digest - UDIA

SCD01182

SCD01259

DEVELOPERS DIGEST 104 President’s Report05 CEO’s Report06 Minister for Planning’sReport08 Current Issues12 Development Feature16 Industry News28 People + Events32 Development Intelligence33 National Update34 Legal News36 Member News39 Profile40 Events + ProfessionalDevelopment41 Sponsors1027123236contentsCOVER IMAGE: VICTORIA PARK BY LANDCOMdevelopersdigest issue 2, 2009Greening the Inner-South: Victoria Parkand Green SquareBiobanking UpdateFinding a balance –the Henry ReviewViews expressed in any article in Developers Digest are those of theindividual contributor and not necessarily those of the publisher. Thepublisher cannot accept any responsibility for any opinions, information,errors or omissions in this publication. To the extent permitted by law, thepublisher will not be liable for any damages including, special, exemplary,punitive or consequential damages (including but not limited to economicloss or loss of profit or revenue or loss of opportunity) or indirect loss ordamage of any kind arising in contract, tort or otherwise, even if advisedUDIA NSWEditor, Developers Digest – Lisa Marshall lmarshall@udia-nsw.com.auPO BOX 912 EPPING NSW 1710T: (02) 9868 3677 F: (02) 9868 7117 W: www.udia-nsw.com.auPublisher: The Magazine Publishing CompanyPO Box 406, Nundah QLD 4012 T: (07) 3866 0000 F: (07) 3866 0066E: sales@tmpc.com.au W: www.tmpc.com.au Advertising Sales: (07) 3866 0000of the possibility of such loss of profits or damage. Advertisements mustcomply with the relevant provisions of the Trade Practices Act 1974.Responsibility for compliance with the Act rests with the person, companyor advertising agency submitting the advertisement.COPYRIGHT All rights reserved. Copyright of articles and photographs ofDevelopers Digest remain with the individual contributors and may not bereproduced without permission. Other material may be reproduced, butonly with the permission of The Magazine Publishing Company.ABN 70010 660 009DEVELOPERS DIGEST 3

president’s reportStructural reformJudy McKittrickUDIA NSW PRESIDENTA new financial year and will it see improvement in the economy and our industry? The stimulus packagehas certainly helped the first home buyer market, but in the coming months that will wind back and thenwhat? Some in our industry will be busy with the schools and social housing work but most will be waitinganxiously upon a recovery to the main economy.Now more than ever we need structuralreform so that we are well positioned whenthe economic and employment conditionsimprove:• taxation– the Henry Review has the potentialto recommend much needed reform intaxation. UDIA has made a submission tothe review calling for Federal interventionto reform the taxation system anddrive an agenda for deregulation andmicroeconomic reform for the propertyand development sector. The submissionfocuses on the impact that the prevailingtax system has on urban development– investment in urban development andthe shape of cities but most importantlyhousing affordability for all Australians;• how infrastructure is funded and delivered– despite the recent reviews to stateand local contributions resulting insome reductions, the system of fundinginfrastructure remains inequitable with newhome buyers unfairly burdened with payingfor infrastructure and services.As a general principal, Government needsto ensure that the cost of infrastructureprovision is borne by the broadest baseof beneficiaries, rather than the narrowinefficient and inequitable frameworkthat currently exists. As a key initial step,UDIA NSW is calling on the Governmentto remove rate pegging and consolidatesmaller local government areas to generategreater efficiencies in infrastructure andservice provision; and• the planning regime remains complex andlegalistic with unnecessary duplicationin approval processes. Why for instancehaving spent over two years to achieverezoning for a release area, is it necessaryto have negotiate Controlled ActivityApprovals for the treatment of ripariancorridors?UDIA both at the national and state levelwill continue to advocate for reform in theseareas.Providing services to members is alsoan important part of our activities and werecently launched Development Intelligence,our quarterly research report.This quarterly report features acomprehensive analysis on every relevantstatistic and data release that impact onthe development industry. UDIA NSWhas partnered with leading industrycommentator Rob Ellis from PropertyInsights to deliver this report, and regularcommentary on issues of relevance to theindustry – including DA approval statistics,changes in the official cash rate, andchanges in consumer confidence.Development Intelligence not only deliverseven more value for your membership butalso focuses on ensuring that you have theexpert analysis and commentary that will becritical to steering a steady course throughthese uncertain times. We would welcomeyour feedback on this latest service.In the coming months we have a numberof events planned with a range of highcalibre and interesting speakers includingBill Evans, Chief Economist, Westpac; BradHazzard MP, Shadow Minister for Planning,and Rod Fehring, CEO, Lend LeasePrimelife, to name but a few. Keep an eyeout for emails and flyers advising of theseevents.One of our biggest annual events is comingup on 25 September – our Awards forExcellence gala dinner. This year marksthe 15th Anniversary of the Awards so besure to join us to help celebrate this state’sachievements and recognise excellence indevelopment.I look forward to catching up with you at ournext event.In the coming monthswe have a number ofevents planned with arange of high calibreand interesting speakersincluding Bill Evans,Chief Economist,Westpac; Brad HazzardMP, Shadow Ministerfor Planning, and RodFehring, CEO, LendLease Primelife, to namebut a few.4 DEVELOPERS DIGEST

ceo’s reportConversion is the keyStephen AlbinUDIA NSW CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICEROver the last 12 weeks I have done a whistle stop tour of all of our policy Committees, personally met withour industry leaders, had the opportunity to brush shoulders with more than 1000 people associated withthe business at our lunches, briefings and breakfasts, and met with the key decision makers in Governmentand the Opposition.of UDIA NSW and policymakers to addressdemand and supply issues simultaneously.If the economic fortunes of the industry arebased on the level of experience, enthusiasmand commitment of the people I have met inUDIA NSW, then we are in good hands.The economic fortunes of not only the industrybut of all Australians are inextricably linkedto our members. More than 10 per cent ofeconomic activity directly and indirectly isa product of property and development.Around 10 per cent of employment is directlyand indirectly attributed to the property anddevelopment sector. There was no mistakethat the Commonwealth Governmentadded further stimuli and boosts to homebuyers. It was also no mistake that the NSWGovernment provided additional stimulus andtax relief for the sector in the recent Budget.Governments are starting to recognise theeconomic significance of the industry. And thisrecognition is a result of the work of UDIA NSWand its dedicated and committed members.Handing out incentives is one thing – butdelivering results on the ground is a totallydifferent proposition. Conversion will be ourkey priority over the coming 12 months.For instance, the NSW Government haspredicted a housing boom in 2009-2010with an extra 24,000 new homes coming tomarket. This we can assume, is the resultof the increased stimulus and tax relief forhome purchasers and probably the result of aforecast economic turnaround.Additionally, our research partner PropertyInsights, through our quarterly researchreport, Development Intelligence, has shownhousing affordability in NSW has never beenbetter – with housing in Sydney now beingmore affordable than Brisbane.A member that was sitting next to me atthe presentation of report remarked thatit has been the first time he had seen anaffordability led downturn!The forecasts are correct but only depict oneside of the equation. I have now learnt thatyou can reduce interest rates, introduce alltypes of buyer incentives but policymakersneed to be acutely aware of the supply sideof situation.Issues such as the availability of finance,delays in the planning system, poorregulatory systems, lack of land supply arecritical. Policy makers should be aware thatyou cannot just turn on the demand tap andsupply will follow and vice versa.Conversion and improving the general activityin the industry will be reliant on the abilityThe present state of the market poses somereal challenges for UDIA NSW. We have justwitnessed a level of demand stimulus neverexperienced in modern Australia. For thedevelopment sector, it is starting to be woundback. The stimulus basically enabled theexisting unsold stock to be sold in a economicdownturn but there has been little new stockcoming to market. The financial crisis has seensome key financial supporters of the propertyindustry announce their withdrawal from theproperty market, honouring their existingcommitments but undertaking no extra debtfinancing for developers. Governments havemade some key policy announcementsregarding removing supply bottlenecks toplanning, but have also wound back some oftheir promises.Once debt finance dries up, land supply isconstrained and the planning system bucklesunder delays and inefficiencies – it doesn’tmatter how many incentives Governmentsprovide, and doesn’t matter how affordablehousing is – there will be little development.Given the prevailing buoyant demandconditions it is more important than ever thatUDIA NSW focuses on improving the supplyside for our industry. If we are confronted bysupply bottlenecks, the ramifications are notfor the next six months, year or two years –the impacts will be long lasting.We will redouble our efforts in improving theplanning system and we will provide betterinformation and research to ensure thatrational investment and finance decisionscan be made. Conversion is the key andwe will make Governments aware of theintricacies of the development sector toensure the future health of this industry andthe economy as a whole.Your involvement in UDIA NSW now willdeliver your business great returns for yearsto come.DEVELOPERS DIGEST 5

minister for planning’s reportMinister’s ReportThe Hon. Kristina Keneally MPMINISTER FOR PLANNINGIn the midst of a global economic crisis Governments have no higher priority than protecting jobs andfacilitating investment. One of the most important tools Governments can deploy to beat back the effects ofan economic downturn and lay the groundwork for recovery is an efficient and effective Planning system.That is why now is precisely the time for NewSouth Wales to set its vision firmly on one goal– creating Australia’s best planning system.Australia’s best planning system is one inwhich decisions are efficient, transparent,certain and made at the most appropriate level.Decisions at their most appropriate levelensures that projects of local significanceare determined at a local level, projects withregional impact are determined at a regionallevel, and projects important to the state’seconomy are determined by the state.The Joint Regional Planning Panels willcommence operating on 1 July. A panel ofexperts will de-politicise decision makingand bring a regional focus by determiningprojects with a capital investment value of$10 million or more.Under the Rees Government, Part 3A of theEP&A Act will continue to provide a whole ofgovernment, streamlined approach to majorprojects.The Joint Regional Planning Panels andPart 3A are key to delivering Australia’s bestplanning system by ensuring that decisionsare made at the most appropriate level.For the Rees Government, there is nohigher priority than ensuring we attract jobsand investment – and Part 3A is crucial inattracting development to our state.However, the NSW Opposition take a verydifferent view.In the past few months the Opposition Leaderand the Shadow Planning Minister haveconfirmed on many occasions that a CoalitionGovernment would abolish Part 3A.In the last few weeks, the Opposition Leaderoutlined what he would put in its place:nothing. Yes, that’s right. Nothing.The Leader of the Opposition has outlined ina speech to the Shires Association, and againon an ABC Stateline interview, that a CoalitionGovernment will return all planning powers tolocal councils.Every coal mine, every residentialsubdivision, every new town centre, everyindustrial estate, every business park, everypower station, every new hospital, school andpublic housing development, every rezoning– all of it determined by local councils.These are major projects, job creatingprojects, projects important to the state’seconomic growth and the Oppositionis promising to wash their hands of anyresponsibility to facilitate this investment.This is a policy position that should causeconcern for any person interested ineconomic growth and job creation. On thisvital issue to the state’s economic wellbeing,the Opposition Leader is abdicatingleadership. He is vacating the space.The Leader of the Opposition thinks he is ona populist bent here.Saying he will ‘hand planning powers back toCouncils’ makes a good glib 10 second grab,but it is not a planning policy that will createjobs and investment.Nor is it a planning policy that will work forlocal communities.It is the ultimate shift to councils – all the costand all the responsibility – to determine everyproject application in the state. This will clogup Council systems; divert Council resourcesfrom dealing with projects important to localcommunities; and will treat major projectsexactly the same as a DA for the family home.Leadership is not just about the title, and it’snot just about the 10 second grab. It’s abouttaking the tough decisions, about taking aview about what’s important to the state asa whole, and it’s about being responsible forthe economic well-being of the state.Our goal of Australia’s best planning systemis the right prescription for the currenteconomic climate, or indeed, for anyeconomic climate.Creating Australia’s best planning system willensure the State of NSW will emerge fromthis economic downturn in better shape thanwhen we entered it.We are well on our way to this goal. Interms of efficiency, the numbers speakfor themselves. In the nine months sinceSeptember, the Rees Government hasapproved 336 major projects, creating over55,000 jobs and facilitating nearly $14 billionin investment – and these figures contrastfavourably for the previous nine months.Efficiency gains are a result of the removalof some 1300 concurrences and referrals,introducing project delivery managers in theDepartment of Planning, and setting cleardeadlines for them to meet: 85 per cent ofprojects to be determined in three months, 95per cent to be finalised within five months; andno project assessment to exceed 8 months.Certainty in planning decisions is essentialto provide confidence for investors andproponents of major projects in our state.The introduction of the ‘gateway process’ forplanning proposals will deliver early, up frontdecisions and tailor the consultation, studyrequirements and plan making process to suitthe complexity of the changes.Certainty will also result from rapid rezoningprocesses. The Rees Government’s decisionto integrate the Growth Centres Commissioninto the Department of Planning and expandtheir focus on land release state-wide will beintegral to meeting our new timeframes forrezoning: 3 months for a minor rezoning tocorrect anomalies; 6-12 months for routinerezonings; 6-12 months for land release andother major rezonings that are consistent withregional or sub-regional strategies, and twoyears for a comprehensive LEP.Transparency is essential for proponentsand the community to have confidencein planning decisions. The newly createdPlanning Assessment Commission and theJoint Regional Planning Panels deliver thattransparency by depoliticising planningdeterminations and providing independentadvice to the Minister.The example of the Ikea proposal in Tempe isa case in point. Issues like political donationsfrom the proponent and the fact that theproject was in my electorate were dealt withtransparently by the Planning AssessmentCommission, who determined the project.The southern hemisphere’s biggest Ikea,as well as the company’s Australianheadquarters in a building with local heritage6 DEVELOPERS DIGEST

