Archive for the ‘Public Transport’ Category

6 Mar

Planning and Finance Role of NSW State and Federal Governments in Growth Centre Development(Central Coast Region Case Study) revision 1

Posted by davhol24 in Affordable Housing, Dr Ray Rauscher, Growth Centre Planning and finance, New Town Centres, Public Transport, Rail and Bus Interchanges, Regional Planning, Strategy formulation, Uncategorized.

this report comprises a

Submission to Commissioner

Notice of Public Inquiry – Central Coast Council

Submission Focus: Term of Reference #3

Planning and Financing Growth Centres – Role of NSW State and Local Government (Case Study Central Coast Region) 

By Dr. Ray Rauscher

Date 26th May 2021

By Dr. Ray Rauscher,

M 043 5004844

email: ray.rauscher@gmail.com dated

original date of composition: 23rd February 2021

I submit these comments for the State and Federal Governments to examine in light of the Central Coast Council’s current position in undertaking examination of: 

  1. Options for a rates variation (adopted 17 Feb 2021 a 15% increase to submit for approval to the State body Independent Pricing and Regulations Tribunal (IPART);
  2. Council finances (i.e. expenditure in all areas including staff levels). 

the principal topics cover in this submission are:

A. Planning and Financing Growth Centres and the Central Coast Region

B. Governance and Central Coast Region Planning and Development

C. New Approaches to Funding Growth Centres Such as the Central Coas

Introduction

My premise is that the State and Federal Governments need to examine how the above circumstances arose in the light of the Central Coast being a declared NSW Regional Growth Centre (commenced in 1975 under the Central Coast Structure Plan (DoP 1975). This paper focuses on the planning and financing of this Growth Centre, acknowledging the Central Coast Region is one of five urban growth centres. The other centres are: South West Sydney; Western Sydney; Illawarra-Wollongong; and, Newcastle Greater Metropolitan Region. Such an examination needs to be undertaken in cooperation with the Central Coast Council (herein referred to as ‘the Council’) and the Central Coast community (i.e. through elected representatives and wider electorate).  Some planning, finance and governance review areas that the State and Federal Governments could consider for the Central Coast Growth Centre (and in turn other growth centres as noted above) follows.

Planning, Finance, and Governance Review Areas

Planning and Financing Growth Centres – Role of State and Local Government (Central Coast Region, NSW, and Central Coast Council) 

Dr. Ray Rauscher rayc.rauscher@gmail.com M 043 500 4844   Dated: 26 March 2021 

I make this submission to the Commissioner of the Public Inquiry into the Central Coast Council (herein called the Council). On the basis of Terms of Reference of the Inquiry I wish to address several items under Terms of Reference #3, ‘other matter that warrants mention particularly those that may impact on the effective admiration of Council’s functions and responsibilities or the community’s confidence in the Council being able to do so’.

In addressing the #3 Term of Reference I submit that one critical issue that has affected the operations of the Council (leading to this Inquiry) is the implications of planning and financing for the Region as a Growth Centred and the increase in population in the region.

the other critical issue for public inquiry is the pubic focus (and the rightful seeking of information by all parties) since the dismissal of the Councillors by the State has been primarily on: the Council’s debt; cost of the amalgamation of two councils into one; and, responsibilities of Councillors and Council staff. While these are important and central questions I submit they are broadly hinged on a general lack of funds available for this Council (given a number of uniquely regional features) to be addressed under three subjects:

In the development of any urbanizing area (city or region) there are fundamental planning and financing tools. At various times the governance bodies contribute different expertise. The starting point for any review is the Central Coast Region being declared a NSW Regional Growth Centre in 1975 (Central Coast Structure Plan(DoP 1975). In examining growth centre planning and finance, the significance of population growth on the Central Coast needs to be first addressed.

Population growth on the Central Coast has been a major issue since 1975 (noted in the above Structure Plan release). Hence the region has experienced growth from 70,000 residents (1975) to the current population of 354,915 (February 2021) and a projected population of 414,615 in 2036 (additional increase of 59,700 people as noted above) (references: idcommunity demographic resources https://forecast.id.com.au/central-coast-nswand Central Coast Planning Strategy 2036(DPIE 2018). 

Submission to Commissioner

Notice of Public Inquiry – Central Coast Council

A. Planning and Financing Growth Centres and the Central Coast Region

B. Governance and Central Coast Region Planning and Development

C. New Approaches to Funding Growth Centres Such as the Central Coas

A. Planning and Financing Growth Centres and the Central Coast Region

The planning and financing of growth centres is herein examined in the context of the roles of State (New South Wales) and Local Government (Central Coast Council). It is acknowledged that the Federal Government of Australia plays a significant role across its Parliament and Departments in planning and financing growth centres. The submission, however, focuses on the Terms of Reference of the Inquiry. The submission is written in the light of the Central Coast Council’s current position (May 2021) of a budget deficit of $547m (a major part of which was brought over from the pre-amalgamated councils) 

Background

In the development of any urbanizing area (city or region) there are fundamental planning and financing tools. At various times the governance bodies contribute different expertise. The starting point for any review is the Central Coast Region being declared a NSW Regional Growth Centre in 1975 (Central Coast Structure Plan(DoP 1975). In examining growth centre planning and finance, the significance of population growth on the Central Coast needs to be first addressed.

Population growth on the Central Coast has been a major issue since 1975 (noted in the above Structure Plan release). Hence the region has experienced growth from 70,000 residents (1975) to the current population of 354,915 (February 2021) and a projected population of 414,615 in 2036 (additional increase of 59,700 people as noted above) (references: idcommunity demographic resources https://forecast.id.com.au/central-coast-nswand Central Coast Planning Strategy 2036(DPIE 2018). 

