Best Practice Tour notes 2010

Best Practice Tour 2010 - New Challenges for Local Government and Planning

Page 1 of 33

Best Practice Tour 2010 - New Challenges for Local Government and Planning

Table of Contents

1. Tour Summary 2. Tour Group 3. Tour Notes & Key Findings / Learnings 4. Acknowledgements

Page 2 of 33

Best Practice Tour 2010 - New Challenges for Local Government and Planning

1. Tour Summary Best Practice Tour - New Challenges for Local Government and Planning A good way to improve your business is to benchmark against the best industry has to offer. In this spirit 25 delegates participated in a 6 day national best practice tour in February 2010 which included selected site visits in Brisbane, Sydney, Melbourne and Adelaide.

The tour was led by LGAQ in partnership with Indec Consulting and Buckley Vann Town Planning Consultants. In total 9 councils participated with representation from Gold Coast up through to Townsville. The mixture of state, elected members and council staff ensured for robust, diverse engagement. The broad theme of the tour was to examine first hand new challenges for local government planning with four focussed streams: 1. New ways of designing places for people (place-making, main streets, etc); 2. New ways of conducting the business of planning (new techniques in development assessment, infrastructure charging); 3. Responding to the challenges of sustainability and climate change; and 4. Affordable housing; New ways of designing communities In each of the cities visited a consistent message driven home was the importance of visioning to set a clear direction for all involved including government, community and industry. In Sydney and Melbourne we observed the rebirth of the main street with its innovative, mixed use turning shopping centres inside out to make them true town centres, built to the street form. A key take home point was getting the street design right is fundamental to getting the city right.

We saw local government step up to the plate on density and demonstrate it can be done in a way that creates highly successful, very liveable communities in town centres, greenfield and brownfield areas; and that protecting the character of a place can happen while accommodating growth.

For example, Melbourne council is promoting redevelopment of only 6% of the city in centres and along transit corridors, which could accommodate its population growth to 2031, leaving the majority of the city to experience minimal change and become “green lungs� of the city.

New ways of doing business Given the high profile infrastructure charges have as an issue in Queensland this topic was also pursued to test experience in other states. Interestingly we found that the actual cost of providing the infrastructure was similar across the visited states.

Differences in the overall cost could however be influenced by factors such as land values (Sydney) and suitability of land for easy construction (Melbourne).

Infrastructure funding is a big challenge nationally with all councils and State Governments alike struggling to meet their infrastructure demands. For Queensland similar pressures on government budgets at both local and state government spheres has signalled a need for us to consider other options like public/private partnerships, leveraging (e.g. land swaps), congestion management charges and demand management.

Page 3 of 33

Best Practice Tour 2010 - New Challenges for Local Government and Planning

Another key finding was the role that state government land development agencies were playing in the management of land supply and in particular the monitoring of land ownership concentration. In other jurisdictions there was evidence of far more competition in growth corridors with 5-6 developers operating and state agencies such as LandCom in New South Wales and VicUrban in Victoria taking an active role as market shapers and promoting competition.

It was also clear that state governments in other jurisdictions generally had a more interventionist stance in terms of managing land demand and supply than the Queensland Government.

Sustainable design One of the highlights of the tour was the opportunity to experience sustainably designed buildings offering unique, positive working environments for those employed by the firms occupying the building. The building managers also noted that in addition to being greener the buildings represented a good economic investment. Following construction the initial additional cost of development was defrayed over 5-10 years with significant operating cost savings resulting after that time.

Many of these buildings employed technology which automatically adjusted temperature through water based “cool beams” rather than air-conditioning, blinds and louvres which closed depending sun intensity and roof top gardens. The tour heard about tangible health benefits for people working in sustainable buildings with reports of reductions in sick leave and consequent productivity benefits for employers many of whom also thought the building provided for a happier, more productive workforce.

Affordable Housing Whilst a big need everywhere a useful distinction was made challenging councils to plan for "affordable living" rather than just “affordable housing”. This means it is not just about the cost of the house but also about accessibility and proximity to employment, services and entertainment. This concept was demonstrated in each state through well located housing products which seized on opportunities to innovate and remove barriers for a range of stock being made available including "Fonzie flats" above garages and construction on small lots.

In Western Sydney the delegates were informed that the challenge lay more in getting builders to try new products outside of their traditional larger lot detached housing.

Buyers we were told often focused on getting a house that felt right rather than seeking a certain sized allotment. In South Australia the State Government took an admirable initiative to deliver greater choice in affordable housing through a systemic, legislated approach requiring 15% affordable housing to be incorporated into all new development.

Where to from here At the end of the tour, in spite of a punishing itinerary with little free time, the delegates worked hard, remained upbeat and saw real opportunity for local government in Queensland to set the agenda and lead public discussion in these areas.

This opportunity is particularly salient at the moment as the State enters into a new phase of deeper contemplation around the future of Queensland’s growth including the Queensland State Government’s own “Population Summit”.

Page 4 of 33

Best Practice Tour 2010 - New Challenges for Local Government and Planning

2. Tour Group The tour group consisted of individuals from LGAQ, local government, industry, Queensland councils and the State Government Department of Infrastructure and Planning. The individuals invited to participate in the tour all have a direct role in guiding and influencing Queensland’s planning system, strategic, policy, legislative and operational issues. The tour group members were: Mr Manus Basson Cr Toni Bowler Ms Linda Bradby Cr Brad Carter Mr David Corkill Ms Dyan Currie Cr Cherie Dalley Cr Roger Ferguson Cr Ray Gartrell Mr Stephen Hill Mr Matthew Hulse Mr Bruce James Mr David King Ms Tanya Lavett Ms Amy Marsden Cr Helen Murray Cr Kathy Reimers Mr Todd Rohl Cr Brett Svendsen Cr Luke Smith Mr Greg Underwood Mr Greg Hallam Mr Mark Piorkowski Mr Garry Barton Mr Greg Vann Ms Keveena Jackson

