Climate Valuation Chief Executive Dr Karl Mallon has called on the Property Council and Urban Development Institute of Australia to clarify whether they are lobbying to prevent crucial extreme weather and climate risk analysis being adopted in the New South Wales planning system.

This comes following comments from both bodies indicating their opposition to the state’s draft Design and Place planning policy.

Dr Mallon said, “We cannot have a situation where the leaders in the property industry are putting people in harm’s way by opposing measures to shield homes from extreme weather and climate risk. 

“We have seen this month the awful consequences of extreme flooding which is being worsened by climate change. Building resilience to these hazards into the planning system is sensible and necessary and protecting homeowners and communities should be the highest priority for all parts of the property industry. 

“If we fail to consider to escalating flooding, fire and extreme heat risk in residential development without improved planning and building codes we will simply be building the climate ghettos of the future and people will be stuck in owing money on homes where insurance is unaffordable, and their very lives are at risk.

“The Property Council and Urban Development Institute of Australia need to clarify their comments. It’s hard to imagine, given the experience of this month and warnings from climate science, that anyone in a leadership position in the property industry could possibly be opposed to making homes in New South Wales resilient to intensifying hazards.”

Background

The State Government’s draft Design and Place State Environmental Planning Policy includes consideration of climate hazard risk and resilience among a series of design considerations to be considered by planning authorities before approving residential developments. 

It comes with draft changes to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 requiring development applications to be accompanied by site analysis identifying the hazards and risks of the development site. 

Section 22 of the Draft SEPP says a consent authority must be satisfied that the development is resilient to natural hazards by — 

(a) incorporating measures to— 

(i) avoid or reduce exposure to natural hazards, and

(ii) mitigate and adapt to the risks of natural hazards, including risks of climate change and compounding risks, and 

(b) mitigating the impact of expected natural hazards through the siting and design of the development.