Projecting ahead 20 years from 2036 to 2056, this author estimates a likely population will be close to 500,000 (½ million) (an increase of 85,385 from the projected 2036 population). In summary from the 2021 population (354,915) there could be an increase of 145,085 people on the Central Coast by 2056 (that is within 35 years). To examine this projection within on a timeline looking backwards from 2021 to 1986 (35 years) is not considered by most as a long timeline. In conclusion, population growth and the challenges it presents to the State and Central Coast Council’s planning and financing is a core and significant factor for the public and governance. The aspect of sustainability (environment, social and economic) is therefore essential to address by all parties (including the Commissioner of this Public Inquiry). What choice within governance decision making (State and Local) will be offered to Central Coast residents in determining an optimum and sustainable population (and cost to service that population) for the Central Coast?  

There are three major factors within this population question that will need to be considered in any review by the Commissioner now and State and Local Government at all times, namely: 

There are three major factors within this population question that will need to be considered in any review by the Commissioner now and State and Local Government at all times, namely: 

It’s noted the State has funded (20 years ago) 3 new Transit Ways (Parramatta to growth centres: Liverpool, Rouse Hill and Blacktown). This included state of the art bus shelters (with time boards, bike racks, adequate seating, night lights and emergency telephone). There are many opportunities for the State to undertake Transit Ways on the Central Coast. The first such route would be from Woy Woy via Gosford, Erina, Bateau Bay, Tuggerah, Wyong, North Lakes and Wyee. It is understood that the Central Coast Sustainable Transport Group submitted this proposal to the NSW Minister for Transport in 2020.

1. Quality of life of all Central Coast individuals (including implications of Covid-19 pandemic)

2. The movement of a portion of Greater Sydney’s growing population (under State planning timeframes) to the Central Coast 

3. Impact of population increases on the environment of the Central Coast

It’s acknowledged that the Central Coast Region is one of five NSW urban growth centres within and adjacent to Greater Sydney. The other four centres are: South West Sydney; Western Sydney; Illawarra-Wollongong; and, Greater Newcastle Metropolitan Area. Planning and financing for all growth centres includes, and to herein be addressed: 

1. Local Government Rates and State Cost Shifting to Local Government

2. State and Federal Governments’ Planning and Financing Growth Centres

3. Continuing Central Coast Growth Centre Costs

1. Local Government Rates and State Cost Shifting to Local Government

2. State and Federal Governments’ Planning and Financing Growth Centres

3. Continuing Central Coast Growth Centre Costs

1. Local Government Ratesand State Cost Shifting to Local Government

There are two questions here for the State and the Council to address:

1.1 Local Government Rates 

The submission acknowledges a decision this month by the New South Wales Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal (IPART) (in determining Council’s request) for a rate rise of 15% (an increase above the 2% allowable annual rate rise increment as set by the State) over three consecutive years. Given the harmonizing of rates across the whole of the Central Coast (a as required by the State), the rate rise will be significantly higher than the 15% within in the pre-amalgamated  Gosford City area and rates in general will fall within the pre-amalgamated Wyong Shire area. The rates question is acknowledged to be a complex and most significant one for all ratepayers of the Central Coast. Coupled with the rates question is the issue of asset sales to raise funds to bring the debt down (noted above) as is currently proceeding  Both of these two issues and several others are core items in respect to meeting costs of a regional growth centre such as the Central Coast. The issues are especially important given the planned regional population increase (approximately 59,700 to 2036 or 15 years from 2021) under State residential release area planning.) 

1.2 State Cost Shifting to Local Government

Cost shifting signals a council carrying financial impositions by the State. The cost shifting is within a context of a council existing as a statutory body created by the State. The council’s councillors can be dismissed by the State (as occurred with the Central Coast Council in 2020). Thus cost shifting to local government, as one issue, needs review, including (for example) in areas of:  waste charges; and, costs associated with State owned land and water assets such as Tuggerah Lakes and their foreshores. The Lakes and foreshores, for example, require continue Council upgrading, recreation use provisions and maintenance (i.e. dredging and stabilisation of The Entrance Channel). Finally, at the same time local government in Australia has no constitutional recognition to better position itself in areas such as cost shifting. It’s been suggested that most Australians favour a local government constitutional recognition.

2. State and Federal Governments’ Planning and Financing Growth Centres

There are a number of questions for the State and Council to address under planning and financing of growth centres as follows:

2.1. Major Open Space and Wildlife Corridor Systems

Major open space provisions such as the Coastal Open Space System (COSS) needs review of a greater funding role of the State and Federal Governments (including planning, additional acquisitions, use of and maintenance). In addition, the State needs to examine how conservation and wildlife corridors can be further established, expanded and maintained (see State Government’sNorth Wyong Shire Structure Plan2012). This is especially so in the growth development release areas such as Lake Munmorah and the extension of the COSS program into all of the former Wyong Shire area of the Central Coast.

2.2. Local and Regional Roads

Many of the roads on the Central Coast are designated ‘local’ by the State (thus funded by the Council). A State review of those roads that could more logically be designated ‘regional’ is needed. In addition, many roads designated ‘regional’ and maintained by Council under agreement with the State (with a subsidy to Council) needs to also be reviewed. The State indicated via a press release on 25 Jan 2021 (Coast News) that it will be reviewing these road designations throughout the State to (quote) ‘ease the associated costs to councils (and thus ratepayers)’.

2.3. Bus Transport and Bus Shelters

The State, given its provision of new buses to Central Coast bus companies (as well as the State collection of fares and provision of information plinths) should take over the role of providing bus shelters.  There is a pressing need for bus shelters over the entire Central Coast. Apparently the Council does not have the financial ability to provide and maintain these shelters. In one suburb alone, Springfield, there are 18 bus stops in the main bus route (total stops covering both directions) and only 2 shelters. This situation exists in a suburb that was targeted by State zoning for rapid development in the 1970s (50 years ago). It’s surmised that the Central Coast residents’ low bus patronage (excluding school runs) is partly a result of poor bus infrastructure such as appropriate and modern shelters (i.e. containing lighting, etc.). 

 

2.4 Transitways

It’s noted the State has funded (around year 2000) 3 new Transit Ways (Parramatta to growth centres of Liverpool, Rouse Hill and Blacktown). This included state of the art bus shelters (with time boards, bike racks, adequate seating, night lights and emergency telephone). There are many opportunities for the State to undertake Transit Ways on the Central Coast. The first such route would be from Woy Woy via Gosford, Erina, Bateau Bay, Tuggerah, Wyong, North Lakes and Wyee. It is understood that the Central Coast Sustainable Transport Group submitted this proposal to the NSW Minister for Transport in 2020.

