17 October 2025

In this Edition...

1. Bi-partisan support for planning reform really CAN happen!

2. First year report card on the National Housing Accord is in – the Albanese Government has underperformed

3. Infill Affordable Housing Bonus scheme – it actually works

...and much, much more.

4. Council watch - heritage listing emerging as key strategy to block new housing on Sydney’s north shore
5. Mark Speakman has come a long way when it comes to housing supply
6. Long Bay redevelopment – the door opens
7. Housing Taskforce offers new Post-Consent Support Service to boost housing supply
8. The nitty gritty of the Planning Reform Bill amendments
9. You call that a marathon debate? This is a marathon debate…
10. DPHI updates
11. Two digital initiatives to speed up housing delivery
12. Members in the news

1. Bi-partisan support for planning reform really CAN happen!

This week the Government’s Environmental Planning and Assessment (Planning System Reforms) Bill 2025 passed the lower house, with the support of the Opposition.

Inserting housing and proportionality into the objects of the Act (the previous absence of which Urban Taskforce told the Daily Telegraph was “hard to believe”) should see a massive shift in the way housing projects are assessed and determined in NSW.

Key changes in the legislation include:

• New objectives (Housing Supply and Proportionality)
• the creation of the Development Coordination Authority (a one-stop shop for all agency comment and concurrence)
• enshrining the Housing Delivery Authority in law
• the introduction of Targeted Assessments to stop duplication between Strategic Assessments and DA assessments
• a fast-track for Complying Development and for the consideration of minor variations

The Bill has now gone to the Upper House, but with Opposition and Government amendments dealt with in the lower house, this should now be an exercise in congratulatory back slapping.

Urban Taskforce set the scene earlier this week with an op-ed in The Daily Telegraph by CEO Tom Forrest explaining how bipartisan support for planning reform was won – a joint effort by the Telegraph and Urban Taskforce in making the case for the centrist parties to join a unity ticket on planning reform:

The Daily Telegraph, 14 October

On Wednesday the Bill was debated. Leader of the Opposition, Mark Speakman, lead his Party’s response. Mr Speakman has asserted authority and demonstrated his YIMBY credentials by securing Coalition support for the reform Bill, subject to a number of amendments. Under the Opposition’s proposed amendments:

• the Housing Delivery Authority would be subject to a full statutory review, and further accountability measures would be introduced (passed)
• district and regional planning panels would remain (lost)
• the Development Coordination Authority would be required to publish annual reports (passed)
• the Community Participation Plan would be set out in regulation or equivalent (passed)
• the new targeted assessment pathway would not apply to major non-residential developments like mines and windfarms (passed).

The Opposition leader also took the opportunity in his speech to highlight the ongoing impact of fees, taxes and charges, like the Housing and Productivity contribution ($12,000 per house and $10,00 per apartment) which is part of the challenge turning approvals into completions.

There was an important improvement made to the Bill following strong representations from Urban Taskforce.  Minister Paul Scully moved an amendment in the lower house to the so-called “zombie DA provisions” which ensures that revocation of consent conditions, or indeed, an entire consent, could only be undertaken in extraordinary circumstances. This power will only be available to the Secretary (and not every Council), and only where a consent has not been progressed for 25 years.

The willingness to consider and act on constructive suggestions to the Bill has been the most significant feature of this Bill’s pending passage into law.  Full credit here must go to Paul Scully, his office, Kiersten Fishburn and the DPHI team.  The Cabinet Office also deserve praise for their hard work to bring this Bill to life.

We agree 100%

2. First year report card on the National Housing Accord is in – the Albanese Government has underperformed

The pontification and procrastination that characterised the first term of the Albanese Government showed up in this week’s ABS data on housing commencements and completions.

While new housing build commencements have recovered somewhat, we are seeing no improvement when it comes to housing completions nationally. The green line below shows that completions have basically flat-lined since the end of COVID.

Completions across Australia seem stuck around the mid 170,000 over that time, a partial reflection of the fact that many in the Federal Government just don’t seem to ‘get’ the centrality of market housing in terms of sorting out the housing supply crisis.

