20 June 2024

'Like stage four cancer': Developer blasts Canberra's glacial and arrogant planning bureaucracy

| Ian Bushnell
Join the conversation
18
render of proposed development in Ulladulla

An artist’s impression of the Fleming Group’s proposed Ulludulla development on the soon-to-be-vacated Bunnings site. Image: Cox Architecture.

A Canberra property developer has blasted the ACT’s planning bureaucracy, saying its uncertain timeframes, shifting goalposts, approval delays and poor communication are making the Territory an untenable place to do business.

The Fleming Group – which has completed 20 projects in Canberra, has two under construction and another two in the works – has recently received the thumbs up from the Shoalhaven Council for a mixed-use multi-unit housing proposal in Ulladulla. It has now progressed to the next step in the NSW planning system.

The Group’s Ian Fleming said a less significant proposal in the ACT would still be languishing in the system, costing the developer time and money and adding to the overall cost of the project.

“This [development] has moved quickly,” Mr Fleming said. “If this was in Canberra’s planning system, we’d still be waiting for a completeness check, let alone have majority support and commitment to see this progress. Canberra could learn a thing or two from Shoalhaven.

“We have a pipeline of developments in Canberra but have unfortunately experienced the Barr Government time and time again to be a roadblock.

“The NSW Minns Government, however, is showing a distinctively progressive approach, and this is something we will be watching closely to see where we invest our capital.”

READ ALSO Cubitt’s in liquidation, but projects will be completed

The Ulladulla proposal seeks to amend the zoning, maximum building height and floor space ratio of the current but soon-to-be-vacant Bunnings site, which would allow a mixed-use development offering a variety of housing options addressing critical community needs such as affordable housing, downsizing and ageing in place.

It was submitted to Council through the NSW Planning Portal on 19 January, deemed accepted on 8 February and on 20 May Council voted to support the project.

Mr Fleming said NSW was eager to boost housing supply and realised the roadblock is the planning system.

“To have the Council get a report and then for it to be voted on within four months is unbelievable,” he said.

“It’s just a matter of progressing it through some legislative requirements now, but it’s basically a done deal. We just have to work with Council now to get the outcome.”

Mr Fleming compared the state of the ACT Environment, Planning and Sustainable Development Directorate to stage four cancer. He said the planning reforms had only made the system more complicated, slower and with worse outcomes – the opposite of what they were intended to do.

“It was better in 2016 than it is now,” he said.

READ ALSO Federal Golf Club board ‘negligent’ for chasing risky development, says former president

A key sticking point was a lack of mandatory time frames for DA completeness checks, which left proponents hanging while interest on borrowed capital piled up and dragged out project timelines.

Mr Fleming said an arrogant EPSDD often restarted the clock on processes and failed to respond to letters and requests to expedite matters.

“There’s zero service and there’s no requirement for them to do anything in any time frame,” he said.

“But then you come to our side of the fence, where we’ve got a lot of money on the line and we’ve got no certainty.”

EPSDD seemed to be all about regulation but not about actually achieving anything.

Mr Fleming rejected suggestions that faster approval times might risk poorer outcomes and more defect-riddled developments.

He said that compared to the amount of construction being completed, the examples of poor quality were actually very small.

There has also been a significant increase in the auditing of certifiers, which he supported.

But in many cases, the builders were following the plans and the engineer.

Mr Fleming said he could live with developer licensing, but it would push up costs that would have to be passed on to the consumer.

He said ACT developers – such as the Snow family, Doma and Morris Property Group – had already started investing elsewhere where they could get a better return on their capital, and others were now contemplating doing the same.

“These are all people that started in Canberra, and then you go, it’s just too tough for you,” Mr Fleming said.

Join the conversation

18
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

How dare you compare to stage 4 cancer. Disgusting. RIOTACT and this developer should be ashamed. Please issue am apology.

Rushing the approvals won’t make better or cheaper housing. Developers will sell for whatever the market can carry. Councils have to make sure that developments fit in the environment and result in useful properties for the residents with sufficient parking, amenities and facilities.

HiddenDragon8:24 pm 20 Jun 24

It would be tempting to dismiss these comments as a developer having a whinge when they don’t get everything they want, and pronto – but the essence of what Mr Fleming has said (putting aside the unfortunate reference to cancer) is all-too-familiar.

