneelementoftheoverarchingobjectiveofthelegislationmustbetoencouragesustainableeconomicgrowth,wearesatisfiedthattheplanningsystemshouldnotendeavourto‘pickwinners’and,asaconsequence,theeconomicviabilityofadevelopmentproposalshouldnotbetakenintoaccountindeterminingwhethertheproposalisacceptableinlanduseplanningterms.
Rejected matter – Commercial viability of existing businessesThequestionaroseofwhetherornottheplanningsystemshouldhaveregardtothecontinuingviabilityofexistingbusinesses,ifdevelopmentapprovalweretobegiventoanewbusinessthatwouldresultincompetition.Inthiscontext,wenotetworelevantreportsoftheProductivityCommission165in2011.IntheDecember2011report,theCommissionmadeitclearthatquestionsofeconomicimpactonexistingbusinessesshouldnotbefactoredintoanassessmentofproposeddevelopments.
Thebroadpositiononconsideringquestionsofeconomicandsocialimpacts,asfoundinsection79Cofthepresentplanninglegislation,wassettledbytheHighCourtinKentucky Fried Chicken Pty Ltd v Gantidis166
…the mere threat of competition to existing businesses, if not accompanied by a prospect of a resultant overall adverse effect upon the extent and adequacy of facilities available to the local community if the development be proceeded with, will not be a relevant town planning consideration.167
Forsimilarpublicpolicyreasonstothosethatcauseustorejectconsiderationoftheeconomicviabilityofadevelopmentproposal,weconsiderthatthemerethreatofcompetitiontoexistingbusinessisnotarelevantplanningconsideration.
165 PerformanceBenchmarkingofAustralianBusinessRegulation:Planning,ZoningandDevelopmentAssessments–May2011(http://www.pc.gov.au/projects/study/regulationbenchmarking/planning/report);EconomicStructureandPerformanceoftheAustralianRetailIndustry–December2011(http://www.pc.gov.au/projects/inquiry/retail-industry/report)
166Kentucky Fried Chicken Pty Ltd v Gantidis (1979)24ALR161
167Kentucky Fried Chicken Pty Ltd v Gantidisatpara170
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 133
Rejected matter – Deemed approvalsAnumberofsubmissionsproposedthatthereshouldbedeemedapprovalsiftheassessmentanddeterminationprocesshasnotbeencompletedwithinthespecifiedtimeperiod.Weunderstandthesentimentbehindthis–namely,adesiretoeliminatedelayintheassessmentanddeterminationofdevelopmentproposals.Weconsiderthatitwouldbeasteptoofartoadoptsuchaproposition.Noonehassatisfactorilyidentifiedanymethodthatwouldenableconditionsofconsenttobeimposedformorecomplexmattersthatwouldrespondtotheparticularproposeddevelopment.Atfirstglance,deemedapprovalmightbeappropriateforacodeassessabledevelopmentapplication,asthiscouldbesubjecttostandardiseddefaultconditionsofconsent.However,wearenotsatisfiedthatitisappropriatetoremoveconfirmingthattheproposalactuallyqualifiesascodeassessabledevelopment.
Inaddition,weexpectdeemedapprovalswouldinevitablyleadtoacultureofautomaticrefusalsasthetimelimitapproached,withtheconsequentneedfortheengagementofreviewprocessesorcommencementoflitigation–neitheroutcomebeingadesirableone.
However,wehavemadeanumberofrecommendationsthatwillassistinreducingdelayinthesystemincludingthefollowing:
• revisingtheclassificationofdevelopmentproposals168
• significantstreamliningofconcurrenceprocesses169
• changingtheculturewithintheplanningsystemtobefacultativeofacceptabledevelopment170.
Rejected matter – Past performance of a development applicant Currently,itisthelongsettledlegalpositionthatapersonorcompanywhoisgivenadevelopmentconsentsubjecttoconditionswillabidebythetermsofthoseconditions171.Duringthecourseofoneofthecommunityforums,itwassuggestedthat,ifapersonorcompanyhadnotobeyedthetermsofadevelopmentconsent,aconsentauthorityshouldbepermittedtotakeintoaccountthatunsatisfactoryperformanceindecidingwhetherornottogiveafurtherdevelopmentconsent,subjecttoconditions(ifafreshapplicationfordevelopmentismadebythatpersonorcompany).
