Black hole… I don’t think so.
Sue Brooks January 30th, 2010
The question I have to ask myself, after reading the Saturday Chronicle (30-1-2010), is – ‘Has the Chronicle joined forces with our local development industry players to influence Councillors?’ After reading yesterday’s latest attack on Council it appears so. Since Christmas we have read story after story after front page headline lamenting the so called ‘facts’ that Council is stopping or holding back development in our beautiful region. In fact we have read whole page articles and editorials by Mr Peter Chapman attacking our Director of Planning and Development Services Mr David King and his hard working staff and Council as a whole. After reading the Saturday editorial and front page story the only conclusion I can make is that Mr Chapman wants Council to get rid of some, or possibly all, of our hard working planning staff!
Council is not sending developers packing. Many developments have stalled in Hervey Bay because of the financial situation and due to a lack of demand not because of anything Council has or hasn’t done. Developing land anywhere within the Fraser Coast or in the rest of Queensland, is a complicated process. It is complicated due to the Legislation, by way of Acts and associated Planning Schemes, that were created long before the current Fraser Coast Regional Council came into being. There are many impediments within the Planning Schemes which hinder development. For instance we have bushfire layers, sewerage smell zones, natural area overlays and airport noise zones to mention just a few requirements. Even sheds are now caught up in Planning Schemes because Councillors of the day tried to make shed building on vacant land difficult to stop people residing in sheds! If you want to build a shed on vacant land I have news for you. It is expensive and complicated. On top of Planning Scheme requirements we have State and Federal requirements. The list of requirements seems to grow longer with every passing year. So if you have a permit to build an aquaculture farm from the State Government you still have to apply, pay fees and meet the requirements within the applicable Council Planning Scheme.
Hervey Bay also has had to implement infrastructure charges in line with State Government requirements. The charges are not a Council invention but a State Government requirement! These charges are used to develop ‘trunk’ infrastructure which is primarily arterial roads and drains. When Council introduced the charges it consulted extensively with the development industry and it also agreed to reduce charges for any ‘shovel ready’ development. This reduction in charges has impacted on our budget projections and helped create the so called Chronicle ‘black hole’ but the fee reductions were done to assist the development and construction industry. It seems Council is damned if we do and damned if we don’t.
Infrastructure charges are not used anywhere else but on core trunk infrastructure. Let me explain. Main Street in Hervey Bay takes traffic from many outlaying areas into the centre of Hervey Bay. For this reason the road is identified as a ‘trunk’ road. Originally this road was built and designed to cope with a limited number of cars. As the city grows more and more traffic needs to use this road. I think it is fair and reasonable that a developer who is creating new houses and new ‘traffic’ that will use Main Street, contributes a reasonable amount to the upgrade of this arterial road. This is in fact happening now with charges collected from developers being used to upgrade this road. If, instead of developer contributions we expect rate payers themselves to pay for these works then rates (or taxes) would need to be raised. Regardless of who has to pay for upgrading our roads etc someone in deed does. The funds to upgrade trunk infrastructure due to increasing population growth, have to come from someone’s purse. If the development doesn’t occur we don’t need to upgrade the infrastructure and hence we don’t need to spend money. This is perfectly logical to me so why doesn’t the Chronicle explain it so that readers can understand it? In other words there is no black hole! If development doesn’t occur we don’t need the infrastructure upgraded and so life goes on as usual. Normal maintenance and upkeep of our infrastructure is not what infrastructure charges are used for. Upgrades and maintenance do come from general rates, fees and charges and grants and subsidies etc.
Now to explain what Council staff do. Council planning staff, under the leadership of Mr David King, assess development applications and make recommendations. They assess an application against the relevant Planning Scheme as that is their job. Council staff cannot and must not assess a development application to arrive at an outcome that the Mayor or Councillors desire. If Councillors want development to occur then they must collectively ensure that the Planning Scheme encourages development to happen. Councillors can’t simply ask the staff to ‘make it so’. If we do direct staff in this manner we are, in my opinion, acting outside our responsibilities. The vast majority of applications that Council processes are dealt with by staff and are approved by staff. Take a look at the Council web site and you can see for yourself the number of applications in and the number out each and every month and you can see how many are refused. The refusals amount to less than 4 a month on average. December 2009 for example saw 62 applications approved and 4 refused! http://www.frasercoast.qld.gov.au/services/town%20planning%20applications%20and%20decisions.shtml
For complex larger developments the recommendations of staff are reported to Council and Councillors make the final decision to approve or refuse a development. Recently a residential development in Hughes Road, Hervey Bay, was deferred by Council. The Mayor then met with the developer’s representatives and with Council staff and changed conditions were applied to the development. The Councillors approved the development in this changed form. In the Saturday Chronicle on page 7, we read about a successful development to provide housing for RV owners in Maryborough. This development was also a challenge for Council as it was difficult to ‘make it fit’ into the current Planning Scheme but make it fit we did and the development is approved. In other words many developments have been approved throughout the region.
