City of South Perth:
A review of DAP operations is both timely and necessary and would join other local authorities in supporting a review of their current operations and functioning.
Town of Victoria Park:
Insufficient weight appears to have been placed on the strategic vision of the Town and its community in decisions made by the relevant JDAP, which could collectively undermine the longstanding vision and detailed planning which has been completed and is currently being undertaken by the Town.
City of Bayswater:
The City has expressed grave concerns regarding the JDAP system and has written to the Minister for Planning John Day seeking an urgent review to make them more accountable to communities.
City of Belmont:
The composition of DAPs with three specialist members and two local government elected members removes much of the planning control from the local Council. The Council ultimately has to bear the consequences of the DAP decisions.
City of Melville:
Decision-making in respect of development applications should rest with the local government. Should issues be identified within terms of a particular local government’s decision-making, then a mechanism should be in place to ensure state government can address those concerns directly with that local government.
City of Canning:
The City has no fundamental concern with the operation of the DAPs. The City recently contributed to a comprehensive review of the DAP system in WA which has led to improvements.
The system adds an unnecessary layer of costs, removes local decision-making and does not deliver the purported benefit of streamlining decision-making.
City of Vincent:
DAPs have largely (and deliberately) removed opportunities for local ‘political’ and community-based issues to be considered in the decision-making process. These issues represent the fine-grain fabric of what is important to a local community in terms of its future character, landscape and amenity, and elected council members are usually best placed to interpret and represent those views.