Review of Canada Bay Local Environmental Plan (LEP)

Council has now agreed to update its Local Environmental Plan (LEP). This major document controls all development across Canada Bay. Council will update it because the previous version from 2013 is now out of date. The key agenda concern for all councillors was to minimise the impact of the NSW state government’s dodgy low rise medium density policy, which allows much looser control over low-rise medium density buildings like dual occupancy buildings, “manor houses” and terraces, within housing zones that already allow multiple occupancy dwellings like apartment buildings.

As of mid July, 50 councils across NSW (including Canada Bay) have been able to defer the application of the low rise medium density policy. The update of the LEP – from the council’s point of view – aims to minimise this new policy of the state government, and similar policies which may arise. The state government, for its own reasons, also wants LEPs updated, and has offered funding to councils for this to occur. The state government must approve each LEP before it takes effect. The update will take about two years, because it requires consultancy to produce a number of substantial documents, and because of the complexity of the LEP document. The process also includes community consultation. Council will produce four background study papers as part of the LEP update:

  • Housing and Employment Study
  • Social Infrastructure Strategy
  • Local Movement Strategy
  • Sustainable Development Strategy

Beyond dealing with low rise medium density, there are potential advantages in revising the LEP. In particular, it could allow some useful changes with environmental benefits. Similarly, more community-oriented provisions in the LEP or DCP can give better community outcomes.

In regard to the Low Rise Medium Density Housing Code

The Low Rise Medium Density Housing Code if applicable in Canada Bay would not allow developers to put manor houses or terraces into places with zoning that does not allow apartment buildings. (I understand that’s due to our Local Environment Plan (LEP) or Development Control Plan (DCP).

However where it applied it would bring other substantial problems, especially with much looser controls on dual occupancies, but other things as well. It also substantially widens the role of private certifiers on those medium density developments.

The period of the extension on introducing the Low Rise Medium Density Housing Code may only be one year. Obviously this gives some breathing room, but does not solve the long-term threat. Obviously a two-year period to revise the LEP is longer than a one year postponement on the Low Rise Medium Density Housing Code, so that leaves a huge gap, during which a lot of buildings would get approved creating precedents which would undermine any action a year later. Probably our best response would be to try to create pressure for longer-term changes through pressure in the next state election, due in March next year. It appears the State Govt wants to reduce that pressure with their one-year postponement.

 

 

Share this:
Share this page via Email Share this page via Stumble Upon Share this page via Digg this Share this page via Facebook Share this page via Twitter

The NSW government controls planning panels, but renames them “local”

One little thing I discovered this week: the NSW government controlled “IHAPs” (Independent Hearing and Assessment Panels) across Sydney all have now been renamed “Local Planning Panels” – by a direction from the Minister for Local Government. Here we see a great example of Orwellian “doublespeak”, with the panels staffed predominantly by people recruited and appointed by the NSW government, with a chair appointed by the government, and now a name chosen by the government. Not very local, except for one little thing: the government makes the councils foot the bill.

According to Wikipedia, “Doublespeak is language that deliberately obscures, disguises, distorts, or reverses the meaning of words.”

George Orwell invented the term in his book Nineteen Eighty-Four. Memorable phrases from that book include the slogans:

  • War is peace
  • Freedom is slavery
  • Ignorance is strength

You may think I am exaggerating. I say: the government does not believe in democracy for local government. So they have set up procedures which take away the most significant decisions formerly made by councillors. They have the power to do this, because the Australian constitution does not recognise local government as an independent sphere of government.

The government uses deceptive, misleading language to describe the planning panels, which are local to the extent that they make planning decisions about specific localities.  Yes there is a single local representative on the panels, who has no power to oppose development which the community does not want – unless it meets the state government’s highly prescriptive rules.

 

Share this:
Share this page via Email Share this page via Stumble Upon Share this page via Digg this Share this page via Facebook Share this page via Twitter

Bus services in the Inner West have been privatised

Bus services in the Inner West have been privatised

As of the 1st July, bus services in the Inner West have been privatised. On that day I went to the rally at the Leichhardt bus depot against the privatisation, and in support of support of drivers who are now losing pay and conditions. The privatisation breaks an express promise by the NSW Coalition that buses would not be privatised. We have already seen a large string of bus stops removed across Canada Bay on a dubious basis – all getting ready to help the operator make more money. Unfortunately, this will get worse.