Manager Planning Services, Isaac Regional Council Redland City Council Development Planning Manager, Ipswich City Council Mayor Rockhampton Regional Council Manager Strategic & Environmental Planning & Policy Gold Coast City Council Manager Land Use Planning, Toowoomba Regional Council Chair Planning and Development Logan City Council Isaac Regional Council Townsville City Council Principal Advisor Local Area Strategic Planning Redland City Council Manager Implementation & Assessment Gold Coast City Council Strategy and Planning Manager, Logan City Council Director of Development Services Fraser Coast Regional Council Business Manager T5/NGP Programme SEQ Housing Affordability Programme Queensland Director Statutory Planning Department of Infrastructure and Planning Redland City Council Redland City Council Development Assessment Manager, Logan City Council Rockhampton Regional Council Logan City Council General Manager Planning and Policy Department Redland City Council Executive Director, LGAQ Manager Environment & Planning, LGAQ Director, INDEC Consulting & Tour Manager Director, Buckley Vann Office Manager, Buckley Vann

Page 5 of 33

Best Practice Tour 2010 - New Challenges for Local Government and Planning

3. Tour Notes & Key Findings / Learning’s Day 1 - Brisbane Sunday, 7 February 2010 a) Kelvin Grove Urban Village b) Brisbane Housing Company c) SKM

Discussion Topics Covered on Day 1: • • •

New ways of designing places for people (place-making, main streets, etc); Responding to the challenges of sustainability and climate change; and Affordable housing.

a) Kelvin Grove Urban Village John Byrne – Byrne Urban Design • •

•

• • • • • • • •

John provided an overview of the site history including former use as Defence Land.

Mixed use done large combination of institutional and private owners to deliver blending in land uses including affordable housing.

The development was built with a strong emphasis on place making at to achieve human scale design outcomes and active frontages.

A key design principle was that car use was not encouraged given the proximity of the site and relationship with city.

Development was designed with the target market (students) in mind with easy linkages to the city for work, entertainment, etc.

Affordable housing and retail have been designed to be at the heart of the development to encourage activity and a sense of activity.

Noted that not all development has yet achieved active frontage or the level of desired activity – it takes time to achieve desired outcomes.

Need to ensure strong commitments to public space not just private space.

Emphasis on a long term plan and ensuring that the development has good bones to grow – get the basics right at the start and stick with it.

For Kelvin Grove development those managing it are still learning about how that site is changing and growing.

Development of remaining land left means that these dwellings can be sold at premium as site has matured (cream of the development).

Page 6 of 33

Best Practice Tour 2010 - New Challenges for Local Government and Planning

b) Brisbane Housing Company David Cant - CEO Brisbane Housing Company (BHC) •

•

•

• •

Purpose built vehicle to deliver affordable housing partnering Brisbane City Council and the State Government.

Current business model has the BHC operating as a not for profit which works to be tax efficient locking in their building assets for the longterm.

David described the BHC as a social business employing commercial analytical techniques with social outcomes.

Site visit to the apartments in Kelvin Grove demonstrated that the housing products were very liveable and of high quality finish.

The residents which allowed the tour group into their units were very happy with living in the Kelvin Grove development.

c) Sinclair Knight Merz (SKM) James Shay, Project Engineer • • •

• •

Variety of techniques to increase the sustainability rating for the new building including blending in recycled materials (ie. recycled timber for stairs).

Use of plants in corridors and throughout building was employed to increase active green space.

Permeable floors – stairs inserted between floors allowing people to travel up and down without having to use the lifts.

High rating or GBAC measuring level of energy used and level of recycling employed.

Useful commercially as it showcases SKM as a forward thinking organisation for its clients.

Page 7 of 33

Best Practice Tour 2010 - New Challenges for Local Government and Planning

•

Also sets it apart from its competitors (who are also attempting to achieve 6 star rating for ‘green buildings’).

Importance of getting the design right first and avoiding retrofitting or changing partway through construction (ie installing stairs through floors was a retrofit).

•

Key Findings / Learnings – Day 1 •

• • •

Government support and involvement can be crucial to creating demonstration projects like the “mixed use, new urbanist design” Kelvin Grove, and offer tremendous opportunities to build understanding of new ways of designing communities, and learnings for government, the private sector and the community about what they can deliver.

Not for profit affordable housing providers can play an important role in both meeting the need for this housing but face significant issues including community reactions and the need to navigate the development approval systems.

Contributions of affordable housing providers like the Brisbane Housing Company are important to demonstrating the nature of this housing and building community understanding of its acceptability.

Sustainable building design is best achieved when pursued from the inception of the design process.

Page 8 of 33

Best Practice Tour 2010 - New Challenges for Local Government and Planning

Day 2 – Sydney Monday, 8 February 2010 a) NSW Planning Assessment Commission and NSW Planning Processes b) Investa - Deutsche's Bank building c) Lend Lease Building • •

New ways of conducting the business of planning (new techniques in development assessment, infrastructure charging); and Responding to the challenges of sustainability and climate change.

a) NSW Department of Planning, Planning Assessment Commission and Regional Panels Marcus Ray - Executive Director Assessment Systems & General Counsel, Department of Planning Gabrielle Kibble - Chair of the Planning Commission; Andrew Jackson - Executive Director, Strategy and Infrastructure Planning, Department of Planning Janet Thomson - Chair of the Sydney West Regional Panel Garry West - Chair of the Northern Regional Panel

Marcus Ray & Andrew Jackson • • • • • •

Implementation of reforms has occurred in NSW through to 2008.

In 2010 the Department is focusing on moving on exempt and compliance development with pressure by the Commonwealth for greater code assessment.

In terms of their work the most difficult thing for the Department has been to improving how council’s undertake their development assessment.

Targeting standardising assessment and improving the quality of info on lodgement.

Department doesn’t have a good comprehensive view of infra contributing requirements but have set the infrastructure levy threshold at $20k in NSW to achieve a level of consistency.

In NSW that majority of developer contributions are derived from contribution plans through that state’s planning legislation under Section 94.

Page 9 of 33

Best Practice Tour 2010 - New Challenges for Local Government and Planning

• • • • • • • •

Section 94 revenue was about $800m last year with the majority of the funding going to regional roads.

Commission will however be setting new requirements related to reporting on the use of funding and where the Section 94 funding money is being spent.

This is in light of perceived issues around how some councils are using contributions as a means of funding other broader activities.

To address the issue a 2 tier system will be implemented which establishes a list of what infrastructure is ok to collect against – any projects over a given threshold will require Ministerial approval and a business plan.