So I am left to wonder what personal agenda the Chronicle editor has which requires him to publish story after story criticising Council and in particular our planning staff. It should be remembered that if our planning staff, in particular senior staff, decide to leave us or if Council decides to dispense with their services, then it is a very expensive and costly exercise to replace them. A cost that would be borne by our community. Our planning staff work in an extremely difficult environment. I would not be a planner for love or money. Planning staff have to constantly deal with some developers and consultants hell bent on getting what they want now, right now and then they also have to respond to intense questioning by Councillors! Most developers want to make their profit and move on to their next profit making project. This is all well and good if their developments comply with the rules. But frequently applications or enquiries to develop land do not meet Planning Scheme requirements. Developers have in the past in Hervey Bay and Maryborough speculated or gambled by buying land not zoned for residential development. The usual tactic is to buy rural farming land cheaply and then apply to develop it. If Council says sorry but no you are not allowed to develop this land somehow the Chronicle blames Council for ‘making developers leave in droves’. I have sat in Council meeting after Council meeting and read countless reports recommending approval for developments that I don’t believe comply with our rules but none the less are recommended for approval. This is because planning staff continually try their very best to find ways to make developments work within the framework of a set of rules not of their making. Let’s not forget that these rules were approved by us, the Councillors.
So at the risk of annoying you Mr Chapman may I respectfully ask why you are so cranky with Council when most development applications are approved and the ones that aren’t approved are knocked back for very sound reasons? Do you Mr Chapman, want Council to ignore its own Planning Schemes? Do you think you can pressure the Mayor and Councillors into getting rid of our highly skilled planning staff? Do you think that Councillors will respond to the pressure you are applying to them for fear of receiving negative press in the future? I have personally suffered negative press on more than one occasion after simply speaking out as I am doing now. I realise Peter that your paper relies heavily on the property industry for your income but is this reason enough to portray Council so negatively? Maybe sensationalist reporting does improve your circulation and thereby make you look successful. If so I am disappointed in my community. You have told me that Hervey Bay has a very low readership compared to Maryborough. Well the people I speak to in Hervey Bay these days, are telling me they will not buy a paper that plasters rubbish and sensationalist negative stories all over its front page and they don’t appreciate the negative journalism. I sincerely hope that your newspaper is not run simply as a business more concerned with making money than truthfully informing and inspiring a community within which you have chosen to reside.
Fraser Coast people tell me that they do not want development gone wild. Our residents live here because it is a beautiful, relaxed happy place to live. Hervey Bay residents don’t want Hervey Bay spoiled by ad hoc multi unit and high rise development anywhere near their foreshore. They don’t want a concrete coast. Maryborough people tell me they want to see their city retain its unique character and grow its population by encouraging development in appropriate well serviced locations. They do not want to see their beautiful and proud city ‘die’. Outlying townspeople tell me that they want to retain their schools and attract more people to their areas without compromising their rural based quality of life. What we need is a local newspaper that is assisting this process not hindering it by placing so much pressure on Council that our planning staff leave us.
This region is a beautiful place to live. Council staff are working as hard as they can to ensure a professional delivery of service. They have implemented PD Online and are continually trying to improve their level of service. How do we expect staff to function well and enjoy living here when their families have to cope with continual public criticism of their performance? If I was looking at applying for a job here one look at the local paper would see me turn on my heel and look elsewhere. We have never been able to attract enough planners to our region due to a nation wide shortage and I’m afraid the excellent ones we have now will turn tail and run.
So Peter, please realise we are doing our very best to help our community develop sensibly and efficiently. We must work within the rules and I would appreciate your involvement and assistance in changing our rules and improving them via our Fraser Coast 2031 process. Let’s all work together to make the Fraser Coast a happy place to live.
