AN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE COMMITTEE FOR SYDNEY’S JOINT SUBMISSION TO THE GREATER SYDNEY COMMISSION & TRANSPORT FOR NSWJANUARY 2018

2

The Committee’s December 2017 joint submission to the Greater Sydney Commission (GSC) Draft Greater Sydney Region Plan, the Transport for NSW (TfNSW) Draft Future Transport Strategy 2056 and the linked TfNSW Draft Greater Sydney Services and Infrastructure Plan was a significant contribution, weighing in at 70 pages. While that document contains the sum of months of evidence building and consultation with members, the Committee recognises the need for a shorter summary. This paper unpacks the submission’s main findings and recommendations. If you would like further information, our full submission is available online.

The Committee’s submission came out strongly in favour of the role and function of the GSC and its broader vision for Greater Sydney. In particular, the Committee was strongly supportive of the decision by both the GSC, as well as TfNSW to embrace the alignment of land-use and transport planning. The Committee has long argued in favour of such a change. In order to reflect this alignment, our submission was developed to respond to both inquiries, with all our recommendations going to both departments. The Committee believes that you cannot achieve the objectives of either organisation without this linkage, and argues that Sydney will only flourish if there remains a close relationship and mutual understanding between our strategic planning bodies.

Going forward, Sydney’s transport network must reinforce core city planning objectives and outcomes – supporting greater access to jobs and increasing residential density close to public transport. It must also enhance the liveability of places and centres, delivered through a hierarchy of transport mode users with greater emphasis on pedestrians and cyclists than has been the case in previous transport strategies.

The Committee commends both the Greater Sydney Commission and Transport for NSW for this innovative and important alignment.

PART 1 – THE COMMITTEE’S SUBMISSION TO THE GREATER SYDNEY COMMISSION

A more clearly defined planning hierarchy: The primacy of the Plan – A Metropolis of Three Cities (AMO3C) – needs to be reinforced. The Committee argues that “other State and Local Government plans should be required to conform and support the Plan and its preferred urban structure, including all agencies which have a role in delivering infrastructure and services for the city”.

Recommendation 1: That the GSC’s metropolitan and district plans be made statutory.

Recommendation 2: That local plans, and other government planning strategies, be required to align with and support the GSC’s published plans. Where they conflict, the GSC’s plans should take priority.

Stronger Local Government input: The Committee’s submission argues that to encourage further alignment going forward, Sydney’s councils should be given a greater role in the governance of the GSC. One option to achieve this objective would be through a series of ‘high level forums’ with council leaders and general managers at which the plans and activities of the GSC would be discussed.

Recommendation 3: That the NSW Government establish a twice a year (or quarterly) forum between itself, the GSC and both the leaders and general managers of local councils to help secure more Local Government input into the drafting and updating of GSC documents.

AN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE COMMITTEE FOR SYDNEY’S JOINT SUBMISSION TO THE GREATER SYDNEY COMMISSION & TRANSPORT FOR NSW

Front Page Image Credit: Sydney aerial view’, by Maksym Kozlenko licenced under CC BY-SA 4.0.

COMMITTEE FOR SYDNEY 3

Securing consistency across government:The Committee argues that the GSC “will be judged not just by the content of its plan but by the capacity of the metropolitan and cross-agency coordination it embodies and promotes to avoid repeating the errors of the past”. To ensure the GSC’s broader vision for Sydney is delivered upon, there will need to be a specific strategy to prevent departments acting as silos and to deliver consistency across government.

The Committee argues that greater clarity around benchmarks, metrics and targets for assessing the implementation of the GSC Plan and the progress of the city is needed, and that the GSC should be given greater authority and powers to review other government agencies, beyond just the role of collaborator and facilitator.

For example, in the ‘Western City’, the Draft Plan is seeking to build a city the size of Canberra today. The Department of Education and Training should publish a plan on how and where new schools are to be delivered and in what sequence. This plan would be audited against the GSC’s vision, with land use and transport integration resulting in far more walkable journeys between schools and homes.

