Quick And Dirty, Is That The Plan?

Sydney Morning Herald

Monday April 7, 2008

WITH a State Government so reliant on the generosity of developers, the community is entitled to mistrust proposals to streamline planning. At the same time, however, the need for reform is undeniable. No less than 120,000 planning proposals worth $21 billion are processed each year in NSW. The figure can only grow as housing in particular faces the pressure of surging immigration. The Government is right to pursue a sustainable reduction in the permanent backlog that clogs council planning offices. The question is: at what price?

Proposals to accelerate the assessment of small-scale developments are part of a much larger suite of reforms being put forward by the Planning Minister, Frank Sartor. The reforms include, among other worthwhile changes, plans to create an independent commission to assess most of the large projects currently decided by the minister. Despite the broad scope of the reforms, the spotlight is likely to remain on the contentious issue of accelerating approval of small-scale developments and renovations.

The Planning Department says councils take an average of 57 days to process small-scale residential projects, while new single dwellings take 78 days. The Government hopes to get this down to just 10 days for plans that meet new design codes. It promises the yet-to-be-released codes will be tailored to suit a range of different developments and will most certainly not be one-size-fits-all. The key to accelerating approvals is allowing private certifiers, rather than council planning offices, to approve more of them. At this point many will start to feel uneasy, and Mr Sartor and his department are clearly aware of the public concern. The release of the draft legislation emphasises the extent of recent community consultation and is anxious to dispel misleading "myths" about what is being proposed. Only conforming developments will be approved by private certifiers, and certifiers will be subject to tougher regulation.

Yet the faster the approval, surely the less time for the development to be scrutinised and objections made. In home building and renovation, as much as anything else, prevention is better than cure. It's too late after the trees ares cut down, or the new wall has gone up. The public will rightly reject a planning overhaul that reduces the amenity of their homes, their streets, their neighbourhoods. Making the approvals process simpler, faster and cheaper is not enough; it must improve an already unreliable approvals process - or at the very least, make it no worse.