2.5 Bikeways

There appears to be a major need for a greater take up by the State in financing bikeways and related infrastructure on the Central Coast. The current expenditure on bikeways is inadequate in meeting the bikeway plans as adopted by the Council.

2.6 Gosford Transport Interchange

The Gosford Transport Interchange needs a total upgrade similar to Newcastle Interchange. This is particularly the case for the bus waiting area as this area is antiquated and totally inadequate for a growth centre.  Upgrades such as electronic bus time signage, seating and commuter protection from wet weather needs attention in a master plan. This would include finance from the State and/or private public partnerships (PPPs) (such as the Newcastle example cited).

2.7 Heritage Planning

The State needs a major role in heritage planning (including signage) in centres such as Gosford City Centre and other major and minor Central Coast CBDs.

2.8 Footpath and Curb and Gutter Provisions

The State needs to consider assisting Council in undertaking footpath and curb and gutter provisions throughout the urban areas. It is understood that there is a Council 50 to 60 year backlog (mostly in established areas) in the provision of this essential infrastructure.  The Council budget is miniscule compared to this backlog, suggesting some urban areas will never see adequate footpaths and curb and guttering. In respect, for a growth area designated in 1975 as noted in the introduction, this situation would appear to be a dysfunction of governance provisions. The issue thus needs a partnership solution between the Council and the State.

2.9 Cultural and Community Service Facilities 

Cultural and Community Service facilities on the Central Coast need to receive better State and Federal Governments support in planning, financing and upkeep. This upkeep of facilities happens extensively in Sydney where State cultural facilities, for example, are readily State funded. This includes Sydney’s museums, culture, performing arts centres, and the recent (2021) $40m upgrade of the Wharf Theatre in The Rocks. 

There is a recent case study on the inability of State, Federal and Local governance to engage the Central Coast community to build a Central Coast Performing Arts Centre (PAC). The project was promoted over 20 years (2000-2020) by the local community. The failure to see this facility eventuate (as reported in the local newspapers The Advocate and Coast News over several years) appears to be attributed to a lack of agreement (in site location and finance) by the State, Federal and Council.  As a result it’s suggested the Central Coast community’s confidence in the three levels of governance working together was diminished. A review of projects such as PAC would be valuable for future need provisions (often generated from the community level).  

2.10 Library and Recreation Facilities

In respect to Gosford CBD library (replacing the existing one) it has taken Council (given funding shortages) over 25 years (1996-2021) to plan, allocate finance, and agree on a site. On 17 Feb 2021 the Council (via the Administrator) agreed to finance the new library. This long timeline suggests Council’s inability to be able to finance some major service provisions such as libraries and recreation facilities and thus needing review. Central Coast residents note, for example, the State is assisting Greater Sydney in the rebuilding, upgrading and operation of the NSW State Library and numerous sporting complexes. The State has financed the new Parramatta Stadium (2020) and has put forth plans to rebuild other Sydney stadiums. 

2.11. Central Coast CBD Main Streets Upgrading 

The State may need to expand areas of financial assistance and consider joint programs with Council to upgrade many Central Coast CBD main streets. These include, for example, CBDs of Woy Woy, Ettalong, Umina, North Gosford, East Gosford, Erina, Bateau Bay, Long Jetty, The Entrance, Tuggerah, Wyong, Toukley, Budgewoi and Northlakes. This could include a review of funding for upgrading and provision of traffic calming, public amenities (i.e. toilets), open spaces, infrastructure, rest areas, landscaping, passive recreation, children’s play areas, seating etc.).

2.11 Central Coast CBD Main Streets Upgrading

The State may need to expand areas of financial assistance and consider joint programs with Council to upgrade many Central Coast CBD main streets. These include, for example, CBDs of Woy Woy, Ettalong, Umina, North Gosford, East Gosford, Erina, Bateau Bay, Long Jetty, The Entrance, Tuggerah, Wyong, Toukley, Budgewoi and Northlakes. This could include a review of funding for upgrading and provision of traffic calming, public amenities (i.e. toilets), open spaces, infrastructure, rest areas, landscaping, passive recreation, children’s play areas, seating etc.).

A review may be needed on the implications (i.e. planning and finance at State and Council levels) of the State designation of ‘State Significant Areas’. Gosford City Centre, for example, is designated a revitalisation area (under the State’s Gosford City Centre Revitalisation Program 2018). There are planning and finance implications of this designation for Gosford CBD. A wider public understanding of this State planning process is needed, given there are  other major development areas that would warrant State initiated (in cooperation with Council) revitalization attention. These may include centres within the following urban growth corridors:  Woy Woy-Umina Corridor; Somersby to Erina Corridor, Tuggerah-Wyong to Warnervale Corridor, The Entrance-Long Jetty and Bateau Bay Corridor, and Northlakes to Lake Munmorah Corridor.

16. Development and Value Capture Planning

3. Continuing Central Coast Growth Centre Costs

There are several questions for the State and Council to address under the continuing Central Coast growth centre costs, as follows:

3.1. Local Government Reform Process

On a broad basis the State Government may need to review their local government reform processes. The State for example commenced its local government reform investigations in 2012 (main document being Destination 2036). It’s noted that this process commenced before the State legislated amalgamations in 2016 within the Local Government

(Council Amalgamations) Proclamation 2016. The State’s amalgamation steps affected the Central Coast councils of Gosford and Wyong. It is understood in effect that the two councils were amalgamated (as a Central Coast Council) via an ultimatum by the State (as reported in the Sydney and Central Coast papers in late 2015). It was reported that the Gosford Mayor’s delegation to the Minister for Local Government at the time was informed the State would amalgamate the two councils were Gosford Council not to agree to amalgamation. In general the sentiment on the Central Coast (then and now in 2020) appears to be that the residents were not effectively and fully engaged by the State in its amalgamation review process. That said, the State may need to review the full implications of the amalgamation, including related costings incurred by the new Council, extended finance impositions on ratepayers now and into the future, and State to local government cost shifting (noted above). 