Commission noted that in terms of development land costs in NSW are a very significant part of infrastructure costs.

Looking to future infra especially with transport.

Embarking on transport strategy for state which will identify some big ticket items with regional share/benefits with potential links to brownfield sites.

Noted that in NSW they have to get better at value capturing following infrastructure investment at the time of land use change or/and at land release.

Gabrielle Kibble – Chair - Planning Assessment Commission • Provided background on the Commission’s role which includes making a decision and/or providing advice to minister.

• Can also get involved when there is a disagreement between local and state government agencies.

Janet Thompson • Noted that in the life of panel it has handled 42 applications so far this financial year, but only made 2 determinations.

• The delay in making decisions was linked to the need to ask for more information.

• Central Sydney Planning Assessment Committee represented the initiation of regional panels in NSW. • Noted that the majority of applications that the Commission is involved in are not controversial and that residents have been largely positive about the process.

• Still working toward reducing the time taken to assess applications which are currently about 270 days or over.

Garry West – Northern NSW • Panel operates outside of Sydney which he indicated was a very different dynamic to urban areas.

• Within his jurisdiction submitters with issues are able to present at public forums run regionally.

• As a means of managing the issues he has a secretariat to corral “like” issues. b) Investa - Deutsche's Bank Building Michael Cook – Investa • • •

Known as one of a few “premium buildings” in Sydney and has had a history of demonstrated commercial success.

Indicates that dividends have been returned to the company as a consequence of sustainability initiatives.

Noted the retail offered on site was done at a cost as Investa was less interested in making profit from the leased space than in achieving a good mix and product offering to keep their tenants happy (value engineering).

Page 10 of 33

Best Practice Tour 2010 - New Challenges for Local Government and Planning

•

Outcome has been good marketing for Investa and happy paying tenants paying premium rents.

•

Deutsche’s Bank Building represented their most successful building in their portfolio at this time.

A significant aspect of the design was to move the lift/service component to the western side of the building, which reduced energy use by reducing the air conditioning required and created large rectangular floor plates in the leasable areas.

Experience has demonstrated project return of $1.40 for each dollar invested in sustainable measures which is high compared to other initiatives returning $.07 for each dollar invested.

Noted that all data on returns for projects is presented on the Investa website from their buildings (everything is metered in Investa buildings to establish costs, benchmarks and monitoring).

•

• •

c) Lend Lease Building -The Bond Trish Arnott – Lend Lease • •

• • •

Visited the Lend Lease Building (“The Bond”) to review their sustainable initiatives.

Innovative cold beam technology had been employed for cooling combined with perforated ceilings which assisted in dispersing heated air. This means the auxiliary air conditioning is needed very infrequently, in more extreme temperature conditions.

A green roof provided further natural cooling coupled with open windows on the office floors for further ventilation.

Within the building there was significant use of recycled materials throughout including the use of adjacent rock face of former quarry as thermal mass and building feature.

Meeting rooms on western face helps moderate energy use.

Page 11 of 33

Best Practice Tour 2010 - New Challenges for Local Government and Planning

•

Noted that the company has recorded a reduction in sick leave since they moved into the building and suspect (but can’t measure) an improvement in productivity of its workforce as they are generally happier with their work environment.

Key Findings / Learnings – Day 2 •

• • • •

•

•

Infrastructure contributions are in effect a user pays system where the cost of infrastructure required for new development is met by that development. The alternative is funding by the community generally, which represents a subsidy for the new development.

In setting infrastructure charges, it is a matter of being transparent about the policy approach to this funding choice and the method of calculation of any such charges levied.

Land costs contribute to making these charges in NSW generally higher than in other states.

In response to concerns about the level of infrastructure charges (e.g. industry concerns on viability, housing affordability, use of funds), there is a need to consider other ways of funding, such as value capture.

Independent development assessment panels have a restricted range of matters referred to them and operate in an open, transparent way. While initial indications are that they have some benefits, they are still in their early days of operation and do not appear to progress matters more quickly.

There were significant differences between the States in how they used and why they formed development assessment panels (eg in NSW the need was for a more regional perspective whereas SA used them for the difficult and where the Council was developing its own land).

Sustainable building design can make good business sense as well as improved environmental outcomes, both for the developer/owner (through reduced on going costs over time, and the ability to charge a premium for this space, potentially higher sale prices) and for the tenants (through reduced sick leave, potential improved productivity, and quality environments for their workforce).

Page 12 of 33

Best Practice Tour 2010 - New Challenges for Local Government and Planning

Day 3 – Sydney Tuesday, 9 February 2010 a) Tour of Rouse Hill b) Tour of Macquarie Park c) Tour - Victoria Park/ Green Square • • • •

New ways of designing places for people (place-making, main streets, etc); New ways of conducting the business of planning (new techniques in development assessment, infrastructure charging); Responding to the challenges of sustainability and climate change; and Affordable housing.

Accompanied for the day by Bernard Gallagher - Director JBA Planning, Sydney

a) Tour of Rouse Hill Arthur Illies - Project Director - Lend Lease / GPT Martin Ollis - General Manager - GPT Stephen Driscoll - Director Sustainability and Policy – Landcom • •

• •

Tour of Rouse Hill development focusing on housing variety /affordability and the town centre.

Housing mix ranges includes detached housing on lots - largest are 450m2, most are between 250 and 400m2. Experience is that quality and price of the house/land package is the key issue for buyers, rather than the lot size.

Outcome of the development has been a slightly higher density than surrounding areas in Western Sydney.

Development’s new town centre has been built with a strong emphasis on placemaking and incorporating a mixed use model (ie retail, office, housing, education, entertainment).

•

•

Represents a partnership between the private developer Delfin and the NSW State Government which started purchasing land in 1980s in bits and pieces.

Delfin’s strategy was to first establish a town centre and follow up with residential development.

Page 13 of 33

Best Practice Tour 2010 - New Challenges for Local Government and Planning

• • • • • • •

Rouse Hill was initiated in the early 1990s following the release and award of a tender to determining the private sector joint venture partner with the State.

The development is based around a Master Plan committing to 25% open space with DA’s are assessed against the Master Plan and Precinct Plan provisions.

Noted that to get the proposal off the ground required significant education by the Delfin to get council across the concept as most of the development did not meet council planning requirements (ie 20% smaller apartments).

