Sue Brooks' Blog

Sue Brooks January 17th, 2010

Dear Peter, How was your week? Mine was pretty frustrating I’m sad to say. Frustrating because your newspaper seems to be rapidly heading down the path of sensationalism and pro development. Any development anywhere it seems… want to build a fish factory in a RAMSAR wetland well just go right ahead. You’re concerned that there are strict environmental protection requirements and Planning Scheme rules? Oh ‘don’t you worry about that’ we are the Fraser Coast and we want any development anywhere so we can boost our economy and grow this newspaper circulation!

Now I might be exaggerating but is this what residents of our community want? I hope not because I certainly don’t. While I do want to see our region grow larger and build a sustainable economic base so there is choice in employment and plenty of sporting and cultural activities I do want development managed so that roads can cope and not become gridlocked. I want development properly designed and located and regulated. I want strong environmental protection and I want developers to provide a good quality product and adhere to the rules. If the rules are problematic come and talk to Councillors so that we can change the rules (where we have the power to do so) as reasonable rules are everybodys goal I believe.

The recent front page headlines screaming about job losses etc in relation to the Centro project were sensationalism at its best. Leda have been negotiating with Council for too long a time I agree, but to print a story saying that approved conditions were ‘new conditions’ was erroneous. The mobility corridor was agreed to early on and is in lieu of the development providing a footpath as every developer these days is required to provide. The million dollar public art component can be used for paving, landscaping, seating and signage etc. All the things I expect in a modern shopping centre. But wait we now find out that the only hiccup is infrastructure charges and the fact that Leda didn’t ‘understand’ the wording!

So we are supposed to believe that a company about to invest in a 100million dollar development doesn’t understand the terms of its approval? If this was truthfully the case then maybe they need to change their advisers. But if it is truthfully the case and I am the first to admit that infrastructure charges have been changing during their application process, then why did Leda not simply ring the Mayor? Why did you Peter, receive the call not the Mayor? Why did the Chronicle relentlessly persecute Mr David King, Director of Development Services, for merely doing his job? Mr King is directed by Council to apply the current policies of Council. If Leda had asked Mr David King to alter these policies and he said no then Mr King was simply doing what he is paid to do. Leda if it was unhappy with this decision should have directly contacted the Mayor and the CEO who could then inform and debate the issue with Councillors. I have not voted on the Centro application myself due to the fact that I part own a business there, but I believe Council is supportive of the project as has been demonstrated by the development approval given against Planning Scheme recommendations. I also believe appropriate infrastructure charges should be levied on any development without exception.

I hope you understand Peter, that Mr King is an honest hard working Council employee. While he is performing his duties in line with Council policy, he is often going to be actively disliked and criticised by some members of the development and construction industry. This is par for the course in an industry which does contain some people whose only care in the world is getting the biggest bang for their buck and the only language they speak is the one with multiple dollar signs. To some members of the development and construction industry profit is more important than truth, honesty, delivering a high quality product and playing within the rules!

I do expect some property related business people to dislike Mr David King. If everyone loved and never criticised or complained about any Director of Development Services as a Councillor, I’d be more than a little bit worried. The biggest game in town is development and I honestly don’t know how Mr King and his team of planning staff work in the environment in which they have to. They don’t make the rules but they have to follow them. I believe they deserve thanks not criticism as they work under difficult conditions and provide the best service possible. It is very difficult whenever they and/or Council refuse a development to read headlines in the Chronicle criticising us for doing our job! One might ask is the Chronicle so dependent on development industry income through advertising revenue such as the property guide and through increased circulation etc, that it is not willing to be objective?

Peter could you encourage and advise business people and developers wanting to set up business here to please speak to your elected members sooner rather than later. Councillors have the power to adapt rules to better suit purposes but we cannot get involved in negotiations once a development application is being assessed. Councillors are in breach of all sorts of obligations if they become involved during the processing of applications as political influence must not be a part this process. Councillors do need to know what hurdles are facing investors so the sooner we know of problems prior to application stage the better. Council staff cannot alter ‘the rules’ but Councillors have discretion and can do so if we believe that bending the rules has merit and can be justified.

Maybe Peter the Chronicle, while retaining its role as a Council watchdog, could focus on promoting the region as a great place to invest in, rather than highlighting negative aspects of our community and of Council. Maybe we would all feel a bit more positive and happier and new people would be attracted here. After all we are the happiest region in Australia so we must be doing something right!

• Development issues
• Comments(3)