minister for planning’s reportlisting, gained planning approval in 7 months– and were welcomed by the local counciland local community. The head of IkeaAustralia told the media that ‘getting planningapproval was the easiest part of the project.’That’s precisely the outcome we want forevery major project in New South Wales.In that context, I issue a challenge. Let’s stoptalking of planning reforms. Reform is a goodword, no doubt about it.But reform is also a concession that thingsare bad and must be fixed. Reform focusesbackwards on what happened in the past.Rather, the goal of Australia’s best planningsystem is forward-looking. It is strivingforward rather than focusing on whathappened before. It is imagining a futurerather than ruing the past. It is creatinga vision for where we are going ratherthan ruminating on the directions we tookpreviously.Make no mistake – I don’t suggest we ignorethe experience of the past – but we don’t letit determine our future.The future of our planning system – andultimately the future of our state’s economicwell being – is ours to create.We have a good planning system, and it is“Getting planning approval was the easiest part of the project,” said the head of IkeaAustralia.getting better each day with the changes weare making.The UDIA is an important part in the work thatwe are doing. As a significant stakeholderin urban renewal and land release, the UDIAplays a leadership role in creating Australia’sbest planning system. Recent initiatives, suchas the Development Intelligence Report,provide significant information and analysisin the current uncertain economic climate. Ilook forward to attending my next UDIA eventin September, and value the advice and inputfrom Judy McKittrick and leadership team atthe organisation.As a state, let’s set ourselves a positive visionand strive towards a goal that challengesand inspires us – a great planning system,indeed, Australia’s best.STRATA SETTLEMENTS4 WEEKS EARLIER?This may be possible!Your final Strata Plan can be endorsedwithout applying to the Local Council:Gordon Wrenis a Principal Certifier-Subdivisionsand an Accredited Certifier-StrataInterested? Go ahead and contact me at:PO Box 150 BANKSTOWN NSW 1885Phone: 0418 223 748 or 9790 6608 Fax: 9708 5753Email: g.wren@bigpond.comWeb: www.grinsell.com.auJSD00895DEVELOPERS DIGEST 7

current issuesSea level rise planning guidelinesAdrien ByrneUDIA NSW POLICY OFFICERThe NSW Government released the Draft Sea Level Rise Policy Statement in February 2009 setting out theGovernment’s approach to sea level rise and how it intends to respond to the impacts of sea level rise in thecontext of land use planning. The draft Policy proposed the introduction of sea level rise planning benchmarksand the development of sea level rise planning guidelines to support those benchmarks.UDIA NSW released their submission in July,for the purpose of informing the Departmentof Planning in the drafting and developmentof the guidelines, and contends that thedevelopment of the planning guidelinesmust be based on the following principleobjectives:• To provide investment certainty todevelopment proponents, landowners,homeowners and the broader community.• To provide certainty to local councilsand development proponents on thecorrect assessment, approval and appealprocesses.• To enable consistency between localcouncils and avoid fragmented responsesor misinterpretation of the guidelines.• To facilitate a triple bottom line approach tosustainable development.UDIA NSW has consulted broadly with ourmembership base, including our RegionalChapters, and has identified the followingconcerns considered relevant to theFlood modelling isnecessary to ensure localcouncils correctly andconsistently apply thesea level rise planningbenchmarks. UDIA NSWasserts that this wouldreflect the objective ofthe current planningreforms to increaseplanning consistencyamongst councils.development of the guidelines. The basis ofthese concerns is supported in the context ofthe principle objectives provided above.Implications of Sea Level RiseBenchmarks on PlanningThe implications of sea level rise andthe application of sea level rise planningbenchmarks to coastal development in NSWremains uncertain. Flood modelling of allcoastal areas must be undertaken by theNSW Government to properly assess theimpact of any sea level rise benchmark onland directly adjacent to the coast as wellas coastal rivers and streams. UDIA NSWsubmits that the implications on associateddevelopment controls upstream of a rivermouth must be considered in the context ofany flood modelling.The development industry and broadercommunity require an understanding ofthe implications of sea level rise policy andrelated guidelines on current and futureland releases. Additionally the implicationsof the guidelines on new development andredevelopment of existing buildings warrantsfurther clarification.Flood modelling is necessary to ensure localcouncils correctly and consistently applythe sea level rise planning benchmarks.UDIA NSW asserts that this would reflectthe objective of the current planning reformsto increase planning consistency amongstcouncils.To support detailed flood modelling, the NSWGovernment and local councils must providecomprehensive mapping of sea level riseaffected land consistent with any applicablesea level rise planning benchmark. Mappingexists for a range of planning matters whichinform local development controls includingbushfire, native vegetation, acid sulphatesoils, heritage etc.Mapping of sea level rise affected land inNSW coastal regions is consistent with thebreadth of mapping surrounding other naturalresource and conservation matters that areapplicable to the planning and developmentprocess. Sea level rise mapping wouldsupport the decision making processes ofthe development industry, local councilsand the broader community. UDIA NSWargues that flood modeling and mapping ofsea level rise are fundamental to inform allstakeholders of the implications of sea levelrise policy.Consideration of Sea Level Rise andClimate ChangeAs evident by recent climate change litigationit is necessary for a developer to ‘consider’climate change and its impacts. Theguidelines must clearly specify what onus ison a developer to adequately consider sealevel rise in the planning and developmentprocess.Fundamentally, UDIA NSW is of the viewthat a robust strategic planning frameworkwould sufficiently consider sea level riseimplications at the strategic planningscale. This would negate the need toconsider this matter at later intervals in thedevelopment process thereby avoidingregulatory duplication and streamlining thedevelopment approval process.Concurrences and ReferralsThe assessment of any developmentproposal potentially affected by sea levelrise policy must be done in the contextof the broader planning outcomes of adevelopment proposal. For the purposesof efficiency and reducing delays in theassessment of development proposals, sealevel rise assessment responsibilities shouldbe delegated only to a relevant councilofficer.UDIA NSW does not support any processthat would require a development proposalto be referred to another agency such asthe Department of Environment and ClimateChange or a Catchment ManagementAuthority for consultation. UDIA NSWsimilarly does not support the need for anyconcurrence mechanism to be introducedthrough statute.8 DEVELOPERS DIGEST

current issuesTransitional ArrangementsTo support the workable implementation ofthe guidelines, the Department of Planningmust consider the need for transitionalarrangements. Many local councils havealready introduced sea level rise policiesand related planning controls. Similarly manylocal councils do not have an existing sealevel rise policy or any associated planningcontrols.An assessment of the impacts of introducingstate-wide guidelines on the existing localplanning framework should be conducted bythe NSW Government. Further, transitionalarrangements must be provided forexisting landowners and developers onsea level rise affected land. This will assistthe development industry as well as localcouncils adapt to new planning guidelines.Appeal ProcessThe NSW Government has recognisedin the draft Policy, that the sea level riseplanning benchmark ‘is not intended tobe used to preclude development of landprojected to be affected by sea level rise.’Considering the intent of the exhibited sealevel rise policy, the guidelines must clearlyoutline an appropriate appeal mechanismfor a proponent to appeal the impositionof a planning benchmark on a specificdevelopment or parcel of land.The relationship between sea level riseplanning controls and SEPP 1 (DevelopmentStandards) must also be clearly outlined inthe guidelines. This will provide clarity toindustry, councils and the community andassist in avoiding single issue planning.Development Potential of LandThe guidelines must consider the impactprojected sea level rise or planningbenchmarks will have on the developmentpotential of land indirectly affected bysea level rise. This indirect impact wouldinclude the implications sea level rise hason services and access routes below thebenchmarks which support developable landthat is above the benchmarks.Further, financial responsibility for mitigationworks including the maintenance of accessroads and services affected by sea levelrise requires consideration. UDIA NSW doesnot support the imposition or recovery ofmitigation costs on the development industrythrough an inequitable levy frameworkor section 94 contributions. Any suchcosts should be borne by the communityas a whole to ensure geographic andintergenerational equity.The guidelines must also clearly specifythe development uses permitted onland affected by projected sea level rise.Considering the draft Policy does not intendto preclude development of land affectedby sea level rise, a clear identification ofpermitted uses would be beneficial to allstakeholders in the development process.Mitigation WorksThe development potential of certain land,as well as the protection of existing property,may be contingent on the ability for aproponent to construct mitigation works oneither public or private land. The guidelinesmust provide for and detail a facilitativeapprovals process for mitigation works to becarried out as necessary to protect property.Mitigating actual sea level rise impactsor adapting development to sea level riseprojections will have implications on theuse of building materials. This may havefurther implications on the Building Code.An understanding of such implications mustbe considered in the development of theguidelines.End noteUDIA NSW appreciates the guidelines arestill in a preliminary phase of developmentand broader sea level rise policy is a complexmatter yet to be fully considered by the NSWGovernment.DEVELOPERS DIGEST 9

current issuesGrowth Centres updateIan ReynoldsDEPUTY DIRECTOR-GENERAL, STRATEGIES AND LAND RELEASE DIVISIONNSW DEPARTMENT OF PLANNINGWhen the Growth Centres Commission merged with the Department of Planning late last year, we heardconcerns from industry that this would slow down the process of planning in the Growth Centres.Nothing could be further from the truth.The program of land release in the GrowthCentres continues and a number ofsignificant milestones have already beenreached in 2009.Plans for residential development in theGrowth Centres were boosted late last yearwith the exhibition of planning packages forthe Riverstone and Alex Avenue Precincts.The draft plans came off exhibition inFebruary, and we’re now working throughthe 300 or so submissions. We hope to seegazettal in the next few months.Riverstone and Alex Avenue are primarilyresidential developments, with the draftplans showing the potential for 15,000 newhomes supported by industrial, retail andcommercial land. We want to see this mixof housing and jobs replicated in similarPrecincts across both Growth Centres.We’ve also finalised two Precinct BoundaryReview Processes in Marsden Park Industrialand Area 20 Precincts. This adds a further145 ha to be planned in Area 20 and 106ha to Marsden Park Industrial. PrecinctPlanning in Area 20 is already showingpotential for around 2,500 new lots. BothPrecincts are well placed next to jobs andkey infrastructure.At North Kellyville, land for over 5,000 lotsWe understand theimpact a more efficientland release process hason development costsand industry certainty,as well as the knock-oneffect this has on theviability of developingland for both housing andemployment.ARTIST IMPRESSION OF THE ORAN PARK TOWN CENTREis rezoned and in the South West, work isprogressing well on Oran Park Town Centre.It is here where the first Special InfrastructureContribution Offset Agreement has facilitatedthe early construction of the $22 million OranPark Link Road.This is all good news in the current economicclimate and supports the NSW Government’sobjective to kick-start the economy, helpto retain and create new jobs and attractinvestment and infrastructure.Our focus has always been to streamlinethe planning process – and with sixPrecincts either rezoned or exhibited, it’sclear Precinct Planning is a successful andefficient approach.We understand the impact a more efficientland release process has on developmentcosts and industry certainty, as well as theknock-on effect this has on the viabilityof developing land for both housing andemployment.And as the Department’s plans for theGrowth Centres are rolled out industryshould also be aware of the protocolsthat have been established to streamlinedevelopment after rezoning.First and foremost is the benefit of anentire Precinct Planning package deliveredconcurrently. Development Control Plansand Section 94 Local Contributions Plansare placed on exhibition alongside zoningdocuments, providing certainty upfront to thedevelopment industry.We’ve also worked with Councils and otherState agencies to develop protocols forissues such as biodiversity certification,Aboriginal heritage, bushfire planning andriparian management. This means theseissues are considered on a wider scale savingthe development process time and money.Planning for the Growth Centres now sitsunder the Strategies and Land ReleaseDivision of the Department. The Division’sresponsibilities are:• Delivering land for housing and employment• Metro and Regional Strategies• Integrating infrastructure provision with landrelease.The Department has announced that I havebeen appointed Deputy Director-General forthis division. Previously, I was the GeneralManager (Operations) for the Growth CentresCommission.I can assure stakeholders that the focuson the Growth Centres will continue – andthe benefits of the work done to date in theGrowth Centres will spread to other areas ofthe State.10 DEVELOPERS DIGEST

