The NSW Government’s significant changes to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act) have taken a step forward. The reforms recently passed the lower house (subject to changes) and are now being debated in the upper house.
In this article, we recap the key changes set out in the Environmental Planning and Assessment Amendment (Planning System Reforms) Bill 2025 (the Bill), the amendments made by the lower house and implications for developers.
EP&A Act objectives rewritten
In section 1.3 of the EP&A Act, the Bill rewrites the objects of the Act, with key changes focusing on promoting:
the supply of housing, including affordable housing
productivity through development
a proportionate and risk-based approach to assessment
resilience to climate change and natural disasters.
The lower house has not amended those key objectives. It agreed, however, to change other key objectives including expressly protecting the environment and the health and safety of occupants of buildings.
While the new objectives for the EP&A Act are intended to promote delivery of projects (particularly housing), and to focus environmental assessment on significant impacts, developers should be mindful of the express reference to protecting the environment, resilience to climate change and natural disasters, and the health and safety of occupants of buildings in determining their approval and assessment strategies.
New approval pathways
Targeted assessment development
A new ‘targeted assessment development’ pathway is proposed for ‘low risk’ development declared by a state environmental planning policy (SEPP). This pathway is intended to capture development that complies ‘up-front’ with certain strategic planning policies, controls and codes – with the NSW Government seeking to achieve an approval timeframe of 50 days.
The lower house agreed to amend the Bill to preclude development that is ‘designated development’ being declared ‘targeted assessment development’ by a SEPP. That change is unlikely to limit the types of development eligible for the targeted assessment development pathway, as designated development is inherently not low risk.
A key benefit for developers is that the consent authority cannot consider certain matters in determining a development application for ‘targeted assessment development’ – including the significant likely impacts of that development, site suitability and public interest.
In practice, the availability of this pathway will depend on the scope and flexibility in the planning policies, controls and codes, and criteria that will need to be satisfied ‘up front’. These are yet to be determined.
Complying development pathway expanded
The scope of developments that can rely on a complying development certificate pathway is intended to be broadened – with minor variations to complying development standards permitted. The intended timeframe for determination is 10 – 20 days (with variation requests deemed approved if no determination is made within 20 days). The lower house has not made any amendments to that pathway.
The NSW Government’s stated objective is to enable 75% of proposals to rely on a complying development pathway.
Section 4.55(1) modification application pathway expanded
The section 4.55(1) modification application pathway is proposed to be broadened to capture modifications that have no environmental impact. If the consent authority does not determine the application within 14 days, it will not be able to refuse the application. The lower house did not amend that mechanism.
Environmental assessment and exhibition
Community participation plans – new public exhibition requirements
Community participation plans (adopted by local councils) will be streamlined and are proposed to be set aside and replaced with a state-wide community participation plan prepared by the Planning Secretary.
The new state-wide community participation plan is intended to identify appropriate exhibition timeframes for development based on their impacts. The lower house did not make any material changes to that mechanism.
Assessment of impacts – risk-based approach
Section 4.15(1) of the EP&A Act is proposed to be changed so that: (i) the consent authority is only required to consider ‘significant likely impacts of the development’ (rather than the existing obligation to consider any ‘likely impacts’); and (ii) significant likely impacts of other development that is not the subject of the development application are not required to be considered.
The assessment of impacts by determining authorities under Part 5 of the EP&A Act is also reduced to consider environmental impacts ‘in a manner that is proportionate to the nature and risk of the activity’.
The lower house did not make any material amendments to those provisions in the Bill.
It will be critical for developers to understand the threshold test for ‘significant likely impacts’ and to implement assessment strategies that reflect that test to get the benefit of these changes. A similar approach should be implemented by determining authorities under Part 5. We expect this area will be heavily scrutinised by consent authorities, key stakeholders and third-party objectors.
Decision-making bodies
Housing Delivery Authority
The Housing Delivery Authority (HDA) is proposed to be recognised as a statutory NSW Government agency under the EP&A Act.
The lower house agreed to certain changes in respect of the HDA provisions in the Bill, including: (i) a requirement for the Minister to publish any decision, and the reasons for a decision, if the Minister decides not to accept certain recommendations of the HDA; and (ii) a Joint Select Committee of Parliament to review every three years whether the objectives of the HDA remain valid and are being achieved – including the objective of increasing housing supply and the timely delivery of housing and improved housing affordability.
The HDA will continue to be a key government agency for developers of large-scale residential projects and mixed-use projects to rely on an SSD approval pathway with a concurrent rezoning. However, there will be scrutiny of the HDA’s role in achieving housing supply objectives and its longevity is likely to hinge on that analysis.
Development Coordination Authority
A new Development Coordination Authority (DCA) is proposed to be created to centralise concurrence, consultation and referral, and general terms of approval for integrated development (instead of that task being undertaken by multiple government agencies).
The lower house agreed minor amendments to the DCA provisions – requiring the Planning Secretary’s annual report to include details of the DCA’s operations.
The success of this mechanism for developers will turn on the ability of the DCS to genuinely centralise those key decisions by the DCA in a timely manner rather than ‘coordinating’ decisions by multiple government agencies.
District and Regional Planning Panels phased out
The Sydney District and Regional Planning Panels are proposed to be phased out – with local planning panels or councils intended to determine development applications for regionally significant development. The lower house did not make any material amendments to those provisions in the Bill.
Development consent conditions
Key changes proposed include requiring the consent authority to allow the developer to make submissions about draft conditions for certain categories of development, and a requirement for the consent authority to consider those submissions. Consent authorities will also be required to impose any applicable ‘model conditions’ specified in a SEPP.
The lower house did not make any material amendments to those provisions.
Reviews and appeals
Key changes include removing the six-month time limit for developers to commence a deemed refusal appeal, and to allow developers to require an internal review by a local planning panel instead of the local council (with specified time periods for internal reviews to be determined).
Power to revoke or unilaterally modify development consents expanded
The Planning Secretary and local councils’ powers to revoke or unilaterally modify certain development consents were originally proposed in the Bill to be expanded allowing the Planning Secretary and local councils to revoke or unilaterally modify a development consent having regard to the provisions of:
For the Planning Secretary – an existing or proposed environmental planning instrument (under the current version of the EP&A Act, the Planning Secretary can only exercise this power having regard to the provisions of any proposed, not existing, SEPP).
For local councils – an existing or proposed local environmental plan (under the current version of the EP&A Act, the local council can only exercise this power having regard to the provisions of any proposed, not existing, local environmental plan).
The lower house agreed to limit the scope of the proposed expansion of powers. The Bill, as amended, now only proposes to expand the Planning Secretary’s power by allowing the Planning Secretary to revoke or unilaterally modify a development consent having regard to the provisions of a proposed environmental planning instrument, not just a proposed SEPP, or an existing environmental planning instrument, but only in relation to a development consent which has been granted at least 25 years before the Planning Secretary proposes to exercise that power.
The Bill, as amended, no longer proposes to expand the local council’s power to revoke or unilaterally modify development consents and effectively maintains the status quo.
Next steps
The Bill, as amended by the lower house, is currently being debated in the upper house of NSW Parliament. It remains unclear whether the NSW Government will need to make material changes to secure its passage through both Houses of Parliament.
We will continue to track the passage of these significant planning reforms. If you would like to discuss any aspect of the reforms, please contact our Environment and Planning team.