Development Assessment Commission

[Shuz]

Is anybody else at all intrigued since the State Government announced on the 10th July to take away the planning powers of developments worth $10m+ from the ACC [effective 17th July] that no new proposals have been announced since? Since that announcement was made I was expecting a flurry of applications to come through from several developers who'd been waiting on Foley's announcement to submit them?

All that we have heard of are the applications being lodged & assessed prior to the repeal date [17/07] and it's kind of got me thinking that we are being left in the dark for any new applications?

[Howie]

Still early days I suspect, there's a few in the pipeline. Plus it can take months before a development comes up on the DAC's agenda, similarly for the ACC DAP we don't usually hear about new applications until they're before the DAP which could take several months.

[Wayno]

Is anybody else at all intrigued since the State Government announced on the 10th July to take away the planning powers of developments worth $10m+ from the ACC [effective 17th July] that no new proposals have been announced since? Since that announcement was made I was expecting a flurry of applications to come through from several developers who'd been waiting on Foley's announcement to submit them?

All that we have heard of are the applications being lodged & assessed prior to the repeal date [17/07] and it's kind of got me thinking that we are being left in the dark for any new applications?

you can visit the DAC website to see latest meeting dates, and past minutes...
http://www.dac.sa.gov.au/go/meetings

[Will]

I was having a closer look at the development registers for July and I found something really interesting. The date when the ACC DAP was stripped of assessing developments over $10 million was July 17. Yet on July 19, the new 7 level application for 57-69 Wyatt Street was lodged. The interesting thing is that, that application is valued at $14 million. This has got me thinking that developments will still be lodged with the ACC and assessed by the ACC's planning staff. The only difference is that the final decision will be made by the state governemnt's DAC as oppossed to the ACC DAP.

[Shuz]

Will, is the development assessment number the same to the previous? It would make sense depending on whether or not its an amended application which would still leave it in the hands of the ACC.

[Will]

Will, is the development assessment number the same to the previous? It would make sense depending on whether or not its an amended application which would still leave it in the hands of the ACC.

No, its a new number. That is what makes this intriguing!

[AtD]

I think developers will want to take a step back and wait for the dust to settle in regards to the State's powers.

[Clr Yarwood]

I can answer this one:

The decision needs to be gazetted in the government gazette to be official – this happened at the end of that week.

I also note that the “flurry” of development applications were lodged BEFORE this date – i.e. developed RUSHED to get their applications in before DAC took control knowing it would be easier, cheaper and quicker to get Adelaide City to assess the applications.

The irony...

[monotonehell]

It's silly r5eally - either nody will probably prodice the same result. Unless either body gets someone with an axe to grind on board.

I say take it out of the hands of the pollies alltogether and let the civil servants have at it. People with degrees in design, urban planning, architecture and etc.

[Clr Yarwood]

Yet another irony – 2 of the 4 council Members currently on the ACC DAP HAVE architectural or planning qualifications!

I also note that Tower 8 has now been given approval – the developer changed the design to fit with the development plan rules…would that be because he knew going to appear in the Environment court would not be a winner?

Hmmmm…I wonder…

[Will Derwent]

I can't say that I am an expert on the internal politics of the ACC and the State Government, but I would point out that the state government may have done this not so much because of the current ACCs attitude to development, but maybe to prevent an anti-development lobby taking control of the ACC in future.

And you're going to get some process headaches in a changeover of authority. In the short term it can be preferable to be working with a bad system you know than a better system that will probably be slow (and maybe make mistakes) when its getting to know the new system. So I could understand that businesses would rush through applications in the current system.

But what I would like to know is: Does the ACC retain powers to decide what kind of planning laws apply to developments of greater than $10million? If they do then this only means that the ACC will still (in essence) decide what buildings go ahead and what buildings don't.

(And just for the record, I wouldn't want planners, architects and experts holding 100 per cent say in development approvals. I don't like politicians, but at least it is easier to sack them when they do things you don't like.)

[Shuz]

Councillor, my apologies for the confusion...

Will the ACC continue to receive and assess development applications over $10m with the difference now that the application gets forwarded to the DAC for final assessment...
or
Do all applications now over $10m get assessed by someone other than the ACC and then forwarded to the DAC
or
Do they now get assessed by the DAC executives only?

My concern being the availability of information to track development applications from proposal to conclusion as the ACC did very well serve, will now become a secretive item of government bureaucracy?

I didn't understand what you meant in your statement which is why I'm still confused towards the new process.

The decision needs to be gazetted in the government gazette to be official – this happened at the end of that week.

[AtD]

I didn't understand what you meant in your statement which is why I'm still confused towards the new process.

The decision needs to be gazetted in the government gazette to be official – this happened at the end of that week.

It's bureaucracy speak, for public servants only!

Basically means there needs to be a public notice issued. The Gazette is where the government places such public notices, along with things such as job vacancies, invitations to tender, etc. All states and the feds run one.

http://www.governmentgazette.sa.gov.au/ ... efault.htm

[Just build it]

I've noticed on a development application lodged with the ACC on the 28th of July that there's an option to 'request DAC be relevant authority' that has been taken (DA/608/2008). I don't understand how the system works though so this may be totally useless information.

[monotonehell]

Yet another irony – 2 of the 4 council Members currently on the ACC DAP HAVE architectural or planning qualifications!

Yes the current ACC DAP is quite sane, but the point is that in the past it has not been so and in the future who knows? It's like going to get a driver's licence and being assessed by someone who has an interest in keeping you on the bus. Better to hand the job to a statutory body staffed by professionals who are employed to assess projects on merit and who have no external influences. *takes off rose coloured glasses*