SURROUND YOURCLIENTS WITH STYLETake your office with you wherever and whenever you need it.With an elite design, you can meet customers on site in surroundings styled to your exact requirements.SDD01210We’ll tailor one to your needsUnique Design Contemporary, creative space Octagonal DesignsCall now: 02 4774 9333Or visit our website at: www.eliteoffices.com.au

development featureGREENING THEINNER SOUTHVICTORIA PARK & GREEN SQUARE12 DEVELOPERS DIGEST

development featureVictoria Park a ‘water wise’ communityA major challenge for Landcom indesigning Victoria Park was how to managestormwater at such a large and complexsite in a sustainable way. The smart solutionthat was put in place takes its inspirationfrom the site’s natural geography.Historically, the local area was home toWaterloo Swamp, a wetland system whichheld, cleaned and released rainwater as itflowed out towards Botany Bay. Landcom’sstormwater management system mimicsthe function of that former wetland in whatwas an Australian first.Rain falling on the streets of Victoria Parkflows into depressions located in themedian strips of roadways, known asbioretention swales. Special plants anda soil filtration system remove nutrientsto cleanse the water, which is stored in aholding tank in Joynton Park. The water isthen purified and used in a striking waterfeature, supplementing the site’s irrigationsystem. Any water lost through evaporationis replenished from a holding pond inWoolwash Park. The water level in thepond, which is planted with macrophytesto improve water quality, is maintained bygroundwater from a bore in Nuffield Park.When rainfall exceeds the capacity ofthe water feature, excess water is heldin stormwater detention basins situatedacross the development’s public parks.These basins slow the rate of water flowingfrom the site, gradually releasing it into theexisting stormwater infrastructure.DEVELOPERS DIGEST 15

industry newsFinding a balance – EnvironmentalSustainability and the Henry ReviewJon EllwoodEXECUTIVE DIRECTOR WALTERTURNBULLIn May 2008, the Federal Government announced the most comprehensive review of Australia’staxation system in more than 50 years.The Henry Review will specifically considerthe role to be played by environmental taxesand the relationship between the varioustaxes and the carbon pollution reductionscheme the introduction of which has beendeferred until 2011.This article looks at the use of taxes toachieve non-tax policy outcomes. Therecommendations from the Henry Reviewaimed at achieving environmental sustainabilityare likely to impact upon industry.Sustainability. It’s a word thrown about withincreasing frequency in this age of climatechange and environmental responsibility.What does it really mean? To most, itmeans achieving economic outcomes andgrowth without detriment to the environment.In an unchecked market economy thisis not always the case, and economicoutcomes often are achieved at a cost to theenvironment. Regulation of the environmentalimpacts is one solution but this requiresactive enforcement. An alternative (orcomplementary) solution is to influencebehaviours through the tax-transfer system.The Tax-Transfer SystemThe tax-transfer system is fundamental toAustralia’s economic infrastructure. It is themeans by which the Government raisesrevenue (the tax system), and redistributesincome (the transfer system). An exampleof the tax-transfer system is the provision ofunemployment benefits by Centrelink fundedby tax revenue.Raising revenue and redistributing incomeaffect behaviour in some way. the tax-transfersystem (e.g. subsidies or concessions) canbe used to achieve non-tax policy objectivesby encouraging behaviours that are beneficialto society.The Henry ReviewThe Review of Australia’s Tax System (knownas the Henry Review) will “examine and makerecommendations to create a tax structurethat will position Australia to deal with the…environmental challenges of the 21st century”.With such a focus on environmentalsustainability, it is likely the Henry Review willmake a number of significant recommendationsto address the negative external costs of variousactivities and behaviours, such as polluting orenergy inefficiency.The Review’s sustainability focusIn the Australia’s Future Taxation System– Consultation Paper, questions regardingthe tax-transfer impacts on the environmentare specifically addressed (in Section 13).The Consultation Paper notes that, whilst “…most environmental damage has resultedfrom agricultural development and theexploitation of native forests, most futuredamage is expected to occur aroundurban areas and water resources”. Thishints at a shift in focus from addressingenvironmental issues in rural and regionalareas to those in urban developments. Whatform the recommendations arising from thisredirected focus may take is unknown, but theConsultation Paper does highlight some of thekey points coming through in submissions.Key points in submissionsThe Review Panel, through the ConsultationPaper, has summarised the “key messages”from submissions. Many submissionssuggest that a Carbon Pollution ReductionScheme alone will be insufficient tomeet Australia’s emissions targets. Taxconcessions should be implemented toachieve energy efficiency initiatives andrenewable energy use. Also suggestedis a range of tax concessions to addressproblems such as water use efficiency.Suggestions include introducing additional oraccelerated depreciation for energy efficientfittings and fixtures in new buildings. Whereexisting buildings are refurbished to meethigh environmental standards, even greaterconcessions may be available to overcomethe barriers associated with introducing ecoefficientinvestments.There also is suggestion that tax concessionsassociated with activities that have adverseenvironmental consequences will beremoved. An example provided is the fuel taxcredit scheme which is seen by many as anincentive to generate carbon emissions.With a likely focus on energy efficiency,renewable energy and water conservation, themost recent Consultation Paper suggests thatdevelopers can expect to see some significanttaxation changes affecting the industry.Where to now?The consultation process concluded on 1May 2009 and the Review Panel is due tomake its final recommendations arising fromthe Review to the Federal Government by theend of 2009. The Government has indicatedit will act quickly on the recommendationsmade by the Henry Review.Impact for DevelopersWhat about sustainability initiatives and theimpact for developers? The Review Panelacknowledges that tax-transfer approachesoften are not the most efficient way toachieve Government and social policies.Notwithstanding this, the Review Panelindicates an increased use of the tax-transfersystem to achieve environmental objectives.It also is likely many environmental issues willcontinue to be addressed by way of regulation.Given that the Review Panel is commissioningresearch on the impact that the taxtransfersystem has on the environment,it is highly likely there will be a raft oftaxes recommended and tax concessionsintroduced affecting urban industry anddevelopment on completion of the Reviewin December 2009. As to what form theserecommendations will take, and how they willaffect developers, is not yet known.From the flavour of the submissions, the taxconcessions are likely to focus on energyefficiency, water conservation and renewableenergy initiatives. For developers, this couldmean increased deductions or accelerateddepreciation for the installation of energyefficient materials and water-efficientlandscaping design. Other tax concessions,particularly fuel tax credits, could be removedor reduced which will affect any businessusing fuel other than in on-road applications.Whilst this remains conjecture at this stage,it is very likely the Henry Review will preferto recommend more tax concessions ratherthan introduce additional taxes to addressenvironmental sustainability issues. Theseconcessions should be readily accessible todevelopers adopting sustainable practicesand methods.jellwood@walturn.com.au16 DEVELOPERS DIGEST

SCD01187

industry newsBioBanking UpdateBioBanking is now fully operational and expecting its first transactions soon. BioBanking, the NSWGovernment’s Biodiversity Banking and Offsets Scheme, aims to streamline the threatened speciesassessment process for developers while improving overall biodiversity outcomes.“BioBanking should provide greater certaintyfor developers,” says Tom Grosskopf,Director Landscapes and EcosystemsConservation at the Department ofEnvironment and Climate Change (DECC).“The scientific methodology underpinningthe scheme will ensure consistent resultswhen assessing threatened species,providing greater certainty for developersduring the development process.“The scheme became fully operational withthe accreditation of the first BioBankingAssessors,” Mr Grosskopf said. “Developersand landholders must use one of theseaccredited assessors to undertake theassessment of their sites. There are now27 accredited BioBanking Assessorsthroughout NSW.”BioBanking is a market-based scheme thatinvolves:• landholders generating biodiversity creditsfrom biobank sites, and• purchasers, such as developers whoneed to ‘offset’ biodiversity loss from adevelopment site, buying the credits.The landholder enters into a biobankingagreement with DECC for their biobankingsite, while developers apply to DECC for abiobanking statement for their developmentsite.“Developers can use BioBanking as a toolto better plan projects and identify suitableland for future development proposals.Different scenarios can be run through theBioBanking Credit Calculator to determinethe most beneficial and cost-effectiveOne advantage fordevelopers is thatoffsets can be located inanother area with similarvegetation, minimisingcosts for developerswhile maximisingbiodiversity gains.development option,” Mr Grosskopf said.The calculator is available for free on theDECC website.“One advantage for developers is that offsetscan be located in another area with similarvegetation, minimising costs for developerswhile maximising biodiversity gains. TheBioBanking Credit Calculator produces areport detailing the vegetation types andregions where the offsets can be located,” MrGrosskopf said.“The same methodology and calculatoris used to determine the credits createdon a biobank site. Another advantage fordevelopers is the certainty provided by abiobanking statement. Consent authoritieshave to accept that the requirements forthreatened species in relation to s. 79C ofthe Environmental Planning and AssessmentAct 1997 (EP&A Act) have been met if abiobanking statement has been issued for adevelopment site.“Also, a biobanking statement cannot beappealed in the Land and EnvironmentCourt.”The developer is also freed of any ongoingresponsibility to manage the offset site asthe purchase of credits funds a landholder tomanage the land.“BioBanking should reduce the amountof time taken for the threatened speciesaspects of the development approvalprocess,” Mr Grosskopf said.“There should be less time spent negotiatingoffsets as the calculator determines thecredits required and DECC aims to processapplications for a biobanking statementwithin 28 to 42 days depending on thecomplexity of the application.”BioBanking for developersBioBanking is a voluntary alternative to thecurrent threatened species assessmentof significance process. A biobankingstatement can be obtained for developmentassessed under Parts 3A, 4 or 5 of theEP&A Act.To obtain a biobanking statement thedeveloper must meet the ‘improve ormaintain test’ for biodiversity values by:• minimising the impact on biodiversityvalues through on-site measures• avoiding ‘red flag’ areas (areas that areimportant for biodiversity conservationand that cannot be easily replaced) orapplying for a red flag variation in somecircumstances• purchasing the required number and typeof credits to offset biodiversity loss onthe development site and then retiring thecredits so they cannot be traded again.The assessment processBefore applying for a biobanking statement,the development site has to be assessed.Assessments must be undertaken by anaccredited BioBanking Assessor (a list isavailable on the website).The BioBankingAssessor produces a credit report thatis submitted with the application fora biobanking statement. The creditsgenerated from each development site willvary as each site has different vegetationtypes, conditions and threatened species.18 DEVELOPERS DIGEST

industry newsApplying for a biobanking statementWhen the assessment has been completed,an application for a biobanking statement ismade to DECC. If the application is approved,DECC registers the biobanking statementspecifying the on-site actions that must becarried out, and the number and type ofcredits that must be purchased and retiredbefore development commences.The consent authorityThe biobanking statement is provided tothe consent authority with a developmentapplication. The consent authority cannotrequest further biodiversity informationif a biobanking statement is provided. Abiobanking statement is valid for two yearsfrom the date of issue.The consent authority must include theconditions of the biobanking statement in thedevelopment consent. When a biobankingstatement is incorporated in a developmentconsent, the credit requirements remain validuntil the development consent lapses.Purchasing creditsDevelopers can purchase their requiredcredits from biobank site owners or otherowners of biodiversity credits. It is likely thatcredits may need to be purchased from morethan one seller. If a developer buys credits tooffset the effects of a development site, theymust retire them so they cannot be tradedagain. Developers, or anyone else, can alsobuy credits to keep for future offsets or to resellat a later date.The biobanking public register lists biodiversitycredits available for sale and biobank siteexpressions of interest. If an expression ofinterest matches a developer’s needs, thedeveloper may approach the landowner andenter into an option to purchase credits after anassessment is undertaken and a biobankingagreement granted.Developers can publicise the credits theyrequire through the ‘list of wanted credits’ onthe website.How much is a credit worth?As BioBanking is a market-based scheme,demand from purchasers and amount ofsupply will affect the value of credits. Thebiobanking public register lists expressions ofinterest, credits available for sale and all pastcredit transactions, which may help informnegotiations regarding the price of credits.The condition of the vegetation on a biobanksite will affect the cost of managing the siteand therefore the landholder will take thisinto consideration when pricing their credits.Landholders, or other credit owners, are alsoallowed to include a profit margin into theircredit price.For more information on BioBanking, visitwww.environment.nsw.gov.au/biobanking oremail biobanking@environment.nsw.gov.au.BioBanking –will it work for my site?By Robert HumphriesMANAGER BIOBANKING AND OFFSETS PROGRAMS, ECO LOGICAL AUSTRALIAThe new BioBanking processes arenow in place, several consultantshave been accredited to undertakeformal assessments, but is it a viablealternative – will it make approvalssimpler, what are the timeframes, andwhat will it cost?BioBanking sits within a legal frameworkwhich can provide greater certainty todevelopers, without the possibility oflegal challenges to BioBanking flora andfauna approvals. In short, the numberof biodiversity credits required by adevelopment is assessed by an accreditedassessor, and the credits required arepurchased and retired, which ‘turns off’the requirements of s5A of the EP&A Actthat relate to the assessment of threatenedspecies.No other approvals are granted, soall other approvals (eg. SEPP, REP,Water Management Act, FisheriesManagement Act), must still beobtained. An approval authority cannot,however, ‘impose conditions that areinconsistent with the conditions ofthe BioBanking statement...’. Federalapprovals, if required, will also needto be acquired separately. However,there are ongoing negotiations withthe Federal Government regardingthe recognition of BioBanking as anassessment option.BioBanking also ‘turns off’ therequirement to survey for many faunaspecies, as many are predicted tooccur. In some circumstances, thiswill reduce assessment costs andtimeframes. However, where survey isrequired, it must be performed duringspecific months. The BioBankingfield methodology also differs to thetraditional process, so if an extensivetraditional survey has already beenperformed it may not be useful.However, BioBanking survey data canbe used in a traditional assessment,although additional fauna survey wouldlikely be required if converting fromBiobanking to a traditional pathway.‘Red flags’ can also occur, whereendangered ecological communities orthreatened species will be affected. Adevelopment must either avoid impacts onall ‘red flags’, or seek a variation to the ‘redflag’ status. BioBanking can be used forPart 3A Major Projects and the Minister forPlanning has discretion regarding impactsto ‘red flags’, and can grant approvals thatimpact on ‘red flag’ areas.These issues mean that a due diligenceassessment early in the developmentproposal is highly recommended. Inparticular, considering:Is it worth consideringBioBanking?If the development clearly wouldn’t beconsidered to be a ‘significant impact’under the 7-part test assessment forthreatened species and ecologicalcommunities, that current pathwaycould be easier and simpler. If, however,negotiations on ecological mattersare anticipated, BioBanking may offeradvantages.Is there likely to be BioBanking‘red flags’ for the development?Not all developments will generate ‘redflags’, even if threatened species areknown to be present. This will need tobe assessed on a site by site basis.Can the red flags be avoided, oris it likely that a variation will begranted?Seeking to vary a red flag will requirediscussions with DECC and will beassessed on their merit.Indicative creditsA rough indication of the number of credits(or offset ratio) can be generated after thevegetation types and indicative conditionsare known for a site (i.e. prior to detailedfield survey). This will give an indication ofwhether BioBanking will be economicallyfeasible for the site and proposal.Availability and cost of creditsSome credits can be sourced from manyareas, whereas other credits will be veryrestrictive and difficult to source. Theavailability of credits and their costsshould be assessed early. Until credittrading becomes established practice,purchase costs will be hard to advise,however, the location, condition, andlikely credit types of the developmentsite can be used to generate a goodindication.DEVELOPERS DIGEST 19

