Ku-ring-gai Council resolved to put on public exhibition an Affordable Housing Options Paper and Draft Affordable Housing Policy at its meeting of 17 December 2024.
Instead of making a determination opposing the rezoning of Lizard Rock, the North Sydney Planning Panel has made a ‘majority decision’ to continue to liaise with the NSW Rural Fire Service (RFS) and seek “what changes might be required” in order to support the rezoning of this high fire risk bushfire bushland in Belrose.
Minns is preparing to scale back his politically contentious “missing middle” housing reforms – that will devastate Ku-ring-gai’s Heritage Conservation Areas
The ABC understands NSW Premier Chris Minns will be referred to the state’s corruption watchdog over his relationship with one of the key figures behind the redevelopment of Rosehill Racecourse.
The decision concerns Mr Minns’s relationship with Steve McMahon, head of government relations at the Australian Turf Club, the organisation which owns the site.
Delegates at the Local Government NSW Annual Conference have condemned a move by the State Government to establish a new planning body to bypass local government on large housing developments.
The cost of water is forecast to skyrocket across Sydney, as a result of the NSW Governments to increase housing density from burgeoning population increases across Greater Sydney.
Greater Sydney is being destroyed by a one size FAILS ALL undemocratic, developer driven planning agenda that will never deliver affordable housing and make the housing crisis worse.
Various housing densities in Brisbane. ‘The holy grail of urban consolidation in established suburbs is a shift from free-standing dwellings to European-style, medium-rise apartments.’ Photograph: Darren England/AAP
The Business Council of Australia wants local governments to be stripped of decision-making powers if they fail to meet “basic timeliness requirements” when processing development applications.
The Victorian government is already heading in this direction. It intends to override council planning to fast-track apartment blocks around transport hubs in established suburbs.
There’s a widespread view that local government shoulders responsibility for our housing shortfall because proscriptive regulations enable well-heeled objectors to block or delay projects. Bolder council action on housing would certainly be welcome. But the matter is more complex than a simple nimby-yimby divide would suggest.
Five years ago, Australia was building homes at a rapid clip. More than 215,000 dwellings were completed nationwide in 2018-19 and more than 1m homes in the five years before that, matching the target set in the 2022 housing accord struck by national cabinet soon after the Albanese government took office. If we’d kept building at that pace, we’d get within spitting distance of the accord’s revised target of 1.2m homes by 2029. Now, though, we’re miles away. Last financial year fewer than 175,000 new homes were completed.
It wasn’t “red tape” and local government delays that caused the slowdown in residential construction but changed business conditions.
Covid was followed by supply chain bottlenecks, rising material costs and shortages of skilled labour. Higher interest rates increased the cost of borrowing for developers and made potential buyers wary of buying off the plan. This has a big impact on larger apartment projects, because most developers need to pre-sell 60% to 70% of units to secure finance before they can build. Overseas buyers are an important part of this market, and in 2017 the Coalition government made it harder to get the numbers to stack up by imposing a 50% cap on foreign ownership in new multi-storey buildings with 50 or more apartments. State governments also hit foreign investors with extra fees, including stamp duty surcharges.
Construction will increase if business conditions improve, though that may go hand in hand with rising property prices, which is hardly good news for affordability. The boom-bust cycle that characterises residential development is one reason why more public investment in social housing is so crucial. Apart from providing homes for Australians whose needs aren’t met by the market, public investment helps maintain overall housing supply in a downturn.
Even with greater public investment, planning has a big role to play in helping the private sector to accommodate a growing population – just not in a way that it’s usually understood.
The holy grail of urban consolidation in established suburbs is a shift from free-standing dwellings to European-style, medium-rise apartments that can accommodate many more people while still providing greenery and open spaces. This is the so-called “missing middle”, a much-needed alternative to the high-rise residential towers creating wind tunnels in city centres and the steady march of detached housing rolling over farmlands on the urban fringes.