Itwasalsosuggestedthat,ifapersonorcompanybreachedtheconditionsofanearlierdevelopmentconsent,theextentandnatureofthosebreachesoughttobeamatterabletobetakenintoaccountinconsideringwhetherornotanyfuturedevelopmentconsentshouldbegrantedsubjecttoconditions.
Wecannotaccepteitherofthesepropositions.Developmentconsentshaveneverbeenpersonalbutare‘inrem’–thatis,attachedtotheland.Whilstpastconductmight,inextremecases,warrantmoreonerousconditionsofconsent172,pastperformanceisnotanappropriatefactortobeconsideredindecidingwhetherornotaproposalshouldbeapproved.
168 Volume1,PartC,Chapter6
169 Volume1,PartC,Chapter9
170 Volume1,PartI
171 Jonah Pty Ltd v Pittwater Council[2006]NSWLEC99
172 SeeVolume1,PartC,Chapter11
15 Rejected matters
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012134
Rejected matter – Property valuesIntheconsultationprocessandinindividualsubmissionsmadetotheIssuesPaper,therewasarecurringrequesttoincludeanelementrelatingtopropertyvaluesindevelopmentproposalassessments.Specifically,itwassuggestedthatdevelopmentproposalsshouldbeassessedastowhetherornottheyhaveanadverseimpactonthevalueofpropertiesinthevicinity,andifso,theextentofthatimpact.
Itisthelongsettledlegalpositionthatanynegativeimpactonpropertyvaluesisnotamattertobetakenintoaccountinassessingtheacceptabilityofadevelopmentproposalthatisotherwisepermissibleatthelocation173.
Althoughweunderstandwhytherearevalidconcernsregardingthepossibleimpactonpropertyvaluesbyaproposeddevelopment,wedonotconsiderthatitisappropriatetochangethelong-standinglegalposition.Onesimpleexampleissufficienttodemonstratewhythisshouldbethecase.
If,inasettledresidentialarea,thereisaparcelofbushlandthatiszonedresidentialbuthasnotbeendeveloped,thoselivinginitsimmediatevicinitymaywellhavebecomeaccustomedtotreatingit,informally,asifitwereareserve.Indeed,thevalueofthesurroundingpropertiesmaywellhavebeeninfluenced,positively,bytheiroutlookovertheundevelopedbushland.Subsequently,theremaybeanappropriateandcompliantapplicationtobuildontheland,whichwouldnotbeproblematicinaconventionalplanningassessment.Ifapproved,however,itmaywellhaveanadverseimpactonthevalueofthesurroundingresidences.Ifthatimpactweretobetakenintoaccount,theeffectmightwellbetheinvoluntarysterilisationofthedevelopmentpotentialofthatresidentiallyzonedland,clearlyinitselfaninequitableoutcome.
Rejected matter – Use of public positive covenants by councilsApublicpositivecovenant174infavourofacouncilcreatesarestrictionontheuseoflandthatisonlyabletobechangedbythecouncil.Somecouncilsusepublicpositivecovenantsasanadditionalmeasuretoenforceconditionsofdevelopmentconsent.
Therewasasuggestionthatthisduplicatesmattersthatcanbedealtwiththroughthedevelopmentconsentprocess.Asaconsequence,whenpositivecovenantsarerequiredtoberegisteredonthetitleoftheproperty,theyareregardedasimposinganunnecessaryexpenseonadevelopmentproponentandshouldbeprohibited.
173Taralga Landscape Guardians Inc v Minister for Planning and RES Southern Cross Pty Ltd[2007]NSWLEC59;(2007)161LGERA1atparas150
174 Apublicpositivecovenantimposesobligationsonthenewowneroflandinfavourofaprescribedauthority.Theseobligationsinclude:
• carryingoutspecifieddevelopmentonorwithrespecttotheland • theprovisionofservicesonortothelandorotherlandinitsvicinity • themaintenance,repairand/orinsuranceofanystructureorworkontheland. Seehttp://rgdirections.lpi.nsw.gov.au/deposited_plans/easements_restrictions/positive_covenants/public_
positive_covenants
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 135
Wedonotacceptthisproposition.Publicpositivecovenantsprovideausefulmethodofgivingnoticetoprospectivepurchasersofpropertyofongoingrequirementsarisingfromadevelopmentconsent.Theiruseisnotwidespreadandtheyremainanappropriatetooltobeavailabletocouncils.Themeritofanysuchrequirementcanbetestedbyanappealagainsttheconditionthatrequiresthistypeofcovenanttoberegistered.
Glossary
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012136
Adversarial processWhenrepresentativesoftwoopposingpartiescontestadisputeinthepresenceofadecisionmaker(contrastwithInquisitorial processbelow).
Affordable housingHousingforverylowincomehouseholds,lowincomehouseholdsormoderateincomehouseholds,beingsuchhouseholdsasareprescribedbytheregulationsorasareprovidedforinanenvironmentalplanninginstrument.(Currentlydefinedinsection4oftheEnvironmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979).
AssessmentTheevaluationofaproposaltoundertakedevelopment.
CadastreDataaboutproperty,includingownership,location,dimensionsandthelike.
CharetteAcollaborativeplanninganddesignprocessthatbringstogethercommunitymemberstofacilitateproblemsolvingand/oracquiringinputintourbanplanninganddesign.
Consent authorityAdecisionmakerwhodeterminesadevelopmentapplication–currentlyunderPart4oftheEnvironmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.
DCPSeeDevelopment Control Plan
Designated developmentDevelopmentdescribedinPart1ofSchedule3oftheEnvironmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.
DeterminationThedecisionofadeterminingauthorityorconsentauthorityeithertoapproveaproposaltoundertakedevelopment(eitherunconditionallyorsubjecttoconditions)orrefuseaproposaltoundertakedevelopment.
Development Assessment ForumAnationalmultipartiteadvisoryforumwhichdevelopsandrecommendsleadingpracticesforplanningsystemsanddevelopmentassessmentinAustralia.
Development consentPermissiongrantedbyaconsentauthoritytocarryoutaparticulardevelopment.
Development Control Plan (DCP)DocumentsthatcontaindetailedrequirementsforthedevelopmentthatisallowedtotakeplaceunderanEnvironmentalPlanningInstrument.AdevelopmentcontrolplaninnotanEnvironmentalPlanningInstrument,butmustbeconsideredbyadecisionmakerwhendeterminingadevelopmentapplication.
Development standardProvisionsunderwhichrequirementsarespecifiedorstandardsarefixedinrespectofanyaspectoffuturedevelopment.Pleaseseefullcurrentdefinitioninsection4oftheEnvironmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.
Environmental Planning InstrumentDocumentsmadepursuanttotheEnvironmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979thatcontroldevelopmentandspecifylanduseforparticularareas.TheseincludeStateEnvironmentalPlanningPoliciesandLocalEnvironmentalPlans.
Gateway determinationAninitialreviewofaplanningproposal(aproposedchangetoorcreationofaLocalEnvironmentalPlan)bytheMinister,whodetermineswhetherthemattershouldproceed,andwhetheritshouldbeamendedandwhatenvironmentalassessmentandpublicconsultationrequirementsshouldbeundertakeninthepreparationofthefinalplanningproposal.
GeoportalAtypeofwebbrowserusedtofindandaccessgeographicinformationandspatialdatasets.
Greenfield developmentDevelopmenttakingplaceonundevelopedland,usuallyontheoutskirtsofanurbanarea.
Infill developmentTheredevelopmentofalreadydevelopedlandinexistingurbanareas.
Glossary
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 137
Inquisitorial process Whenthedecisionmakercombinesinvestigativeandjudgmentalroles(contrastwithAdversarial processabove).
Issues PaperAdocumentpreparedbytheNSWPlanningSystemReviewentitled,“The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW? Issues Paper of the NSW Planning System Review”,December2011.
Judicial review Areviewofthelegalityofadecisionconductedbyajudge.
Joint Regional Planning PanelIndependentplanningbodiesestablishedundertheEnvironmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979toassumeacouncil’sfunctionsasaconsentauthorityfortypesofspecified,larger-scaledevelopments.
Land and Environment CourtAcourtestablishedbytheLand and Environment Court Act 1979todetermineenvironmental,development,buildingandplanningdisputes,withthesamestatusastheSupremeCourtofNewSouthWales,andwhichissubjecttothesupervisionoftheNewSouthWalesCourtofAppeal.