Instead, we get Federal Labour MPs falling over themselves on how Labor is addressing social and ‘affordable’ housing shortages as if these categories area more worthy than housing built by the private sector.

The housing supply crisis is more than a political game.  It is true that Albo won the politics on housing in the last term of the Federal Parliament.  But the fact is, the outcomes have been poor.

There was hope that Minister O’Neil would set the path right, particularly with the Greens all-but wiped from the political landscape, but Housing Australia remains a mess. There is simply not enough focus on supporting those that deliver 95% of housing supply – the private sector. 

While there is no hope of achieving the Housing Accord Targets, getting as close as we can is critical for housing affordability, and this will continue to be an issue at the top of the political agenda, particularly with the Opposition having appointed Senator Andrew Bragg as the spokesman in this field.

Social Housing is important but the exclusive focus on it is analogous to treating the symptom while ignoring the cause of a crisis.  If you don’t deliver enough housing to meet demand, prices will rise.  When prices rise, those on low incomes are forced out.  This creates the need for more social housing.

It’s time the Albanese Government focussed on policies that fix the problem!

Housing-enabling infrastructure and lower taxes on new home supply are the keys. The Urban Developer picked up on our analysis:

NSW commencements show some promising signs...

On the housing commencement front, figures for the 12 months to June 2025 for NSW (the red line below) show that there were 46,724 commencements for the financial year, an increase of 6,377 on the previous year. 

Where NSW goes, so too the nation. NSW drove a broader national resurgence - with 179,038 dwellings commenced across Australia, an increase of 19,071 on the previous year. 

With the NSW Planning Reform Bill now all but locked into law, and an array of state led planning initiatives now in place, we hope to see an improvement on key housing metrics over the coming quarters.

Urban Taskforce CEO Tom Forrest told realestate.com that while there was a long way to go in delivering more housing supply, recent reform has proved successful, especially in states like New South Wales.  

And we certainly need to see vast improvement, with the commencements data still only 56% of the new dwelling completions needed to hit the Accord housing completions targets.

What is not helping is the conspiring of rising construction costs and a never-ending array of Government fees taxes and charges on the feasibility of new housing. The shortages in construction labour, at every level of skill and profession, is a major obstacle to the delivery of the Accord targets.  There are no short-term fixes here.  We need a targeted, construction industry mass immigration plan.

It was a point CEO Tom Forrest took up with the Daily Telegraph:

We would like to thank our principal sponsor, Decode Group.

Decode continues to set a high benchmark for reliability, quality and community impact with a $1.4 billion pipeline, including six $150M+ flagship projects across NSW and more than $3.3 billion in total value already delivered, and a 100% project completion rate.

3. Infill Affordable Housing Bonus scheme – it actually works

• More than 10,000 dwellings are under assessment, including more than 2,200 affordable homes
• More than 6,000 have already been approved, including more than 2,000 affordable homes

Paul Scully’s ministerial colleagues, along with DPHI, need to appreciate to this.

The infill affordable housing bonus scheme, which requires between 10% - 15% of the total dwelling in a project to be operated by a Community Housing Provider for 15 years, works.

It works to boost general housing supply.  It works for delivering a significant boost to the stock of affordable housing.  It works for housing delivery feasibility. It works!

The Minns Government went off track with the TOD program where they mandated in-perpetuity dedication of affordable housing.  This feasibility killing obligation dramatically undermines the potential of the TOD program and the affordable housing outcomes from that massive announcement have been very disappointing. To make the point clear, this contrasts with the success of the Infill AH Bonus scheme discussed at the top of this article.

The solution - get rid of the 2% in perpetuity affordable housing contributions in the Tier 2 TOD areas. It adds complexity while reducing feasibility. Just scrap it. If applicants utilise the Infill Affordable Housing Bonus, then they should pay in accord with those rules.