The Committee also urges consideration of a ‘pan Sydney City Deal’ involving the three tiers of government to drive the delivery of elements of the Draft Plan across the city. Furthermore, the submission recommends the establishment of ‘State Government-to-Local Government’ City Deals to drive a program of town centre renewal across Sydney.

Recommendation 4: That the GSC be given greater authority and powers to review other government agencies, beyond just a role of collaborator and facilitator.

Recommendation 5: That GSC compliant long-term plans are developed by all major infrastructure departments of government, including Local Government, to ensure consistency with the long-term plan across governments.

Recommendation 6: That the Federal Government’s City Deals program be expanded as a further means of aligning and coordinating delivery of urban infrastructure, with consideration of a similar model to be rolled out at the ‘State Government-to-Local Government’ level.

Tracking the Western Sydney jobs gap:The Committee’s submission cites research by Western Sydney University (WSU) which found that while almost 14,000 people enter the work force each year in Greater Western Sydney, only 8,000 jobs are created. To rectify this imbalance, the Committee argues that Sydney needs a “decisive shift in the proportion of knowledge jobs being created in Western Sydney”, while also making sure that the “jobs which are agglomerating in the ‘Harbour CBD’ are made more accessible to people living in the Central and Western Cities”. The former will be achieved through a focus on strategic centres and collaboration areas, while the latter will be addressed through high-speed, mass-transit.

Challenge for further discussion: According to the GSC’s data, for every dwelling in the Eastern City District there are 1.28 jobs presently available in nearby centres. By 2036, that ratio will surge to 1.4 ‘jobs per dwelling’. For residents in the Western City District however, the ratio will increase by a much smaller amount, from the already low base of 0.32 ‘jobs per dwelling’ to the still low level of 0.36 by 2036. In the Central City District, which encompasses Parramatta , the increase will be even smaller, shifting from 0.55 to 0.57 over 20 years. Disturbingly, the GSC’s own forecast is for the jobs imbalance to be worse in 2036 than it is today.

Figure 1. ‘The ratio of ‘Jobs in Centres’ to ‘Dwellings by District’

Recommendation 7: That baseline mapping of the current effective job density across Sydney be conducted to track how the imbalance shifts over the lifetime of the GSC Plan and TfNSW Strategy.

Recommendation 8: That baseline mapping be undertaken, not just of 30 minute access within the three cities by public transport, but also of the time taken to get to the Harbour City from all parts of Sydney.

1.5

1.2

0.9

0.6

0.3

0.0EASTERN CITY

DISTRICTCENTRAL

CITY DISTRICTWESTERN CITY

DISTRICT

2017

2036

NET CHANGE

4

Figure 2: The number of jobs accessible within 30-minutes in Sydney on a weekday morning

Source: Committee for Sydney, The Geography of Time, 2017.

Rebalancing the city using connectivity and placemaking: The Committee welcomes the GSC’s focus on placemaking as an employment generator, and agrees that “supporting the revitalisation of our many town centres and improving their connectivity with better transport is critical to improving urban productivity, environmental sustainability and the health and well-being of our citizens”.

Recommendation 9: That appropriate acknowledgement be given to the role of strategic centres and town centres as job agglomeration locations provided that they are well designed, walkable, amenable & well connected by mass-transit.

COMMITTEE FOR SYDNEY 5

Turning Sydney’s strategic centres and town centres into job hubs: While the Committee commends the emphasis on the importance of ‘centres’ for job creation, the Committee argues that there “needs to be more fine-grained analysis of what kinds of centres are likely to be the focus of jobs in future, what kinds of jobs will be generated and where those centres will be”. There also needs to be more focus on encouraging vibrant, safe and economically successful town centres at night.

Challenge for further discussion: The Committee submission notes that in the current Draft Plan, “most future residential development in Sydney is away from the existing ‘strategic centres’ and that most of the existing strategic centres are not in Western Sydney. This raises the question as to whether, in growing the population of the Western City, we are actually intending to create new strategic centres to help provide employment close to them, in addition to developing the amenity, connectivity, and economic attraction of Liverpool, Penrith, Campbelltown and Blacktown”.