Land use tableCategoriesofdevelopmenttypescontainedinaLocalEnvironmentalPlan.Thesecategoriesareusuallydevelopmentpermitted without consent, permitted with consentorprohibited.
LEPSeeLocal Environmental Plan.
Local Environmental Plan (LEP)AnEnvironmentalPlanningInstrumentpreparedbyarelevantplanningauthority,usuallyacouncil,andmadebytheMinisterforthepurposesofachievinganyoftheobjectsoftheEnvironmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.
Local Planning PanelAMinisteriallyappointedindependentpanelmadeupofthreelocalgovernmentmembersandtwoStateappointedmemberstoincreaselocalgovernmentinvolvementintheplan-makingprocessandimprovetheflexibledeliveryoftheStandardInstrumentlocalenvironmentalplan.
MetadataDataaboutdata.Metadataplaystwoimportantroles.Thefirstistohelpusersidentifyandfindinformation.Thesecondistoenableuserstoestablishforthemselveswhetherthedataissuitableforitsintendeduse.
Mine subsidenceMovementofthegroundasaresultofcollapseorfailureofundergroundmineworkings.
Minister for Planning and InfrastructureTheHon.BradHazzardMP.
Non-conforming useAlandusethatisnotpermittedbythecurrentzoningoftheland,butwhichwasanexistinguseatthetimeofthezoningoftheland.
NSW Planning System ReviewAnindependentpanelestablishedinJuly2011toundertakeareviewofplanninglawandplanningsysteminNewSouthWalesandtomakerecommendationsforreforminconsultationwiththecommunityandstakeholders.
PACSeePlanning Assessment Commission
Planning Advisory BoardAproposedbodytoprovideadvicetotheMinisterforPlanningandInfrastructure,principallyonstrategicplanningandtheimplementationofthenewplanningsystem.
Planning agreementAnagreementorarrangementbetweenaplanningauthorityandapersonwhoisdevelopingland,wherethepersondevelopingthelandisrequiredtodedicateland,payamonetarycontributionorprovideanothermaterialpublicbenefitforapublicpurpose.AlsoknownasaVoluntary Planning Agreement.
Planning Assessment Commission (PAC)AnindependentbodycorporateestablishedbytheEnvironmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979toundertakedelegatedfunctions,includingtheprovisionofadviceandthedeterminationofprojectapplications,principallyofstatesignificance.ProposedtobereformedandrenamedthePlanningCommission.
Glossary
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012138
Planning certificateIssuedbycouncilstolandownersandprospectivepurchaserscontaininginformationaboutaspecificparcelofland,includingtheplanningcontrolsthatapplytothatland,alsoknowassection 149 certificates.
Planning CommissionAnindependentdecisionmakingandadvisorybodyproposedtobeestablishedundertheproposedPlanningCommissionAct.
Planning proposalAproposedamendmenttoaLocalEnvironmentalPlanortheproposedcreationofanewLocalEnvironmentalPlan.
Precautionary principleWheretherearethreatsofseriousorirreversibleenvironmentaldamage,implementingmeasurestopreventenvironmentaldegradationshouldnotbedelayedbecauseoflackoffullscientificcertainty.Whenapplyingtheprecautionaryprinciple,decisionsshouldbeguidedbycarefulevaluationtoavoid,whereverpracticable,seriousorirreversibledamagetotheenvironmentandassessmentoftheconsequencesofvariousoptionsintermsoftheirrisks.
Private certifiersPrivatebuildingsurveyorswhoareresponsibleforassessingandsigningoffondetailedplansandconstructionphasesofcertaindevelopment.
Prohibited development Developmentwhichisforbiddentobecarriedoutinazonebytheprovisionsofanenvironmentalplanninginstrumentordevelopmentthatcannotbecarriedoutonlandwithorwithoutdevelopmentconsent.Ascurrentlydefinedinsection4oftheEnvironmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.
Public Positive CovenantAnobligationcreatedforanowneroflandinfavourofapublicauthority(prescribedauthority)andmayincludethecarryingoutofspecifieddevelopment,provisionofservices,maintenance,repairorinsuranceofastructureonland.Publicpositivecovenantsarecreatedundereithersection88Dorsection88EoftheConveyancing Act 1919.