Yet high-quality urban infill is easier said than done. A significant challenge lies in the fragmented pattern of land ownership that was put in place as our cities grew. A single suburban lot is generally too small to accommodate mid-rise housing built around courtyards or shared gardens. If we are going to meet our housing aspirations, we need to overcome the fragmented pattern of land ownership established in postwar subdivisions. This means a bigger government role to create incentives for blocks to be amalgamated to a scale to allow precinct-level redevelopment.
Detached houses on separate blocks provide plenty of benefits. Back yards provide space for leisure; gardens absorb rainfall, reducing runoff and flood risks and mature trees cool the landscape. But much of our postwar housing stock is no longer fit for purpose. It was built without thought for energy efficiency or the impact of the climate crisis, and intended for larger households than today. Many houses are now underutilised. At the 2021 census more than 1.2m homes had three or more bedrooms “in excess of need”.
Under current settings, these family homes are being demolished one by one. Some make way for two, three or more townhouses squeezed on to a single parcel of land; others are replaced by McMansions. Sometimes the original house is retained but a granny flat added or the block subdivided in a battle-axe arrangement to fit another dwelling.
Such piecemeal redevelopment brings a modest increase in density but with the loss of the very things that make suburban life attractive. Trees are cut down and open space disappears as gardens give way to concrete and brick. The ad hoc nature of this redevelopment also makes it harder for local and state governments to ensure services and infrastructure can keep pace with population growth.
We are at risk of getting the worst of all worlds. More high-rise towers in the centre and around train stations and more urban sprawl on the fringes, combined with the loss of amenity in established suburbs as existing houses are gradually replaced by piecemeal redevelopment. We need a strategic approach to facilitate well-designed medium rise development at a scale that accommodates more people, creates shared open space and preserves greenery. We need more sophisticated planning, not less.
FOKE is calling for a more sophisticated planning approach for Ku-ring-gai.
One that builds a sustainable, liveable, net zero and affordable home future whilst still preserving its high biodiversity – bush turkeys live amongst the Gordon Railway Station Gardens – and its beautiful gardened, tall tree lined streets and bushland landscape. It has been characterised as where the natural form dominates the built form. No where else in Sydney has Ku-ring-gai’s tall dominating Blue Gums that fill the sky with its large canopy branches.
Indeed, in an age of biodiversity collapse we should be providing even more ‘greenery’ that restores, rejuvenates and builds resilience to Ku-ring-gai’s urban forests. They are essential for Sydney and renowned as the ‘lungs of Sydney’.
Ku-ring-gai’s tree canopy, rich biodiversity needs urgent protection. It is where the last remaining critically Endangered Ecological Community of Blue Gum High Forest and Sydney Turpentine Ironbark Forest is left on the planet. It is a haven for wildlife who utterly depend on Ku-ring-gai’s tree canopy for hollows – that takes decades to form, as well as for food, nesting and survival. Ku-ring-gai is a rare urban Sydney Forest that needs planning controls that ensure its survival into the future.
FOKE has always challenged the holy grail of urban consolidation particularly for Ku-ring-gai with its garden heritage suburbs created by the North Shore railway line.
Four consecutive railway stations – Roseville, Lindfield, Killara, Gordon – along that railway line are now designated as Transpor Oriented Developments (TODs). These blunt 400 metre concentric circled maps designate the location of six storey apartment infill development. Yet this “missing middle” threatens to wipe out what many consider an environmentally sensitive area as well as a place that has some of the best domestic architecture in the country.
The railway line that created Ku-ring-gai’s heritage is now threatening to destroy this golden era of free-standing Federation, inter-war and 20th Century architecture.
The North Shore railway line is also on a rising ridgeline with its western side steeply sloping downwards into the Lane Cove National Park. Its eastern side slopes into the Garigal National Park.
Another reason that makes Ku-ring-gai unique. Ku-ring-gai is essentially a catchment to three surrounding national parks. It is a wildlife corridor between national parks and bushland valleys connecting the North Shore to the Hawkesbury to the north, Parramatta to the west and the Northern Beaches to the east.
Ku-ring-gai’s steep terrain and ridge-top development leads to greater flood risk from flash flooding. It is also a highly prone bushfire area.