But it’s worse. Councils across Greater Sydney are introducing their own affordable housing schemes into their own Local Environment Plans.  This Minns Government can stop these changes coming into effect, but to date, they have not.

With both LEP affordable housing obligations applied on top of State Government TOD affordable housing requirements, and the development feasibility is getting smashed.

The Minns Government needs to put an end to local affordable housing levies which actually lead to less housing and lower affordability.

4. Council watch - heritage listing emerging as key strategy to block new housing on Sydney’s north shore

With NIMBY Councils along the north shore apparently running out of options to thwart housing, there were two stories this week showing how councils are using heritage provisions as one of the last remaining weapons against a fairer share of housing in their LGA’s.

(i) North Sydney Council IGNORES its own heritage advice!

North Sydney Council met this week to consider a proposal (lodged under the Low to mid-rise reforms) to redevelop low rise housing at Neutral Bay into 25 apartments, including 6 affordable homes.

The two heritage officers at North Sydney Council (both with heritage qualifications) advised Council that the existing houses would not meet the threshold for heritage listing:

In a move that sounded a lot like Donald Trump, Council boldly declared that they were certainly not going to let "professional advice" cloud their judgement, with the Mayor commenting on the heritage advice that recommended against listing:

Wow!

A group of NIMBYs have whipped up another campaign in North Sydney. One of the protestors is planning to downsize into a luxury apartment (I wonder who will build that??).

Consistency has never been a strong suite for NIMBYs.

(ii) Willoughby goes on a heritage listing spree

Willoughby City Council has released a planning proposal for consultation examining the heritage listing of: 

• the Naremburn Civic Centre Heritage Conservation Area; and
• 14 heritage items of local significance. 

Listed heritage items are excluded from the Low and Mid-rise planning policy reforms (something that needs to change), and the existence of heritage conservation areas will allow Councils to shove a foot in the door and thwart development. They will take every opportunity. Hence the renewed interest by Willoughby Council in using their heritage powers to hamper the LMR reforms.

How will the Minns Government respond?

The Minister for Planning excitedly declared that the LMR planning reforms would deliver 112,000 additional new homes by 2029. But these NIMBY councils are slowly, but surely, undermining the NSW targets. 112,000 will soon look like pie-in-the-sky if NIMBY councils continue to undermine and impeded the LMR reforms.

The bi-partisan planning reforms show the mood of the public is behind housing supply. Don’t let these Councils frustrate this worthy goal.

(iii) City of Sydney to consider Ultimo-Pyrmont Peninsular Plan

The UItimo/Pyrmont Peninsula Strategic Plan will soon go back to Council for finalisation.

The current plans for Pyrmont include:

• an additional 4,192 new homes and up to 25,000 new jobs
• changes to the 7.12 contribution plan to levy up to 3% on a new development with a CIV more than $1 million
• affordable housing contribution of 9% to any residential floor space that exceed the maximum FSR that applied prior to the proposed changes.

There are a number of HDA projects within the precinct. With the City of Sydney undercooking heights and densities, adding its usual over-prescription when it comes to planning controls, along with a 3% infrastructure and 9% affordable housing tax - no wonder developers are exploring alternative pathways.

Council is looking at a “stage 2 sites” that could yield more housing, although with a 9% affordable housing tax, that is fanciful.

(iv) Parramatta Council’s door keeps revolving

And finally, in the revolving door of leadership that is Parramatta Council, they will be looking for a new CEO with the decision terminating now former CEO Gail Connolly.

While there has clearly been a breakdown in the relationship between Councillors and the CEO, this has happened far too often in Sydney’s “second city”.  This is not good for investment confidence, and it reeks of a tin-pot town.  It’s time Parramatta Council grew up.

5. Mark Speakman has come a long way when it comes to housing supply

The victory of Mark Speakman (with the able support of Scott Farlow) over the remaining anti-housing elements within the Liberal Party, marks a significant shift, some would say of Damascene proportions, when it comes to the exigencies of housing supply.

