'Putinesque' is legitimate description of DA process
Mr Wiffen's informed email (Peninsula News, September 19) exposes the development application submission and assessment processes again for their ad hoc approach to assessment,
His use of the term "Putinesque" is a legitimate description of the process that ignores and rejects public input.
This can also be seen in Gosford's revitalisation policy which states: "Where existing development currently receives less sunlight than this requirement (three hours on June 21), this should not be unreasonably reduced."
The public will not be given any definition to quantify the term "unreasonably reduced".
Instead confidential negotiations between the proponent and council staff will decide.
How can this process amount to "planning"?
It begs the questions: What qualifications are needed to become a town planner? Does town planning cease at the qualification presentation ceremony?
Will those involved in development applications that include reduced and nil solar access advise potential residents of this non-compliance in advance of negotiations?
Reduced solar access will be responsible for increased energy consumption, increased infrastructure costs and health decline.
Will the proponents include expert reports on these matters in the development application?
Unfortunate residents and workers in Gosford's town centre, living with reduced solar access, will now be joined by those on the Peninsula and shortly also by more residents across the whole local government area.
Letter, 24 Sep 2022
Norm Harris, Umina