An enquiry was heard at NSW State Parliament house on 20 May into the development of the Transport Oriented Development (TOD) program. Witnesses included representatives from property organisations, various Councils, environmental and community groups.
Representatives from Willoughby City Council included Councillor TANYA TAYLOR, Mayor, and Mr DYALAN GOVENDER Acting Head of Planning.
The last hearing is scheduled for 24 July.
The following made an impact on me when watching the 20 May sessions marked (*) above:
Need to avoid land banking by developers
Striking the right balance between employment and infrastructure and housing – if you can’t keep a job then can’t keep a home, and jobs outside the area create transport planning issues
State allocated $520m for infrastructure upgrades associated with TOD, but Hornsby indicated $175m and Ryde indicated $770m
Councils waiting on targets and timeframes from DPIE, and some highlighted a lack of constructive engagement
20k planned developments lodged in NSW planning portal for Ryde, but thought to be blocked by Sydney Water due to lack of water and sewerage infrastructure
Build to rent (such as premium international student accommodation) is not affordable housing
Data centres built in Macquarie Park do not create jobs or homes, and are located there because there was pre-planning for electrical infrastructure and making the area an innovation district, and encouraging international business collaboration
Councils need more capacity to deal with DA approvals, there is shortage of qualified and experienced planners, and preferred approach is to train in-house
Examples of successful liveable areas with density
Funding from the Special Infrastructure Contribution (SIC) – which stayed in the LGA, has been replaced by the Housing and Productivity Contribution (HPC) which can be invested anywhere in Sydney
Lots of concerns on level of consultation and timeframes for community engagement (which is 420 work days according to State guidelines for complex matters)
State target is 40% tree canopy coverage, but likely 15-20% only with development
Climate change and increasing densities presents challenges and inconsistencies, and tree canopies are one of the biggest tools to reduce huge potential health risk for the future population
(Tree canopy) targets are aspirational but only minimum development standards are enforceable
Kur-ring-gai council was questioned on the level of spend on advertising, which was taken on notice, and the Mayor noted that the legal action would continue and noted that “might not have been necessary had we been given 12 months deferred commencement, like other councils. “
The NSW State Government announced on the 30 April that AI was being trialled to help planners speed up DA decisions. With that in mind, the following is an AI summary of the uncorrected 69 page transcript, followed by answers to specific questions:
Witnesses expressed concerns about the impact of the TOD program and low- and mid-rise housing reforms on heritage conservation areas and listed heritage items. They argued the reforms represent a “one-size-fits-all” approach that fails to consider site-specific heritage constraints. While acknowledging the need for more housing, witnesses said heritage and development can coexist with good planning. They called for place-based planning led by local councils and strategic planning that integrates heritage. Witnesses noted the lack of detail and consultation around the reforms and questioned whether heritage protections would be sufficient. The Heritage Council said it wants to see developments sensitively integrated into suburbs while protecting heritage character.
A summary of the concerns and impacts associated with the Transport Oriented Development (TOD) program:
Communities are at risk of becoming disillusioned with the Government and planning system due to a lack of transparency and information regarding additional infrastructure impacts.
Stronger affordable housing requirements are urgently needed to ensure a sustainable approach to housing developments.
Concerns exist about the TOD program not delivering sufficient infrastructure to support increased housing, such as open space, stormwater upgrades, schools, and transportation services.
Criticisms have been raised about the weak application of the Apartment Design Guide criteria, potentially leading to reduced amenity and sustainability in housing developments.
Calls for a more holistic and coordinated approach to infrastructure planning to support the increase in density resulting from the TOD program.
Disappointment over the lack of industry engagement in the assessment process for identifying key TOD locations.
Advocacy for clearer guidance for assessors in dealing with conflicting controls, expanding tier 2 sites, and fast-tracking TOD site approvals.
Suggestions to double height controls under the TOD SEPP to ensure commercial viability of new developments.
Emphasis on evidence-based prioritization of future TOD precincts with controls that support housing delivery.
Encouragement for the Government to work closely with industry to maximize the potential of the TOD program in creating well-located homes near transport, jobs, and services.
A summary of the positive aspects and opportunities associated with the Transport Oriented Development (TOD) program:
Acknowledgment of the TOD program as a new and innovative housing strategy by some local government areas.
Potential for the TOD program to address housing affordability concerns and provide well-located homes near transport, jobs, and services.
Opportunity to create a holistic approach through an independent, coordinated body to ensure adequate infrastructure to support increased density.
Emphasis on the need for affordable housing requirements to be strengthened to ensure long-term community benefits.
Recognition of the TOD program’s role in delivering much-needed homes and the necessity of commercial viability in the development process.
Advocacy for reviewing and recalibrating controls around building heights, floor space ratios, and affordable housing requirements to address the housing crisis effectively.
Importance of industry engagement in the assessment process to enhance the effectiveness of the TOD program.
Recommendations for clear guidance for assessors, expanding tier 2 sites, and fast-tracking TOD site approvals to expedite housing delivery.
Call for evidence-based prioritization of future TOD precincts with controls that support sustainable housing development.
Potential for the TOD program, if implemented correctly, to create more sustainable communities with improved access to amenities and transportation options. By Nick Lochrin