industry newsThe Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme –what is it and how will it affect developers?Grant Parker, PARTNER andKim Glassborow, LAWYER, HOLDING REDLICHThe introduction in March this year of draft legislation for the Carbon Pollution Reduction Schemetakes Australia one step further towards implementing a national scheme aimed at reducing pollutioncaused by emissions of carbon dioxide and other harmful greenhouse gases.This draft legislation has some distanceto go before it is finalised, with criticismdirected at the Federal Government fortargets considered too low, the availability offree permits for big polluters and businessesfacing an increase in their operating costs.In this article for the Digest, Grant Parkerand Kim Glassborow from Holding Redlichdiscuss the Scheme’s structure, summarisethe Government assistance to certain sectorsand considers what impacts it is expected tohave on developers.“Climate change presents a risk to thesurvival of the human race and other species... it is, a deadly serious issue. It has beenincreasingly under public scrutiny for someyears”.Biscoe J in Walker v Minister for Planning(2007) 157 LGERA 124 at 161BackgroundThere is no doubt that climate change due togreenhouse gas (GHG) emissions is now aglobal problem.One of the Federal Government’s responsesto this global problem is the introduction ofa new national ‘cap and trade’ emissionsscheme called the Carbon PollutionReduction Scheme (CPRS). On 10 March2009, the Federal Government releasedthe draft CRPS legislation. This followedthe release of the Government’s WhitePaper on the CPRS in December 2008. TheWhite Paper’s objective was to set out theGovernment’s policy regarding the structureof the CPRS, including the GHG reductiontargets under it. The objective of the CPRSis to achieve reductions in Australia’sGHG emissions in a way that meets theGovernment’s target of reducing GHGemissions to 60 per cent below year 2000levels by 2050.Coverage under the CPRSThe aim is for the CPRS to apply to thelarger GHG emitters, being facilities thathave direct GHG emissions of 25,000 tonnesor more of carbon dioxide equivalent ayear. The GHGs caught under the CPRSare emissions of carbon dioxide, methane,nitrous oxide, sulphur hexafluoride,specified hydrofluorocarbons and specifiedperfluorocarbons.GHG emissions from the following sectorswill be covered by the CPRS:• stationary energy• transport• industrial processes• waste• fugitive emissions.Agriculture will be included in the CPRS at alater date but not before 2015.GHG emissions in the transport sector willbe treated differently from those in the othercovered sectors. In the transport sector,the CPRS obligations will be placed on theupstream suppliers of transport fuels ratherthan on those directly emitting from the useof such fuels.Scheme caps and permitsThe CPRS will set a national annual cap onGHG emissions from the covered sectors.The Government will outline the caps at leastfove years in advance with the caps for thefirst five years to be announced in early 2010.Liable entities will need to acquire andsurrender a permit, known as an AustralianEmissions Unit (AEU), for every tonne ofGHG emissions generated in a financial year.The total number of AEUs available for thatyear will be equal to the national cap. If, forexample, the cap limits emissions to 200million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalentin that year, there will be 200 million AEUsissued for that year.AEUs will be tradeable and will not havean expiry date (allowing AEUs acquired inone year to be surrendered in later years).The price of AEUs will be set by the market,subject to a cap of $40 per tonne until 2015(subject to indexation at 5 per cent real).The Government has indicated that the likelyopening AEU price will be $25 per tonne.The Government intends to auction AEUson a monthly basis. Initially, approximately70 per cent of AEUs will be auctioned withthe rest to be allocated as free AEUs (seethe “Application of the CPRS to developers”section below).Application of the CPRS todevelopersThe CPRS is unlikely to apply directly todevelopers given the sectors covered and theGHG emission thresholds. However, the CPRSmay have a significant impact on developmentprojects. The most likely impact will beincreased development costs and uncertaintysurrounding those increased costs.Effect on building product pricesThe producers of building products such ascement, steel, bricks, glass and aluminiumare likely to be required to hold AEUs. Anumber of these producers will be entitledto free AEUs as emissions-intensive tradeexposed(EITE) industries, such assistancebeing intended to dissuade such producersfrom moving their production off-shore. Toqualify for EITE assistance:• the combined value of exports and importsfor the relevant product from all producersmust exceed 10 per cent of the value ofdomestic production from all producersin any year from 2004/05 to 2007/08 (orthere must be a demonstrated inabilityto increase costs due to the potential forinternational competition); and• the emissions intensity of the activityproducing the product on an industrywideweighted average must exceed1,000 tonnes of CO2e per million dollars ofrevenue (or exceed 3,000 tonnes of CO2eper million dollars of value added).The rate of EITE assistance will be:• free AEUs for 60 per cent of the GHGemissions of the liable entity (subjectto adjustment to accord with industryaverages) where the emissions intensityis between 1,000t CO2e/$ million revenue(or 3,000t CO2e/$ million value added) and1,999t CO2e/$ million revenue (or 5,999tCO2e/$ million value added); or• free AEUs for 90 per cent of the GHGemissions of the liable entity (subjectto adjustment to accord with industryaverages) where the emissions intensityis equal to or greater than 2,000t CO2e/$20 DEVELOPERS DIGEST

million revenue (or 6,000t CO2e/$ millionvalue added).EITE assistance will be reduced by 1.3 percent per year and will be reviewed at fiveyearly intervals. As a consequence of thecomplexity of the eligibility rules and rates ofEITE assistance, developers are likely to faceuncertainty regarding the price of buildingproducts whose producers are required tohold AEUs under the CPRS. It is possiblethat tenderers for building projects will not bewilling to fix the price for such products andinstead seek to adjust these prices once theimpact of the CPRS on prices is known.Effect on electricity pricesThe CPRS will require electricity generatorsto hold AEUs for those generation facilitieswhose annual direct GHG emissions areequal to or exceed 25,000t CO2e. As themajority of electricity generated in New SouthWales is from coal-fired generators, thoseelectricity generators in NSW are likely toneed to hold AEUs. The Government willprovide free AEUs to coal-fired electricitygenerators until July 2015 (under anarrangement to be known as the ElectricitySector Adjustment Scheme (ESAS)). Afterthat date, those generators will be requiredto purchase all AEUs required to meet theirobligations under the CPRS.In order to be eligible for ESAS assistance,the emissions intensity of the generatorbetween 1 July 2004 and 30 June 2007 mustexceed 0.86 tonnes of CO2e per megawatthourof electricity generated (with provisionto be made for generators not operational by1 July 2004). The level of ESAS assistancewill be capped at 26.14 million AEUs per yearover the five year life of the ESAS. An eligiblegenerator’s proportion of that assistance willbe determined by multiplying the result of thefollowing formula by the annual cap:Emissions intensity of generator exceeding0.86t CO2e/ GWh x output of generator from1/7/04 to 30/6/07Sum of calculation above in formula for allgeneratorsThe extent to which the ESAS will limitincreased electricity prices as a result of theCPRS is unclear. However, it is clear thatelectricity generated from renewable sourceswill not need to be priced to include the costof AEUs as these forms of generation will notbe subject to the CPRS. The possible impactof the CPRS on electricity prices for electricitygenerated from coal-fired generators shouldcause developers to further consider theattractiveness of ‘greener’ sources ofelectricity such as GreenPower.If increased electricity prices do occur as aresult of the introduction of the CPRS, thisis likely to result in a renewed focus on theenergy efficiency of buildings due to theincreased cost of outgoings. Consequently,developers may see even more potentialtenants seeking to occupy those buildingswhich have or are targeting 4 to 5 starNABERS Energy ratings. Building owners willalso need to consider whether net or grossleases are more suitable in an environmentwhere electricity prices are tipped to riseunder the CPRS.Effect on costs of waste disposalGHG emissions from landfill facilities will becovered by the CPRS (excluding those fromfacilities which closed prior to 30 June 2008).However ‘legacy’ emissions from wastedeposited in landfills prior to 1 July 2008 willnot be included in the CPRS until 1 July 2018.While the general threshold for liabilityunder the CPRS is 25,000t CO2e annuallyfor a facility, landfill facilities are subject toa lower threshold of 10,000t CO2e where afacility is operating in proximity to anotheroperating landfill facility. The Government isyet to announce the proximity but an exampledistance of 80 kilometres was used in theWhite Paper. The threshold will rise to 25,000tCO2e per year once the landfill facility hasbeen closed for 10 years.As no Government assistance is providedto the waste industry under the CPRS, thecosts of waste disposal are likely to increase(particularly for those substances whichcontribute to GHG emissions from landfillfacilities). The inclusion of emissions fromwaste deposited since 1 July 2008 and theinclusion of ‘legacy’ emissions from 2018mean that landfill operators will have torecover the cost of holding AEUs for theseemissions from current users of their facilities.Effect on transport costsAs outlined above, upstream fuel supplierswill be liable to meet the CPRS obligations inthe transport sector. Accordingly, suppliersincurring costs to meet those obligations,being primarily the cost of holding AEUs, willseek to recover those costs by increasing theprice at which the relevant fuel is supplied.However, the Government has agreed to cutfuel taxes on a ‘cent-for-cent’ basis until July2013 to offset the price impact on fuel of theintroduction of the CPRS. The Governmentwill review this adjustment mechanism at theend of this three year period.ConclusionWhile the final form of the legislation maydiffer from that proposed in the WhitePaper and included in the draft legislation,developers should now be preparing forthe increased costs likely to arise from theimplementation of the CPRS.For more information, contact:Grant Parkergrant.parker@holdingredlich.com.auKim Glassborowkim.glassborow@holdingredlich.com.auSCD01170DEVELOPERS DIGEST 21

industry newsBackground to the CarbonPollution Reduction SchemeNoni ShannonGILBERT & TOBINWith the announcement on 4 May 2009 that the commencement of the Carbon Pollution ReductionScheme (CPRS) will be delayed to 1 July 2011, and that there will be other significant changes, suchas fixed price permits for the initial period and a potential increase in the reduction target to 25% of2000 levels, it is an opportune time to look back to the findings of the Garnaut Final Review and theCommonwealth Government’s detailed policy response.The full version of this article is available inthe Members Only section of the UDIA NSWwebsite: www.udia-nsw.com.au.Further detail of the CPRS is set out in thearticle ‘The Carbon Pollution ReductionScheme - what is it and how will it affectdevelopers’ at page 20.The Garnaut Final Report – proposedchangesOn 30 September 2008 Professor RossGarnaut released the Final Report of hisClimate Change Review which outlinesthree possible carbon reduction targets forAustralia:1 for Australia to reduce its entitlements toemissions to 25 per cent of 2000 levels by2020;2 for Australia to reduce its entitlements toemissions to 10 per cent of 2000 levels by2020; and3 for Australia to reduce its entitlements toemissions to 5 per cent of 2000 levels by2020.The international climate change meeting inCopenhagen later this year is a key elementto deciding which of Professor Garnaut’srecommendations will be adopted.“If things go well, very well, Copenhagen willbe the end of one process and the beginningof others that will lead, over time, to effectiveglobal mitigation at a level that reduces risksof a dangerous kind to an extent that seemsacceptable to most informed people”.Garnaut emissions trading scheme(ETS)Professor Garnaut recommends theintroduction of a cap-and-trade emissionstrading scheme (ETS) as the most suitablemeans for Australia to reduce its emissionsand contribute to the global mitigation ofdangerous climate change. 1Whilst Professor Garnaut recommendsthat the ETS begin operation in 2010, hesuggests that an unrestrained fully marketbasedETS not commence until 2012.Garnaut compensation proposalProfessor Garnaut’s conclusions in relationto compensation have remained consistentthroughout the review process. However, itis in this area that the Government’s positionhas diverged the most from the proposalsset out in the Final Review.Households: As the effects of a carbonpricing regime, such as an ETS, fallsdisproportionately on low incomehouseholds Professor Garnaut hasrecommended that at least half of theproceeds from the sale of permits beallocated to households, focusing on thebottom half of the income distribution. 2EITEs: One of the most controversialaspects of the ETS is the approach that willbe taken in relation to emission-intensivetrade-exposed industries (EITEs). If an ETSis introduced into Australia in the absenceof a global agreement, a potential distortionarises. If EITEs firms are subject to a higheremissions price in Australia than theywould be in other countries, and they wereunable to pass this price rise on, there maybe sufficient reason for them to relocatein whole or part to countries with fewerconstraints. This phenomenon has beentermed “carbon leakage”.Electricity Sector Adjustment Scheme:The Green Paper has also proposed toprovide a limited amount of direct assistanceto existing coal-fired electricity generators toameliorate the risk of adversely affecting theinvestment environmentWhite Paper targetsThe Government’s White Paper for theCPRS outlines and provides detail on the(then) final design of the CPRS, the mediumterm carbon reduction target range and anumber of supporting policies, initiatives andprograms.The White Paper committed Australia toa medium term target range of a 5 - 15%reduction in greenhouse gases below 2000levels by the end of 2020.The Target has been established prior tointernational negotiations at the CopenhagenConference scheduled for late 2009. It isenvisaged that post-Kyoto 2012 emissionreduction commitments will be agreed atan international level at the CopenhagenConference. On this basis, the Government22 DEVELOPERS DIGEST