3.3. State Significant Areas

A review may be needed on the implications (i.e. planning and finance at State and Council levels) of the State designation of ‘State Significant Areas’. Gosford City Centre, for example, is designated a revitalisation area (under the State’s Gosford City Centre Revitalisation Program 2018). There are planning and finance implications of this designation for Gosford CBD. A wider public understanding of this State planning process is needed, given there are  other major development areas that would warrant State initiated (in cooperation with Council) revitalization attention. These may include centres within the following urban growth corridors:  Woy Woy-Umina Corridor; Somersby to Erina Corridor, Tuggerah-Wyong to Warnervale Corridor, The Entrance-Long Jetty and Bateau Bay Corridor, and Northlakes to Lake Munmorah Corridor.

3.4 Future Central Coast Region Gaining City Status 

The loss of the designation of ‘Gosford City’ under the amalgamation noted above may need to be addressed by the State. City status, for example, has a range of financial, state, national and international advantages to capitalise on.  The State, it is noted, refers within its State Significant revitalisation plans for Gosford CBD (see above 3.2) as plans for the ‘Gosford City Centre’. 

The State may wish (in cooperation with Council) to establish and fund a ‘Committee to Investigate Central Coast City Status’. The committee would investigate all implications (pluses and minuses) of the potential for the Central Coast achieving city status. Such a committee could spend up to two years to complete its task (including engaging the electorate and working within the Central Coast Council chambers). In time the Committee (in cooperation with Council) would present a report for comment to the electorate and then to the State. The report would include comments on how other urban and regional areas have achieved city status. 

In addition, it is important to ensure democratic procedures are used in consideration of city status. A referendum on city status could be considered for the 2024 NSW local government elections. Were the results to indicate a majority in favour of city status the implementation of that move would again be the responsibility of the Committee to Investigate Central Coast City Status. The referendum could offer names for such a city, including for example: City of Gosford Wyong, or City of the Central Coast. Within a city designation there could then be designated a number of city centres for planning and financing, including:  Gosford Centre (potentially keeping its current State designated ‘regional capital’), Woy Woy-Umina Centre, Tuggerah-Wyong Centre, The Entrance-Long Jetty Centre, Toukley Centre, Northlakes Centre, and so forth. 

3.5. Governance and Elections Review

There have been recent suggestions by Central Coast residents over the 2020 and 2021 period (see Coast News) and by the Council Administrator (Dick Persson) of the need for a local government governance and elections review. The governance of Council (including number of councillors, ward systems, and structures for engagement of the public) is an important review area given the Central Coast is a growth centre. The Administrator has recommended a referendum for the coming 2021 election with one option being to reduce the number of councillors from 12 to 9 and eliminating the wards. 

A wide review of the Central Coast as a Growth Centre (especially for planning and financing) is critical (as noted in above examples).  A review could tie into the State’s local government reform process noted earlier (see above 3.1). The review could also tie in the Federal Government’s review of local government planning and finance. This could include consideration of constitutional recognition (1.2 above). Finally, there are many other alternatives that should be considered in reviewing governance for planning and financing growth on the Central Coast and other growth centres (noted in the introduction above). Some of these alternatives relating to Greater Sydney and growth centres are addressed in the recent book Cities in Global Transition(Rauscher 2017 Chapter 18).

B. Governance and Central Coast Region Planning and Development (to be completed)A. Governance and Central Coast Region Planning and Development

To be completed

C. New Approaches to Funding Growth Centres Such as the Central Coast

Despite the development of the Central Coast (as a designated Growth Centre), there appears inadequate financing (Federal, State and Council levels) of a range of affordable and social housing, open and public spaces and sustainable transport (examples noted above). New approaches to funding costs related to urban development, especially in growth centres, will also need scrutiny (one example is the pursuit of ‘value capture planning’. 

A State review of this financing challenge could incorporate looking at expanding the band of urban development finance approaches. One system widely used in other countries and occasionally in Australia (i.e. in transport projects such as the planned Aerotropolis in Southwest Sydney and Metro Sydney) is Value Capture Planning (VCP). The subject covers developer provisions and land value capture levies. See a current book (2021) on the subject of VCP entitled Renewing Cities with Value Capture Planning(Rauscher

2021). The book develops a VCP model and applies this model to four growth areas (case study in brackets): Greater Sydney Inner City (Waterloo-Redfern); Greater Sydney Middle City (Canterbury-Bankstown); Central Coast (Gosford City Centre); and, Newcastle Greater Metropolitan Area (Newcastle West End). 

To be completed

C. New Approaches to Funding Growth Centres Such as the Central Coast

Despite the development of the Central Coast (as a designated Growth Centre), there appears inadequate financing (Federal, State and Council levels) of a range of affordable and social housing, open and public spaces and sustainable transport (examples noted above). New approaches to funding costs related to urban development, especially in growth centres, will also need scrutiny (one example is the pursuit of ‘value capture planning’.

2021). The book develops a VCP model and applies this model to four growth areas (case study in brackets): Greater Sydney Inner City (Waterloo-Redfern); Greater Sydney Middle City (Canterbury-Bankstown); Central Coast (Gosford City Centre); and, Newcastle Greater Metropolitan Area (Newcastle West End). 

 

A State review of this financing challenge could incorporate looking at expanding the band of urban development finance approaches. One system widely used in other countries and occasionally in Australia (i.e. in transport projects such as the planned Aerotropolis in Southwest Sydney and Metro Sydney) is Value Capture Planning (VCP). The subject covers developer provisions and land value capture levies. See a current book (2021) on the subject of VCP entitled Renewing Cities with Value Capture Planning(Rauscher

2021). The book develops a VCP model and applies this model to four growth areas (case study in brackets): Greater Sydney Inner City (Waterloo-Redfern); Greater Sydney Middle City (Canterbury-Bankstown); Central Coast (Gosford City Centre); and, Newcastle Greater Metropolitan Area (Newcastle West End). 