Recommendation 10: That the GSC conduct more fine-grained analysis of what kinds of centres are likely to be the focus of jobs in future, what kinds of jobs will be generated, and where those centres will be.

Recommendation 11: That the GSC support the development of centres as job hubs by initiating a town centre urban renewal and design program in association with local councils in Sydney, supported by the Government Architect (GANSW), to improve the urban design of centres, such as by implementing ‘Chicago Complete Streets’ style policies and providing the green infrastructure to improve their amenity and walkability.

Recommendation 12: That centre-supporting social and transportation infrastructure improvements are framed with wider renewal and city-shaping objectives in mind. This will include the coordination of station upgrades, public realm enhancements and any development restructuring of the core area.

Challenge for further discussion: The relationship between homes and centres is significantly more dispersed in the Western Parkland City than other parts of the city. By 2036, the Western Parkland City is projected to be a city of 10 centres, with a population of 1.5 million people, spread over an area that is roughly twice the size of the Central City and Eastern City combined. This means that the average distance from a home to a centre will be much further in the Western Parkland City, while the jobs and services that are located within those centres will be substantially less accessible.

Image Credit: Forest Road Entrance to Hurstville Central’, July 2017, by Philip Terry Graham licenced under CC BY 2.0.

6

Figure 3: A map of centre locations in the Greater Sydney Commission’s Draft Greater Sydney Region Plan

Source: Committee for Sydney and Cox Architecture, 2017.

Recommendation 13: That the GSC provide more clarity about whether there will be new strategic centres established to support the substantial population growth in the Western Parkland City, including specific detail about how new centres would complement and support the existing centres of Penrith, Liverpool, Campbelltown and Blacktown.

Recommendation 14: In the event of new centres being created, that the planning and delivery of those centres be undertaken by a dedicated delivery vehicle, potentially in the form of new Urban Development Corporations (UDCs) modelled on the UK New Town Development Corporation model.

Recommendation 15: That the GSC further boost jobs by developing a strategy to grow the night time economy of Sydney’s strategic and town centres, with advice to be taken from the Committee’s soon to be released report into Sydney’s Night Time Economy.

COMMITTEE FOR SYDNEY 7

Establishing a hierarchy of transport mode users:The Committee notes that any place based strategy to turn strategic centres and town centres into job hubs will necessarily require a commitment to a hierarchy of transport mode users with greater priority on pedestrians and cyclists than has typically been the case in previous transport strategies.

Recommendation 16: That the both the GSC and Transport for NSW keep their proposed ‘Movement and Place’ hierarchy of transport users, but that the shift away from car-heavy road use be more heavily emphasised.

Funding ‘Centre Renewal’ and infrastructure: The Committee argues that the NSW Government should consider creating a UK inspired “Town Centre Renewal Challenge Fund, which could put up some government funding, matched by local councils, and perhaps other private funding, for the best town master planning and transformation programs in Greater Sydney”.

The Committee also notes that local councils would likely bear much of the cost associated with town centre renewal and argues that the time has come to finally abolish rate capping.

Finally, the Committee’s submission considers the challenges associated with building new rail infrastructure to better connect centres, and comes out strongly in support of value capture policies to augment existing funding mechanisms. However, it should be noted that the canvassed Special Infrastructure Contribution (SIC) model only provides ‘one-off’ funding, rather than the recurrent funding required to cover ongoing operation costs. The Committee has long supported the introduction of a broad-based land tax to support Sydney’s development and to help fund necessary public transport. The proposed tax would not need to be high, just sufficient in scope to help defray the gap between ticket revenue and the existing government subsidy.

Recommendation 17: That the NSW Government establish a Town Centre Renewal Challenge Fund, modelled on similar funds used previously in the United Kingdom.

Recommendation 18: That council rate capping be abolished. If rate capping is not to be removed completely, consideration should be given to changing how IPART determines the annual increase. A simple formula might be combining CPI increases with a further proportional increase to reflect the rate of population growth in each LGA.

