FORCING developers to pay for extras like public art could be holding back new housing, Stirling mayor Mark Irwin says, and he wants council to consider giving them a one-year free ride on having to pay.
Like many councils Stirling requires developers to set aside money for art, either paying for an artist to produce an on-site artwork or giving the city a cash contribution to a public art fund. They have to pay a minimum of 1 per cent of the overall cost of any development valued at more than $5 million, or $500,000 plus 0.5 per cent for every dollar over $50 million.
There are a couple of other contribution schemes that occasionally kick in, like payments to improve a right-of-way adjacent to a new project, or cash to cover new verge trees.

At the August 1 meeting Mr Irwin requested staff “investigate the potential to review the planning policy requirements that trigger a financial contribution as part of development approval” and wants council to consider voting for “a 12-month moratorium on these contributions”.
Mr Irwin has now submitted written reasons for the proposal stating: “The current market conditions have resulted in a number of developments being placed on hold or cancelled as they are no longer feasible to construct.
“This is making the delivery of housing and other development in the City increasingly difficult.
“In order to assist the industry, it is considered appropriate that any additional costs that a development is required to pay are reviewed and placed on hold temporarily.”
Stirling’s policy governing developer art contributions says the aim of art is “making an area liveable with a local distinctiveness and a sense of place” and “contributing to the overall appearance and amenity of an area subject to development”.
But it hasn’t always worked out. When the council was consulting on its 2021-2025 public art masterplan, one complaint that popped up among respondents was “poor artistic results from public artworks commissioned by developers on private land”.
by DAVID BELL

Leave a comment