There have been recent suggestions by many residents over the 2020 and 2021 period (see Coast News) and by the Council Administrator (Dick Persson) of the need for a local government governance and elections review. The governance of Council (including number of councillors, ward systems, and engagement of the public) is one potential review area. This review may be especially important for any Growth Centre (as noted in the Introduction). A review could tie into the State’s local government reform process noted earlier (#14 above). The review could also tie in Federal Government’s review of local government planning and finance. This could include consideration of constitutional recognition. Finally, there are many other alternatives in reviewing governance into the future for planning and financing growth on the Central Coast (see Cities in Global Transition(Rauscher 2017 Chapter 18). 

Conclusions

Many of the suggestions herein in this submission could apply to other NSW council areas (especially Growth Centres). This suggests a full review of the position of NSW local government in regards to financing growth and development. This should include a review of State and local government population projections as noted in the introduction (including post covid-19 urban planning implications). Any review should also look at local government growth planning and financing (including State and Federal government’s roles as noted in examples within this paper). 

Any review needs also to project ahead to the year 2056 (the year the NSW State is using in its forward planning as noted). The State’s consideration of recommendations by the Commissioner for this Inquiry and suggestions contained in the wealth of submissions likely to be made for is important in addressing issues and concerns raised by Central Coast residents, businesses, elected officials and institutions on the planning and financing of the Central Coast Region’s growth.

To be completed

Many of the suggestions herein in this paper could apply to other NSW council areas (especially Growth Centres). This suggests a full review of the position of local government today in NSW in its structure, planning and financing (including State and Federal government’s roles as noted in #18 above). Any review needs to project ahead to the year 2056 (the year the NSW State is using in its forward planning).

References

Department of Planning (1975) Central Coast Structure Plan. State Government, Sydney

Department of Planning, Infrastructure and Environment (2018) Central Coast Planning Strategy 2036. State Government, Sydney

NSW Government (2012) Destination 2036. NSW State Government, Sydney

NSW Government (2016) Local Government (Council Amalgamations) Proclamation 2016. NSW State Government, Sydney

NSW Government (2018) GosfordCity Centre Revitalisation Program 2018. NSW State Government, Sydney

Rauscher, Ray (2017) Cities in Global Transition. Springer Publishers, Switzerland

Rauscher, Ray (2021) Renewing Cities with Value Capture Planning. Springer Publishers, SwitzerlandDr. Ray Rauscher rayc.rauscher@gmail.com M 043 500 4844   Dated: 23 February 2021 

12 May

Transport for NSW Long Term Master Plan – Submission on Discussion Paper

Posted by Habitat Association in Authors, David Holland, Dr Ray Rauscher, Freight handling centres, LAnd Management and Land Values of Green Corridor Lands, New Town Centres, Public Transport, Rail and Bus Interchanges, Rail Freight, Regional Planning, Renewable Energy. Tagged: , , , , , , , .

As an advocate for both adaptive thinking and the Environment the Habitat Association for Arts and Environment has included the latest publication by one of its members, David Holland, on transport planning for New South Wales.

For those who are surfing the web from outside of Australia, New South Wales is arguably the most populous State in Australia and has a large economy in Australian terms.

This means that transport planning in New South Wales (NSW) is pivotal to the future success of that economy and the we being of the residents and workers of the State.

We may even go as far as to say that without a solid strategy for the future and new co-operation between the various transport agencies, NSW is poised to produce more transport bottleneck which will affect the states future prosperity. The submission outline three themes that Mr. Holland feels are important for the way forward. They are sustainability, security and reliability.

The submission not only looks at very practical aspects of providing a sustainable public transport system, but also sustainable ways to operate transport systems into the future. This is highlighted in the approach related to handling freight. The submission proposes a logical but revolutional way to handle freight service between regions and between other Australian States.

The use of renewable energy in the rail system is touched on as a way for the State to meet renewable energy targets.

The Central Coast of NSW is referred to in much of the submission. David believes that regional Australia is often left out of detailed transport planning processes because of the assumption that all commuting, as has been traditionally the case, is flowing to and from the Sydney metropolitan areas. With the slow but steady improvement of job opportunities in the regions, more and more commuting is being done intra-regionally. This means that public transport services should not only accommodate this trend but transport planning should drive this trend, providing appropriate infrastructure to give greater opportunity for regional investment in the growing regional economic powerhouses of the Illawarra, the Central Coast, the far west of Sydney around Penrith and the Blue Mountains, and the south west of Sydney around Campbelltown.

To Read More follow this link>:

Related articles

11 Feb

A Paper to identify the nexus between Wyong Shire’s Township master Plans, the Wyong Township’s Transport Precinct and the NSW Road and Maritime Services Proposal

Posted by Habitat Association in Affordable Housing, Architecture, Public Transport, Rail and Bus Interchanges, Regional Planning, Social impacts on population growth. Tagged: , , , , , , , , , .

Planning Public Transport Structures & Wyong Town Centre

The drive to put a four lane highway through the township

By David Holland,  B.A.S. Env. Plan. Grad. Dip. Env. Mgmt.

Introduction

Over the last few years the Road Traffic Authority has been updating the Pacific Highway on the Central Coast.  It has been prioritising the work by widening the most needed sections first. In the last 2 years the road between Wyong Road and the Wyong river has been completed to the 4 lane standard. This has improved traffic flow from the Tuggerah Business and commercial precinct. With this stretch of road the RTA has incorporated a secragated bike track as well as bus priority lanes. This section of road has been well thought out and is a quality segment of road.

The next stage is the crossing of Wyong River and pushing a renewed road through the township of Wyong.

Background

Over the last three years the NSW Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) has engaged in several community consultation campaigns. The first was directed to residence in the locality, explaining some of the alternative proposals put up by the RMS, none of which fully addressed the concerns presented in the submission to the RMS.

Various groups and individuals have contributed to the number of options that could be made to enable the Pacific Highway traffic to flow through the Township.