Recommendation 19: That a broad based, metropolitan land tax be introduced with all revenue strictly hypothecated for use on key urban infrastructure.

Distributing jobs through Collaboration Areas:The Committee supports the concept of ‘Collaboration Areas’ and seeks a long-term commitment from the GSC to delivering these precincts, with more and better transport and accessibility options. The Committee agrees that the ‘Collaboration Areas’ concept could help bring government and private sector together to calibrate local services and infrastructure to support business platforms and to help “solve local operating problems”.

Challenge for further discussion: The timeframes for activity and focus on the Collaboration Areas by the GSC seem very short term for a 40-year plan, which raises several questions including: 1) What long term support will be provided to sustain the identified Collaboration Areas, and; 2) What is the long-term role of the GSC in such areas?

Recommendation 20: That the NSW Government look to best practice international case studies in order to better inform the long-term planning of the GSC’s proposed Collaboration Areas.

Challenge for further discussion: Innovation Districts internationally are heavily reliant on good public transport access and walkability, and it is not clear whether all nine of the Collaboration Areas will have such infrastructure.

Recommendation 21: That the NSW Government ensure all Collaboration Areas are supported by necessary public transport infrastructure, with their importance being reflected in and supported by their relevant district plans..

Rebalancing job access using high-speed mass-transit:The Committee argues that the economic rebalancing of Sydney sought by the GSC can only come via a ‘modal shift’ towards mass-transit. This necessary rebalancing also needs to result in a spatial extension of Sydney’s rail network to cover more of Sydney and to better connect more Sydneysiders to fast transport between where they live and where they work.

The prompt delivery of the Western Metro is a critical component of this and should eventually be extended to the Western Parkland City, in addition to a new Badgerys Creek Airport high speed, high volume connection with few stops.

Recommendation 22: That the final GSC Plan specifically acknowledge that getting from the CBD to Parramatta in 15 minutes and from the CBD to the Badgerys Creek Airport in under 30 minutes is essential if the three cities are to grow as one metropolis.

8

Better phasing of infrastructure priorities:The Committee notes its concern that the West Metro was not identified in the Draft Plan as an “urgent priority”. The Committee argues that “without it there is the danger of the three 30-minute cities amounting to an institutionalising of the current 90-minute city, and of the city continuing its sprawl trajectory”. The submission argues that new high-speed rail links are critical “to binding the three cities together and to increasing the Effective Job Density in parts of the city currently too far from a rail network in Western Sydney”.

Challenge for further discussion: Prioritising the F6 and the Northern Beaches Link over West Metro will not have the rebalancing effect sought by the GSC.

Recommendation 23: That the NSW Government give primacy to the West Metro above the F6 and Northern Beaches Link.

Recommendation 24: That the NSW Government implement a specific plan to ensure fast rail connectivity between the Sydney CBD, Parramatta and Badgerys Creek.

Recommendation 25: That the NSW Government pursues a decisive ‘modal shift’ towards rail in Western Sydney with a network that effectively links Blacktown, Penrith, Liverpool, Campbelltown and Parramatta to each other and to the new airport.

Recommendation 26: That the NSW Government immediately begin planning for a north-south rail network via the new airport.

Figure 4. The Committee for Sydney’s rail vision for Sydney

Source: Committee for Sydney, 2016. Connecting Western Sydney: Submission to the Australian Government Western Sydney Rail Needs Scoping Study, page 8. The coloured arrows have been overlayed on to the Western Sydney Rail Options map and represent the Committee’s priority rail projects of a high-speed east-west line and a north-south rail link.

COMMITTEE FOR SYDNEY 9

Set a ‘modal shift’ target for mass and active transport: The Committee argues that for the GSC to succeed with its plans, it is critical that the final Greater Sydney Region Plan include transport ‘modal shift’ targets, with progress assessed at frequent intervals between the current baseline and the end of each plan’s implementation time frame.