Section 149 certificatesPlanningcertificates,issuedbycouncilspursuanttosection149oftheEnvironmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979,tolandownersandprospectivepurchaserscontaininginformationaboutaspecificparcelofland,includingtheplanningcontrolsthatapplytothatland.SeePlanning certificate.
SEPPStateEnvironmentalPlanningPolicy(SeeState Environmental Planning Policy)
Spatial dataDatathathasadirectorindirectreferencetoaspecificlocationorgeographicalarea.
Spatial datasetsAnidentifiablecollectionofspatialdata.
Spatial data servicesOperationsperformedonacomputer,whichenablethespatialdatasetstobeviewedon-line,downloadedandtobereformatted(ortransformed)sothattheycanbeusedinotherapplications.
Standard Instrument Local Environmental PlanAstandardisedformatforallnewLocalEnvironmentalPlansmadeafter31March2006setbytheStandard Instrument (Principal Local Environmental Plans) Order 2006.
State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP)AnenvironmentalplanninginstrumentmadebytheGovernorforthepurposesofachievinganyoftheobjectsoftheEnvironmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.StateEnvironmentalPlanningPoliciesoverrideanyconflictingprovisioninaLocalEnvironmentalPlan
Stop the clockTheabilitytosuspendassessmentofadevelopmentproposalwhileseekingfurtherinformation.
The Act/the present planning legislationEnvironmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979
The CourtSeeLand and Environment Court of NSW
Triple bottom-line decision makingEqualconsiderationoftheenvironment,economyandsocietyindecisionmaking.
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 139
Unincorporated areaAreasofFarWesternNewSouthWalesthatarenotpartofanyLocalGovernmentArea(notincludingLordHoweIsland).
Unitary planning document Thecompositeplanningdocumentproposedtoapplytoanyparcelofland.Itwillcomprisethreeelements–Statecontrols,therelevantLocalLand-UsePlanandtherelevantDevelopmentControlPlan.
Web GISAninternetaccessiblegeographicinformationsystem.
Index
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012140
AAboriginalreserve4,25,119,
120,121affordablehousing16,80,81,
82,136alternativedecisionmaking
13,68amberlight68amendmentstocodeassessable
development13,68,69amendmentstomeritassessable
andimpactassessabledevelopment69
applicationfee12,21,50,51,54,55,102,120
Architecturalreviewanddesignpanel14,70
assessabledevelopment13,14,15,16,17,18,21,64,65,68,69,70,73,74,75,77,78,83,84,85,87,88,89,96,99,100,101,124,129,131,133
assessmentofapplication52,101
assessmentreport14,19,28,33,66,72,73,74,91,92,93
Ccarbonaccounting116climatechange116codeassessable13,14,15,17,
18,20,21,26,64,68,69,71,74,75,77,78,83,84,86,87,88,89,96,99,100,101,124,125,129,131,133
commercialviability132communitycompensation79communityconsultation13,43,
63,64,67,79communityengagement3,15,
25,74,97,122compensation30,79,106compliancecost23,44,108
conceptplan129conciliation/arbitration
model103concurrence6,7,8,13,15,21,22,
24,30,31,32,35,37,38,39,42,60,68,77,101,102,103,104,118,133
conditionsofdevelopmentconsent15,76,77,134
conflictsofinterest92consentauthority16,19,20,21,
22,26,35,53,71,77,78,79,85,89,90,93,94,95,96,97,99,100,101,102,103,104,114,119,125,128,129,133
continuingprofessionaldevelopment25,60,61,115,122
copyright57,124costsorder22,72,103,104,107council4,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,
15,17,18,19,20,21,23,24,25,26,27,28,31,33,34,35,39,41,42,43,44,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,59,60,65,67,68,69,70,72,73,75,78,80,83,84,85,87,89,90,91,92,93,94,95,97,99,100,102,103,106,107,108,109,110,111,112,113,114,115,116,119,120,121,122,123,124,125,126,127,128,129,130,131,133,134,135
councilordermakingpower23,110