Yet for past decades Ku-ring-gai’s geographic and ecological constraints have been blatantly ignored.
Ku-ring-gai’s environmental splendour has been significantly eroded in the last two decades as it has taken its fair share of medium density that has been built by demolishing swaths of potential heritage areas and ‘gardened and tall treed wildlife connectivity’. Its natural dominated landscape has been replaced by concrete, hard surface medium-rise apartments. And now locals fear more will be lost forever and irreversibly concrete the landscape forever.
The NSW government is determined to prioritise housing supply at all costs. It is determined to override local government democratic council planning to fast-track apartment blocks around transport hubs in the garden suburbs of Ku-ring-gai.
The acronym ‘TOD’ (Transport Oriented Development) has entered the language. It was created in late 2023 when the NSW Government announced its signature high density policy across Greater Sydney. It undemocratically bypassed Council zoning controls.
Researchers Peter Mares acknowledges that housing is more complex than ‘the simple nimby-yimby divide’ would suggest. Yet few understand the complexity of housing in Ku-ring-gai.
The “missing middle”, a description that describes medium density (around 6 storeys) is hailed as a solution to high-rise residential towers. Yet this too can have devastating consequences for established garden suburbs like Ku-ring-gai with its Heritage Conservation Areas and heritage homes. How can residential heritage houses and streetscapes be respected, protected and appreciated into the future if it has a six storey apartments towering over them?
Detached houses on separate blocks are the fabric of Ku-ring-gai’s heritage. It is what protects the tree canopy for the majority of Blue Gums grow on private land ie front and back yards.
The space around a detached home not only provides space for leisure; create amenity and absorb rainfall and keeps us cool. It is essential for reducing stormwater runoff into three national parks that surround Ku-ring-gai and infesting it with weeds and increasing water pollution that stops people swimming on our beaches.
It is misleading to say that Ku-ring-gai’s postwar housing stock is no longer fit for purpose. They have been solidly built – mostly in double brick. The demolition of these houses and the razing of garden blocks exacerbates the climate crisis. The smaller homes and garden flats are often affordable, but they are increasingly being demolished for larger houses for the same number of households. The new concrete buildings are big carbon emitters.
With Exempt and Complying development many family homes are being demolished, replaced by ever expensive McMansions. One sold for nearly $10 million dollars? How can that be?
Subdivisions basically eliminate the necessary space for Ku-ring-gai’s tall canopy trees.
Twenty years ago, residents described urban densification as the ‘rape of Ku-ring-gai’. Today some are saying it will be the ‘death of Ku-ring’-ai’. Ku-ring-gai’s remaining natural landscape will be bulldozed, razed, destroyed and transformed into a bland, homogenous. 21st Century airport architecture hard surface inner city dwelling. The trees will go. The birds will go and we will be left wondering how did we let this all happen?. Ku-ring-gai’s local character and precious environment will be lost forever.
With perpetual population growth, local and state governments will never be able keep up with demands for new open space, playgrounds, schools, hospitals and other services and infrastructure.
The ‘hungry giant’ is never satisfied. When will the high rise rezonings stop? Nor will the urban densification stop the urban sprawl on the fringes.
FOKE is calling for a more sophisticated planning approach for Ku-ring-gai. And that might mean that we need to start having a mature conversation about how we are to achieve a sustainable long-term future that challenges ‘forever growth’ that will kill us all.
The Sydney Morning Herald published this article about alternative TOD options even before Ku-ring-gai’s elected representatives had a chance to inform residents about them. Read the full SMH article below.
The plan to squeeze 45-storey apartment buildings into Ku-ring-gai
Apartments up to 45 storeys high would be squeezed into a section of Ku-ring-gai under a council move to appease the state government’s demands for increased housing density by creating alternative plans to the transport-oriented development scheme.
Despite the TOD scheme being in place since May, and the council taking the Minns government to court over the policy, councillors will on Wednesday vote on options to be put on public exhibition that would significantly increase density in some areas while maintaining large swaths of low-density heritage housing.