Some include the diversion of the traffic to a new ramp to the freeway.  The RMS suggested that this would skew traffic flows towards minor streets in the western parts of the town causing traffic problems in these areas.

The Baker Street Master Plan

This is a Wyong Council master plan which is located immediately to the east of the railway station. It will allow multi-storey development  in both commercial and residential forms. It is a pivotal plan for any realistic development for the township.

The River foreshore Master Plan

The river foresaw master plan is located on the Wyong river to the south-east of the Transport Precinct.  Although some re-design may need to be incorporated into the plan due to new considerations of sea level rise introduced in 2010, this is potentially a necessary expansion for the town. It will provide the potential for additional residential developments.

Both master plans will add to the attractiveness of the township as a residential location and provide the much-needed consolidation to development around the township to ensure the viability of both the shopping opportunities within the town and the transport precinct.

The Town Plan (DCP 7)

The existing town has a heritage constraint on development, but will be able to be redeveloped over time under the Development Control Plan (DCP) 7 for the Shire. In addition adjacent and within the confines of DCP 7 a cultural Master Plan was released in 2011. This will be developed to further enhance the township experience.

The Transport Precinct

The current transport precinct consists of the railway station, bus interchange, a commuter car park and a taxi rank. In close proximity to the interchange are several small take away and coffee shops. Although the precinct works well a number of issues are evident concerning it.

1. Security and the misbehaviour of public transport users

2. Many people use the interchange to transfer to other designations and spend little time in the town.

3. As the station is the most northerly permanently attended  station by railway staff on the Central Coast and has good ticketing facilities and good car parking facilities, many commuters prefer to drive to this station in preference to other stations closer to their place of residence. In addition, although the bus services are improving, many commuters find the private car more convenient and faster to get to the train at this station.

The Future role for the historic town

When problems with the fragmentation of the town by the proposed roadway are overcome and suitable inducements are created for developers to develop the master plans to the east of the town, the town will hold a good future as a business centre for the region. This business sector would then be supported by a commercial retail, and service sector within the town. With the appropriate transport precinct at the heart of the town, it will emerge that most of the movement around the small town will be as a pedestrian.

To read the recommendations put forward by the Wyong Planning Committee of the CEN, after considerable consultation with a range of local organisations including Wyong Shire Council click on the link.

Submission to the RMS on the proposal to put a four lane highway through the township

Related articles

20 Sep

Submission for the North Wyong Structure Plan NSW Australia

Posted by Habitat Association in Aboriginal Culture, Affordable Housing, Biobanking Natural Resources, Biodiversity Preservation, Climate Change, Extractive industires, Extractive Industries, Green Corridor Planning, Human impacts on natural Environments, LAnd Management and Land Values of Green Corridor Lands, New Town Centres, Population growth and planning for Tertiary Education Institutions, Public Transport, Rail and Bus Interchanges, Regional Planning, Social impacts on population growth, Wetlands.

The North Wyong Structure Plan is one of the most important documents compiled for the Central Coast. It identifies the pattern or template for development in the fastest growing areas of the Central Coast, the areas north of the township of Wyong.

The plan has been produced from the objectives of the Central Coast Strategy 2008, which is the main future looking document for the whole Central Coast.

The relationship of this plan to the Draft Central Coast Regional Transport Strategy (CCRTS)

Recently, the Central Coast has had the opportunity to be presented with the Central Coast Regional Transport Strategy.  This document although still in draft, in our opinion, was not able to satisfactorily identify the future transport needs of the Central Coast. By not using demographic trend data to show the huge needs in transport for the future of the Central Coast it was not able to properly analyze future transport trends and plan projects that relate to these trends. As this plan relies on the CCRTS for transport planning into the future we feel that the transport component of this plan is inadequate.

This document however, while only touching on transport has been able to show the capacity that the Central Coast will be able to contribute to NSW and the growth potential of the area covered by the North Wyong Structure Plan.

Trend from Private to Public Transport

The Plan outlines a potential of up to 10,000 new jobs with the release of developable land over the scope of the Plan. With this increase in employment opportunities there will be an increasing burden on transport infrastructure to move commuters. To increase efficiencies and reduce carbon emissions the Plan should move with the trend away from private forms of transport to public transport. This planned trend will help avoid cost blowouts on roads funding and time wasted by commuters waiting on congested roads.

It is expected that a large proportion of the jobs will be filled by workers from the southern parts of the Central Coast and Newcastle. It would be ideal that everyone living in the region would be able to walk or ride to work, but this would not be practical considering individual life style choices. However, workers will examine the feasibility of how to get to a particular job. This is where transport plans and transport planning must use a forward planning model to help enable large parts of the work force to easily access public transport.

The CCRTS, of which the Plan relies as a blue print to achieve sustainable transport is lacking in vision.  The Plan lacks a vision for transition from the medium term planning to the long term planning. The Plan, for example, relies on the CCRTS to supply the needed road infrastructure for the massive amounts of movement that is planned within the Plan.  This movement must be planned so that workers leave their cars at home and travel by public transport to work, either locally or from the regions. Bus services must become a seamless option for commuters.

<Read More Issues covered in this submission>

19 Sep

Central Coast – NSW – a Regional Growth Area

Posted by Habitat Association in Affordable Housing, Biobanking Natural Resources, Biodiversity Preservation, Climate Change, Green Corridor Planning, LAnd Management and Land Values of Green Corridor Lands, New Town Centres, Population growth and planning for Tertiary Education Institutions, Public Transport, Regional Planning, Social impacts on population growth, Water infrastructure planning.

Proposal to establish a ‘regional growth area’, including governance and planning structures, for the Central Coast – covering Gosford City and Wyong Shire.

Sustainable Communities Research (SCR) has recently been working on aspects of the growth centre of Warnervale / Wadalba as well as greenfield and renewal growth areas in Wyong Shire and Gosford City. The paper addresses key issues and major questions of strategic planning and infrastructure financing of these areas. Of priority importance for the Central Coast are water planning, population management and infrastructure provisions.

