The Coalition has stopped short of committing to an overhaul of the controversial Lower Hunter Regional Strategy but has said it holds concerns about the blueprint and would look ‘‘very closely’’ at some elements.
But the Greens have stepped up pressure for widespread changes, laying out an election platform for planning in the Hunter that argues for a complete review of the strategy, which the party calls a complete farce.
The strategy forecasts a population of 675,000 by 2031 and proposes 60per cent of new homes to be built in greenfield or new land release areas.
Greens MP David Shoebridge said it promoted urban sprawl and was based on closed door consultation with major landowners.
Both the Greens and the Coalition would scrap Labor’s ‘‘part 3A’’ planning laws, but the Greens said they would introduce legislation to overturn state significant site rezonings of Catherine Hill Bay, Gwandalan and Huntlee for residential development.
Greens Cessnock candidate James Ryan said the Hunter could not afford to wait while the Coalition conducted a two-year review of planning laws.
He said the strategy overhaul was needed ‘‘if the Hunter area is not to repeat the failures of Sydney’s urban sprawl’’ and to ensure it is based on ‘‘merit, public transport corridors and community needs’’.
The Coalition wants the Hunter and the Illawarra to accept more of Sydney’s growth, but has not said how many new residents that would entail for the regions.
Coalition planning spokesman Brad Hazzard said he considered the strategy population forecast to be ‘‘within the ballpark’’ and there were plenty of areas in the Hunter appropriate for greenfield development.
But the Coalition wanted ‘‘more rigour to be applied to the data that underpins’’ the strategy and to scrutinise some of the areas marked for development.
‘‘Clearly there is the need to re-engage with the community and make sure that where government is heading is where the local community wants to head,’’ Mr Hazzard said.
‘‘The Coalition is a little concerned that some of the bases upon which those conclusions [in the strategy] were drawn may have been influenced by the government being too closely aligned with some development interests.’’ A five-year review of the strategy is due this year.
Email a friend