Buildings could be zoned up to 45 storeys around Gordon station. Credit: Edwina Pickles
Ku-ring-gai Council staff have given councillors three alternatives to the TOD program that focus on protecting heritage conservation areas within the LGA, ranging from protecting 78 to 100 per cent of them.
The trade-off to those heritage conservation areas remaining untouched is significantly higher building heights in other parts of the suburbs.
Under the first option, labelled “safeguard and intensify”, the council’s target of 23,200 new dwellings would be achieved by shifting density out of heritage conservation areas and into established commercial zones mostly within 400 metres of train stations.
Sites already zoned for commercial use around Gordon train station would be allowed to reach up to 25 storeys, while 10 storeys would be allowed around Killara station, 15 around Lindfield station, and 12 around Roseville station.
Dwelling numbers are based on council estimates and slightly differ to the state government’s estimates. Source: Ku-ring-gai Council
The second option, called “preserve and intensify”, transfers more dwellings away from smaller town centres Roseville and Killara to the larger Gordon and Lindfield and all heritage conservation areas would be protected.
Buildings in Roseville and Killara would be allowed to be zoned up to 25 and 15 storeys respectively, while Gordon could have 45 storeys and Lindfield 35.
The third option expands “preserve and intensify” to commercial zones within 800 metres, not 400 metres, of train stations, resulting in lower building heights.
The state government’s TOD plan does not overrule local heritage laws, meaning tall buildings could not, for instance, replace a heritage-listed house, but the report said because the plan “specifically excludes heritage items and provides no incentive for them to be included within future development sites, they are effectively isolated”.
The famous Harry Seidler-designed Horizon apartment block in Darlinghurst stretches 43 storeys into the sky, less than the 45 on the table for Gordon. Credit: Wolter Peeters
The report highlights the council would still need to establish new public green space, sporting facilities and other infrastructure to meet the increased density.
The options, if approved, would bring Ku-ring-gai Council in line with the 12 other Sydney councils that produced amended density plans in line with the government’s transport-oriented development push.
The council’s new Liberal Mayor Christine Kay declined requests for an interview. In a statement, she said: “The mayor does not endorse proposals to councillors.
“As a council, we vote based on all the information before us and we will be listening to what the community thinks about the alternative scenarios if the council votes to place the report on exhibition.”
Planning and Public Spaces Minister Paul Scully said he was “cautiously optimistic that Ku-ring-gai councillors might be willing to do their part in confronting our housing challenge”.
“Perhaps a good starting point would be to end the legal action and concentrate resources on strategic planning – an option that has always been available to them,” he said.
Sam Ngai, the former mayor who led the council’s action against the state government and now serves as a councillor, said he expected residents to fight hard against each of the options.
“It’s not like you have a choice. If you choose not to act, it’s just [the TOD plan],” he said.
“At the end of the day, we have to meet those targets. Each of these scenarios give you that number of dwellings, but give you different heights in different places.”
FOKE urgently wrote to Ku-ring-gai Council requesting that the Extraordinary Meeting be rescheduled to ensure residents had an opportunity to comment on this critical planning matter. However, it will proceed for WED 20 Oct 2024.
At the Extraordinary Meeting of Council on Wed 30 October Ku-ring-ga Council will discuss their legal case against the TOD SEPP. Even though it will be discussed as Confidential Business it is important to have as many residents present in the Chambers.
At the Extraordinary Meeting of Council on Wed 30 October Ku-ring-ga Council will discuss the Lindfield Hub Commuter Car Park Funding Deed. Even though it will be discussed as Confidential Business it is important to have as many residents present in the Chambers.
One Ku-ring-gai Councillor said she would NOT SUPPORT the legal action against the TOD in her FOKE Candidate Statement. The others did not supply answers to our Candidate Questions prior to their election. We believe they too do NOT SUPPORT the legal action
These Ku-ring-gai Councillors said they would SUPPORT the legal action against the TOD as stated in their FOKE Candidate Statements prior to their election.
How can we trust NSW Planning to deliver a liveable future when it is proposing planning changes that will lead to lower-quality, less sustainable housing, with no trees when we are expecting more intense future heat waves that will put lives at risk?
