The state's peak body for local government is urging the NSW Government to consider carefully the positions set out in the NSW Productivity and Equality Commission's Review of housing supply challenges and policy options for NSW, released earlier this week.
Local Government NSW (LGNSW) President Cr Darriea Turley AM said the report's broad-ranging recommendations to address some of the non-planning system challenges impacting housing supply delivery included several matters that reinforced councils' longstanding views on planning and infrastructure barriers, and generated issues of particular concern to councils.
Cr Turley said LGNSW appreciated the focus the Commission had brought to the matter and hoped to work with the government to identify how some of these ideas might be further considered, but that the answers would not simply be found in higher towers and smaller apartments with less sunlight.
Councils across the state remained supportive of working with the government to find measures to address the housing crisis, she said.
However, Cr Turley also said that communities would be alarmed about recommendations to expand and double planning densities and allow and fast-track requests to add extra floors to existing approved developments, as well as the report's rhetoric of 'relaxing' and 'restricting' design-related provisions.
If adopted, this would represent a concerning trend away from the important health, social and environmental outcomes the government is promising it will deliver as part of its planning reforms.
"In a review whose scope was supposed to be on the non-planning barriers, it's worrying that the report suggests a reliance on plans for more, and bigger, towers, overriding community-led planning to the detriment of density done well and liveable communities," Cr Turley said.
"Councils clearly understand the pressure for more housing delivery and the speed at which it must be delivered, but they also understand their communities want affordable, liveable homes with good amenity rather than hasty developments thrown up without appropriate standards or scrutiny.
"The NSW Government has been increasingly engaging with councils on density reforms in recent months, which we commend them for, and it is critical that this engagement continue.
"The report confirmed that low feasibility and the development industry's poor rates of dwelling commencement in recent years were the result of elevated interest rates and high construction costs.
"The RBA's higher interest rates are intended to slow economic activity, and the interests of our communities are not well-served by trying to spur on construction with proposals based on the weakening of building and liveability standards.
"Communities want housing growth and lower prices, supported by critical local infrastructure such as roads, public transport, parks, public schools and hospitals. Increased heights and density alone do not deliver this."
Cr Turley said LGNSW welcomed the report's finding that infrastructure contributions were not a barrier to increased housing supply, and that removing them could even result in higher land prices.
"However, we do oppose proposals to allow deferred payment of developer contributions, which would conflict with the NSW Government's aim of delivering the right infrastructure at the right time," she said.
"Councils and their communities shouldn't have to pay the price to improve developers' cashflow. Councils very much welcome any push to increase delivery of affordable housing within developments, but if developers are to receive substantial and permanent bonuses and incentives as part of their density increases, the affordable housing delivered under that uplift must be provided in perpetuity.
"We also welcome the Commission flagging the need to use our existing housing stock more efficiently.
"LGNSW has been calling for the NSW Government to investigate regulatory or other measures to incentivise landowners to unlock the significant housing potential that already exists to put existing housing (including unoccupied housing) into the long-term rental market.
"But we caution against proposals to pull back on the much-needed building reforms already underway to address decades of poor building quality.
"We acknowledge the positive work of the Building Commission and can't risk returning to a regulatory framework that allows major defects to flourish again," Cr Turley said.
