Maxwell Shifman, UDIA national president, says Australia's cities keep sprawling despite planning strategies such as Plan Melbourne's 70/30 infill-to-greenfield target, because dense infill costs far more to deliver than greenfield housing. He calls for less politicising of developers and better dialogue with environmental groups.
As I told the Australian Property Journal: “For example, Plan Melbourne has a stated aim of seeing 70 per cent of new dwelling growth in established areas and 30 per cent in greenfield areas.”
I also said: “But despite these lofty goals, the reality is the complete reverse, and it is only getting more skewed towards new greenfields,”
And I added: “The biggest barrier is the substantial cost differential between delivering dense dwellings in established areas and delivering new homes in new greenfield areas.”
I went on to say: “It’s simply not feasible with Australia’s high land costs, substantial planning restrictions and red tape in established areas, together with our high labour and materials costs, to deliver denser housing affordably, at scale.”
I also made the point: “We’d also like to see governments stop using developers as political fodder and instead treat us like the key partners and contributors we are.”
And finally: “The irony is that governments that have these state planning goals also seem to put into place numerous competing policies that disproportionately impact the viability of delivering denser housing.”
I also noted: “A lot of what is said by environmental groups is based in academic theory and not based in reality; we would welcome better dialogue on what the sector delivers, particularly from a relative affordability perspective.”
I went on: “We can all work together much better to discuss the positives and challenges associated with all forms of development, including that in new greenfields areas.”
Australian Property Journal, 11 November 2022 — Read the full article