Housing is an issue. And all the talk and fury is about how to provide more housing, affordably. Yet right now, the NSW government is proposing and contemplating changes that will lead to lower-quality, less sustainable housing with worse amenities that will result in poorer health for occupants.
And the changes could quite possibly destroy the architecture profession in this state.
High-density housing at The Ponds in western Sydney. Credit:Wolter Peeters
How? Two major “reforms” are coinciding: amendments to building legislation and relaxation of design standards.
First, the Minns government vowed to introduce a single, consolidated building bill to simplify building legislation. So the Home Building Act 1989 (NSW), which has been foundational for 30 years, will be replaced by the Building Bill, a draft of which was released in August. Already, you can see the shift; it’s not about homes, it’s about building or, more bluntly, property development.
The aim is to better regulate building, but the kicker is the registration system for architects will be integrated into the new Building Bill, and the Architects Act will be repealed. Yet, the Architects Act is fundamentally about consumer protection and the accountability of those designing our buildings. Essentially, by introducing registration requirements to most arms of the construction industry to enforce greater accountability, the government is lowering the bar. It may look like it’s homogenising the construction design sector, but it’s cheapening it.
It will allow building designers to be licensed like architects but not bear the responsibility of architects. Architects study for a minimum of five years, sit practice examinations, show professional development throughout their practising career and, most importantly, hold insurance. Serious accountability to ensure consumers are protected. Also, a registration board can deregister or fine them, and it all seems to be working just fine. So why change it, particularly when there are few complaints or deregistrations?
Furthermore, it appears future students needn’t bother with architecture degrees and postgraduate training because they will be able to do a TAFE diploma to do the same job with less responsibility.
It is even possible NSW architects will not be able to practise in other states because their education and registration might not meet the competency standards of the national accreditation body, the Architects Accreditation Council of Australia.
Simultaneously, the government is quickly assessing a NSW Productivity Commission review of housing supply, released last week, which wants to relax design requirements for apartments, including the need for most to have some direct sunlight. Understandably, advocates such as the Committee for Sydney and the Australian Institute of Architects raised concerns about diminished design standards, and I share those concerns.
There seems to be a theme emerging, and as director of the UNSW Cities Institute, I’m worried. Our job is to find better ways forward for our urban environments, to make them healthier, more liveable, equitable and accessible. These moves will send us backwards.
The blithe dismissal of a profession is serious business, particularly when the profession has adapted its education model and thinking to encompass healthier and more sustainable living with consumer protection and satisfaction as its primary focus. Lowering standards is an even more serious business. While some of the commission’s recommendations are logical, the lessening of standards for apartment design is unhealthy. Literally.
Sydney’s problem has not been over-development; it has been poor development.
The real problem of delivering affordable housing of an appropriate standard lies in the segmentation of services driven by a variety of contractual arrangements, all designed to avoid responsibility for poor design and shoddy construction. The proposed legislation aims to be a solution to this mess. The answer, however, is not dumbing down the quality of housing or eliminating the few checks and balances we have.
It all feels particularly counterintuitive in a city still reeling from when a number of our new apartment blocks started cracking and listing a few Christmas Eves ago. The new bill, as it stands, and some of the more worrying commission recommendations will encourage cheap design and harmful standards. While trying to solve the housing problem, they will take us back to the 1990s.
That definitely won’t make housing more affordable. It will make housing of lower standards that is unable, or unwilling, to contribute to better, healthier communities in NSW.
Peter Poulet is the director of the UNSW Cities Institute.
Ku-ring-gai is a place of high biodiversity. It is one of the few areas of Sydney that still retains its majestic carbon-rich urban forests, tree canopy, bushland valleys and stunning displays of gardens that are wildlife corridors and habitat for unique mammals, birds, reptiles, frogs and insects. It is also surrounded by three national parks.
This is something the NSW Government should celebrate and conserve. Yet the NSW Government is determined to destroy it – even in the midst of a biodiversity crisis.