Town Centre draws on a retail trade area greater than the development estimated at about 300,000 people.

Approximately 100,000 sqm of GFA – 210 shops providing an open air (differentiated product) which sets it apart from the standard mall offering.

Whilst open air, there’s been significant investment in technically managing environmental impacts on the shopping precinct including automated blinds, cooling and extending roofing structures to shelter from rain.

With a strong emphasis on placemaking and quality design the town centre is intended to work as a main street.

•

The town centre is not gated but accessible to the public with community use encouraged and managed through a “public assessable management plan” developed (on Delfin’s website).

•

Community Benefited rate/levy will be applied once critical population/development mass is reached.

Innovative traffic management that uses modern technology in the shopping centre carpark.

Transport accessibility is provided through a connection with the bus based Transitway (dedicated bus lane to Parramatta).

Being located nearby the Parramatta NW Business Park provides a close employment node for the development’s residents.

• • •

b) Tour of Macquarie Park Nick Chapman - Project Manager, City of Ryde Dominic Johnson - Group Manager Environment and Planning • • •

Macquarie Park is a traditional business park, built mainly in the 1980s and 1990s.

Recent investment in heavy rail links and other initiatives has prompted the City of Ryde to plan towards completely redevelop the area over the next 20-30 years.

This involves a big challenge in moving from the current built form of large lots with large, low rise buildings surrounded by surface car parking and landscaping to Page 14 of 33

Best Practice Tour 2010 - New Challenges for Local Government and Planning

a finer grained, built form involving taller buildings and more emphasis on the quality of the public realm.

• • • •

Working toward greater density, more permeability as an icon development.

Attempting to brand the technology park and develop it as a product with emphasis on attracting firms associated with technology, biotechnology, medical and R&D. The council’s employment target is grow from 66,000 (2007) to 160,000 (2031).

Residential development not sought to diversify the land use mix, due to potential for conflict with industry uses.

c) Tour - Victoria Park/ Green Square Cr John McInerney – Councillor, City of Sydney Cr Di Tornai – Councillor, City of Sydney Monica Barone - CEO Michael Harrison - Director of City Strategy and Design, City of Sydney Paul Anderson - Landcom Richard Perkins - City West •

Visited the City of Sydney development location in Victoria Park “Green Square” an initiative of the NSW state development agency Landcom, in conjunction with the City of Sydney and Housing West. It forms part of the Council’s planning for a larger areas known as Green Square.

Page 15 of 33

Best Practice Tour 2010 - New Challenges for Local Government and Planning

•

Development focus for Victoria Square was fixed on urban renewal through sustainable new urban design and provision of inner city housing and it is largely completed and feaures medium to high densities in medium rise form, incorporating a strongly urban form, water sensitive urban design (e.g. large swales doubling as parks and mid-road swales) and integrated parkland.

Development has evolved through different models (governance) of redevelopment and delivery of affordable housing (CityWest).

•

•

CityWest as an agency operates independent of government with in house development capability which is cost effective (works as a not-for-profit).

CityWest accesses development Section 94 contributions which are usually in the form of cash rather than in-kind works or contributed assets.

Rental income covers CityWest operational expenditure with capital expenditure derived from the Section 94 contributions.

Richard Perkins indicates that CityWest’s operating model enables them to try new concepts in icon projects.

• • •

Key Findings / Learnings – Day 3 • • • • •

• •

At Rouse Hill, an urban fringe greenfields development, lots sizes are much smaller than typically the case in Queensland, with most in the 250-400m2 range.

The focus is on the quality and “feel” of the house and land package, rather than the size of the lot.

Their experience is that this is what the average buyer is more interested in; and the challenge is educating builders in the delivery of this product.

Rouse Hill Town Centre is an outstanding demonstration of a new approach to place making, based on new urbanist, mixed use model with a strong emphasis on the quality and importance of the public realm and many sustainability features.

Business parks, while they create employment, can result in a relatively unsustainable and poor quality built environment and, once established, present major challenges to redeveloping in line with best practice planning approaches; requiring significant effort and focus by government.

Medium to high density housing can be established in a way that produces high quality living environments integrating sustainable design and affordable housing.

State land development agencies can play an important role in facilitating innovation and meeting housing needs and affordability objectives.

Page 16 of 33

Best Practice Tour 2010 - New Challenges for Local Government and Planning

Day 4 - Melbourne Wednesday, 10 February 2010 a) Melbourne City Council b) Growth Areas Authority (GAA) c) VicUrban • • • •

New ways of designing places for people (place-making, main streets, etc); New ways of conducting the business of planning (new techniques in development assessment, infrastructure charging); Responding to the challenges of sustainability and climate change; and Affordable housing.

Commentary on sites provided by Bill Chandler - Chandler Consulting Services

a) Melbourne City Council Rob Moore - Melbourne City Council Desley Renton - Melbourne City Council • • • • • • • •

Presentation on Melbourne CBD planning and latest corridor planning initiatives with Rob Moore on “Transforming Cities”.

Focus on how to transform the existing city not just grow on the fringe and work out viability as an after thought.

Sustainable city is looking holistically at how it can be achieved, how to increase the city’s resilience and reducing vulnerability to natural hazards (ie. bushfire and water supply).

Introduced the concept of “Metro Melbourne – 6% city”.

Only need to transform 6 % of the city to meet density targets, based on centres and transit corridors.

Message to community emphasis is that 94% is left untouched – this is more palatable and politically acceptable.

Increases in density are to be achieved in designated “Areas” and ”Urban Corridors” primarily serviced by public transport.

Visited Council House 2 (CH2) as an example of sustainable building design.

• Tour of CH2 sustainable council building (an excellent example of a well designed green building).

• Building was very efficient – windows and ventilation cooling via floor and curved concrete ceiling (automatic and monitored).

• Emphasis on natural lighting and green areas including a roof top garden.

Page 17 of 33

Best Practice Tour 2010 - New Challenges for Local Government and Planning

b) Growth Areas Authority (GAA) Peter Seamer - Growth Areas Authority Andrew Widdecombe - Victoria Department of Planning and Community • • •

•

• • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Presentation on Growth Areas Authority

by Peter Seamer.

GAA is a state authority under the Victorian Planning & Environment Act. Both GAA and VicUrban are active in monitoring development activity and identifying imbalances in market supply and ownership of land.

The agency focuses on greenfield/ broad acre development establishing UGZ (urban growth zone) and UGB (urban growth boundary).

GAA’s role is to streamlining the development process in partnership with local government.

Currently the approval processes take about 5yrs to move from a greenfield site to the completion of a house.

GAA has stripped out stages in the development process reducing the development period of about 260 weeks down to about 155 weeks.

Emphasis on upfront engagement such as with cultural heritage assessment – hit it once and only once.

Infrastructure proposed to be funded through the GAIC (Growth Areas Infrastructure Contributions), State Government Tax and a Betterment Tax. Aimed to take some profit back for infrastructure.

Underlining principle is that in value is a consequence of expectation government will deliver services.

Push back has been experienced from land owners and developers.

Proposed GAIC is about $95,000/hectare plus land, but its delivery is uncertain due to opposition in the Senate Andrew Widdecombe, Victoria Department of Planning and Community Development provided an overview of the strategic “Melbourne 2030” plan.

Department of “Central Activity Districts” (CADs) which represent mini centres (or mini CBDs) for accommodating employment and growth.

Has a whole of government focus and includes some of Melbourne’s most disadvantaged areas.

Integrating the Melbourne 2030 Planning update plus Victorian Transport Plan Focus on accessibility and achieving mode split - 6 Step Stage for CADS: 1. Agreed shared vision – see councils as a genuine partner 2. Planning certainty – clear rules in planning 3. Supportive infrastructure – initial focus on public realm 4. Land assembly - in CADS facilitating land assembly (compulsory acquisition included) for infrastructure and as a catalyst developing sites 5. Seed catalyst projects – (ie. government tenanted buildings) with partnership between local, state and federal.

6. Marketing and investment - facilitate council and community support and investment.

Page 18 of 33

Best Practice Tour 2010 - New Challenges for Local Government and Planning

c) VicUrban Gabrielle Kuiper - Environment Director - 03 8317 3583 Mark Haycox - Senior Urban Designer - 03 8317 3448 Emma Appleton - Urban Design Director Regeneration Jonathan Pinkney - Development Manager Sunny Haynes - Director Social and Economic Development Olwyn Redshaw - Office of Housing - Project Planning and Innovation • • • •

• •

• • • • •

Building in ESD into the departments in agreement with developers with features that included river cooling, green roofs, chilled beam and water sensitive design.

VicUrban see their development of land as the sponsor for redevelopment, facilitator and catalyst for private sector investment with the intention of derisking innovation.

About half way through fully re-developing the Docklands are so are taking a look at where to now in the future – at a stop point in the development so to allow a through review of project - where things worked and didn’t work.

Key initiatives achieved include: ⇒ Clean energy options - includes roof mounted PVC, solar water heating, co generation and tri generation water management ⇒ Tri generation are gas powered generating electricity, heat and cool undertaken at a very large scale ⇒ Water Management included sewer mining and storm water harvesting Achievement of outcomes was focused over the whole of the development area – individual buildings were developed within the context of the whole precinct.

VicUrban was established to connect (has own Act) the private sector with the public sector (contributed up to 90% of land).

Strong focus on urban design considering implications of design at street level, from across the street and the neighbourhood setting.

Housing Choice Australia – as an example has a partnership between Lend Lease.

VicUrban works toward establishing necessary and sufficient conditions to attract developers focusing on providing rapid, clear advice to developers/private sector.

Interesting examples of brownfield reuse included Media House (The Age) which was built over a heavy rail line.

Olwyn Redshaw spoke about the need to focus on affordable living (incorporating all aspects including land/housing cost, finance, transport, access to services, employment and facilities) rather than just affordable housing.

Page 19 of 33

Best Practice Tour 2010 - New Challenges for Local Government and Planning

Key Findings / Learnings – Day 4 • • • •

• • • •

Focussing government energy and resources on the delivery of greenfield development can assist in producing more timely and efficient outcomes.

Infrastructure costs in Melbourne are moderated by the easier building conditions arising from the generally flat topography and soil conditions.

The use of an infrastructure “tax” is transparent, but is experiencing industry and political resistance.

Melbourne is currently at a very interesting stage, where it has a choice between the Growth Areas Authority work in progressing planning and release of major greenfields areas and the City of Melbourne led work on “Transforming Australian Cities” by accommodating the growth in urban infill in centres and transit corridors. The way this plays out will be of interest/relevance to growth management challenges in Queensland.

State land development agencies can play an important role in facilitating innovation and meeting housing needs and affordability objectives.

Council House 2 (CH2) is an outstanding example of sustainable building design, with obvious mid/longer term benefits to the building owner/manager, its staff health and productivity and the environment.

Sustainable development initiatives can occur across a larger area as well as individual buildings (as demonstrated by some of the Docklands work).

It is more appropriate to focus on affordable living rather than just affordable housing, as this recognises the other cost and social implications of simply providing affordable housing in locations remote from employment, services and transport options other than the car.

Page 20 of 33

Best Practice Tour 2010 - New Challenges for Local Government and Planning

Day 4 - Melbourne Wednesday, 10 February 2010 Wednesday Night Debrief

Brad Carter • Very useful.

• Hands on – touch and feel = very useful.

Matthew Hulse • Good to see the other States and what they’re doing there.

• Confirms QLD has got the right process in place.

• Good educational process (not living in a vacuum).

Luke Smith • State in Queensland hasn’t been enabling councils – telling them what to to do but not enabling them to do it.

• In Victoria the State is allowing councils to do and supporting with funding.

Greg Hallam • Noting with respect to the cost of the land – the raw cost of land in Victoria is cheaper by about $30k making it easier and less costly to develop.

• In Queensland our market is tied up by a limited number of developer players.

Cherie Dalley • State in Victoria have the guts to get PPP’s started and invest whereas in Queensland the State Government just isnt’ doing it.

• ULDA do not have the brief, resources or the funding to do what VicUrban are doing currently.

Matthew Hulse • About trying to leverage with the State to do – we’re broke and they’re broke.

Greg Hallam • Need to look at higher use rights, land swaps, PPP’s and congestion management.

David Corkill • Local Government has to step up to the plate to do the right thing – can’t expect the State to do it for us.

Greg Hallam • QLD still has autonomy of Planning.

Cherie Dalley • Local Government need to bite the bullet on the higher density and demonstrate leadership.

Greg Vann • Noting density at Rouse Hill is good example – life style options.

• Melbourne is offering broader products with the lifestyle component.

• Dept and, industry is inherently conservative – they know what they sold last year “Builders are also a challenge”.

• Reframing the proportions.

Page 21 of 33

Best Practice Tour 2010 - New Challenges for Local Government and Planning

Greg Hallam • Now it’s about Managing the debate – the debate has been started and all participants have got a dib in it (UDIA, PC).

• Infrastructure Charges - cost of infrastructure charges needs to be worked up and determined accurately.

• More emphasis on getting BOOT/BOOM arrangements working for local government – How can it be done?

Todd Rohl • Noted that an incentive has typically been involved in getting things done, achieving the outcome.

• Have to work out how in Queensland incentivising the developers can be done carrot versus the stick.

• Floor space Ratio/ more GFA in return for public works or infrastructure?

Greg Vann • Shared vision is needed establish funding and how to go forward.

David Corkill • Noted the tour had presented excellent speakers.

Luke Smith • Very Happy with logistics.

• Perhaps less lecture in afternoon with more tours.

Toni Bowler • Carrying capacity – been raised w/ in Redland City Council.

• Brought to LGAQ Annual Conference as a motion.

• Meant to ensure – are we able to cope.

• On the tour would like to see more examples of best practice as those demonstrated at Victoria Park in Sydney.

Greg Hallam • Notes the figures about the migration are ¼ influx from interstate and ¾ overseas migration.

• More push from State Government.

Page 22 of 33

Best Practice Tour 2010 - New Challenges for Local Government and Planning

Day 5 - Melbourne Thursday, 11 February 2010 a) Surf Coast Council at Torquay b) Geelong Council

• • •

New ways of conducting the business of planning (new techniques in development assessment, infrastructure charging); Responding to the challenges of sustainability and climate change; and Affordable housing.

a) Surf Coast Council at Torquay Mayor Libby Corker Dennis Barker - Director Sustainable Communities Brydon King - Manager Planning and Development Surf Coast Council • • • • • •

•

•

•

• •

Visited Surf Coast Council at Torquay with a discussion by Dean Webster on current issues in the Shire and Torquay.

Presentation on project Torquay/Jan Juc 2040 by Brydon King including the challenges of engaging the community on long term growth planning.

Significant growth is expected but community is anxious.

Greenfield development proposed at Armstrong Creek will see 50,000 additional people - council will have to determine how the new development will equitably pay their fair share for infrastructure.

Growth has been significant – they are thinking driving the development of regional services and infrastructure.

State is placing emphasis on regions taking up the growth so pressure will be on as to how regions will actually achieve this task.

Council is feeling pressure to turn over agricultural land to rural residential (their vision is to however maintain that land for agriculture).

Development Contribution Plan (DCP) is set at 60/40 within the Victorian Model and is very complex for small council to undertake.

Council has made attempts to manage growth through a development area within the proposed Spring Creek Plan which earmarked an area for 30k extra people but found they had not communicated well to the community.

Strong community opposition to the plan resulted with council electing not to adopt the plan and rethink the process.

Council found that there was detail in the plan which created significant concern with affected communities.

Page 23 of 33

Best Practice Tour 2010 - New Challenges for Local Government and Planning

• • • • •

Highlighted to them the need for communities to be engaged on how the community is going to develop.

“Torquay – Jan Juc 2040” is a growth management plan is now under development seeking to align community expectations with planned growth learning from the mistakes made during community engagement on the Spring Creek Plan.

Will have an education role - how community see’s service level delivery with emphasis on community trade offs.

Challenges include identifying where to accommodate a Central Activity District (CAD); scenarios need to be developed to guide supportive development; and little support from the State in terms of identifying a transport corridor Summary challenges for the council: ⇒ Community aspirations being aligned with land use planning; strong growth and lack of understanding of implications for community; capacity of region to accommodate growth of particular focus; ⇒ Funding growth is an issue – finalising a DCP is difficult and costly to undertake for a small council; and ⇒ Government commitments to help plan and provide infrastructure not always aligned (i.e. transit corridor).

b) Geelong Council Joanna Van Slageren – Manger of City Development, Geelong Council Melissa McBride – Coordinator of Statutory Planning, Geelong Council Peter Smith –Coordinator of Strategic Implementation, Geelong Council • • • • •

• •

Presentation by Geelong Council on growth areas from a strategic and statutory planning perspective and work done by council on climate change.

State government required councils to bring forward lots for development. ⇒ Council fell under their 10 year (zone lot) supply target; and ⇒ Had to plan for growth to 85,000 by 2030.

Update of the current Planning Scheme included developing a housing diversity strategy (policy is to increase density) which supports urban consolidation.

Seeking to reinforce the existing strong mixture of commercial/retail, government, institutional and recreational uses.

Geelong Council includes within its boundaries “Armstrong Creek” which is their growth area (planned by precinct): ⇒ Established a framework plan (driven by council) that identifies commercial- employ areas. ⇒ Challenge will be piling together fragmented owners (about 6) and having them coordinate developing.

Partnership with State includes secondments from the state working together on the project.

Infrastructure charges for housing is about $7–10k per lot, not including water cycle management or State infrastructure.

Page 24 of 33

Best Practice Tour 2010 - New Challenges for Local Government and Planning

Key Findings / Learnings – Day 5 • • •

It is important to establish an agreed vision about the future to align community aspirations and land use planning, before undertaking the detailed planning.

Government leadership in planning for greenfield development can assist in coordinating orderly development where land ownership is fragmented.

Regional areas have major opportunities to pursue best practice planning initiatives identified in the four themes of this tour.

