Category: questions to meeting

Posted on

Some of my questions for the Feb 25 meeting

I’m compiling my questions in preparation for the upcoming Council meeting. Here are the questions dealing with the first few items on the Agenda.

13.1 Matters Outstanding Questions

Sustainable Development

  1. Resolution 322/2021 regarding the Harrington Height and Development Strategy is now four years old. The status indicates it will progress only after the MidCoast LEP and DCP are finalised. With the LEP gazettal anticipated in mid-2026, does this mean work on the Harrington Strategy will not commence until the second half of 2026? Is there any preliminary work being undertaken now to avoid further delays?

Public Spaces

  1. Regarding Resolution 2025/415, it notes that a public meeting will be held in due course. Can the Executive Manager provide a progress update on this planned event?

14.1 DA2025/0699 115 Amaroo Drive, Smiths Lake

Sustainable Development

  1. The officer’s report recommends approval of DA2025/0699 for a two-storey dwelling at 115 Amaroo Drive, Smiths Lake, however Council has received a significant number of detailed community submissions, as outlined in Attachment 14.1.7, raising serious concerns about non-compliance. Can you please provide a response to each of the specific technical and environmental objections and explain why approval is recommended?

14.2 Housing Barriers Review Implementation Plan – Quarterly Update

Questions

  1. When does the team expect to resume work on the Cultural Change initiatives, and what specific actions are planned?
  2. Who within the organization has overall responsibility for driving this implementation plan forward? Is there a single owner, or is it distributed across multiple teams? How are we ensuring that actions don’t fall through the cracks, particularly those that require coordination between different branches like Sustainable Development, Customer Experience, and Corporate Services?
  3. In the “Tools are in place” section, Action 1.3.1 involves reviewing existing systems in conjunction with Technology One as part of the Business Transformation program, with a completion date of November 2025. The status notes it’s ‘on-track.’ Can you give us an update on what this will deliver for development assessment, will applicants notice a difference in their experience when this work is complete, and will it resolve the integration issues with the Planning Portal?
  4. Action 1.3.5 involved reviewing access arrangements for historical information and is marked as ‘Complete.’ Is it now easier for staff and applicants to access historical records for modifications and other applications? 
  5. Regarding Action 1.4.2. Given the industry-wide shortages of qualified planners and building surveyors, How many staff are participating in mentoring?
  6. Regarding Action 2.3.3 involving education-style seminars targeted at internal staff and is marked as ‘Commenced and ongoing.’ Can you tell us what topics have been covered recently, have we addressed the specific referral area issues raised in the original report, particularly around engineering, water quality, and ecology referrals and are staff finding these sessions valuable? 
  7. Action 3.2.2 involves considering options to differentiate between greenfield and brownfield development to encourage infill redevelopment opportunities. The status is ‘On-track’ with the LEP/DCP work. Can you give us a preview of what incentives or different controls might be considered to make infill development more attractive and feasible for developers?
  8. The original report noted that external referrals—particularly to the RFS and Department of Planning—were taking 60 and 70 days respectively. Has there been any improvement in these external referral times? What advocacy or engagement has occurred with these state agencies to address these delays, given they are outside our direct control but significantly impact our assessment times?
  9. The original report was completed in October 2023. When do we anticipate undertaking a follow-up review to assess whether the barriers identified have actually been addressed? At what point do we go back to staff and industry and ask if improvement has taken place?

14.3 Development Activity & Assessment Performance (October – December 2025)

Questions

1. In Table 2 taking into account the Average and Median timeframes. The report highlights a significant gap between the average DA determination time (81 days) and the median (36 days). Can the Executive Manager provide more detail on the nature of the applications that are pulling the average up and what is the common profile of these applications (e.g., are they larger subdivisions, applications in environmentally sensitive areas, or those requiring multiple external referrals)?

2. The report states the total development cost for lodged applications is $392 million.What proportion of this value is attributable to new housing (detached dwellings, villas, etc.) versus commercial or industrial development which would help us to measure progress against the housing strategy mentioned elsewhere in the agenda.

3. The report mentions that 66 fast-track applications were determined in an average of 9 days. What criteria define a “fast track” application, and what percentage of total applications currently meet this criteria and are there plans to expand the criteria or resources for the fast-track team to increase the proportion of applications that can be processed through this efficient pathway?

4. The report aligns with the Community Strategic Plan’s goal to “Deliver housing to meet demand.” Beyond tracking the number of determinations, does Council track how many of these approved dwellings are actually being constructed through the number of subsequent Construction Certificates, final occupation certificates or other methods?