Share this:
Share this page via Email Share this page via Stumble Upon Share this page via Digg this Share this page via Facebook Share this page via Twitter

More on dealing with development approvals

Most people reading this page will be dealing with some kind of development application that they support or don’t support. Hopefully this page will help you.

First of all, don’t send your objection to a councillor thinking they will be able to listen and get the application rejected at a council meeting. That’s because councillors no longer have a decision-making role on development approvals (which in my view undermines local democracy).

If you have an objection, send it to council staff. Council will then normally contact you about it.

If the development is contentious, then the Council staff will refer their report and recommendation on the DA to the “Local Planning Panel” (previously called an Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel [IHAP]) for Canada Bay. If the development is not seen as contentious, Council staff will determine the outcome. However, the following matters require referral to the Canada Bay Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel:-

  • DAs relating to development previously determined by the Panel
  • DAs where the owner or applicant is the Council or a Councillor, a member of a Councillor’s family, a member of Council staff who is involved in exercising Council’s functions under the Act, or a State or Federal Member of Parliament, a relative within the meaning of the Local Government Act 1993 of any such person/s. DAs for minor works such as internal alterations and additions to retail/office premises, advertising signage etc are excluded from this requirement.
  • DAs that receive 10 or more objections from 10 or more different households.
  • DAs seeking to depart by more than 10% from the development standards contained within the relevant Local Environmental Plan, but not where the Secretary of the Department of Planning and Environment has given concurrence to the contravention of the development standards or where the concurrence has been assumed.
  • DAs associated with sensitive developments such as designated developments, residential flat buildings assessed under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 – Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development, demolition of heritage items, licensed places of public entertainment (eg., clubs, hotels etc), sex services premises or restricted premises, and DAs accompanied by a Voluntary Planning Agreement under Section 93F of the Act.
  • Modifications of existing development consents under Section 96 and Reviews of Determinations under Section 82A of the Act that meet the abovementioned criteria. Note: Any Section 82A Review of a Determination arising from an application previously determined by the Panel shall be determined by different members of the Panel to those who made the original decision.
  • All Planning Proposals are required to be referred to the Panel for advice.
  • Council can elect to refer any other planning or development matter that is required to be determined by the Council to the Panel for advice.

More information on government policy for planning panels.

You can also call Council’s Strategic Planning team on 9911 6555.

Dealing with the panel

Unlike the DAs previously determined by councillors in open meetings, the IHAP’s meetings are mostly closed to the public, although they must publish the reasons for their decisions.

However, can still have the opportunity to address the IHAP at its meeting, for which you will need to register in advance.

How the NSW government has changed the rules

The NSW Government’s new legislation excludes councillors from making decisions on DAs. The excuse is to stop corruption. The “solution” is to remove the democratic influence of councils, with the NSW government grabbing control and planning laws made even more developer-friendly than before.

Up until now, DAs which were controversial were passed from council staff to the councillors. The decisions were made in an open council meeting, where people for or against a development had the chance to speak. But now, because of new NSW state government law, our councillors will no longer have any role in these decisions. Instead, they will be made by planning panels called IHAPs (Independent Hearing and Assessment Panels) – all across Sydney and Wollongong.

In most cases, the outcome would be the same. But in some cases it would be different, because elected councillors are concerned not just about following planning rules, but representing the community’s best interest. For that, they are accountable to the community, and can be later voted out of office if enough people disagree with them.

This is the latest example of the NSW state government taking power away from democratically elected local councils, and imposing their own rules. Not only that, but the extra bureaucracy adds more costs to councils for all its expenses. Then on top of that: if somebody appeals to the Land and Environment Court against any of their decisions, the council (who had no say in the decision) has to foot the legal bill.

Who asked for this backward step? The real estate industry. The Planning Panels / IHAPs are called independent, but the state government effectively controls them.

If you are concerned about this, learn about what the state government has done and continues to do about planning laws. Yes, I know it’s complicated. That’s why they have gotten away with this – up until now.

I hope this helps explain the current situation.

