The
Minister can take control of a residential, retail or construction project with
a capital investment value of more than $50 million if, in his opinion, it is
of state or regional significance.
The
President of the Local Government Association, Cr
Genia McCaffery, said the current lack of transparency and
the wide-ranging powers conferred on the Minister had increasingly marginalised
communities from the development process for major projects.
“Amendments
to our planning laws have resulted in a loss of planning powers among councils,
and has promoted a perception of, and increased the potential for, undue influence
and corruption in the development process,” Cr McCaffery said.
“This
has only served to frustrate and alienate many local councils and our
communities when we try to achieve good planning outcomes.
“The
ability of councils to fund infrastructure associated with major developments
is also being undermined because of significantly reduced section 94
contributions being made to councils when the Minister intervenes.
“We
want an independent planning commission to undertake the assessment of major
development projects, engage with councils and the community, and make
recommendations to the Minister for Planning.
“The
legislation also should be changed to provide objective criteria for
determining when developments or sites are of state or regional significance,”
Cr McCaffery said.
The
President of the Shires Association, Cr Col Sullivan
OAM, said State Cabinet should determine such applications if
the Minister for Planning rejected the advice of an independent planning
commission.
“We
also need a clear definition of the ‘exceptional circumstances’ that result in
a project being declared critical infrastructure.
“The
existing legislation is being increasingly used to override local development
controls. In some instances, state-determined heritage and environmental
requirements and guidelines are also being ignored.
“The
legislation has led to unnecessary and unjustified ministerial intervention in
development applications in Sydney
and many other parts of the State,” Cr Sullivan said.
“Councils
are being given inadequate time to comment on major developments taken over by
the Minister.
“And
councils cannot recover their costs after using significant resources to
provide the Minister and his department with advice on the impacts of the
development on their local community,” Cr Sullivan said.
[See
policy paper on the link below: