smh.com.au
NSW Housing Plan Faces "Reckless" Criticism Amid Building Crisis
NSW is considering allowing six-story buildings to bypass council approvals via complying development certificates (CDCs) to boost housing, but this is criticized for potentially worsening the building crisis due to reduced oversight and increased risk from private certifiers.
- What alternative approaches could balance efficient development approvals with thorough risk assessment for larger, more complex residential buildings in NSW?
- Expanding CDCs to larger developments risks overlooking crucial aspects like overshadowing and privacy concerns, highlighting a need for robust risk mitigation. Hybrid models combining CDC and merit-based assessments, or incorporating precinct masterplans, could offer a balance between efficient approvals and comprehensive oversight. The upcoming NSW Housing Pattern Book may also reduce some risks.
- What are the immediate implications of potentially allowing six-story buildings to bypass local council approvals in NSW, considering the state's building crisis?
- NSW is considering changes to allow terrace homes and apartment blocks up to six stories to bypass local council approvals via "complying development certificates" (CDCs). This aims to boost housing supply but faces criticism for potentially worsening the state's building crisis. Councils and experts express concerns about reduced oversight and increased risk.
- How would shifting development approvals from councils to private certifiers impact the assessment of factors like construction traffic management, waste disposal, and operating hours for larger residential buildings?
- The proposed reform would shift the approval process from councils to private certifiers, raising accountability concerns given the state's existing building quality issues. Critics argue that larger developments necessitate thorough assessment considering factors like construction traffic, waste management, and operating hours, which are handled during council assessment. The current CDC process typically applies to smaller buildings.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article's framing emphasizes the negative aspects of the proposed reforms. The headline and opening paragraph immediately highlight the criticisms from councilors, setting a negative tone. The concerns raised by councilors are given significant weight and prominence, while potential benefits are largely absent. This prioritization of negative perspectives shapes the reader's perception of the reforms.
Language Bias
The article uses loaded language to portray the proposed reforms negatively. Terms such as "reckless," "unpalatable," and "asking for a whole lot of trouble" are emotionally charged and suggest a strong negative opinion. The repeated emphasis on potential risks associated with the reform paints a biased picture. More neutral alternatives could include phrases such as "controversial proposals", "concerns regarding potential risks" or "expediting the approval process".
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on the criticisms of the proposed reforms, giving significant voice to councilors and industry experts who express concerns. However, it omits perspectives from proponents of the reforms, such as developers or state government representatives who might highlight the potential benefits of streamlining the approval process and increasing housing supply. The potential positive impacts on housing affordability and addressing the housing shortage are not thoroughly explored. While acknowledging space constraints is important, the lack of counterarguments leaves a potential bias by omission.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a false dichotomy by framing the debate as a simple choice between faster approvals (with associated risks) and the existing council assessment process. It doesn't adequately explore potential hybrid models or alternative solutions that could balance efficiency with risk mitigation, such as the hybrid models mentioned by the Planning Institute of Australia. This simplification overshadows the complexity of the issue and limits the reader's understanding of possible solutions.
Sustainable Development Goals
The proposed planning reforms to bypass local council development applications for larger residential buildings raise concerns regarding sustainable urban development. The lack of proper assessment may lead to poorly planned developments, impacting infrastructure, community needs, and potentially exacerbating existing building quality issues. This contradicts sustainable urban planning principles, potentially leading to unsustainable growth and negatively impacting the quality of life for residents.