industry newsThe Government willconsider the scope fordomestic offsets in2013. The Governmentwill also investigate,in consultation withIndigenous landmanagers, the possibilityof forestry opportunitiesunder the Scheme,for example credit forreductions in savannaburning.indicated Australia could be committed to aTarget range rather than a set target to retainflexibility for international negotiations at theCopenhagen Conference and to provideguidance to business and households aboutthe likely level of emissions reductionsrequired.Indicative Targets will be updated everyyear so that at least five years guidanceis available at all times. The first indicativenational emissions trajectory will be:• in 2010-11, 109% of 2000 levels;• in 2011-12, 108% of 2000 levels;• in 2012-13, 107% of 2000 levels.The Government reaffirmed its longerterm commitment to a 60% reduction ingreenhouse gases below 2000 levels bythe end of 2050 but left open the possibilityof deeper emission cuts after 2020 if theinternational community agrees to maintainthe global levels of CO2-e at a level of 450parts per million.White Paper CPRS modelThe Government committed to a cap andtrade model for an ETS commencing on 1July 2010. This has now been extended byone year to 1 July 2011 as per the PrimeMinisterial announcement on 4 May 2009.a) Who is covered?The Scheme will involve mandatoryobligations for around 1000 entities (LiableEntities) and will cover around 75% ofAustralia’s emissions and include all sixgreenhouse gases (GHGs) covered underthe Kyoto Protocol.The White Paper proposed two categoriesof Liable Entities under the CPRS, beingentities who are liable for a facility thatdirectly produces emissions above acertain threshold and entities that arespecifically defined as upstream LiableEntities (for example, upstream suppliersof liquid fuels such as gasoline used fordomestic purposes).b) Buying permitsi) Sourcing permitsThere will be no restrictions on who maypurchase or hold a permit under the CPRSand there will be a wide range of permitsources for Liable Entities to draw from.ii) AuctioningA large proportion of the carbonpollution permits will be auctionedfrom the commencement of the CPRS.The auctioning process will be asimultaneous ascending clock auction,with an option to submit a proxy bid ina ‘sealed bid format’. The only limitationon participation in these auctions willbe the lodgement of a security deposit.Auctions will be held 12 times throughoutthe year with the first auction taking placeas early as 2010. This will be prior to thecommencement of the CPRS. Entities whohave received free permits may sell theirpermits at the auctions occurring in 2010and 2011.iii) Carbon PriceAs the CPRS is substantively a marketbasedmechanism the setting of thecarbon price will vary according to marketmovements in the price of carbon. TheCPRS has been designed to limit thequantity of emissions whilst allowing themarket to flexibly set the carbon price.c) Surrendering PermitsThe White Paper stated that theGovernment’s aim was to commence theCPRS on 1 July 2010 which would be thestarting date of the first reporting year.Liable Entities will be required to reportemissions to the CPRS regulator by 31October of each year following the reporting(financial) year. The final date for the annualsurrender of permits will be 15 Decembereach year.The CPRS has been designed to link withinternational markets and schemes whichwill enable Liable Entities to surrenderother compliance permits to meet theirobligations, for example under the KyotoCDM and JI mechanisms.The Government will consider the scope fordomestic offsets in 2013. The Governmentwill also investigate, in consultation withIndigenous land managers, the possibilityof forestry opportunities under the Scheme,for example credit for reductions in savannaburning.If an inadequate number of permits aresurrendered for any given reporting year, anadministrative penalty will be imposed onthe Liable Entity.The CPRS regulator will also be empoweredto investigate and enforce CPRS obligationsthrough a range of mechanisms includingcivil penalty and criminal provisions.White paper industry assistancepackaged) Assistance to Emission Intensive TradeExposed IndustriesAssistance will be available for EITEs toprovide transitional support to preventcarbon leakage in Australia.e) Climate Change Action FundThe Climate Change Action Fund (CCAF)has been established to ensure the smoothtransition to the CPRS for industries who arenot entitled to the free allocation of permitsunder the EITE assistance scheme.The CCAF will include:• Stream 1: $130 million over 5 years forinformation programs for community andlarger industrial business;• Stream 2: investment in energy efficiencyschemes and low emission technologiesprincipally with incentives to invest in lowemission technology;• Stream 3: funds for structural adjustmentassistance for workers, communities andregions; and• Stream 4: funds for the coal sector tofacilitate the adjustment to the CPRSincluding $750 million from 2010 to 2015.A Stakeholder Consultative Committee,comprising business, environmental andcommunity stakeholders, will be establishedto advise the Minister in relation toapplications and proposals.f) Electricity Sector Adjustment SchemeThe Government has committed tofurther allocation assistance for coal-firedgenerators under the Electricity SectorAdjustment Scheme (ESAS). The level ofassistance will be assessed according to amethodology that weighs assistance by the:• historical energy output of the generator,measured as the electricity generated bythe asset between 1 July 2004 and 30 June2007; and• extent by which the Scheme regulator’sestimate of the emission intensity of thegenerator (over the period 1 July 2004 to30 June 2007) exceeds the Government’sthreshold level of emission intensity (0.86tonnes of CO2-e per megawatt hour ofelectricity generated).It is estimated that $3.9 billion will beallocated to the ESAS over 5 years. There arecomplex provisions regarding eligibility forassistance and the degree of assistance thatwill be provided.The author would like to thank JuliaGreen and Christopher Johnson for theirASSISTANCE with this article.1Final Report, 13.2.3, p 3102Final Report, Chapter 16, p 385DEVELOPERS DIGEST 23

industry newsBlack Saturday, Victorian Bushfires– can it happen in NSW?Rod Rose, DIRECTOR - BUSHFIRE andDavid Peterson, PRINCIPAL BUSHFIRE CONSULTANT, ECO LOGICAL AUSTRALIAIn the aftermath of the Victorian bushfire tragedy, some are asking whether similar bushfire impactsare likely in NSW and whether we are adequately prepared.Bushfires of similar intensity to those ofBlack Saturday have occurred in NSW, andexperts agree they will occur again. There is,however, less certainty about the potentialfrequency and magnitude of such impacts atour development/bushland interface. Thesepotential impacts depend on many factorsincluding the intensity of fire, building designand maintenance, the quality of the bushfireprotection systems, and emergency andevacuation procedures.The potential intensity of a bushfire canbe predicted using slope, vegetation andweather data. These data show that themajority of our urban bushland interface isexposed to weather conditions every yearthat have the potential to produce a bushfireof an uncontrollable intensity.Two major NSW studies 1 of our development/bushland interface concluded that the entire282 km interface at Wollongong City, anda 170 km interface on the southern side ofBlue Mountains City, had the right conditionsevery year to carry bushfire intensities thatwere uncontrollable.Climate change is predicted to exacerbatethe magnitude and frequency of extreme fireweather for many of our developed areas. Asa result it is likely a greater number of higherintensity bushfires will impact urban and ruraldevelopment.Anecdotal information from Victoria suggestsAn enormous amount islearned from bushfiresof the magnitude ofthose on Black Saturdayand further changesto bushfire protectiondesign in NSW isconsidered likely.that most of the destroyed buildings wereconstructed prior to the introduction ofimproved bushfire planning laws. Olderdevelopments at the bushland interface,in Victoria and NSW, are by far the mostvulnerable to bushfire. Whilst improvingthe bushfire protection measures of olderbuildings may sometimes be difficult, thoseliving in higher bushfire risk situations mustpersonally take steps to reduce their risk.Community wide action is important, but apersonal response is considered essential.The good news is that in NSW no housesbuilt under the new bushfire protectionplanning laws introduced in 2002 havebeen lost to bushfire. Unfortunately, newerhousing is a small percentage of our urbanand rural bushland interface, and this factor,combined with the anticipated increase inhigh intensity fire events, means that futurelosses of NSW housing built prior to 2002are highly likely. To address this, significantretrospective changes to both buildingdesign and surrounding landscapes, wouldbe required, along with a reliable annualmaintenance regime.An enormous amount is learned frombushfires of the magnitude of those on BlackSaturday and further changes to bushfireprotection design in NSW is consideredlikely. For new development this may not be adramatic change; for older style developmentthe challenges are significant.1 Bushfire and Environmental Services P/L(BES) studies in 2003 (Wollongong City) and1998 (Blue Mountains City). BES is now part ofEco Logical Australia P/L.24 DEVELOPERS DIGEST

industry newsA green choiceLightweight structures in building design and material selectionJeff TrevarthenCSR PANEL SYSTEMSThe choice and sourcing of building materials can have a significant environmental impact on abuilding. To achieve a better environmental outcome (simply put – a reduced environmental load)for the project, specific directives and policies can be set that create the framework for a sustainabledesign, and ultimately influence the selection of materials.This framework can also influence themethods of manufacture and may encourageprefabricated construction off-site as ameans of improving efficiency, reducingwaste and increasing recycling throughdesign for future disassembly. In countrieswhere the population and demand forbuilding materials is high, manufacturershave developed prefabricated systems andthen bolted them together on site. This hasled to revolution in lightweight constructionmethods helping to reduce the environmentalload per building.In Australia, there has been a move towardlightweight construction however the nationstill lags behind the rest of the world in termsof the use of heavyweight materials such asbricks and precast concrete. Recently therehave been increased discussions on the roleof thermal mass in the design of buildings,and whilst this article does not discuss this indetail, it is important to note a few points.Role of thermal massManufacturing products with thermalmass requires more energy and producesmore greenhouse gases than equivalentlightweight materials. Thermal mass is moreeffective when used inside a structure inorder to stabilise room temperature and mustbe able to take advantage of solar heat gainin winter and minimise this during summer.Cost savingsMany leading developers and builders inAustralia have made the move to lightweightconstruction in high rise multi level framedbuildings. This design methodologyinfluences the project in a variety of areas,providing cost savings and can also increasethe fire, thermal and acoustic performance ofthe building.Areas where cost savings can be achievedare:• Material volume – less reinforcement andconcrete in the slab, columns, transferbeams and foundations.• Design flexibility – longer clear spans.• Increased letable/ liveable floor area –slender external / internal walls.• Speed of construction – modularconstruction approach allows rapidinstallation as well as less waste.• Less craneage – lightweight generallymeans more m 2 and less lifts of cranesand hoists on site. Also smaller cranes arerequired which leads to savings.• Delivery times – environmental savings onrunning vehicles with larger and heavierloads.• Improved trade continuity through multiskilled installation teams increasing theirscope of works.Role in refurbishmentLightweight materials (and buildingdesign) also have a significant role in therefurbishment or conversion of existing olderstyle building. Most major cities in Australiahave large areas that are built on foundationsor existing structures that are simply notable to take heavy construction materials.Good environmental practice utilises existingstructures, and replaces or upgrades onlywhat is necessary to achieve a new structurefit for use. In these projects lightweight panelsystems for facades, internal walls and floorsare regarded as good environment designmanagement.Delivery of materialsBuildings are increasingly being constructedfrom an expanding and fragmented range ofmaterials. Consideration must be given to theimpact of getting all these materials to thebuilding site in order to construct the buildingwith the minimal impact on the environment.The cost of transport plus the energyconsumed to deliver materials are furtherreduced when lightweight materials areused. Waste removal must also be taken intoaccount. Increasingly materials are beingdesigned to be reused at their end of lifeand an important factor in this is the energyrequired to break them down to reuse them.Often lightweight materials outscore heavybuilding materials on this account also.Making the choiceObviously traditional heavy building materialsare still required in many building situationswhere lightweight products are not practicalIn Australia, there hasbeen a move towardlightweight constructionhowever the nation stilllags behind the rest ofthe world in terms ofthe use of heavyweightmaterials such as bricksand precast concrete.(sub structure and load bearing elements forexample). Rather than continuing to do whatwe have always done, there is an opportunityto integrate lightweight building materials intoour designs leading to a better environmentaloutcome and a reduction in costs.It takes effort to research and make thechange to a light weight structure howeverthe endeavour has proved worthwhilefor many leading developers, builders,architects, engineers and consultants. Byconsidering a reduction in your total buildingweight there is the potential to not only savemoney for your clients but also contribute toa lower environmental foot print, offering abetter outcome for our community.DEVELOPERS DIGEST 25

industry newsAchieving social, economic andenvironmental goals through housing diversityAnna Petersen, SOCIAL SUSTAINABILITY MANAGER andAnna Chubb, POLICY MANAGER, LANDCOMLandcom began to formally define its sustainability charter when it was corporatised in 2001.The Landcom Corporation Act 2001 obliges it to practice sustainable development. The principalobjectives under the Act specify its duties in protecting the environment and being sociallyresponsible while conducting an economically successful business.Four key principles were developed to guideits activities:• Deliver a sustainable quality of life• Conserve resources• Minimise the impact on biodiversity• Minimise pollution.In the early days, Landcom’s focus was onenvironmental initiatives, in part becausethe Act specifies compliance with otherlegislation to protect the environmentthrough ecologically sustainabledevelopment. This is why the Triple BottomLine (TBL) performance indicators forprojects, which were set in 2001-2002,include many indicators with specifictargets for environmental performanceincluding water cycle management, energyefficient design, sustainable energytechnology, native vegetation and ripariancorridor management. The environmentalinitiatives that were introduced at that timeare now considered standard practice inLandcom business, and indeed across thedevelopment industry.Landcom began to look strategically at itssocial sustainability policy in 2004. At thattime it had a range of discrete communitybasedor social initiatives in place (theWelcome Program, the Moderate IncomeHousing Policy and community consultationprocess) but it did not have any embeddedstrategic social planning processes in place.Landcom’s Social Sustainability Policy wasprepared based on the social determinantsof health and their application to land use.Overarching objectives were set around:• achieving mixed communities throughhousing and land use diversity• providing household product that willenable people to remain within their existingarea as they age• providing housing for moderate incomeearners• social, physical and cultural integration withthe existing community• access between new and existing areasThe Sustainability Model: achieving viability, liveability and equity(Adapted from ‘Healthy City Model’ from Trevor Hancock, Health Promotion International)• contributing towards communityinfrastructure which addresses communityneeds• benefiting existing community members aswell as new.Landcom’s social sustainability objectivesrelate also to economic and environmentaloutcomes. The social policy also sets out thesocial planning process that is now followedfor all new projects.Landcom’s Sustainability ModelSustainable development has three inputs:the environment, the economy, and thecommunity.When people in the development industrytalk about sustainability, often they arereferring to the interplay of the environmentand the economy – the balancing ofeconomic development with the need forenvironmental protection and resourceconservation. Landcom aims to considerequally the relationship between theenvironment and community, and betweenthe community and economy. Ultimately,sustainable development is developmentthat balances outcomes for all three.The Sustainability Model shown illustratesthe relationships. Development that meets26 DEVELOPERS DIGEST