Recommendation 27: That the GSC’s final Greater Sydney Region Plan allocate each of the three cities a series of ‘modal shift’ targets, with cumulative city-wide targets also put in place.

Better infrastructure appraisal:The Committee has long called for a changed, more evidence-based and less siloed approach to infrastructure appraisal and prioritisation. The Committee’s submission argues that there needs to be a “greater role for the GSC in infrastructure appraisal and prioritisation”.

Specifically, the Committee’s submission argues that “the merits of all future transport infrastructure should be appraised against its ability to meet the preferred structure of the city” and be “required to align to the delivering of AMO3C”.

The Committee notes that recognition of ‘place’ in both documents should also logically lead to the prioritisation of key infrastructure projects over others because they create better ‘place’ outcomes, which in so doing will enhance productivity, liveability and sustainability.

Recommendation 28: That there be a shift in the infrastructure appraisal process away from its current focus on travel-time reduction and towards a focus on transport modes which deliver better and broader economic outcomes, greater amenity, sustainability and connectivity for more people; including a preference for modes that deliver that higher density urban form in and around the key centres.

Recommendation 29: That the NSW Government prioritise transport projects and modes which support placemaking & liveability, and which enable the increasing numbers of workers in the knowledge economy to access their jobs in centres in less than 30 minutes, without worsening congestion on the roads.

Recommendation 30: That all future transport projects be assessed against how they would impact each of the proposed ‘modal shift’ shift targets.

Sydney in its regional context, connected by mass-transit: The Committee agrees with both the GSC and TfNSW that Greater Sydney is on its way to becoming a ‘city-region’ of five cities, connected through greater and mutually beneficial interactions between Sydney, Newcastle/Gosford and Wollongong. This recognition means that the NSW Government now needs to start thinking about how to integrate and capitalise on this extended conurbation, and how to better link it with faster mass-transit.

The Committee also suggests that in planning the future city region, the NSW Government may find that Parramatta is the most natural centre for a rail interchange, not just for a Greater Sydney of three cities but for the ‘city-region’ of five cities in 2056.

Recommendation 31: That the NSW Government add to its ’30 minute’ Sydney targets with a new regional ‘one hour’ target for rail connections from Sydney to Wollongong and Sydney to Newcastle.

Planning for the ‘aerotropolis’:The Committee argues that it is vital that the new Western Sydney airport be planned to support the region and not cannibalise the existing strategic town centres of Western Sydney. The Committee argues that there needs to be much more detail provided to the public about what an ‘aerotropolis’ is, as neither its nature or its location was established clearly by the GSC Draft Plan.

Challenge for further discussion: It remains unknown what the proposed ‘aerotropolis’ will be or what kind of rail connectivity it will enjoy, or what the centres around it will look like.

Challenge for further discussion: It is highly likely that much economic development promoted by the airport will be heavily automated, potentially leading to a relatively jobless growth scenario.

Recommendation 32: That the GSC clearly outline its expectations for the aerotropolis, including any impacts that development of the airport will have on the jobs and economic strength of nearby centres.

10

Housing targets and the affordability question:The Committee supports the adoption of affordable housing targets for each district, but remains concerned that the proposed targets do not adequately reflect the employment and infrastructure capacity of each district.

The Committee also welcomes the GSC’s commitment to inclusionary zoning, but has called for greater certainty on the target to be delivered through the planning system. The Committee argues that the proposed caveats to this policy are too broad, which could severely undermine the NSW Government’s stated housing affordability targets.

Recommendation 33: That the GSC and the NSW Government develop a more comprehensive housing strategy for all tenures and typologies.

Recommendation 34: That the new strategy include greater public-sector funding for new and affordable housing.

Recommendation 35: That the NSW Government remove planning and non-planning barriers to small, family led developments, such as terrace and attached housing, and that this should include removing barriers of minimum lot sizes, especially around transport nodes.

Recommendation 36: That the NSW Government help facilitate the development of new housing business models such as built-to-rent.

Recommendation 37: That the NSW Government fine tune its inclusionary zoning policy to better deliver on its ambitions to boost affordable housing supply across Sydney.

