Connolly said the council had obtained legal advice suggesting the minister did not have the power to order a review of the decision,and that the council “will not be engaging any further in this review process or attending any panel meetings” unless it was shown evidence it was “lawful”.
“Whilst[the] council acknowledges the state government’s desire to address the housing crisis,it needs to be done in a way that respects due process and the public policy principle of finality,” she wrote.
“Otherwise,the time and expense associated with local government and applicants engaging with planning panels will amount to wasted resources and will diminish the credibility of the local environmental plan-making process.”
‘Changed circumstances’
In October,the council,through law firm Bartier Perry,wrote to Scully warning it would “consider taking legal action” if the minister persisted with trying to overturn the existing decision.
Despite that threat,a new panel in November reconsidered the North Rocks proposal and approved it subject to a series of conditions. In its decision to reverse the previous ruling,the panel noted “changed circumstances notably the increased importance of national and state delivery of housing”.
In August,a previous local panel decision to reject a plan for 220 new apartments in Leichhardt was also overturned after the department requested a review.
Loading
Inner West Council,which opposed the development,insisted the review was “inconsistent” with planning rules.
But the government says it has its own legal advice confirming the minister was able to make the intervention,and Scully has written to councils and planning panels urging them to “factor in” the need for the planning system to “present no impediment to dwelling approvals and construction in appropriate locations”.
The government has made solving the housing crisis its signature policy since the election in March,but its decision to allow snap rezoning of land surrounding dozens of railway stations across Sydney has put it on a head-on collision with councils opposed to greater density.
This week,Liberal-controlled Ryde Council launched a campaign against the government’s plan to transformemployment land at Macquarie Park into 8000 new homes,with chief executive Wayne Rylands accusing Premier Chris Minns of “knee-jerk reactions to the housing crisis”. The changes have also earned the ire of a series of Sydney councils such as Northern Beaches,who say the government is bypassing local government powers.
Senior government figures,however,are convinced the scale of the housing crisis is so severe that public opinion has shifted to support more high-density housing across Sydney,and is quick to highlight critics of more housing density from the Liberal Party.
“I’m asking councils to represent the views of young people,families and others in their local areas by welcoming growth and the housing it produces.”
Minister of Planning Paul Scully
On Friday the Liberal MP for the seat of Pittwater,Rory Amon,posted a photoshopped image of skyscraper buildings along the Northern Beaches. Labelling it a “dramatisation”,Amon said it illustrated “the impacts of high-rise without infrastructure”.
The government,he claimed,planned for “21[metre] high-rises along large swathes of Narrabeen,Warriewood,Newport and Avalon Beach” because of changes to R2 and R3 zoning that will allow more medium-density housing.
Scully said Amon’s post was an example of “childish and grossly misrepresentative scaremongering campaigns”,pointing out that other members of the Coalition have been vocal in calling on the party to adopt more aggressive pro-housing policies.
The planning minister was unapologetic about the government’s intervention in planning decisions,saying councils needed to “do their fair share” to ease the housing shortage.
“So,I’m asking councils to represent the views of young people,families and others in their local areas by welcoming growth and the housing it produces,” he said.
In a statement,a spokesperson said Parramatta Council was “committed to delivering on its housing targets without sacrificing the principles of good design or the character and liveability of our communities”.