CourtofAppeal8,35,36,40,80,137
crossborderimpact20,97cumulativeimpact44,59
Ddeemedapproval133defaultconditionsof
consent133
definitions16,79,80,82,83DepartmentofPlanningand
Infrastructure6,7,8,10,11,12,13,14,15,18,20,21,23,24,25,26,27,28,31,33,36,38,40,42,44,48,50,52,58,59,60,61,62,71,74,77,85,87,97,99,100,110,112,113,114,116,117,120,121,123,124,126,127
designateddevelopment101designcriterion21,100determinationperiod65developmentapplication11,12,
17,19,21,28,29,50,51,52,54,55,60,64,86,89,90,94,95,96,101,102,131,133
developmentapplicationfee12,54,55
DevelopmentAssessmentForum16,82,83
developmentconsent15,16,20,21,23,46,49,50,57,68,76,77,78,79,84,85,94,99,100,106,107,109,128,130,133,134
developmentcontribution12,55DevelopmentControlPlan9,11,
26,42,47,50,74,77,100,124developmentstandard17,42,66,
84,86Director-General7,10,11,24,31,
38,41,42,48,60,97,106,116,117,118
Director-General’srequirements24,116,117
dutytocooperate57,59
Eeconomicviability132economy4,48,81,138electronicaccess63,143electronicregister21,57,85,100email65
Index
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 141
enforcement22,23,24,105,107,108,111,112,113environmentalimpactstatement24,42,114,115,116,117,118
EnvironmentalPlanningInstrument29,124
e-planning11,12,50,52existinguse18,87,88
GGovernor-in-Council31
Hheritage12,14,15,17,19,21,53,
54,56,57,70,74,75,83,84,90,91,100,101,115
hospital70
Iimpactassessable13,14,16,17,
18,20,21,65,68,69,70,73,74,78,85,86,88,89,96,101,102,116
IndependentCommissionAgainstCorruption(ICAC)4,46,59,60,61,62,63,64,66
IndependentHearingandAssessmentPanel19,53,70,90,91
IndependentHearingandDeterminationPanel12,19,53,54,91
informationtechnology11,12,52,143
interactivemap26,65,123interimoccupationcertificate27,
129,130IssuesPaper5,42,47,59,79,81,
83,89,92,94,114,116,125,126,132,134
JJointRegionalPlanningPanel
9,12,17,18,19,21,26,29,36,42,53,54,64,66,67,75,84,85,86,88,89,90,91,92,93,102,124,125
LLandandEnvironmentCourt6,
7,8,11,20,22,23,24,29,30,32,33,35,36,37,38,40,49,77,78,95,99,100,101,103,104,105,106,107,108,109,112,117
landowner’sconsent19,94landuse4,63,98,132LocalEnvironmentalPlan41,42,
50,64,136localinfrastructureplan10,11,
47,48,49,50LocalPlanningPanel137lodgement17,52,84,94
Mmasterplan129metadata57,137minesubsidence26,125,126,
137MinisterforPlanningand
Infrastructure6,13,15,24,28,29,30,31,37,41,53,60,62,68,74,75,112,113,127
minor4,6,13,15,17,18,20,31,33,37,64,65,69,75,76,78,80,86,87,91,96,104,128,130
minornon-compliance17,86modeldelegation19,95modificationstoexisting
approveddevelopment20,95
NNewcastle26,27,125,126NIMBY72notificationrequirement23,107
Oobjector19,22,34,66,93,103occupationcertificate27,129,
130openstanding66,107
PPart3A28,29,41pastperformance133physicalcommencement80planmaking13,62,67
PlanningAdvisoryBoard15,20,24,62,64,74,97,112,113,124
planningagreement10,46,47,60,63,66
PlanningAssessmentCommission10,28,29,34,36,37,41,45,53
PlanningCommission4,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,14,17,18,20,24,25,26,28,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,45,48,52,53,54,60,61,62,64,66,74,85,86,88,89,99,100,117,118,120,121,125
PlanningInstituteofAustralia61planningportal52,99PlanningReformFund11,12,50,
51,52precinctcommittees26,122,123privatecertification5,74,128prohibition15,60,75projectvalue21,102propertyvalue134publicauthorities14,17,70,71,
84,85Publicbenefitinfrastructure
61,71publicconsultation64publicexhibition29publicinterest8,16,34,39,60,
61,78,79,80,107publicinterestcondition16,
78,79publicnotification15,64,76,
85,90publicparticipation7,39,66,
69,92publicpositivecovenant
134,135publicpurpose70publicsubmission63,73,90
Qquantitysurveyor’scertificate
21,102
Index