Page 25 of 33

Best Practice Tour 2010 - New Challenges for Local Government and Planning

Day 6 - Adelaide Friday, 12 February 2010 a) State Government Presentation b) Adelaide Hills Council • • • •

New ways of designing places for people (place-making, main streets, etc); New ways of conducting the business of planning (new techniques in development assessment, infrastructure charging); Responding to the challenges of sustainability and climate change; and Affordable housing.

a) South Australian State Government Presentation John Hanlon - Deputy CE, SA Department of Planning and Local Government Andrew Sykes – Strategic Infrastructure Exec Officer, City of Charles Sturt Jason Ting – GM, SA Department of Planning and Local Government Chris Zafiropoulos - GM, SA Department of Planning and Local Government Andrew Bishop - Manager Project Delivery, Land Management Corporation Sandy Rix - GM, Planning & Property Service, Land Management Corporation Robyn Evans – Manager Strategic Projects, Housing SA Carmella Luscri - Principal Planner, SA Department of Planning and Local Government •

• •

• • • • •

Welcome by John Hanlon with presentations co-ordinated by Carmella Luscri indicating presentations on: ⇒ South Australian Planning System - Jason Ting & Chris Zafiropoulos ⇒ Lochiel Park housing development – Andrew Bishop ⇒ Bowden Village Master Plan – Sandy Rix ⇒ Affordable Housing - Robyn Evans ⇒ Port Road Storm Water Project and Waterproofing the West - Adrian Sykes.

Discussions on assessment panels (including independent panels) and infrastructure planning for stormwater capture and reuse.

Planning Systems discussion including use of panels: ⇒ independent experts have helped improve level of professionalism; ⇒ helped make development process more straight forward; and ⇒ depoliticised the process – focused councils on policy and planning work not on building garages.

Objective for the panel were to increase public confidence in planning systems and address the need for continuous improvement.

Assessment Panels in Charles Stuart Council: ⇒ council determines what goes to the panel (ie. complex projects). ⇒ 1% of DAs go to panels – but that 1% represents 30% of workload.

Council determines what goes to the panel (ie. complex projects).

Elected Members on the panel are trained up and the rest are happy not to be involved.

Presentation on Bowden Urban Village – intended as a model transit oriented development (TOD) precinct.

Page 26 of 33

Best Practice Tour 2010 - New Challenges for Local Government and Planning

• • •

• •

• • • • • • • • • •

Engaged a consultant to run through strategic process with emphasis on need to produce a market ready, robust development.

Focused on how to sequence the infrastructure to find out the “mojo” for the site and determine its unique selling point.

Presentation on Lochiel Sustainable Village – demonstration project of sustainable housing undertaken by the State Land Management Corporation.

Affordable housing is a requirement in new development within SA – associated with the Housing Plan for SA. Amended Acts have enabled requirements to be set for meeting 15% affordable targets and 5% high need housing in targets in “significant new development”.

This required legislation and policy changes to be gazetted under SA Housing Trust Regulations to describe criteria for affordable housing.

Process is currently that the Affordable Housing Unit enters into affordable housing agreement/ land management agreement to meet 15% target and issues certification with developers and NGO’s form relationships to deliver 15%.

The impact of the policy is expected to be significant as all significant growth areas will be subject to the 15% and 5% targets for housing.

Ground work is delivered and integrated into system representing a “systemic solution” to addressing affordable housing.

Andrew Sykes (City of Charles Sturt) discussed a citywide approach to storm water catchment management.

Council started looking for storm water capital works management options other than building a big pipe to ocean.

Details were provided on how council sought to “water proofing the west” and redistribute water supply from areas of stormwater generation to areas of demand/need such as schools and parks.

Started as a flood mitigation project but recognised there was an opportunity to reframe the initiative as a “Water Reuse Project” which successfully attracted Commonwealth and State Government funding.

Initiative is also securing a proportion of winter river flows from the River Torrens heading out to sea and redirecting the water into wetlands to maintain and redistribute to places of need.

Visit to Lochiel Sustainable Village - ecologically sustainable development (ESD) demonstration project.

Page 27 of 33

Best Practice Tour 2010 - New Challenges for Local Government and Planning

b) Adelaide Hills Council Peter Peppin – CEO Mark Salver Howard Lacy Stuart Boyd • • •

•

•

• • •

• •

• • • •

Adelaide Hills Council provided a presentation on planning case study for conflicting demands of urban housing in a sensitive ecology.

Adelaide Hills Council is a mid-size council with 170 staff– whilst formed from an amalgamation in 1997 noting it is only in the last 5 years where the benefits arising from the amalgamation of have occurred.

Big issues for council are associated with flooding and bushfire which are being addressed through council planning processes (development and buiding codes).

From a Queensland perspective noted that they’re similar in some ways to Scenic Rim. Historically not a growth council but they are beginning to feel the pressure for development particularly being in close proximity to Adelaide.

Most densely populated bushfire prone area in South Australia.

This is intensifying the bushfire issue as new development is often targeted at risky locations within the forest.

All new houses require two tanks – one for water supply and the other for fire fighting with access made for emergency vehicles.

Public transport is a challenge and low service levels mean most of the community travels by car.

Developer contributions don’t happen in South Australia – councils negotiate individually through land management agreements.

Development permits are council’s only bargaining chip but it’s not an effective system as more than one development means more than one agreement.

Example of Mt Barker that management of multi management agreements represents and a significant impost on staff resources.

Strong agricultural land use means significant impact issues within residents affected by primary production activity.

Part of the Draft 30 Plan for Greater Adelaide regional planning strategies – intent is for new development to be incorporated within existing boundaries.

Page 28 of 33

Best Practice Tour 2010 - New Challenges for Local Government and Planning

• • • •

• • •

• • • •

Stuart Boyd discussing affordable housing within Adelaide City Council.

Adelaide Hills Council - strong sense of identity and long living residents but experiencing a growing affordability gap.

Under the National Rental Affordability Scheme (NRAS) covers roles for councils in housing provision Marketing Housing – Market; Affordable Housing – Government; and Social Housing – Government.

Examples given include: ⇒ Sydney Place – Units for affordable housing provided through property value increases after construction of the development. ⇒ Whitmore Square – National Competition (won by local firm Troppo) with cost per unit at $420k with council initially covering cost of construction for development but later recovering the capital expenditure through sales.

Council is involved in providing retirement villages - 63 units (2 bedroom) over 6 townships sites.

Gumeracha site is a joint venture with “Unity Housing” which is attracting State and Commonwealth funding through the Affordable Housing Fund, NRAS and debt financing.