 

Councillor Charles Jago
Canada Bay Council

Share this:
Share this page via Email Share this page via Stumble Upon Share this page via Digg this Share this page via Facebook Share this page via Twitter

Rezoning proposal in Homebush wants to double heights of buildings

Rezoning proposal in Homebush wants to double heights of buildings

In mid February I attended a public meeting in Homebush run by the Eastern City Planning Panel, held to get community input into a rezoning proposal for 11-17 Columbia Lane Homebush. This property is within Strathfield Council area, but very close to Canada Bay area. The proposal, with apparent NSW Government support, is to increase the allowed height from 32m to 80m, say 22 storeys or maybe more! This will effectively double the height of buildings in that area, setting a precedent through the precinct. The entire community was dead-set against it. But the meeting was only about input; the community does not actually get a say! I had the opportunity to speak, and made the point that the precedent would continue right along George Street into the Canada Bay area, and most probably further. Once again we see the NSW Government pushing to take control of development out of the hands of democratically elected councils. The panel later said that they would defer their decision until a traffic study being jointly run by Strathfield, Canada Bay and Burwood Councils is ready. Meanwhile, further buildings much higher again have been put forward close by.

(From original Facebook post)

Share this:
Share this page via Email Share this page via Stumble Upon Share this page via Digg this Share this page via Facebook Share this page via Twitter

NSW state government stops councillors determining development approvals

As of 1 March, the NSW state government has stopped councillors in Canada Bay from determining the outcomes of any development approvals (DAs). The excuse is to stop corruption. The “solution” is to remove the democratic influence of councils on development across Canada Bay, with the NSW government grabbing control and planning laws made even more developer-friendly than before.

Until now, DAs which were controversial were passed from council staff to the councillors. The decisions were made in an open council meeting, where people for or against a development had the chance to speak. But now, because of new NSW state government law, our councillors will no longer have any role in these decisions. Instead, they will be made by planning panels called IHAPs (Independent Hearing and Assessment Panels) – all across Sydney and Wollongong.

In most cases, the outcome would be the same. But in some cases it would be different, because elected councillors are concerned not just about following planning rules, but representing the community’s best interest. Councillors are accountable to the community and can be later voted out of office if enough people disagree with them.

This legislation is the latest example of the NSW state government taking power away from democratically elected local councils, and imposing their own rules. The fees for the extra bureaucrats are paid for by the council. If a party appeals to the Land and Environment Court against an IHAP decision, the council (who had no say in the decision) has to foot the legal bill. I still don’t know if the IHAP will make decisions in public, and when their meetings will take place.

Who asked for this backward step? The real estate industry. The IHAPs are called independent, but they are effectively controlled by the state government.

LOCAL DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT

Local people will continue to send me emails about their concerns about developments going on around them. Yes, I can send them to the IHAP. But I won’t be able to do much to help them. If you are concerned about this, learn about what the state government has done and continues to do about planning laws. Yes I know it’s complicated. That’s why they have gotten away with this – up until now.

See my later post with more on dealing with development approvals.

[The Inner West Courier published a modified form of this post on 6 March 2018 on their letters page.]

Share this:
Share this page via Email Share this page via Stumble Upon Share this page via Digg this Share this page via Facebook Share this page via Twitter

Public transport rally – 17th February

Public transport rally – 17th February

I attended the public transport rally to draw attention to the need for change in the public transport sector. Clean accessible public transport is the only system capable of moving most people across Sydney. The problem is, it’s overcrowded and the NSW government has failed to step up with the major improvements we need. In the week preceding this rally, the government announced privatisation arrangements for Inner West buses. Meanwhile, they have dropped the ball on real improvements.

They could do a lot: they could fast track trams along Parramatta Road (and all around Sydney). There is a plan for  Parramatta Rd electric trams that doesn’t even require tram tracks! But that plan got dumped without even consulting the public.

They could electrify the buses. And they could stop wasting our money on Westconnex. And especially they could stop privatising public transport which will essentially freeze it the way is, that is until the operators start to chip away at services to make a bit more money! Today I went to the rally in Sydney to support public transport. Former councillor, Pauline Tyrrell attended the rally with me.

Share this:
Share this page via Email Share this page via Stumble Upon Share this page via Digg this Share this page via Facebook Share this page via Twitter

Greens re-elected to Council

In a hard-fought election campaign, Greens member Charles Jago has been elected to the City of Canada Bay Council to replace retiring councillor Pauline Tyrrell, who has completed three terms on Council. 

Overall voting trends in the Council area showed a swing away from the Liberals and Labor, while the Greens achieved a small positive swing of 0.75%. Two groups of Independents also ran in this election. Daniela Ramondino, a local business woman was successful in getting a seat, with the vote for independents coming from Labor and Liberals.

