Parramatta Greens Clr Phil Bradley will oppose development which breaches the sensible planning constraints of the Parramatta Local Environment Plan (LEP) on the basis that the LEP has been on public exhibition and agreed by a demcratically elected Council.

Clr Bradley said,

It is unacceptable to have wealthy property development companies able to override the public plans of the Parramatta community by offering to give the Council money.

Allowing wealthy developers to override our planning regulations while requiring the rest of the community to abide by them is discriminatory and undemocratic.

However where Parramatta Council continues to allow this undemocratic process, the Parramatta Greens will continue to insist that the community receives fair value for the increased profits that result in the developments exceeding the planning regulations.

Currently in the CBD, the public does not get a fair share of development profit. The public value share in the CBD is currently only 20% of the land value uplift.

The current rate was reduced on 13 June 2017 below  a Council officer recommended rate close to the 50% applied outside the CBD, on the basis that the NSW government could charge their Special Infrastructure Contribution (SIC) levy without causing the total charge to exceed 50%. 

Unfortunately, the NSW government has delayed implemention of the SIC levy.

Council officers have estimated that the current rate will result in a shortfall of about $200 million in funding for the necessitated CBD infrastructure.

Also, the contribution for developers exceeding the planning regulations outside the CBD should remain at 50%.

Greens Clr Phil Bradley also said

In Parramatta the bizarre situation exists that the largest developments and the largest property developers make less contribution for public infrastructure than those developers outside the CBD.

This is a double standard which the Greens will continue to campaign against.

Residents deserve a fair deal with a 50% share, which a Council consultant SGS Planning & Economics said "should not have a negative impact on the feasibility of future development or housing affordability."