Concludes with noting: ⇒ different approaches being made by different councils; ⇒ focus is on responding to local needs; ⇒ projects will determine outcome; ⇒ Increasing affordability gap means more rentals; and ⇒ Council policy states that the reason that are supplying housing is that the market has failed to deliver.

On the use of Independent Development Assessment Panels – introduced in 2007 with the aim of making the planning system more efficient.

Noted there was some resistance as it was felt panels would favour developers but council experience has been good with 5-7% of all applications received (non compliant, controversial).

Panels in South Australia include 4 independent and 3 elected members including a qualified and experienced town planner with the councils themselves selecting the panel members based on their skill sets.

Experience has been that the panels have depoliticised the development approval process resulting in good collaboration between elected and independent members.

Page 29 of 33

Best Practice Tour 2010 - New Challenges for Local Government and Planning

•

Tour of Adelaide Hills by bus included examples of three main street projects undertaken by council (examples of designing places for people) namely, the main streets of Stirling, Woodside and Lobethal which are all commercial centres of the respective towns.

Two residential developments visited in Woodside a retirement village complex and a relatively recent medium scale residential subdivision in Gumeracha consisting of small scale (4 unit) joint venture affordable housing development.

•

Key Findings / Learning’s – Day 6 •

• • • •

The SA State Government is focussed on achieving a rational “cascading” of planning from the State, to regional, to individual agencies and local government, so as to better deliver intended outcomes; a significant shift towards more housing in infill areas, and significant funding of transport infrastructure.

Demonstration projects can play an important role in leading and changing government and private sector approaches, evident in projects such as the Lochiel Sustainable Village, Bowden Urban Village & Part Road Storm Water Project.

The State Government through specific land development agencies can play a leadership role in this.

Ways of addressing affordable housing include mandating a specific requirement, and means of ensuring some of this is delivered through normal market mechanisms as well as State Government housing and not for profit agencies.

In sensitive locations, planning may need to be focussed on maintaining particular values, such as ecological, landscape and lifestyle, rather than to accommodate growth. This requires significant effort, including the need to consider direct involvement in matters such as affordable housing.

Page 30 of 33

Best Practice Tour 2010 - New Challenges for Local Government and Planning

Day 6 - Melbourne Friday, 12 February 2010 Friday Night Debrief

Key Learnings - Messages/Themes • • •

How do we capture the innovation/the new ideas?

Model the learning’s around the key themes?

How do we apply them to our situations?

Brad Carter • Question of how we build in the ideas.

• Identify a couple of icon projects then try to run with them their councils.

Linda Bradby • Affordable Housing vs Affordable Living.

• Get the streets right you get the city right.

• Process – panels were depoliticising the DA Process but wasn’t making it go faster.

• How does LGAQ deal with it?

• No efficiencies in it but there was a perception that there was less processing time.

David King • You have to tailor community engagement within the process.

• Having your say not your way.

• Need for having the high level discussion about the vision for the community.

Greg Vann • Sustainability is good business & has physical health benefits.

Cherie Dalley • Managing the ongoing need for housing choice including rental – helping hand to assist to ownership not at providing first home.

Bruce James • Why can’t we do 200m2 lots – we’ve seen that small in Rouse Hill?

• Average person doesn’t like them but they are selling in Sydney.

• Needs all stakeholders involved - banks, councils, state and developers.

• About getting the right product on the go.

Greg Hallam • We do not have an interventionist State Government.

• Need to have a pact with the State that allows for the creation of a TOD that includes all stakeholders.

• Protection of product and of market supply.

Bruce James • All major projects involve invisible hand of government guiding.

Toni Bowler • Focus on protection of heritage/environment – build that into planning process.

• Reflecting on how to grow the number of people that are informed.

Page 31 of 33

Best Practice Tour 2010 - New Challenges for Local Government and Planning

Roger Ferguson • Partnership / Joint Venture with land that is available with State - they need to provide as partners on assets.

• How is the State coming to the table?

Greg Vann • Is there some agency within the State that can do what LandCom can do?

• Missing piece of the planning system in Queensland.

Helen Murray • Affordable Housing is needed by 50% of the population – it is a systemic issue for the whole economic system.

Greg Vann • Where the markets are failing there needs to be intervention .

• Affordable Housing – No Affordable living - need to address market future.

• How to we do a LandCom? • What are the incentives?

David Corkhill • Decisions being made now need to be made within long term and maximum yield in mind – avoid short term focus.

• Resilience for communities.

Helen Murray • Need clarity on what is the role of elected member.

• Need to respect the role of the elected member.

Brad Carter • Caught between a real tension with council on short term vs long-term considerations.

• Some political members are only concerned within election.

Dy Currie • Need to understand the strength in explaining to the community about the consequences of decisions that are being made and why (the 6% City).

• Market/communications is critical - Fact that community is being engaged & being clever in sending that message.

Ray Gartrell • Focus was on affordable cities noting we are a nation of fringe cities.

Matthew Hulse • Value around being open and honest with interaction between political and officer • Shared values in moving cities/communities forward.

• Tend to forget how important the small issues being faced by the individuals in the community.

• We need to remember that drives us.

• Overseas tour is needed with places like Portland and Vancouver – Big picture view needed.

Page 32 of 33

Best Practice Tour 2010 - New Challenges for Local Government and Planning

4. Acknowledgements The LGAQ extends it sincere thanks to the Queensland Government and local governments for approving the participation of their respective officers and political representatives on the study tour. The breadth of perspectives within the tour group has enabled a comprehensive appreciation and assessment of best practice in planning.

The Association also extends its deep appreciation to the councils, housing organisations and state government agencies in Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria and South Australia for sharing their experiences and learnings. Thanks also to the corporations and firms for inviting the tour group to visit them and their buildings to learn how councils in Queensland can achieve greater sustainability through their built environment.

Thanks to our corporate partners in the tour Gary Barton from Indec Consulting and to Greg Vann from Buckley Vann Town Planning Consultants who were intimately involved in the tour programe development. Special thanks to Greg Vann who not only shared his extensive planning experience and knowledge with the tour participants but ensured the tour remained light and enjoyable through his ongoing commentary.

Sincere thanks is also extended to Keveena Jackson, Buckley Vann’s Office Manager for the flawless tour delivery and her tireless efforts in arranging transport and logistics for the study tour.

Page 33 of 33