Streamlining the planning process and supporting local identity and character – can the two exist?

The consultative frameworks that support local government strategic planning and land use planning seek similar outcomes: to prioritise local issues that inform council programs and services and determine the future urban and regional form of the local government area. The former is primarily derived from a collaborative process involving local residents and stakeholder and the latter is framed within a more consultative position that must also align with sub-regional and regional strategies and targets. The community strategic plans required by the Local Government Act 1993 (NSW) and the proposed Local Plans envisaged under the Planning Bill 2013 (NSW) are to be informed by the local community and seek similar outcomes that define how a local area will be managed, planned and will change over the next 10 years. From a strategic perspective there would be significant benefits to align the ‘operational’ planning of local government and land use planning so that there is a seamless integration between how suburbs and centres are managed, what services are offered and how and where new development will be supported that reflects community aspirations, the council’s resources and capacity and is consistent with broader planning priorities. Local councils are committed to the integrated planning and reporting reforms introduced some years ago. The current NSW Government planning reform lay the foundation for greater strategic planning and inclusive community involvement within a clearly articulated priority of economic growth and propose a nested hierarchy of plans from the state to local level. With two similar processes accessing the same community it raises the questions of how local government strategic plans and landuse plans can complement each other, align service and infrastructure delivery and co-exist with their respective consultative frameworks and legislative objectives. This paper outlines preliminary research that explored 16 community strategic plans in the context of how they inform land use planning and concluded that there is much work to do.