The location of new housing supply:The Committee also notes a weakness in the GSC’s housing target of 725,000 extra dwellings by 2036, or 36,250 per year. Specifically, the GSC’s Draft Plan assumes that the peak productivity rate of growth that has been seen in the last three years will be further increased. The Committee is not convinced that this rate of development will be maintained over the next three years, let alone the life of the Plan.

The Committee also argues that “greater justification is needed on why some districts are to experience greater and faster population growth than others” and warns that “the mismatch between housing and employment targets for some Districts may aggravate the existing spatial and economic divide in Sydney”.

Challenge for further discussion: Comparisons between the housing numbers being planned on the Upper North Shore of Sydney versus those planned for the Canterbury-Bankstown corridor are illuminating and somewhat

surprising, as are the housing numbers and densities expected along the Northwest Rail Link (now Metro) compared with the Metro in the Sydenham-Bankstown corridor. It is difficult to understand why the housing numbers and densities in and around both corridors are not more closely aligned.

Recommendation 38: That the NSW Government consider increasing the housing targets for those areas that currently have the best connectivity and employment, and to modify the housing targets for some other areas further West.

Supporting Sydney’s green infrastructure: The Committee argues that “green infrastructure must be at the heart of the future development of Sydney, and is central to creating a more sustainable city and to generating community support for Sydney’s growth”.

The Committee also applauds the South Creek Corridor Plan and its dual role as the key provider of both amenity and environmental outcomes, creating attractive urban communities. However, the Committee argues that this vision for well-connected transit oriented compact communities within a Parkland City can only be achieved if the spread of low density housing into parkland areas is avoided.

Recommendation 39: That the Green Grid be implemented as a priority, building on the excellent pilot project around Parramatta.

Recommendation 40: That the policy to maintain riparian corridors in public ownership be maintained.

Recommendation 41: That the detailed level of analysis undertaken to deliver on a multitude of environmental and developmental outcomes for the South Creek Corridor be replicated for the other regions of Sydney, including a specific strategy to avoid urban spawl.

KPIs, big data, and the Smart City strategy:The Committee has long argued that it is vital for Greater Sydney to become a more data-driven and responsive city and that Sydney cannot claim to be a Smart City without such an approach. The Committee’s submission similarly argues for “clear and measurable metrics on the city’s performance” that could be measured against a series of city wide targets.

Recommendation 42: That in line with the Committee’s recently published issues paper, #WeTheCity3, the NSW Government appoint a Smart City Commissioner to the GSC with a mandate to promote a more data-driven and responsive Sydney and GSC.

COMMITTEE FOR SYDNEY 11

PART 2 – THE COMMITTEE’S SUBMISSION TO TRANSPORT FOR NSW Many of the recommendations contained in the submission to the Transport for NSW (TfNSW) Draft Future Transport Strategy 2056 and the linked Draft Greater Sydney Services and Infrastructure Plan were also included within the submission to the GSC. As such, the following summary contains mostly new information not yet visited, or existing recommendations that have received strong re-emphasis.

Overall, the Committee commends both the GSC and TfNSW for the unique extent of the collaboration that has been achieved thus far, and suggests that such collaboration will be required on an ongoing basis if Sydney is to be both sustainable and successful at mid-century.

Mass-transit as an enabler for effective job density:The Committee’s submission argues that one of the primary factors holding Sydney’s competitive performance and social inclusion back is a huge and historical under-investment in mass-transit.

The submission points out that “better public transport access has been shown to improve effective job density and improve health outcomes by incentivising people to walk to rail stations or bus stops”. Earlier research by the Committee has also confirmed that places with poor access to mass-transit perform less well economically, and are associated with what has become known as the ‘walking deficit disorder’ or type 2 diabetes.

Challenge for further discussion: The Committee notes that much of Sydney’s public transport network is heavily concentrated east of Parramatta, while residential development has trended westwards, reinforcing the economic attractiveness of Eastern Sydney, while putting immense strain on west-east transport corridors and exacerbating the economic and health divisions across Sydney.