A little over 2 years ago Mr Speakman was in full NIMBY mode over a modest proposal to turn a local shop in Cronulla into 30 apartments, asking the Minns Government to put the shop on the state heritage register!

This week we saw the Leader of the Opposition back the Minns Government’s planning reforms, and while at it speak in favour of removing the burden of fees, taxes and charges, as well as kick-starting property tax reform in NSW.

Mark Speakman has shown a capacity to reappraise and recalibrate – helped along with some fleet-footed political steps that had our Urban Taskforce “Property Development Sporting Analogies Division” aflutter.

There was talk of “Marky Mark” and comparisons of the achievements of the Leader of the Opposition with respect to the Planning Reform Bill with the finishing skills of ex (and future) Wallaby and current Rooster Mark Nawaqanitawase! (now known in Macquarie Street as “the other Marky Mark”).

With foot-skills, balance and courage like that – we say, “well played Mr Speakman”.

6.  Long Bay redevelopment – the door opens

A good place for a prison – 100 years ago!

The Premier Chris Minns opened the door this week to housing instead of a jail at Long Bay – but he noted that the full development of the precinct needed a metro - something to which his government, so far, would not commit.

Urban Taskforce has strongly backed development at Long Bay. CEO Tom Forrest spoke with the Daily Telegraph, saying all the investigative work on a southeast link had been carried out by the previous Labor Government in 2008:

The Urban Developer also spoke with Tom on the prospect of housing at Long Bay – with Tom describing the jail as “Dickensian”.

7. Housing Taskforce offers new Post-Consent Support Service to boost housing supply

With the Planning Reform Bill making its way through Parliament, along with a number of new planning assessment and approval pathways, it is pleasing to also see the DPHI hone in on the problem of converting DAs into CCs with the new Post-Consent Support Service.

The Housing Taskforce will soon morph into the Development Co-ordination Authority, but while that transition takes place, they have expanded their role to provide a new service, designed to help resolve post-consent and construction delays or challenges. 

The service will help to:

• Support developers to navigate post-consent issues and bottlenecks
• Bring the right people together: developers, councils, and state agencies to resolve post-consent issues
• Support faster decision-making to transition more homes into construction.

To be eligible for support, the project must: 

• Have a valid development consent for more than 50 homes or more than 20 social or affordable homes and be progressing towards construction or nearing occupation
• Be experiencing a delay or issue with a local or State agency that’s preventing construction or occupation from progressing. 

Priority will be given to projects that can commence and/or complete quickly and deliver the greatest number of homes per application. If your project meets the eligibility criteria, contact the Housing Taskforce for support. 

8. The nitty gritty of the Planning Reform Bill amendments

Continuing in the bipartisan spirit, a number of amendments were moved by both the NSW Government and the Opposition.

Opposition

Amendment No. 1
Ensure that if the Minister does not accept the recommendation of the Housing Delivery Authority and deviates from its recommendation, the Minister must publish reasons for their decision to improve transparency and accountability.

Amendment No. 2
Provide that the Secretary of Planning must report on the operations of the Development Consent Authority as part of the annual report of the Department

Amendment No. 3
Parliament to oversee the finalisation of the single Community Participation Plan.

Amendment No. 5
Provide the Housing Delivery Authority if it is to amend an EPI needs to ensure such change is "reasonably necessary" rather than “convenient”.

Amendment No. 6
For declaration of targeted assessment development, the Minister must invite the public to make written submissions on the proposed policy within a specified period after the date on which the explanation was published, being a period of not less than 28 days, and

Amendment No. 7
Establish a Joint Select Committee to review the operation of the HDA

All of these were accepted by the Government.

Amendment No. 8: sought to restore the regional panels (Government did not accept this so we are stuck with local panels)

Government amendments

Amendment No. 1 (together with an Amendment from Independent MP for Wakehurst)
Requirement for the consent authority to consider the relevant Bush Fire Protection Planning guide if the land in question is recorded as bush fire prone land. This will require up to date mapping (which is not always the case)

Amendment No. 2
A SEPP must not declare a designated development as targeted assessment development

Amendments Nos 3, 4 and 5
Relate to the provisions around so-called zombie DAs and the revocation or modification of consent. The drafting of the bill unintentionally extended those provisions beyond where the Government had intended them to work. These amendments reduce that power to be held only by the New South Wales Government and puts a time period on the age of a development consent of 25 years. The original draft did not have a time period and was open to abuse by an antithetical consent authority.