industry newsTerrace houses at The Ponds are an example of smaller lot homes that are receiving widemarket acceptance.environmental and economic needs isdescribed as viable; that which meetsenvironmental and community needs isdescribed as liveable; and that which meetscommunity and economic needs is describedas equitable. Sustainable developmentis development that achieves a balancebetween viability, liveability and equity.Landcom is using this model to guide itsbusiness and work program to strengthenthe connections between economic,environmental and community outcomes,and maintain Landcom’s position asan innovator and leader in sustainabledevelopment. Landcom’s new HousingDiversity Guide is focussed on balancing allthese objectives.The Housing Diversity GuideLandcom has produced a Housing DiversityGuide to make it easier, faster and morecost effective to deliver a wide range ofhousing types in all of its projects. AllLandcom projects are expected to providefor a diverse range of households. TheSustainability Model illustrates how HousingDiversity achieves economic, social andenvironmental sustainability objectives.Economic objectives are achieved through:• Housing affordability – smaller parcels ofland and smaller dwellings can reducethe cost of the house and land packageconsiderably, making it achievable forfamilies earning average householdincomes to purchase their own home.• Contribution to affordable living – providinggreater housing diversity in existing urbanareas will mean that people will haveincreased choice to live closer to work,therefore reducing other costs such astransport.• No subsidies are required to underpin orreduce costs – it can be facilitated by theprivate sector.Social objectives are achieved though:• Meeting the housing needs of increasinglydiverse household types including smallerhouseholds, particularly single personhouseholds.• Creating community diversity – housingdiversity supports community diversity byenabling a range of different family types,age and income ranges to live in the sameneighbourhood.Environmental objectives are achievedthough:• Reduction in the environmental footprint– decreasing the use of resources andamount of land. Despite the decreasein average household size, the averagefloor area of new residential dwellings hasincreased by 31 per cent in the 20 yearsto 2006-07. 1 In addition, 41 per cent of alloccupied private dwellings had two or morebedrooms that were unoccupied. 2Despite the benefits of housing diversity, it isstill rather difficult and costly to deliver. Thebest examples of housing diversity are foundin older, inner city areas. However, houses inthese areas command higher prices.The Housing Diversity Guide containsdesign options and new models to achievehousing diversity in newer areas. It identifiesthe key planning and design principlesthat are essential for small lots (generallyhousing developed at higher densities onlots between 150 and 450 sq m), basedon current best practice from developersand builders around Australia, who areresponding to changing demands frompurchasers for new housing.The Guide includes four different hometypes – villa, cottage, duplex and manorhome. Significant savings can be made byreducing the cost of both the land and ofthe dwelling. Reducing the cost of the landcomponent significantly reduces the costof purchasing a home. Smaller house typesalso help to meet the needs of a diverserange of households, especially single andtwo-person households, which are the mostrapidly growing household types in Australia.Smaller homes on smaller lots also reducethe use of resources, reducing the footprintof a suburb.The lot sizes were developed by testinghouse designs against key assessmentcriteria as well as current council controls. Thekey assessment criteria were: affordability;amenity; diversity; integration; variety of tenureand environmental sustainability.Each of the lots were tested against keyplanning principles which covered: integratedplanning threshold (mainly amenity includingsolar access, privacy, streetscape andview loss); floor space ratio; site coverage;landscaped area; building envelope controls;solar access and accessibility.In keeping with the goal of all Landcomprojects providing opportunities for a diverserange of households to live in, there areexamples of housing diversity at work ina number of developments. Landcom’sHunterford estate at Oatlands, a mediumdensity housing joint venture with St Hilliers,illustrates the full range of housing diversitywith single detached, attached row houses,residential flat buildings and garage topstudios. Terrace houses at The Ponds, a jointventure between Landcom and Australand,in North West Sydney are an example ofsmaller lot homes that have received widemarket acceptance.The Housing Diversity Guide is just one of themany projects that contribute to Landcom’sSustainability Model, and it is clear thathousing diversity can address all of thesocial, economic and environmental goals.For a copy of the Guide, visitwww.landcom.com.au.Anna Petersen apetersen@landcom.nsw.gov.auAnna Chubb achubb@landcom.nsw.gov.au1ABS 2008 “Feature Article: average floor area of newresidential dwellings” in Building Approvals Australia,February 2008 Cat No 8731.0, ABS Canberra.2ABS 2006 “A Picture of the Nation” Cat No 2070.0ABS Canberra.Landcom’s Hunterford developmentILLUSTRATES the full range of housingdiversityDEVELOPERS DIGEST 27

people + eventsWinter Luncheon with Minister Keneally1 23456123456Judy McKittrick, Minister Keneally,Simon BasheerMinister for Planning, Kristina KeneallyPeter Andrews, Dipen Rughani andEmma DeanCameron Holt, Judy McKittrick andAaron ChandlerStephen Albin, UDIA NSW CEOStephen Barr and Roger Collins-Woolcock28 DEVELOPERS DIGEST

people + eventsWestern Sydney Luncheon123Hunter Chapter4512345Networking drinks at this year’svenue, Sydney Olympic ParkSean O’Toole, LandcomSell-out crowd for the annual eventAshlee Henson and David EnglandJim Peachman, RTADEVELOPERS DIGEST 29

people + events2009 National Congress1234512345Stephen Holmes, UDIA NationalPresidentSite tourTony Perich, Ralph Bruce and NickDuncanTrade show and sponsor exhibitionUDIA National Awards forExcellence President’s Awardwinner – Prince Henry at Little Bayby Landcom30 DEVELOPERS DIGEST

LKD00756

development intelligenceUnderlying and Cyclical Demand for Housingin NSWUnderlying demand for housing in NSW has been strong for a number of years. Since this has notbeen matched by sufficient construction of new accommodation, a supply shortfall has resulted.Also, recently there has been a dramaticimprovement in housing affordability and anincrease in the the first home owners grant,thereby boosting demand further. Supply isnow starting to respond, but unless there is asufficient uplift in new accommodation, pricepressures will intensify further where demandis strongest, namely the least expensivesuburbs.The underlying demand for new dwellings(captured in the chart below) has three maincomponents:• Household formation is the propensityfor sections of the population to createseparate households requiring separatedwellings. This creation can come aboutthrough a number of avenues such asmigration, marriage, separation, childrenleaving the family home etc. Needless tosay, household formation is extensivelydriven by the growth in the population,although a long run decline in householdsize has also contributed.• Demolitions are simply the removal of adwelling from the housing stock which willrequire replacement if the housing stock isnot to diminish.• Other, which includes dwellings such asholiday homes, vacant homes and thoseavailable to rent or sale.In NSW, primarily a consequence of a pickupin population growth, underlying demandfor accommodation has steadily increasedsince 2004. Even so, housing completionshave failed to keep pace, leading to ahousing shortfall and, as a consequence, adecline in private sector vacancies and rapidrental growth.The lack of first home buyer interest, as wellas a fall-off in housing finance, suggestshousing affordability was a significantrestraining factor holding back demandduring this period.This is hardly surprising as in June 2008housing affordability in Sydney was at itsmost onerous level since the boom/bustperiod of 1990.However, the combination of virtuallystagnant house price inflation and asharp decline in mortgage interest rateshas resulted in affordability improvingsignificantly. In the nine months to March2009 affordability improved by over 35% inNSW and is currently some 20% below itslong run average.So, as well as strong underlyingfundamentals, namely rapid populationgrowth, rising rents and an accommodationshortfall, there has been a dramaticimprovement in cyclical demand conditions.If this was not enough to bolster housingdemand, in October 2008 the first homeowners’ grant was increased, therebybringing forward future demand. Quitesimply, the FHOG, initially at least, byreducing property prices improves housingaffordability.Credible and reliable information is thecornerstone of building a great business.UDIA NSW is your trusted source ofdevelopment industry information and ispleased to have launched DevelopmentIntelligence, a quarterly report featuringa comprehensive suite of industrystatistics and analysis. UDIA NSW hasformed a collaboration with leadingindustry commentator Rob Ellis fromProperty Insights to deliver membersthis quality publication, and regularcommentary on issues of relevance tothe industry – including changes in theofficial cash rate, DA approval statistics,and changes in consumer confidence.For the full copy of the latestDevelopment Intelligence report, visitthe members only section ofwww.udia-nsw.com.au.Not only has this resulted in first-time buyerdemand increasing significantly, but it isfinance for construction and new dwellingswhich have risen sharply in recent months(see chart below). Adding to demandpressures, rising rental yields are improvingthe attractiveness of housing for investors.However, as the Reserve Bank points out,price pressures are already intensifying inthe least expensive suburbs, (where firsthome buyer demand is strongest) while priceweakness is apparent in the more affluentsuburbs. So, with demand for housing set toaccelerate, unless further accommodationbecomes available, the upward pressure onhouse prices is likely to intensify.32 DEVELOPERS DIGEST

national updateUDIA National UpdateUDIA has been advocating the need for reform of DAs at both state and Federal level for aconsiderable period of time.COAG Streamlining of HousingDevelopment AssessmentsTherefore we welcomed the COAGannouncement of 2 July 2009 to streamlinehousing development assessments by:• Increasing the use of code-basedassessment, with a target for increaseto be set later this year, by making andharmonising codes for houses, units andcommercial developments; and• Measuring performance according tothe number, type and length of DA, withpublication of a report in June 2010.Whilst welcoming the announcement, giventhe economic pressure the developmentand construction industry is under, UDIAhas also called for a greater emphasis to begiven to reforming the planning and approvalprocess at the State and Local level for allforms of development - not just small codeassessable or those larger projects receivingFederal or State funding.National President meets withMinister for HousingAs part of UDIA’s on-going dialogue andadvocacy with the Federal Government,National President Stephen Holmes andNational Vice-President Peter Sherrierecently met with Housing Minister the HonTanya Plibersek MP to discuss a range ofissues impacting on the industry includingNational Rental Affordability Scheme(NRAS), the First Home Owners Grant Boost,Ruddbank, and the Social Housing Initiative.UDIA regularly meets with key FederalGovernment Stakeholders includingMinisters, Shadow Ministers, Advisers,Backbenchers, Senior Public Servants andParliamentary Committee Staff to educateand lobby on behalf of our industry.BroadbandThe Government’s establishment of aNational Broadband Network included anannouncement that fibre-to-the-premises(FTTP) infrastructure would be requiredin greenfield estates that receive planningapproval after 1 July 2010.UDIA has pro-actively engaged with theFederal Government in relation to this issue,including arranging industry consultationsin all mainland states, plus advocatingindustry concerns with senior officials in theDepartment of Broadband, Communicationsand the Digital Economy, and with theMinister’s Office.In our discussions and submissions, UDIAhas strongly stated the case that thereshould be no difference in relation to thetreatment of new estates and retrofitting.It is simply inequitable for there to be anupfront capital charge for Greenfield estatesbut a cost recovery approach for elsewhere.And that if developers are required todeliver the FTTP in Greenfield estates, thensome type of rebate scheme needs to applyto the connection.FHOG BoostFollowing intensive lobbying from UDIA, theFederal Government announced in the MayBudget that it would extend the First HomeOwners Grant (FHOG) Boost for an additionalsix months.Given the success of the FHOG Boost, UDIAis continuing to advocate for a targetedstimulus package for all new housingconstruction, including the introduction of aNew Home Owners Grant.RuddbankDespite strong lobbying on behalf of theindustry by UDIA and kindred industryassociations, the Ruddbank legislationwas recently defeated in the Senate by theOpposition and the Greens. With the seriousproblems Australian development companiescurrently face in accessing finance, thedefeat of the Bill is a major blow to theindustry and is likely to put thousands of jobsat risk.UDIA believes that rather than opposing theRuddBank legislation, the Senate shouldseek to resurrect the Bill and extend thelegislation to include residential propertyprojects as well as commercial property.National Vice-President Peter Sherrie outlinedUDIA’s concerns on Lateline Business.To view the transcript and video pleasego to: www.abc.net.au/lateline/business/items/200906/s2601271.htmUDIA National Congress 2010Following the recent successful 2009National Congress in Brisbane, preparationsare already well underway for the 2010 UDIANational Congress to be held in Sydney fromthe 8th to 11th of March 2010.The 2010 UDIA National CongressCommittee is inviting members to submitabstracts for consideration for inclusion in theCongress workshop program. All abstractswill be rigorously reviewed by a panel ofexperts who will assess them for inclusion inthe Congress workshop program.For more information regarding the 2010National Congress, including the Call forPapers, please go to: www.udiacongress.com.auAbout the UDIA National Office:UDIA’s National office is located in Canberrato allow UDIA to more effectively representthe development industry to the FederalGovernment and national media.Richard Lindsay is the Chief Executive Officer ofthe UDIA National Office, and can be contactedon 02 6230 0055 or udia@udia.com.au.For further information regarding UDIANational, please go to: www.udia.com.au.DEVELOPERS DIGEST 33

