ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT QUARTERLY
In brief, the gripes of all parties are numerous. Consolidation of the recurring themes into the Top 5 Gripes for Land Use Planners in dealing with development applications were;
1. Not the right information to support development applications- inaccurate planning reports and / or technical information( a trust us approach)
2. Lobbying CEO, Directors, state government anyone that will listen to exert pressure when you are not giving them the answer they want to hear
3. Applicants who think their application is the only one that is being dealt with at that time
4. Being contacted( pressured and harassed) by several different parties relating to the same application to only give the same message
5. Higher consideration of the monetary contribution of a development as opposed to a net community benefit
While for the economic developers and proponents Top 5 Gripes were;
1. Timeframes – taking too long to make a decision
2. Planners not returning phone messages and or responding to emails
3. Planners not being prepared to provide informal advice on whether an application is likely to be supported
4. Lack of coordination within Council or between Council and external referral agencies final concurrent session of the conference) and our opposition which is always one of the best attended sessions, the Business Locations Consultants Forum, where site selectors talk about current opportunities they are representing.
Our panel had a telephone conference call prior to the conference in which we shared our presentations and settled on the key messages from each speaker. Despite our concerns we had a full room and surprisingly by a show of hands, around 30 planners. The session went really well and we fielded many questions, with a line-up of people after the presentation seeking more detail and to discuss a particular issue they had. The follow-up feedback on the session by organisers( each session is rated by participants) suggested we hit the mark, ranking highly among all sessions for the conference.
On reflection I think the most satisfying part of putting yourself forward, is to have your ideas tested and argued in front of your peers. Peers are inquiring, challenging, a bit cynical but always looking at the relevance of any contention from their own perspective and as presenter you hope it resonates.
As an Economic Development Australia( EDA) member, taking the time to present is challenging and even a little stressful, but is balanced by the way it opens an opportunity to engage such a wide variety of people in our field, doing quite amazing work.
My network has expanded as a result and the few days in Toronto was a welcome break. The whole experience was refreshing and engaging in my professional development. Relevance 10 / 10 and Value 10 / 10. Give it a try and think Atlanta Georgia 2018.
5. Requiring reports and supporting documents which are not required and or referenced in the planning scheme – i. e. social impact assessment, ESD reports, etc.
In summary, my suggestions for economic developers are to firstly understand( planners are people and skilled professionals), support( take away some of their pain), engage( teach don’ t tell) and recognise( find subtle ways of recognising good work). This approach can grow the confidence of all parties and lead to a highly engaged team approach to development facilitation.
There were 3 panel members and a moderator and our session was 90 minutes which included 20 minutes for each to present and 30 minutes for questions. In the lead up to the conference we were concerned about our time slot( being the
VOL. 11 NO. 1 2018 | 25