On Monday evening Council unanimously passed a motion prompted by our administration but amended by me. A motion aimed at protecting us against unintended development as a result of the State Government’s new Planning & Design Code.

The recommended motion can be found under item 4.4 in the agenda, on page 315.

The detail of our submission can be found as attachments, following that item. My amendment focused on the following.

Item 4.        Insert “The Hon the Minister for Planning, Vickie Chapman”. After Jayne Stinson MP ADD “and Carolyn Power MP”.

After item 2 ADD a new item 3 and renumber subsequent items.

“Council affirms the concerns expressed in the submission, that protection is needed to prevent unintended development to occur if and when anomalies, errors, and omissions are found in the Code. That, when found, they are immediately acknowledged and action taken to speedily correct them to avoid unintended development.”

……………………………………………………………….

In speaking to the motion, as amended, I was aware that cries by the community to further delay the implementation of the Code were likely to be received by the Government like “water off a duck’s back”. The Government has been strong in putting that the time for delays is over. That Stage 3 of the Code should be up and running as early as February next year.

The Commission recognizes however that there remain anomalies, errors, and omissions in what will be known as the first generation of the Code. Anomalies errors and omissions that they claim can be picked up by way of Code Amendments.

This I see as a potentially flawed paradigm in that unintended development could be approved before they can close these “loopholes”. Development that will be with us, FOREVER.

I was keen to ensure that Unley Council showed some leadership in seeking the Government to realize they need to implement a strategy that avoids/prevents unintended consequences.

Unley Council, under this suggestion, is advocating that development proposed while a Code Amendment is being considered cannot circumvent the amendment should it be approved. There needs to be a mechanism that determines the policy for a given precinct is deemed to be that which the amendment is seeking to correct. Until and unless the Minister does not approve the amendment.