UPDATE 11/12/2008: LDA's John Roberston expressed at our December 2008 meeting that he has issue with this article, and that I have based my assertions on the Canberra Times article, which was factually incorrect. I informed Mr Robertson that I was quite happy to correct any points that are factually incorrect if he were to inform us of the nature of the error made by the Canberra Times on which we drew. He declined to do so.

He also indicated that LDA Chairman John Haskins was at the time affronted by my comment below about his former role with the MBA. My point was that, whether or not Mr Haskins was a strong candidate for the role, his appointment by Jon Stanhope was always going to be questioned as being hard to remain at arms length from the local development/building industry due to this background. Often in politics the appearance is more important than the reality. My comment was intended to reflect on the appointment process used by the Chief Minister - not on the integrity of Mr Haskins. It was a concern widely expressed in various public forums and media at the time. On reflection however, my statement could have been more clear, and I apologise to Mr Haskins for that.

As to the substantive nature of our concerns, it must be said that the LDA has come a long way in the last few months. Accelerated land releases are resulting in some blocks now being available for over the counter purchase - albeit still some way off before they are ready to build on. Consultation with GCC has improved markedly, but there are some areas still in need of improvement - with us and the wider residential and business communities of Gungahlin.

We are also seeing marked improvements in the LDA's approaches to aspects of new estate development, and it appears that much is being gained from their experiences with their various joint venture arrangements such as Crace and Forde. I'm informed that LDA people have actually been strong drivers behind some of the improvements in those JV developments themselves, and if that is the case, then congratulations are warranted for the two Johns for steering the LDA to a better path.

I also remain convinced that the LDA board would benefit from community participation.

The Canberra Times is reporting today that 33 of the blocks available from the LDA for the much-promoted over the counter sales on Monday 11 August were sold to just three builders.

Why is this a bad thing?

Because more often than not, the builders buy job lots and whack up whatever plan they have that fits on the block and with a stack of insulation can squeeze past the minimum star ratings. If the blocks are adjacent, we end up with dumb bland cookie-cutter streets. And forget liveability, or reduced costs of operation…

The alternative would be people buying a block and working with a builder or designer or architect to come up with a house that will suit the block and maximise passive solar design, and really suit their needs.

In addition, the builder sells a house and land package, meaning the buyer has to cop stamp duty on the whole lot – not just the land component.

And maybe there we have hit on the nub of it – the LDA keeps the builders happy by keeping up their shelf stock, and keeps the government happy by doubling the stamp duty take?

I said at the time that Jon Stanhope putting the former Master Builders head John Haskins in charge of the LDA was a “fox and henhouse” move. And I haven’t seen anything to sway me from that position to date. If anything the LDA has become even more wedded to the builders.

And LDA chief executive John Robertson’s response today that they wouldn’t be changing their system just goes to indicate the depth of the problem at the LDA and with the ACT Government for allowing/perpetuating the situation.

It’s safe to say I don’t have too many unburnt bridges at the LDA, so I might as well be straight about this: the LDA is ripe for a complete overhaul. There are key people there need to “explore other personal development opportunities” and there are systems and corporate values that need a serious rethink. A savvy government would initiate this before the election, but I suspect it will have to wait until after – so I hope the potential cross-bench candidates are taking notice…? The Act that enables the LDA provides for another 2 board positions – it is time the community was represented.

And as I write this, Mr Stanhope has just issued another media release trumpeting the affordable housing initiatives – all of which have been effectively neutered by the market supply manipulation driving up land prices, on which I have previously written here.

Meanwhile, for those people wanting to sidestep all this LDA nonsense, check out Crace and Casey – one thing Mr Stanhope has got right is to allow these “englobo” sales where the LDA is effectively out of the equation.