Tanya Plibersek, Federal Environment Minister commits Australia to protecting 30% of its lands and 30% of oceans by 2030
Nov 2022
UN climate summit kept alive hopes of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius
Dec 2022
Australian Government joins 195 other nations in signing onto the adopted the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF). The target of GBF is to protect at least 30% of the world’s land, freshwater and ocean ecosystems by 2030 (‘30×30’) – a target both the Australian Federal government and NSW Government committed to domestically
Dec 2023
NSW Government announced its Transport Oriented Development program, Low to Mid Rise Housing and Dual Occupancies that will effectively upzone Ku-ring-gai by 90% and destroy its tree canopy
There will be an information session on the Hawkesbury-Nepean Coastal Management Program on Saturday 19th October 10am – 3pm Sustainable Futures Day, Cameron Park, 5 Eastern Rd, Turramurra
Convicted criminals and unlicensed agents are operating in the real estate sector across multiple states, a Guardian Australia investigation has found.
Today the NSW Productivity & Equality Commission’s ‘Review of Housing Supply Challenges and Policy Options for NSW ‘ was released recommending even more TODs across Greater Sydney, including Ku-ring-gai. That’s why Ku-ring-gai’s legal action against the TOD is so important.
The NSW Government’s Transport Oriented Development (TOD) will “fatally” weaken Ku-ring-gai Council’s heritage, setbacks and tree canopy controls for Roseville, Lindfield, Killara and Gordon.
Canada Bay Council is now weighing up whether to take legal action against the NSW Government’s plans to rezone mass areas – predominantly low-density streets – to create 16,100 medium to high-rise density homes.
Scott Farlow MLC, Shadow Minister for Planning and Public Spaces, spoke at the Save Greater Sydney Coalition Forum ‘Getting Housing Right: Why it Matters – without the spin’
See what Michael Pascoe, Author & Journalist, said at the Save Greater Sydney Coalition Forum ‘Getting Housing Right: Why it Matters – without the spin on 7 August 2024
See what Sharon Veale, Heritage Adviser, said at the Save Greater Sydney Coalition Forum ‘Getting Housing Right: Why it Matters – without the spin on 7 August 2024
See what Dr Peter Sheridan AM said at the Save Greater Sydney Coalition Forum ‘Getting Housing Right: Why it Matters – without the spin’ on 7 August 2024
See what Saul Deane, Urban Sustainability Campaigner, said at the Save Greater Sydney Coalition Forum ‘Getting Housing Right: Why it Matters – without the spin on 7 August 2024
See what Elizabeth Farrelly, Architect and Author, said at the Save Greater Sydney Coalition Forum ‘Getting Housing Right: Why it Matters – without the spin on 7 August 2024
Scott Farlow MLC, Shadow Minister for Planning and Public Spaces, will speak at the Housing Crisis Forum on Wed 7th August at the NSW Parliament Theatrette 6.30pm
For those Ku-ring-gai residents attending the Housing Crisis Forum on Wed 7th August at the NSW Parliament Theatrette 6.30pm this Mayoral Minute provides an important update
The Australian Bureau of Statistics has identified 24,000 Sydney dwellings “inactive”. Yet another reason to attend Housing Forum on Forum on Wed 7 August at NSW Parliament House Theatrette 6.30pm
Please write letters to the Upper House Crossbench calling on them to SUPPORT The Hon. Scott Farlow, MLC & Shadow Minister for Planning’s DISALLOWANCE BILL opposing the Transport Oriented Development (TOD) program across Greater Sydney, including in Ku-ring-gai.
New evidence debunks the ‘scientific justification’ for logging critical koala habitat. Knowing this, it is more important than ever to see this documentary.
The Transport Oriented Development and Well-Located Housing SEPPs have triggered a surge of interest among developers, leading to a frenzy of activity akin to a gold rush. Developers are increasingly reaching out to homeowners with offers to secure “Option Contracts” for the future purchase of their land.
The final public hearing on the Development of the Transport Orientated Development (TOD) will be held in the Macquarie Room, Parliament House, Sydney on Wed 24 July, 2024