From this work SCR makes three recommendations for consideration, including: extending the area of responsibility of the CCRDC to the Warnervale / Wadalba growth centre; designating Wyong Shire as a Local Government Growth Area; and, designating the whole of the Central Coast as a Regional Growth Area.  The report also suggests five Central Coast plans need to complement the Central Coast Regional Strategy (CCRS) (2008). These plans as noted below are: infrastructure; sustainable transport; conservation; water management; and affordable housing.

Report Recommendations:

A. Growth Areas

We recommend that the State government designate the whole of the Central Coast (Gosford / Wyong) as a Regional Growth Area.

We make three suggestions (containing options) about growth areas for the State government to consider:

1.      State government extending the area of responsibility of the CC Regional Development Corporation (CCRDC) to the Warnervale / Wadalba growth centre;

2.       State government designating Wyong Shire as a ‘Local Government Growth Area’;

3.      State government designating the whole of the Central Coast (Gosford / Wyong) as a Regional Growth Area (preferred option).

B. Planning

We recommend that five plans complement the Central Coast Regional Strategy:

1.      CC Infrastructure Plan – with commitments to delivering needed infrastructure to meet population growth.

2.      CC Sustainable Transport Plan – follow-up actions under the CC Regional Transport Plan (2010) linking the existing major population centres and integrating public transport (rail/buses), roads, cycleways and walkways.

3.      CC Conservation Plan – the yet to be completed plan to conserve the local environment and address degradation from past development (especially the lakes and valleys)

4.      CC Water Management Plan – linking the three above to this plan under the newly formed CC Water Corporation.

5.      CC Affordable Housing Plan – to ensure many local people on lower incomes can afford to live on the Central Coast.

A report presented to:

Hon Bernie O’Farrell, Premiere of NSW, Australia on Wed 21st Sept 2011

by:                             Sustainable Communities Research

Compiled: Wed 24th August 2011

In association with

Habitat Association for Arts and Environment

www.habitatassociation.com.au

Authors            –       Kevin Armstrong and Dr. Ray Rauscher

To read the full report: <click here>


19 Aug

Submission to Transport NSW on: Draft Central Coast Transport Strategy 2010

Posted by Habitat Association in Climate Change, Human impacts on natural Environments, New Town Centres, Population growth and planning for Tertiary Education Institutions, Public Transport, Rail and Bus Interchanges, Rail Freight, Regional Planning, Social impacts on population growth.

This submission on the draft Central Coast Transport Strategy(herein referred to as the dCCTS or the Strategy) is laid out under the following headings:

  1. Structure of the dCCTS
  2. Issues, Concerns and Questions
  3. Connections between Statistical Data and Works
  4. A Complete Strategy for the Central Coast
  5. A Proposed Structure for the Strategy

1.0 Structure of the dCCTS

The dCCTS is divided into three time frames.

  1. Current to 2012
  2. Medium term 2012 to 2020
  3. Long Term 2020 to 2036

Each timeframe addresses: Rail, Road, Buses, Bicycles, Walking, Freight, Transport Interchanges, Car Parking and Governance.

The dCCTS lists projects in order of:

1. Recently completed or soon to be commenced;

2. Long term.

There is some reader confusion between these two project categories. For example, the $300 million roads funding is noted as a future project, though these funds are mostly already expended on the nominated projects. Also, the new bus routes as announced by the State were finalised with the commencement of new schedules on 8 Nov 2010.

2.0 Issues, Concerns and Questions

There are a number of issues, concerns and questions that must be raised.

2.1  Central Coast Bus Review

I see the dCCTS as needing to compliment the recent Central Coast Bus Review (under the Outer Metropolitan Bus Review) process. I draw attention to the submission on bus transport needs compiled by myself on behalf of the CEN.

Ref. (Bus review Central Coast 2009)

This submission highlighted the bus needs of the North Wyong District. The dCCTS heralds the result of the outer metropolitan bus review, but many of the North Wyong services (i.e. Lakehaven) as requested in the submission have not been incorporated within the new bus timetables (8 Nov 2010). The dCCTS states that a North Wyong Bus Servicing Strategy is to be prepared between 2012 and 2020. This seems to be yet another delay for the North Wyong area to get a comprehensive plan established. (dCCTS ref p32, 47).

Additional issues associated with the new expanded services for North Wyong extolled in the Strategy, are in contradiction to the new timetable which run the last services generally earlier in the evening than the old timetable to certain destinations north of Lakehaven and in particularly on the weekends. Finally, new peak hour services are ending their runs later at Morisset and Wyee stations than from Lakehaven, thus disadvantaging workers returning home from Tuggerah in comparison to these afore-mentioned locations.

2.2 More Services Needed for North Wyong

The claim in the strategy is that more services run past the Wyong Hospital. This is true except on Sundays where there are now fewer services to the hospital and services finish several hours earlier. Saturday services are not much better even though services between Tuggerah and Lakehaven have increased dramatically on Weekends (ref. p. 29 dCCTS).

2.3 Contributions from Key Stakeholders

I express concern in the comment that Transport NSW will allow contributions from key stakeholders when assessing the needs of the community for additional services. Can the State define ‘key stakeholders’ (dCCTS ref. p31)?

2.4 Bus Corridors

No Strategic Bus Corridors were identified in the North Wyong Area. There is a need, however, for these services, as follows (not exhaustive):

  • Lakehaven to Gosford via Bateau Bay
  • Lakehaven to Charlestown via Swansea
  • Lakehaven to Gosford Via Tuggerah
  • Tuggerah to The North Entrance via Mingara

2.5 Metro Bus

The Metro Bus is a Sydney program and would thus need more explanation of its introduction to the Central Coast (ref p31 dCCRTS). The Strategy suggests that it should be expanded to the Central Coast. If Metro Bus is to become the dedicated bus transit ways on the Central Coast, I suggest The Entrance and the Tuggerah transport interchanges should come under any Metro Bus program and other Central Coast interchanges should be investigated (dCCTS ref p32).