Recommendation 43: That the NSW Government develop a strategy to reduce the effective job density gap that exists between the eastern Harbour CBD City and the rest of the city. Detailed policies to address this are outlined in the first chapter of this submission, including calls for a stronger focus on mass-transit rail links.

Will the draft TfNSW Strategy deliver on the 30-minute city?:The Committee’s submission expresses its deep concern that the proposed West Metro was not identified in the TfNSW Draft Strategy as an “urgent priority”. Bluntly, the Committee cannot see how the GSC’s objectives of rebalancing Sydney towards a 30-minute city, which the TfNSW Strategy is meant to support, can be met without it.

Challenge for further discussion: Without the West Metro, there is a high likelihood that the three 30-minute cities will in effect amount to the institutionalisation of the 90-minute city that Sydney has now, with the city continuing its dangerous sprawl trajectory.

Recommendation 44: That the final TfNSW Future Transport Strategy 2056 document properly adheres to the broader goals of the GSC, prioritising projects that deliver on the objectives of the GSC Plan and its preferred urban structure for Sydney, most notably the ‘30-minute city’ objective.

Recommendation 45: That the final TfNSW Future Transport Strategy 2056 document specifically lists the West Metro as an “urgent priority” above both the F6 and the Northern Beaches Link.

Could Parramatta be the city-region rail interchange of Sydney?:The Committee’s submission argues that beyond the three cities immediately envisaged by the GSC for Greater Sydney, the city is in fact already on its way to becoming a ‘city-region’ of five cities, including both Wollongong and the Newcastle/Gosford region.

The Committee’s submission argues that it is possible that Parramatta may in fact be the natural ‘city-region’ rail interchange for the emerging Newcastle-Sydney-Wollongong region. A rail interchange at Parramatta will reinforce the concept of the GSC’s ‘Central City’, support greater connectivity to Western Sydney, and also enhance connectivity to the economies of Wollongong and Newcastle/Gosford.

Recommendation 46: That the final TfNSW Future Transport Strategy 2056 document includes a pathway towards the development of high-speed rail projects connecting both Wollongong and Newcastle to Greater Sydney within one hour.

Recommendation 47: That the NSW Government considers whether Parramatta is the more sensible location to develop as a city-regional rail interchange for the regional ‘five city’ network.

12

Figure 5. Parramatta at the heart of the city-region rail interchange

Source: Cox Architecture, 2017.

COMMITTEE FOR SYDNEY 13

Reemphasising the need for ‘modal shift’ targets:The Committee also urges TfNSW to recognise the vital importance of implementing a ‘modal shift’ target for Greater Sydney, with progress assessed at frequent intervals between the current baseline and the end of the Plan’s implementation time-frame.

The Committee’s recommendation to both the GSC and TfNSW is that each of Greater Sydney’s ‘three cities’ be allocated their own ‘modal shift’ target, within a cumulative three cities total. The Committee notes that without such a target, there is no real visible and accountable KPI or incentive for the transport system to deliver on TfNSW’s stated values including its evident support for a mass-moving and active transport network for Greater Sydney.

Challenge for further discussion: The submission notes that TfNSW itself stresses that by 2056 the ‘Harbour CBD’ will have a population density ‘similar to Singapore today’, while Greater Parramatta will have a population density ‘similar to what London has today’. And yet, in the Draft TfNSW Strategy, the private vehicle mode share of Sydney in 2056 is depicted to be significantly higher than the current levels of other global cities with comparable populations.

Recommendation 48: That the final TfNSW Future Transport Strategy 2056 document also include ‘modal shift’ targets that are consistent with recommendation 26 of this submission. The targets should be consistent and specifically included in both the final TfNSW Future Transport Strategy 2056 document and the final GSC Greater Sydney Region Plan document.

Figure 6. The existing Transport for NSW private vehicle mode share forecasts

Source: TfNSW, 2017, Draft Future Transport Strategy 2056, page 29.