And what did the Greens Party say?

The Bill gave the Greens Party an ideal platform to trash more market-based housing as apparently unworthy, with an amendment moved to impose a 20% affordable housing component on any development of more than 10 homes. A great way to ensure nothing gets built, which is precisely what is sought by a Party which is increasingly the last bastion of NIMBYism.

The proposed amendment only had 3 in support (out of a 93 member house!). Emphatic - and shows how out of touch the Greens are with the broader public. They are yet to learn the lessons of their Federal election drubbing.

9.  You call that a marathon debate? This is a marathon debate…

A few eyebrows in the office of the Urban Taskforce were cocked when we saw a release from the NSW Property Council, referring several times to the “marathon debate” over the Planning Reform Bill. Apart from the rantings of the Greens Party, it was barely even a debate!

More seasoned observers of parliamentary proceedings begged to differ with the PCAs characterisation.

Our team of NSW Parliamentary debate archivists immediately turned to the Public Sector Wages and Conditions Bill 2011, where then MLC (now Senator) David Shoebridge of the Greens Party spoke for almost 6 hours alone. The Greens barely raised a whimper over the planning reform this time around.

10.  DPHI updates

Changes to the Community Participation Plan
The Department has made changes to its Community Participation Plan.

A minimum 14-day exhibition period now applies to relevant residential State significant development applications. There is flexibility to extend exhibition period timeframes where appropriate.

For more information and to view the updated Community Participation Plan, visit the Department’s website.

Housing Delivery Authority Expression of Interest form now updated
DPHI has updated the Housing Delivery Authority (HDA) expression of interest (EOI) application form.

The HDA EOI application form now reflects the current HDA SSD criteria and offers clearer guidance for applicants. The accompanying EOI submission questions PDF has also been revised, to align with the new form.

For more information visit the HDA webpage.

Updated Planning circular – Estimated development costs
The Department has updated its circular, Changes to how development costs are calculated for planning purposes, to support faster housing delivery.

The new guidance recommends that councils accept applicant-estimated development costs for residential projects valued under $3 million, provided they are prepared in line with the circular’s requirements.

The change allows councils to focus their resources on assessing larger, more complex developments rather than single dwellings, helping to cut submission-to-lodgement timeframes for most residential applications.

Councils retain the authority to question or verify any cost estimates they believe are unreasonably low, ensuring accuracy and accountability across the planning system.

11. Two digital initiatives to speed up housing delivery

The NSW Land Subdivision Pipeline dataset gives NSW Government agencies as well as local councils, developers and prospective home buyers comprehensive access to the latest approved subdivision activity.

This information helps coordinate and streamline infrastructure planning decisions such as the location of new schools or roads, as well as early planning for the construction of essential services like electricity, gas and telecommunications.

 The registration of land ready for development has also been made more efficient with survey plan lodgements now 100% online.

The NSW Land Subdivision Pipeline can be viewed on the NSW Government’s Spatial Digital Twin Explorer.

12. Members in the news

*Please note these articles may be paywall protected

“…Goodman Group is chasing approval for 1400 apartments on a site it has assembled in Sydney’s southern suburbs near Mascot station, where the Minns government has flagged the potential for more residential projects… 

To read more, click here:                  The Australian, 12 October

"…Castle Group has appointed property leader, Ranisha Clarke, as chief executive officer, to spearhead the company’s next phase of growth…

To read more, click here:                       The Urban Developer, 14 October

"…Dexus has brought its premium-grade commercial tower in the heart of North Sydney to market...

To read more, click here:                The Urban Developer, 15 October

Follow our new LinkedIn Page