legal newsSustainability extends to planningintegrity and consistencySimon FraserCOLIN BIGGERS & PAISLEYSustainability involves meeting present needs without compromising the ability of future generations tomeet their needs.It dictates ways to manage or regulate naturalresources, industry, commerce, developmentand town planning. It is reflected in laws,environmental planning instruments andpolicies at all levels of government.In previous articles in this Digest I havefocused on several cases which illustrate thatsustainability considerations can ultimatelyaffect whether development consent isgiven. These articles have referred to casesconcerning a retirement development inSandon Point and a coal mine in Anvil Hill,the key issue being whether sustainability,climate change and biodiversity shouldhave been considered as relevant factors indetermining the development applications.In the Hub Action Group case the Courtrejected a development application for awaste facility in Molong because, in part,it was not considered to be a sustainableuse of the land. The Court wisely noted inthat case that sometimes there is a shadowbetween ideas for sustainability and thereality of it.A recent case in a very urban locationillustrates how planning documentshave operated to give some reality to theobjective of sustainability. In Humphrey’scase (Humphrey & Edwards v City of Sydney[2009] NSWLEC 1075) the Land andEnvironment Court examined whether theCity of Sydney was permitted to considerprinciples of sustainability, as formulatedin local and State government planningdocuments other than environmentalplanning instruments, when determining adevelopment application. The SustainableSydney 2030 Draft Strategic Plan and theSydney City Draft Subregional Strategy werethe documents in question. In this case“sustainability” was used in the context of theeconomic and master planning sustainabilityin the area of the development site.Sustainable Sydney 2030 VisionThe Sustainable Sydney 2030 Vision asexplained in the Draft Strategic Plan sees a“green, global and connected” city. In thiscontext “green” means environmentallyfriendly with sustainable industries drivingeconomic growth. “Global” involvespromoting Sydney as a global citywith world-class tourist attractions andembracing innovation and new technologies.“Connected” means highly accessible withextensive walking and cycling routes andupgraded public transport.Activity HubsThe Draft Strategic Plan is far from beingjust a motherhood document. It enunciatespractical, tangible steps for achievingthe often abstract and undefined ideal ofsustainability. One part of the plan is thecreation of “Activity Hubs” – focal pointsfor local shopping and facilities such aslibraries, education centres, primary schools,community gardens, fresh food markets andwireless internet hotspots. The Plan providesthat every resident in lesser Sydney (the areaadministered by the City of Sydney) wouldbe within walking distance, one kilometre, ofa Hub.The Plan sees Sydney in 2030 having 10Activity Hubs:• Barangaroo, the region to the west of theCBD encompassing Miller’s Point and theRocks• Crown Street, Surry Hills• Glebe Point Road• Green Square, in the Rosebery/Alexandriaregion• Harris Street, Ultimo• Haymarket• King Street, Newtown• Kings Cross• Oxford Street• Redfern Street.There is a plan for each Activity Hub. InCrown Street, for example, the Council willidentify opportunities for a fresh food market,investigate opportunities for the Surry HillsShopping Centre to undergo a renewal,support creative industries and start-upsin the area south of Goulburn Street andencourage reuse of warehouse buildings inthe area south of Goulburn Street.Green SquareBarangaroo and Green Square are labelled“Future Activity Hubs” requiring substantialdevelopment or urban renewal. The Planprovides that by 2030 the areas will beexemplary of sustainability. In GreenSquare, the area in which the developer inHumphrey’s case wished to develop, thatexemplary sustainability is to be achieved by:• prioritising sustainable transport• creating generous canal-side open spaceand parkland along the tributary channels• providing affordable housing• improving access from Rosebery to theGreen Square Activity Hub• expanding the mixed-use residentialareas thus allowing for new employmentopportunities• focusing on emerging environmental,creative and knowledge oriented industries• replicating the mix of small business andresidential use in Surry HillsA key element of this was for the GreenSquare Town Centre (Town Centre), an areaof about 14 ha, to be the major commercial,retail, cultural and entertainment centre forGreen Square.Development applicationThe site at issue in Humphrey’s case is a lightindustrial site at Alexandria which extendsbetween Botany Road and Wyndham Streeton the north-western edge of the majorintersection of those roads with BourkeRoad. It is located on the opposite sideof Bourke Road from the boundary of theplanned Town Centre.The developer had obtained developmentconsent from the Council in February2008 for a mixed use development ofapproximately 26,000 sq m of floor space.It comprised 15,000 sq m of retail space,11,000 sq m of commercial space and a carpark with a capacity of 614 vehicles.The developer then lodged a furtherapplication to amend the approval, havingunsuccessfully applied for a modificationunder Section 96 of the EnvironmentalPlanning and Assessment Act (EPA Act), toincrease substantially the retail space (to25,000 sq m) and car parks (to 800) andreduce the commercial space (to 1100 sq m).A main element of the increased retail spacewas to be a discount department store.Council failed to approve the development34 DEVELOPERS DIGEST

legal newsapplication within the prescribed period. Itthought that the development would have adetrimental impact on the vitality and successof the Green Square Town Centre, hinderingit from functioning as a cohesive centre,diverting patrons from it and competingwith it for retail spending and visitor trips.Patrons would not flow freely between thesites because of the physical constraintsseparating the site from the Town Centre.These consequences were argued by Councilto be contrary to the public interest. TheCouncil’s position was that the developmentsite should be primarily commercial officespace. Council had approved the originalplan in 2008 on the basis that it comprisedin the retail component a supermarketand speciality shops which were mainlyconvenience based retailed. The newproposal not only increased the retail mix, butchanged its character, particularly with theproposed discount supermarket store.Court decisionThe developer appealed to the Land andEnvironment Court against the deemedrefusal by the Council. The Court upheldthe Council’s position that the proposeddevelopment would have an unacceptableimpact on the Town Centre. It did soessentially on two grounds, namely that theproposed development was:• in conflict with the relevant planningdocuments and the objective under the EPAAct, and• not in the public interest because it wouldcreate unacceptable “economic impacts inthe locality” (Section 79C(1)(b) of the EPAAct).Council also argued that the development didnot relate acceptably to the public domain.Although that argument was unsuccessful, itdid not affect the outcome of the case.Relevant planning documentsThe Court referred to the South Sydney LocalEnvironmental Plan 1998 (Amendment No17 - Green Square Town Centre) which statesthat the Town Centre was to be the majorcommercial, retail, cultural and entertainmentcentre in the area. The Court also notedSection 79C(1) of the EPA Act whichprovides general matters for considerationin determining a development application,including the public interest. The New SouthWales Court of Appeal had previously heldthat the public interest may be representedby environmental planning instrumentsand other planning documents. Relevantplanning documents in this case, includedthe Sustainable Sydney 2030 Vision andthe Sydney City Draft Subregional Strategy,being State Government’s strategy for GreenSquare to be a sustainable development. Themost important of those plans was the planfor the Green Square Town Centre to be thefocal point of the area.The Court accepted that the developmentwould be inconsistent with the Vision andStrategy plans. It was held that as a matter ofcommon sense the development of a retailcentre which is similar in retail floor area tothe nearby Town Centre would substantiallyand adversely affect the economic viabilityof the retail areas in the Town Centre. Thatwas especially so because the developmentwould be completed before the Town Centreand there would be easier car access andmore car parking. For these reasons and forthe further reasons argued by Council, thedevelopment was held to be significantlyinconsistent with the planning controls, Visionand Strategy. It would have a detrimentalimpact on the Town Centre and would not bein the public interest.In reaching this conclusion, the Courtreferred to the established principle ofthe importance of ensuring integrity andconsistency in policy making.Existing and proposed investmentAs a further point, the Court held that theapplication should be rejected on groundsof “the public interest” under Section 79C(1)(e) of the EPA Act because the proposeddevelopment, if approved, would beinconsistent with the significant investmentsalready made by Landcom (as the majorlandowner in the area), the Council and theState government in planning for the TownCentre, including site preparation. The totalestimated cost of all planned infrastructureand public domain works was $103,200,000.Implications for developersDevelopers and their advisors shouldtake note of Humphrey’s case as one ofan increasing number of cases wheresustainability principles, as enunciatedin planning documents, may affect thedetermination of a development applicationor modification. There is an increasingnumber of laws, planning controls andpolicies at all levels of government affectingdevelopment in the name of sustainability.Well informed planning and legal advice isessential for a proper understanding of thelaws, planning controls and policies whichaffect a proposed development.Sustainability is a broad concept which ishere to stay – we must learn to see it as anopportunity rather than as a threat.shf@cbp.com.auArchitectureUrban PlanningProject ManagementEnvironmental AssessmentResidential single dwellingsMedium densityCommercial/IndustrialResource extraction projectsLKD00702PO BOX 543 Round Corner NSW 2158P: 02 9651 6011 F: 02 9651 6022Contact Brent Winning 0418 242 738bmwinning@claron.com.auwww.claron.com.auDEVELOPERS DIGEST 35

member newsHeart of Harrington Grove now completeHarrington Grove, located in Sydney’s southwest is pleased to have launched the focalpoint of their development, the multi milliondollar Country Club.Surrounded by miles of woodlands andgrassy hills, the Country Club is the newvenue for casual dining, recreation, relaxingand community interaction in HarringtonGrove. Designed by a team of awardwinning architects to create a venue withoutstanding leisure and recreation facilities,the Country Club offers rich elegant interiorswith luxurious lounges and cosy fireplaces,juxtaposed with soaring ceilings andexpansive glass walls opening to magnificentview. The leisure and recreation facilities willbe reserved for residents and their guests.Harrington Grove is a 1200 lotmasterplanned residential lifestyledevelopment that brings Sir WarwickFairfax’s dream to reality, a careful blendingof old world traditions and values and abusy contemporary lifestyle, where naturalsurroundings meet an urban vision.The development consists of a residentialsubdivision of 40 per cent of the site with theremaining being rehabilitated and managedas a conservation area for large areas ofCumberland Plain Woodland. Small distinctcommunity precincts have been carefullydesigned and developed to engender astrong sense neighbourly interaction andsecurity with a focus being placed on thebalance between nature and residents.project updatesGeorges Manor takes sustainability in aged care developments to a new levelA new development by the KresnerGroup – Advantaged Care at GeorgesManor in Sydney’s south west – has takenenvironmentally sustainable design to a newlevel for the aged care industry.Laurie Kresner, the head of Kresner Groupwhich both develops and operates aged carefacilities, says the decision to incorporateESD elements into Georges Manor was justone part of the development’s contribution tothe local community.“It’s not a legislatively-led decision to useESD principles as the design was completedprior to Section J being implemented, for usit’s a matter of the social responsibility of ourorganisation and the provision of top-levelservices to our residents,” says Mr Kresner.“Particularly in aged care, issues such asinfection control are vital to the wellbeingof our residents, so there needs to be nocompromise at all when it comes to thequality of services such as sterilisation in thelaundry. We have found a way to do this thatis also sensitive to the environment.”The laundry at Georges Manor is a coldwaterlaundry system that uses ozonetechnology to sterilise rather than boilingwater. Aged care facilities are notorious forchewing up huge amounts of power – MrKresner says in a typical aged care facilitythe boiling of water accounts for 70 per centof the energy use.“Besides the substantial savings in energyuse by not boiling water, our Ozone systemalso uses 60 per cent less water than thetypical laundry system,” Kresner says.Other sustainable elements of thedevelopment include sensor lighting, whichdramatically reduces energy usage, andwater harvesting for toilet flushing andirrigation of the extensive landscaped areas.“Our water harvesting system also includes apeak flow moderator to reduce flash floodingin the local area as well as the latest filteringsystem that helps to remove ground rubbishbefore the excess water is released into thelocal water system,” added Mr Kresner.More than 60 large solar panels on the roofof the development provide ample energyfor the hot water needs of both residents andback-of-house services, with any additionalhot water boosted by a gas system.The approach to lighting at Georges Manorbegins with the architectural design of thefacility, which maximises the sites northernfrontage.Architect Simon Thorne at IDG Architectssays most of the residential rooms providenorth facing units or south facing roomswhich use the courtyards to bounce light intothe rooms. He adds that east or west facingrooms are minimal but where necessary theyhave been protected with louvres or deepoverhangs.36 DEVELOPERS DIGEST