14

Embracing road user pricing:The Committee argues that the future tightening of budget forecasts among other factors has triggered a need to discuss road user pricing. The Committee’s submission argues that a road user scheme would be useful for forward funding the construction of roads and public transport projects, ideally with a mode-neutral approach to allocating transport funding.

The Committee also argues that road user pricing would be useful for driving a change in behaviour, which would reduce congestion by reducing trips in peak times on congested roads.

Recommendation 49: That the NSW Government consider moving towards the broader implementation of road-user pricing, with all revenue hypothecated strictly for transport purposes while maintaining a mode-neutral approach for evaluating expenditure proposals.

Enhancing the ‘Movement and Place’ framework:The Committee strongly commends TfNSW for the crucial shift in mindset away from simply evaluating transport projects based on their capacity to deliver the ‘efficient movement of people and goods’, particularly with regards to roads. The Committee’s submission strongly supports the ‘Movement and Place’ framework embraced by both TfNSW and the GSC. The Committee’s submission argues

that in acknowledgement of such a shift, it is now incumbent on the NSW Government to review its infrastructure appraisal processes.

Challenge for further discussion: The Committee’s submission shares the concerns expressed by Canterbury-Bankstown Council that the balance is not right yet vis a vis the ‘efficiency’ of the new Metro through their area and the quality and impact of station design at Bankstown. The submission argues that ‘impact on place’ needs to become a consideration when choosing the design and scope of new transport infrastructure.

Recommendation 50: That the NSW Government better clarify the differences between different categories of ‘streets’ and ‘roads’, to better develop a more place friendly ‘hierarchy of users’ for each category. The Committee’s view is that this hierarchy of users should have an even more place friendly focus than was envisaged in both the GSC Draft Plan and the TfNSW Draft Strategy.

Recommendation 51: That the new ‘Movement and Place’ framework contain a focus on how transport efficiency and good placemaking can be combined when developing new rail services and stations. In building new mass-transit capacity, TfNSW must apply this framework consistently, including during the appraisal of potential infrastructure projects, with appropriate consideration of the impact of each project on the liveability of places and centres in Sydney.

Source: Canterbury-Bankstown Council, 2017. Sydenham to Bankstown Metro: Key issues and opportunities, page 5.

Figure 7. A comparison between the design of Metro Northwest and Southwest

COMMITTEE FOR SYDNEY 15

Transport and city planning in an era of shared, autonomous and electric vehicles: The Committee’s submission warns that despite the obvious benefits of autonomous vehicles (AVs), poor planning could easily see the unplanned proliferation of AVs result in substantially worse congestion. The Committee argues that different policy frameworks could either hasten or reverse the trend towards a more dense, sustainable city.

The Committee argues that automated vehicles should complement the public transport network by connecting commuters to it, operating largely within the ‘last kilometre’ between people’s homes and their nearest train station or major public transport hub. The submission suggests that rather than “autonomous cars”, the optimum city-shaping approach should be to promote ride-sharing driverless vehicles as part of the broader mass-transit system.

Recommendation 52: That the NSW Government moves to ensure that the deployment of AVs in Sydney fits the GSC’s overall strategic spatial plan, by pursing an approach to AVs that is not focused on the individual customer of transport services but on the best outcomes for the city.

Some recommendations for Badgerys Creek:The Committee notes that much of the strategy surrounding the future of Badgerys Creek was underdeveloped in both the GSC Plan and TfNSW Strategy. As such, the Committee argues that more work is needed to ensure the airport’s seamless transition into the NSW transport network.

Recommendation 53: That the NSW Government carry out a long term strategic review of Badgerys Creek that integrates regional scale governance, economic drivers, and long term spatial planning.

Recommendation 54: That the NSW Government involve all levels of government and stakeholders in the planning of the airport prior to major political decisions are locked in.

Recommendation 55: That the NSW Government develop a 30-year Airport Region Plan.

16

The Committee for Sydney Level 27680 George StreetSydney NSW 2000 sydney.org.au @Committee4sydcommittee@sydney.org.au +61 2 9927 6511