Over the life of the ACT Public Service, I have heard too many similar stories (and not just about planning and development), including from people with deep experience of public administration, about dismaying decision-making processes including what seemed, at times, to be an almost complete contempt for, or ignorance of, quaint notions such as natural justice and the broader principles of administrative law.

Some of this is probably to be expected in what is (delusions of nation-leading grandeur aside) a municipal/provincial bureaucracy which tends to be a consolation prize or stepping stone for people who would rather be elsewhere, and has been relatively undisturbed after nearly a quarter century without a change of government, but it would be nice to think that we could get better in return for the rates (particularly) and other taxes and charges we pay.

Bunnings in Ulladulla is basically in an industrial estate backing onto a concrete plant (nice). That won’t be noisy or dusty will it? If that is the epitome of ‘good planning practice’ I’d rather see them take take a bit more time and do something sensible..

Darryl Kerrigan7:00 am 21 Jun 24

You obviously don’t know Ulladulla very well then, my parents have a place in Mollymook so we go to the current Bunnings regularly. Its neighbours are all residential homes on the right and the community centre on the left, hardly industrial! Yes over the back is a concrete batching plant but it probably mixes a driveways worth of concrete a week…probably more dust on the McDonalds cheeseburger two blocks down. Your planning outcome is like putting industrial in Braddon, oh wait Braddon was industrial but is now mixed use.

ACT govt = incompetence + arrogance + callousness….. you can add to the list. That was from a personal experience having lived in other LGAs and states in Australia

Shelby Jarromin7:25 pm 20 Jun 24

The ALP/Greens have been in power for way too long. It’s time to flush the toilet and clean the bowl, even if it is for only for a single electoral cycle. They all look tired and bored anyway!

If you don’t like it – leave

Darryl Kerrigan8:18 am 20 Jun 24

It’s what the article is saying. It’s not the pandemic the government doesn’t control people or businesses capital and if they create an environment that is anti investment the money does leave. The result less supply and higher property prices because as you suggest they “leave”.

How dare he be so insensitive to cancer sufferers. Diddums. He has to deal with delays and bureaucracy. It is nothing like Stage 4 cancer.

Darryl Kerrigan8:22 am 20 Jun 24

Would you have preferred “terminal”? Far out what about the first home buyers paying $100k more than they need to because of the bureaucracy? Is it impossible to have mandated timelines? Typical public service entitlement and I’d bet it’s not a free government service either.

Want to actually provide evidence to your supposition around $100K? Or is it just hot air you’ve made up….

Darryl Kerrigan11:50 am 20 Jun 24

Hot air but a figure I’ve heard from people in that industry. Having just gone on the website it’s clear he has a lot of experience to validate what he’s saying, how many developments have you done JS9? What amount more are you happy to pay due to an inept bureaucracy 30k, 60k, 120k? I’m glad someone is calling out highly paid and resourced public servants who are providing a service worse than a small regional council. I’m all for calling out dodgy builders and developers but sounds like the ACT Government are throwing stones whilst living in a glass house.

Happy to slam the planners AND the developers, all of whom have ignored Canberra residents and their needs for high quality well-designed environmentally smart sustainable housing that keeps us warm in winter and cool in summer. Most of what’s been built here has not meet those needs, has destroyed tree cover and green space whilst being full of faults and poor quality materials.

What a surprise. Just look.at the incompetence this Barr govt has shown so far. They have zero understanding of business but complain about the increased cost of housing and rentals. Gee I wonder how that happens. They throw money away on projects that never see the light of day but cost an absolute fortune then have these bureaucrats justifying their existence by making life difficult. I’m not surprised the developers from here are moving far afield. Just look at the amazing apartments on the waterfront in Newcastle built by DOMA group. This place is hopeless.

Lol you’ve obviously not heard the stories about the amazing ‘quality’ of said waterfront apartments in Newcastle. Different place, same problems.

He’s concerned about regulation! So are consumers! There’s lots of apartment complexes in Canberra where developers have treated residents with absolute disdain and work, tirelessly, to ensure they can walk away from any defects. Perhaps the government needs more staffing in terms of moving developments along and I think we’d all be happier if inspections were resumed by government, rather than commercial certifiers who are often in the pocket of developers.

“The Ulladulla proposal seeks to amend the zoning, maximum building height and floor space ratio of the current but soon-to-be-vacant Bunnings site” Is that all?????

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.