member newsDynamic Property Services makes BRW Top 50 Great Places to WorkSydney based Dynamic Property Serviceshas been placed 5th in the BRW list of top 50Best Companies to Work for in 2009. Namedas the ‘top home-grown hero’Dynamic is in the company of internationalgreats such as Google.Managing Director Wally Patterson said “I feelvery privileged to work with such a talentedteam of people. We are all very proud ofthe recognition we have received today,to be named in the top five of the 50 ‘BestWorkplaces’ Australia wide.”“More than 1 million people live in, work in orown strata units in NSW.Managing multi-owner properties issomething that is often taken for granted, yetstrata and community schemes are becomingincreasingly complex. It is a very demandingjob that requires a high level of legal andtechnical knowledge and very long hours – itis not an occupation that generates a lot of‘fun’!”, said Mr Patterson.Dynamic is considered a quality leaderin strata, partly due to high skill level andcommitment of staff and partly due to anaverage portfolio size of 38 schemes permanager. (The industry norm is 60 to over 100schemes per manager – Institute of StrataTitle Management benchmarking 2008).“We hire for attitude and values, on the basisthat skills can be taught” said Mr Patterson.“We always involve a number of peers in anyselection process so we feel confident about thefit. Once we have the right people ‘on the bus’we can take the bus wherever we want it to go.”“In an industry where recent surveysshowed only 1 per cent of strata companiesthought their staff were their competitiveadvantage, Dynamic knows that itscompetitive advantage is a culture thatattracts and retains some of the bestpeople in the industry who are ethical,enthusiastic, committed, hardworking, andknowledgeable.”Colin Biggers & Paisleyjoin Nuns RunJune saw 55 Colin Biggers & Paisley staffmembers make their way to Centennial Parkto join Sister Helen Clarke and Sister LeoneWittmack on their final leg of a 400km‘Nuns Run’.Beginning in Dubbo, the two Sisters ofcharity from St Vincents Hospital journeyedthrough several small towns across NSWin order to raise funds and awarenessfor the new Garvan St Vincent’s CampusCancer Centre. The new Cancer Centreis an initiative of the Garvan Institute ofMedical Research as well as St Vincents &Mater Health Sydney which focuses on thedevelopment of new diagnostics and thedelivery of individualised clinical care.The final meet was in Sydney, where over550 people joined the nuns in either a 2 or4km fun run. Colin Biggers & Paisley wasa major sponsor of the event and throughmany generous donations, was able to raise$8,875, which made them the third highestfundraising team. Overall, the Nuns Run wasable to raise over $150,000 to help fund the$100m custom built cancer centre.Colin Biggers & Paisley Nuns Run participantsgeneral newsEDAW AECOM to become Design + Planning at AECOMEDAW AECOM will transition its nameto Design + Planning at AECOM,beginning October 2009. The namechange signifies AECOM’s evolutionto a more deeply integrated industryleadingconsultancy whose professionaltechnical, creative and managementsupport services help clients enhanceand sustain the world’s built, natural andsocial environments.“EDAW has been a member of AECOMsince 2005,” said EDAW President JasonPrior. “Now we’re developing closerintegration with our colleagues in order tobetter address the challenges of our time.Boral awarded Freedom AwardThe Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation(JDRF) in May awarded Boral their FreedomAward that recognises the greatestcontribution to fundraising programs from asingle supporter.Boral’s combined staff and corporatedonations of nearly $450,000 in 2008 havebeen invested into the best Australianmedical research programs that seek a curefor type 1 diabetes and its complications.The 2008 Freedom Award caps a productiveeight year partnership that has seenBoral reach an extraordinary $2 million incontributions to JDRF.JDRF CEO Mike Wilson said “we are veryAs part of the new AECOM, we are ableto draw from an extraordinary breadthof experience and expertise to addressland-based and community challengesas we face an era of climate change,urbanisation, and resource scarcity.”AECOM’s professional network includesplanners, engineers, architects,economists, environmental professionals,and a myriad of allied specialists locatedthroughout more than 100 countries.Through closer collaboration with thiswider network of professionals, EDAWdraws on a richer array of expertise forprojects of all scales.grateful for the strong support from Boral,which has been a critical part of our abilityto fund 44 research programs across thecountry.”“This fantastic achievement reflects abroad-based involvement from Boral staffacross the country, led and guided bythe input and example of Boral CEO andManaging Director Rod Pearse.”Mr Pearse said “I am extremely proud thatthrough our unique partnership with JDRF,which has spanned eight years, the Boralteam has now contributed $2 million toJDRF, with Boral employees enthusiasticallyraising $1.65 million of this total amount.”DEVELOPERS DIGEST 37

member newsGeorge Rounis, General Manager –Residential Projects, Clarendon Residential GroupUDIA NSW Councillor George Rounis hasbeen appointed to the new national role ofGeneral Manager – Residential Projects.Clarendon CEO Maurice Felizzi said “Georgewill add strategic focus to our recentlyestablished Residential Projects division,an area which we are keen to develop in thefuture.”George, a civil engineer by profession,comes to Clarendon from a 15-year careerat Australand, where he was most recentlythe NSW State Manager, Residential Landand Housing. Prior to that he worked atBlacktown City Council, one of Australia’sfastest growing localities, as a DevelopmentServices EngineerGeorge Rounis said, “I am excited tobe joining Clarendon at a time when itis focussed on growth and excellence.The company has a strong focus on theproject home consumer market, and thedevelopment of the new residential projectsdivision will allow us to service the needs ofland developers, government and investorswith the same attention to quality and timelydelivery.”movers+shakersKeep the industry up to date on yourbusiness in the Developers Digest!UDIA NSW members are welcome to submit material for Member News. Send yourinformation on new appointments, updates on your latest projects and generalbusiness news to Digest Editor Lisa Marshall on lmarshall@udia-nsw.com.au orcall Lisa on 02 9868 3677 to discuss submissions for the next edition.Changes to Stockland’sresidential businessDenis Hickey departsStocklandAs a result of the departure ofResidential CEO, Denis Hickeyin early July, Stockland hasmade changes to its Residentialorganisational structure andmanagement team.A number of internal promotionsresult from these changes.David Pitman, CEO RetirementLivingExecutive General Manager Strategyand Corporate Development, DavidPitman, will take on the role of CEORetirement Living. He will continue tohead up Group Strategy.David has previous operationalexperience and was keen to returnto a line management role. He hasplayed a key role in developing thegrowth strategy for Retirement Livingand is well placed to add significantvalue to this business.Mark Hunter, CEO ResidentialQLD General Manager Residential,Mark Hunter, will relocate toSydney to take on the role of CEOResidential, becoming part ofStockland’s Executive Committee.Mark has over 28 years experiencein the property sector, in South Africaand Australia. He joined Stockland in2000 and has managed Stockland’slargest Residential Communitiesbusiness over the last two years,with responsibility for 31 residentialprojects.Nick Duncan, General Manager –NSW, Clarendon Residential GroupFormer UDIA NSW CEO, Nick Duncanhas been appointed to the role of GeneralManager – NSW for Clarendon ResidentialGroup.Clarendon CEO, Maurice Felizzi said, “NickDuncan’s experience and energy will helpconsolidate and grow our business in NSW,where we are the number one home builder.”Nick is a highly qualified propertydevelopment professional with 20 yearsexperience in the industry, includingGeneral Management roles in NationalDevelopment, NSW and WA state operationsfor the Stockland Group and the HousingDevelopment Manager in NSW for Mirvac.Mr Duncan said “I am looking forward toworking with a team of passionate andcapable people to develop the strategiesthat will continue to build on our leadershipposition in NSW. Clarendon is a companythat is determined to be client focussed andcommitted to establishing best practice inevery part of the business – that commitmentwill set us apart from our competitors.”38 DEVELOPERS DIGEST

North Coast Chapter ChairPosition: Sole TraderCompany: Keiley Hunter Urban PlannerCan you describe some the key aspects/functions of your role?Following a recent serious illness (breast cancer –fixed now thanks to a major rebuild!) I decided toleave a mid size consultancy and set up my own smallhome based practice.I happily work from my lounge room over-lookingCoffs Jetty on smallish DA’s either on my ownor as part of an informal alliance with other localdevelopment professionals.I also provide a strategic planning “locum” toKempsey Shire Council where I project managerezoning processes.profileWhat do you enjoy most about your role?The flexibility to be as busy as I need or want tobe. The opportunity to work as a team with otherlocal development professionals – engineers, LA’s,surveyors, ecologists without the formality of aemployer/employee relationship.Biggest challenges?Staying away from the beach when I should beworking.Most interesting project you are currentlyworking on?Rezoning of highly constrained land at South WestRocks to achieve a low density living environment withstrong linkages to the surrounding lagoon and creekenvironment. We hope to achieve some perpetualenvironmental management outcomes through theuse of a voluntary planning agreement. So far, allparticipants are keen, however, there is still somecommunity resistance to the project.My main focus (wish) for the project is to demonstratethat local government and developers can worktogether to achieve a sustainable outcome within asensitive coastal location.What do you think are some of the key issuesaffecting the development industry at themoment?The rezoning process is slow and complex.Communities are cynical and not prepared to workwith Councils and developers in a meaningful way.We really need some more good urban developmenton the mid north coast to demonstrate that this ispossible.How and why did you become involved inUDIA NSW?As a sole trader, I felt that UDIA NSW was thebest forum for me to keep up contact with otherdevelopment professionals and keep informed ofchanges and events in the industry.Any personal mottos or philosophy’s youaspire to?Yes, if you want something done, do it yourself!In my spare time I...Outrigger canoe, surf, swim, ride, eat good food andlove my coffee. I also maintain contact with threeteenagers who are dispersed between Brisbane andTamworth.KeileyHunterDEVELOPERS DIGEST 39

events + professional developmentLunch with Brad HazzardThursday 6 AugustThe Hunter Region has experienced significantgrowth through mining, land developmentand new industry, and UDIA NSW sees abright future for the Region and the potentialthat it holds for not only accommodatingnew dwellings, but also job generation andincreasing exports. Join us to hear what MrBrad Hazzard MP plans for the Hunter Region.Venue: Noah’s on the Beach, NewcastleSeniors Living orRetirement Living – theNext Evolution!Tuesday 18 AugustJoin us to hear from three key seniors livingdeveloper’s and hear their rationale behindtheir companies recent investment decisionsand discuss market trends, design trends andnew ownership models emerging in the sector.Register today!Venue: Swissotel, SydneyDevelopment IntelligenceBriefingWednesday 16 SeptemberUDIA NSW has partnered with leading industrycommentator Rob Ellis from Property Insightsto deliver you a quarterly report featuringcomprehensive analysis every relevantstatistic and data release that impacts on thedevelopment industry. This industry briefing willprovide a commentary on the report and theopportunity to ask questions directly to Rob Ellisover breakfast.Venue: Swissotel, SydneyAwards for ExcellenceGala DinnerFriday 25 SeptemberThis year marks the 15th Anniversary of the UDIANSW Awards for Excellence. Join us to celebrateand recognise excellence in development andcelebrate this state’s achievements. Save the date!Venue: Sydney Convention & Exhibition CentreUDIA NSW ProfessionalDevelopment Foundations Training17, 18, 24, 25 SeptemberDesigned for new graduates entering thedevelopment sector, those considering a careerin property development, and those with atechnical background looking for a broader, moreintegrated overview of the industry. Modulesinclude Development Opportunities and FinancialFeasibility; The Regulatory Environment: Obtainingan Approval; Development Project Managementand Property Development Marketing and Sales.Venue: UDIA NSW Office, SydneyState ConferenceFriday 30 OctoberThe past year has been turbulent and the industry isfocused on funding and finance into the future. Thisyear’s state conference will focus on The Stimulusand Beyond with keynote addresses from Bill Evans,Chief Economist, Westpac and Ross Greenwood,Finance Expert, Nine Network and 2GB.Venue: Star City CasinoFor more information on upcoming UDIA NSW events and professional development, visit www.udia-nsw.com.au or email events@udia-nsw.com.auIf you or a colleague would like to be added to UDIA NSW’s event notification email list, send your request to events@udia-nsw.com.au.ADVERTISEMENTElite Relocatable Offices – providing aprofessional marketing suite for developersElite Relocatable Offices has been in the business of providing customers with up market marketingsuites for 18 years.Elite Relocatable Offices has been in thebusiness of providing customers withup market marketing suites for 18 years.ERO has been lead by Brett and DaryynRossiter who have sought to provide theircustomers with a professional and functionalenvironment to market their products,whether it is a house and land development,land only or apartment development.ERO has been at the leading edge ofsupplying marketing suites to its customers,coming up with innovative designs all thewhile keeping in mind the customer’s needsfor functionality as well as keeping thatprofessional sales environment.ERO’s aim is to provide customers withexceptional service.“ I have found them to be a very professionalorganization offering a flexible and reliableservice,” said Australands Residential salesmanager, Dino Carulli.ERO has continually offered flexibility withits designs so that the customer gets themost out of their marketing environment.Clarendon Residential Group’s PaulPerkovic wrote, ”I have dealt with ERO overthe past years on numerous projects. Asa family run business the Elite team havealways displayed a cooperative and flexibleapproach in delivering either custom builtbuildings or modifications to their existingbuildings to suit our project requirements.”Glen Amanonce from AV Jennings said,“Using ERO means that we can provideour customers with a professional salesenvironment that is cost effective, relocatableand very functional.”For 18 years, ERO has been providingtheir customers with the right environmentto market their products from. ERO lookforward to working with your team on yournext project.For more information vist the web site atwww.eliteoffices.com.au or contact Brettor Darryn on 02 47 749 333 or email themat info@eliteoffices.com.au.40 DEVELOPERS DIGEST

sponsorsSponsorship with UDIA NSWIn this increasingly competitive market, there has never been a more important time to strengthenyour business profile by aligning your interests with UDIA NSW.Through our wide networks, UDIA NSWsponsorship provides you with a valuableopportunity to promote your business to allstakeholders in the industry, and offers youunparalleled access to key decision makersin the field.UDIA NSW brings the development industrydirect to your business by providing youwith a network of members that include –developers; financiers; builders; suppliers;consultants; contractors, councils andgovernment authorities. Last year more than5,000 industry members attended UDIA NSWfunctions to hear from key government andbusiness leaders.Take an active stance in the promotion ofyour organisation and the expansion of yourbusiness networks by sponsoring a UDIANSW event. Contact Jennifer O’Rourke,UDIA NSW Business Development Manageron 02 9868 3677 or email sponsorship@udia-nsw.com.au to discuss sponsorshipwith UDIA NSW today.Industry Leaders ProgramAwards for ExcellenceWinter LuncheonWestern Sydney LuncheonDevelopment Intelligence BriefingMajor sponsorSupporting sponsorMajor sponsorSupporting sponsorHunter ChapterYoung Developers Trivia NightCEO Boardroom SeriesMajor sponsor Major sponsor Major sponsorSupporting sponsorProfessional Development - Financial Feasibility Professional Development -Property Development Management

SCD01205