(Name withheld) , of  WEST PENNANT HILLS NSW, made the following submission on the project:

Proposed amendment to parking provisions for boarding houses: ARHSEPP

Modification to the car parking requirement puts car parking for a single
person 12sqm room on par with a 50sqm 1 bedroom apartment as per
Division 1 of SEPP ARH. This seems entirely inequitable?

As per Division 1 of SEPP ARH, a bedsitter or studio apartment of
minimum 35sqm does not require a car parking space, yet a boarding
room is now proposed to require 0.5 space?

Has any qualitative or quantitative analysis been undertaken of car
parking demands for 'new age boarding houses' (or any form of boarding
houses) to come to this conclusion?

Does the Department propose a savings provision for applications
lodged prior to the amendment of this provision, as the change has
significant impacts upon the viability of many existing projects?

I object to this proposed amendment as it only increases the cost of
providing this form of housing.

Should a sliding scale of car parking provision be considered, where
developments up to perhaps 20 rooms be required to provide 0.2/0.4
spaces (based on accessibility) and then any rooms proposed in excess
of this number, the more onerous car parking rate?