2.6 Fast Rail and Freight Services

The strategy mentions long-term planning for a fast rail and plans for a loop rail for freight services though there are no references to any improvements to the current level of access to the rail. The one exception here is, the addition of the Warnervale township station. The fast train and freight loop installations on the Central Coast will take pressure off the existing rail line, thus allowing an expanded system to meet the Central Coast’s growing population (ref p33, 38). CEN has submitted proposals to the State for two new stations, one at Blue Haven and the other at the southern end of the Coast’s rail line west of Woy Woy Station. This will give quicker access to rail for about 20,000 people by the year 2036.

Web Reference:

Planning Public Transport Structures in North Wyong: A Proposal for a Blue Haven Bus and Train Interchange

2.7 Parking Trains

2.8 Local Government Transport Plans

2.8 Minor Towns not Addressed in Strategy

2.9 Secure Bike Parking (Page 14)

2.10 Wyong town Centre (Page 24)

2.11 Commitment to Provide Alternatives to Private Transport in North Wyong (page 24/25)

2.12 Changing Demographic due to Climate Change

2.13 North Wyong Public Transport Links to Newcastle

2.14 Promoting Public transport use

3.0 Connections Between Statistical Data and works

3.1 The dCCTS quotes a range of statistical data.

3.2 What assumptions could be made from the nexus of these facts?

4.0 A Complete Strategy for the Central Coast

5.0 A Proposed Structure for the Strategy

To read detail on the above sub headings and see full document:

<Click Here>

Submission By

David Holland

B.A.S. Environmental Planning

Grad. Dip. Environmental Management

Member of the Sustainable Transport Committee of CEN

Member of the Community Environment Network (CEN)

11 Jun

Commentary on Australia’s Future for Renewable Energy

Posted by Habitat Association in Climate Change, Freight handling centres, Human impacts on natural Environments, Hydrogen Chemical Carriers, Hydrogen economy, Public Transport, Rail Freight, Renewable Energy, Solar Hydro Power, Solar Voltaic Electricity Generation. Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , .

This is a discussion paper about renewable energy and how Australia is placed to act on reforms to improve the uptake of renewable energy. The paper also comments on a series of letters sent to Federal Government Members and Ministers from 2006 to 2010.

The commentaries on the letters add additional information not given in these letters to the federal government. This additional information has been added with a contemporary nature relating to the year 2010.

This discussion paper has within its appendix list the actual letters sent to the federal government. In addition it has the two replies from two federal departments received from the final letter written in 2009. These letters are from the Minister for Resources and Energy and the Department of Infrastructure, Transport.

These replies outline some interesting plans for the direction of the then Rudd government and actions containing exciting programs underway. The commentary on the letter from the Minister for Resources and Energy analyses information presented in the letter that explain the government’s promoting of the ‘hydrogen economy’, and the continuation of research into carbon abatement programs. Some interesting results are emerging from this program that may be environmentally friendlier than the simple carbon capture and storage concept.

The commentary on the reply from the office of the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, makes two important points. Firstly the government is continuing the planning for coal extraction by providing additional rail infrastructure for the coal mining industry. Secondly, though the introduction of Infrastructure Australia a range of much-needed infrastructure within Australia can be planned, This will ensure proper investment in future infrastructure provided consideration is given to issues surrounding the impacts of climate change and peak oil. These should include best practice planning for the use of renewable fuels and renewable energy.

The commentaries on the letters are detailed, adding to the information contained in the letters. When reading these commentaries the original letters should be referenced to get a better picture of how the subject has evolved over the 2 to 3 year period between the letters and the commentary.

Some of the subjects canvassed by the letters include; ‘the future of fuel cell technologies’, ‘the hydrogen economy’, ‘using hydrogen as an energy carrier’, ‘the efficiencies of heavy freight rail’ and that a move towards higher levels of public transport use will help reduce carbon emissions and reduce government spending on high cost infrastructure such as roads.

The letters cover, as does the commentary, the issue of a carbon trading system or carbon tax. It outlines in brief the need for some market based system to line up with world’s carbon trading systems or programs that provide ways to give disincentives for producing greenhouse gases by manufacturing enterprises. These enterprises utilize the ‘public good’ resources such as a balanced gaseous air mix in our atmosphere and clean seas that still have a capacity to absorb carbon dioxide. However many industrial and transport processes are impacting on the percentage of CO2 in the atmosphere which is tending to cause changes to other economic systems reliant on stable weather patterns. These economic systems such as food production and other systems including natural systems rely on stable climate and weather patterns. When these systems are impacted the world’s population and general economy can be drastically affected. High levels of CO2 impact the very wellbeing of human life on earth and any compensation by manufacturing and industry is meaningless. However, these externalities explained above are considerable and morally they should somehow be accounted for in the manufacturing process. With these externalities accounted for by an artificial but morally sound price signal, it then may be that a cheaper and more economically sound (assuming the pure economics of a level playing field) process may be found that is better for the manufacturer. This is where a price on carbon helps to artificially price the damage these externalities are causing and attempts to give industry some impetus to find more carbon neutral forms of energy production.

One of the most important areas the commentary covers is that of a future change in energy sources from a fossil fuel driven economy to a renewable energy economy.

This move must be accompanied by a government planned response to supporting infrastructure. It is one thing to drive a renewable energy industry and connect it to an existing grid, but another to plan for and encourage infrastructure development by private industry to build plant in areas away from the grid.

Similarly, an organized plan is need for the infrastructure needed to support a move away from fossil fuels in the automotive industry. Without government initiatives and proper planning to a standardized type of automotive support infrastructure, private investment will continue to identify a move towards renewable automotive fuels too risky.

With no standards for a supply route for a renewable energy fuel, private industry will find it a mammoth task to provide both a vehicle to run on a particular renewable energy source as well as provide the infrastructure, this with the high possibility that the whole new type of renewable energy system, including the vehicle and infrastructure, will not be embraced by the public due to its initial costs or lack of convenience etc.

The paper makes no apologies for being prescriptive. Although many of the concepts in the paper have been thought through by government experts, there is always the danger that assumptions can be made about the detail of what is being explained in a paper. So the avoid this some level of detail in some of the concepts and processes are present in the document.

Read More >>