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012142
Rregisterofconsents20,57,76,
85,99revocation23,106rezoning15,60,64,75,76righttoknow25,90,93,117,
122,123road35,51
Sschool70section149certificate138securitybond16,78selfassessment99spatialdata4,56,57,58SpatialInformationAct4,13,56,
57,58StandardInstrumenttemplate
18,89StateDevelopment24,115,116StateEnvironmentalPlanning
Policy63Statesignificantdevelopment
28,61,101Statesignificantinfrastructure9,
41,42,60,61,62,71,85stoptheclock21,101strategicplanning10,13,43,44,
50,59,61,63,67,74,81,122strictliability23,110,111studentaccommodation12,16,
55,81,82submission4,10,14,19,29,33,
34,42,43,46,47,59,63,70,73,79,81,83,89,90,93,94,98,109,114,115,119,125,128,131,133,134,143
sustainabledevelopment16,80,81,83
Ttimeperiod21,73,101,102,133transferabledevelopmentright
27,126,127triplebottom-line138
Uunincorporatedarea26,124,125unitaryplanningdocument11,
47,49,50,62,124universities12,55,70utilities57
Vvoluntaryplanningagreement
10,46,47,60,63,66
WWesternLandsCommissioner26,
124,125
Zzoning18,64,75,87,89,131,
132.See also rezoning
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012 143
Appendix 1 NSW Planning System Review Terms of ReferenceTheNewSouthWalesPlanningSystemReviewistoundertakethefollowingtasksinadvisingtheNewSouthWalesGovernmentonanewplanningsystemfortheStateandanewlegislativeplanningframeworktoreplacetheEnvironmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.Indoingso,thePlanningSystemReviewisto:
1. ConsultwidelywithstakeholdergroupsandcommunitiesthroughouttheStatetoidentifytheissuesthatrequireconsiderationindevelopinganewplanningsystem;
2. Toconsiderstakeholderandcommunitysubmissionsonissuesidentifiedduringtheconsultationprocess;
3. ExamineinterstateandoverseasplanningsystemstoensurethatrelevantbestpracticeoptionsareconsideredforinclusioninanewplanningsystemforNewSouthWales;
4. RecommendastatutoryframeworkandnecessaryimplementationmeasuresforanewplanningsystemforNewSouthWalesthat:
• enunciateswhatshouldbethephilosophyandobjectivestounderpinanewplanningsystem;
• containsclearandsimpleprocessesembodiedinlegislationwritteninplainEnglish;
• identifieswhatplansshouldbemadeandwhatshouldbetheprocesses,includingstakeholderandcommunityparticipationandconsultation,forthemakingofthoseplans;
• setsoutadevelopmentproposalassessmentanddecisionmakingframeworkthatpromotestheenvironmental,economicandsocialneedsoftheState;
• identifiesandsetsouttheroleof,processesforandaccountabilityofeachbodyundertakingdecisionmakingconcerningdevelopmentproposalsandhowsuchdecisionscanbemadeinatimelyfashion;
• setsoutthebasisforstakeholderandcommunityparticipationinthedevelopmentproposaldecisionmakingprocess;
• setsouthowothermattersinthepresentplanningsystemnotlistedaboveshouldbedealtwith;
5. Promotesthemaximumuseofinformationtechnologyin:• makingandprocessingofdevelopmentproposals;• availabilityofinformationtodevelopmentproponentsandthecommunity• abouttheassessmentprocessesforanddeterminationofindividual• developmentproposals;and• maximisingtheavailabilityofgovernmentheldinformationaboutindividual• parcelsoflandthroughasingleelectronicaccesspoint;and
6. AnyothermattersthatthePlanningSystemReviewconsidersshouldbeincludedintheirrecommendationsthatarenototherwisedealtwiththeabove.
(As published in the Issues Paper December 2011)
The Way Ahead for Planning in NSW | Recommendations of the NSW Planning System Review | Volume 2 – Other Issues | June 2012144
Notes
Notes
JUNE 2012
NSW Planning System Review
GPO Box 39Sydney NSW 2000www.planningreview.nsw.gov.au
THE WAY AHEAD FOR PLANNING IN NSW
| RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE NSW PLANNING SYSTEM REVIEW
| VOLUME 2
Top Related