Articles
Urban Taskforce | Infill
|
- |
|
||||||||||||
Greenfield housing code should extend to urban infill26 May 2017The announcement by NSW Planning Minister, Anthony Roberts, of a new Greenfield Housing Code to speed up approvals is a good initiative that needs to be extended to mid-rise urban infill projects, says the Urban Taskforce. Metropolitan Strategy Discussion Paper Supports 70% Infill Housing3 May 2012The discussion paper on Sydney’s Metropolitan Strategy reinforces a 70% split of infill housing with 30% in Greenfield site says the Urban taskforce. Sydney infill sites need special attention30 January 2012The Urban Taskforce congratulates the NSW government for setting up a special committee to encourage development in greenfield areas. A lot of effort has been wasted in zoning land in the past. This has been in the ownership of hundreds of different owners who do not see the value of developing their land, so no change has occurred. The government has now taken a much more sensible approach and asked the larger land owners to submit proposals to the government so that real development can occur.
John Brogden the ideal person to drive urban renewal in Sydney30 January 2012The Urban Taskforce has welcomed the appointment of John Brogden as the new Chair of Landcom. |
 What's NewFile Size: 104.03 kB
4 July 2012The Urban Taskforce has reviewed the Draft NSW Urban Activation Precincts Guideline, June 2012 ("the guideline")and associated material and we have identified a number of issues worthy of further consideration. Our comments are generally outlined below for your consideration. File Size: 160.03 kB
6 June 2012The Urban Taskforce has reviewed the Auto Alley Urban Renewal Study Community Consultation material which outlines the results of the preliminary investigation into the Auto Alley precinct. We have identified a number of issues worthy of further consideration when more detailed investigations are undertaken for the preparation of the urban renewal plans for the Auto Alley precinct (the precinct).
File Size: 109.70 kB
5 October 2011There needs to be an anti-NIMBY provision. Narrowing of state significant development categories is not appropriate. Rail corridor should be defined. There is an absence of transitional provisions for existing applications before the joint regional planning panels. There are problems with the provision related to staged development and joint regional planning panels. |
|||||||||||||