Despite an 8% swing against Labor, they were able to re-elect former Labor Mayor Angelo Tsirekas and also maintain three councillor positions. A 6% swing against the Liberals saw them lose one councillor position (down to three), at the expense of previous mayor Helen McCaffrey. Charles Jago for the Greens and Ms Ramondino hold the other two councillor positions.

Charles has been an active Greens member for over 15 years and has lived in the City of Canada Bay area since 1989. He currently works as an adult trainer and his professional experience includes working in the information technology and community development sectors.

Charles’s key concerns include:

  • Environmental sustainability, including climate change
  • Planning and development that serves the residents of the Council area
  • Information technology
  • Transport, especially public transport
  • Energy, including demand management and energy efficiency
  • Social justice issues
  • Local democracy to serve local residents.

 

Contact details:
Email:  use our Contact form
Telephone: 0403 902 613

Share this:
Share this page via Email Share this page via Stumble Upon Share this page via Digg this Share this page via Facebook Share this page via Twitter

Candidates for Canada Bay Council election announced

Candidates for Canada Bay Council election announced
Candidates (l to r): Steve Maxwell, Alysha Hardy, Charles Jago, Pauline Tyrrell and James Okeby.

Candidates (l to r): Steve Maxwell, Alysha Hardy, Charles Jago, Pauline Tyrrell and James Okeby.

Canada Bay Greens are fielding a diverse team of candidates for the upcoming Council elections on 9 September.

Heading the team is Charles Jago who is also running as the Greens mayoral candidate.  He is supported Alysha Hardy, James Okeby, Pauline Tyrrell and Steve Maxwell.

During the 30 years Charles has lived in the Council area, his children were educated locally and competed in local sports teams.  As a long-time Greens member he has been involved in such campaigns as saving the foreshore walk around Concord Hospital, improving public transport services, preserving Cabarita Park and more recently in fighting against forced council mergers.

Reinforcing Charles is three-term Greens councillor Pauline Tyrrell who has championed residents’ rights by promoting the building of a new primary school in Concord West, expanding the bush care program and cleaning up the Parramatta River foreshore. Pauline is retiring as councillor but will still stand on the Canada Bay Greens ticket.

Charles commented, “I am really proud to be following on from Pauline who has done a great job in her twelve years as a councillor.”

Alysha Hardy and James Okeby have first-hand experience of affordable housing issues for young people as well as being passionate about providing more accessible services for elderly and disabled persons in our community.  The final candidate Steve Maxwell is a local resident who represented the Greens in the battle to stop the Clyde Waste-transfer dump in Auburn. Currently retired, his interests lie in supporting the Arts, local Greens campaigns and reviving ‘Speakers corner’ in the Sydney Domain.

As local residents, the Greens team oppose unsustainable residential overdevelopment and support maintaining open spaces and community buildings.  The Greens have consistently opposed any forced merger of Canada Bay with Strathfield and Burwood Councils because surveys have shown that the majority of residents do not want a merger.  Ensuring good public bus services also has a high priority and the Greens will fight to ensure that buses are not privatised, that existing services are not reduced and that local bus routes are improved to better suit residents’ needs.

More information: view the Greens campaign flyer.

Share this:
Share this page via Email Share this page via Stumble Upon Share this page via Digg this Share this page via Facebook Share this page via Twitter

Date set for Canada Bay Council elections

Residents will go to the polls on September 9 to elect nine councillors to represent the community on the City of Canada Bay Council, despite uncertainty over the proposed amalgamation with Strathfield and Burwood Councils.

Under the Local Government Act 1993, Councils where a merger is proposed but have not been amalgamated by April 10 will have an election in September.

If the election proceeds it will have no bearing on the status of the merger proposal, so it is possible for the Council to be amalgamated a short time after the votes are counted.

If the State Government does proceed with its plans to merge the Council the interim the election will not proceed. In such a case, an Administrator will be appointed and election for a new Council will be postponed.

Strathfield Council is still contesting the State Government’s plans to merge it with City of Canada Bay and Burwood Council in Court. It is one of five metropolitan Councils contesting the amalgamation proposals.

Nominations for the Local Government election on 9 September open on July 31 and close on 9 August with pre-polling set to begin on 28 August. For more information about the election visit the Electoral Commission NSW’s website.

Share this:
Share this page via Email Share this page via Stumble Upon Share this page via Digg this Share this page via Facebook Share this page via Twitter