(Name withheld) , of  Sylvania Southgate NSW, made the following submission on the project:

Proposed amendment to parking provisions for boarding houses: ARHSEPP

I am writing to you in regard to ‘Proposed amendment to SEPPARH 2009
â€" Boarding Houses’ increase of parking ratio on accessible
boarding house developments from 0.2 to 0.5 per room.

One of the key aims of the SEPPARH is to increase the supply of
affordable, rental and social housing through a range of housing types
including boarding houses. One of the key contributors to the success
of this legislation in creating supply is the ability to construct a
boarding house in low-density areas on a smaller scale in comparison
to large-scale boarding houses which are usually built in high density
areas and have easier provisions such as wider block sizes and
basements to allow for this parking ratio to be met.

By increasing the parking ratio in accessible areas to 0.5, this will
create a major limitation on the ability for small scale boarding
houses in low-density zones to be designed and approved, particularly
when dealing with small lot sizes and block widths.
There is no specific evidence suggesting the current 0.2 parking ratio
is not effective in providing sufficient parking for accessible
boarding houses. Prior to the proposed amendment to the SEPPARH 2009
â€" Boarding Houses being made to increase parking in accessible areas
to 0.5, a study of current occupied boarding houses should be
undertaken to determine that there is actually a need for an increase
in parking ratio. Given that properties located within 400 metres of a
bus stop or 800 metres of a train station provide ample transportation
for occupants, a need for the additional parking ratio should be
determined using data from existing occupied boarding houses, prior to
proposed changes being made to the SEPPARH 2009.

The ‘Proposed amendment to SEPPARH 2009 â€" Boarding Houses â€"
Explanation of Intended Effect’ discussion paper outlines community
feedback as the key reason for the proposed amendment. I would
question at which point these community concerns have been raised, as
I would assume these types of concerns would have been raised at a
planning level, following DA submission to council and prior to the
boarding house being operational. I question whether these
‘community concerns’ have been put forward in refusal to
development of the boarding houses, rather than after completion and
occupation. This should be determined and taken into consideration,
prior to the advocacy of such changes.

Unfortunately there is a lack of education around what modern and
new-age boarding houses are, many residents across NSW have a negative
impression of these types of developments and types of occupants they
believe may reside in the development. I believe that this issue of
parking ratio increase is an attempt to inhibit the development and
approval of small scale boarding houses and therefore limit supply in
residential areas and should not be approved.