28 FEBRUARY 2025

In this Edition...

1. All the way with HDA

2. STOP PRESS - We’ve HAD enough! 

3. Mid-rise reform – more holes

...and much, much more.

4. Sydney YIMBY backs the UTA assessment!
5. Wait – there’s more (holes in the policy)!
6. NSW Planning Bill – mostly worthy – but a worry in parts
7. Ingham scores big win at Tahmoor
8. Queensland re-establishes Property Consultative Committee 
9. Big week for housing in Victoria - 4 big areas of planning reforms 
10. Polls show housing central to voters’ concerns (again)
11. ASIC must tread carefully when it comes to burgeoning private capital and credit sector
12. Quote of the week – NZ Housing Minister*
13. The bigger picture for the Sydney Town Hall - look behind you!
14. New CEO for St George Community Housing
15. Urban Taskforce in the news
16. Council Watch
17. Members in the news 
SOLVED: HDA auto-correcting to HAD

1. All the way with HDA

No sooner had the ink dried on Round 1 of HDA deliberations on EOIs for inclusion in the new planning pathway than into our inbox pops their decisions on Round 2.

This is a truly great effort from the DPHI State Significant Development Applications (SSDA) assessment team and bodes well for the game changing planning reform initiative.

The HDA certainly seems to be hitting its strides, with a further 39 EOI’s assessed and 23 of those were recommended for inclusion into the State Significant pathway.

This represents potentially more than 10,484 additional homes that will be streamlined through the HDA. That’s on top of almost 6,500 signed off in Round 1.

That’s a total of applications for over 17,000 new homes to be fast-tracked through the new HDA pathway. Excellent progress for a new planning policy and process only announced by the Premier and Planning Minister in December.

We are advised by DPHI that there are five (out of the 23 recommended to progress) EOI’s, representing almost 2,000 new homes, which are currently active DA’s that are before councils’ regional panels etc. HDA will seek feedback from these applicants to see if they wish to withdraw from their existing assessment process to allow the Minister to determine whether they should be called in under the HDA SSDA pathway. It is expected that most applicants will prefer the HDA process.

The new HDA policy and process precisely reflects the calls from the Urban Taskforce. There is strong demand from investors and from the property development community.  Our calls for a centralised assessment and determination process for high value, high yield housing development applications were systematically ignored by the former government. That is how we got into this crisis in the first place.

Urban Taskforce CEO Tom Forrest spoke with the radio station 2SM on the impact of the HDA so far:

 The new HDA policy and process reflects the benefits of going to the market and asking for proposals that are feasible and ready to go, rather than the traditional planning approach where the planners determine the rules and hope they meet the market.

2. STOP PRESS - We’ve HAD enough! 

Urban Taskforce code breakers work out how to type HDA without auto-correct changing it to HAD!!!

One of the only downsides of the Housing Delivery Authority is typing its acronym HDA.

It’s tough enough managing the labyrinth of planning rules, regulations and policy in NSW, without having the to take on the might of Microsoft auto-correct on an half-hourly basis!

An ongoing issue for the productivity for beleaguered UTA staff has been endlessly typing the acronym HDA, only for the “bloody autocorrect”* to change it to HAD!

We are aware of frustrations throughout the sector.

As part of Urban Taskforce’s ongoing service to the broader property development community, the IT Division at Urban Taskforce has provided the advice to re-program your Microsoft computer.

Some have equated this breakthrough to the code work undertaken at Bletchley Park during the Second World War.

The UTA’s Research Division conclude that preventing 'HDA' from auto-correcting to 'HAD' removes 34% of office frustration experienced since December 2024 (which is saying something given the publication of the low and medium density reforms!).

For the details of the solution (including screen shots), scroll down to the end of the newsletter or click the button below.

*  This is a direct quote of the regularly heard exclamation is the Urban Taskforce office. 

3. Mid-rise reform – more holes

While the HDA is hitting its strides, the mid-rise planning reforms have more holes in them than a piece of emmenthal.

Urban Taskforce summed up the industry response to the long-awaited mid-rise reforms: a bit of a fizzer and a missed opportunity.

Online industry journal, Soureceable, published CEO Tom Forrest’s summation of the underwhelming reforms.

Today it is being reported that some of the sites included in last week’s announcement will now be automatically excluded due to aircraft noise. Long standing town centres replete with dense (albeit mostly but not exclusively low level) housing are being excluded from the policy.  This is ridiculous.  Modern apartments will have much better noise attenuation and are far better equipped to deal with aircraft noise. 

The exclusions, revealed in the SMH today, in effect mean that Stanmore station, Leichhardt Marketplace, Annandale Town Centre and Petersham (and the 800m of potential up-zoning surrounding these centres) will be excluded, along with parts of Kingsford and Rockdale.

The Department says they were included as flight paths change, but seriously? In that case, why not simply allow for unlimited height, just in case the flight paths change?

A further question remains on the detail of these reforms as to why most of the inner west light rail, Lewisham Station and Summer Hill Station were excluded from the list??

Shadow Minister for Planning, Scott Farlow MLC, summed up much of the confusion:

*Please note, the below link may be paywall protected

The big question being asked “around the traps” was whether the policy was deliberately designed to underachieve, or whether it reflects an ongoing, systemic conservatism in the planning framework here in NSW. The contrast with Victoria (see story 9) could not be more stark in this aspect of planning policy

Another question was the uncritical response of some peaks to the Government’s announcement. Where does “wanting to work with the Government” end and being “an uncritical cheer squad begin”?

For a policy that significantly walked back the draft mid-rise housing reform policy, Urban Taskforce was bemused by the response of some in our sector.  From the more critical comments in today’s SMH, it seems they have had some member “feedback”.

Mortgage Professional Australia noted the differing responses between Urban Taskforce Australia and the NSW Property Council.

You decide who hit the mark.

4. Sydney YIMBY backs the UTA assessment!

More on the money were those “young upstarts” - Sydney YIMBY - who described the mid rise reforms “as more of a talking point than a policy” and shared our displeasure with the Government’s final package:

Once you move beyond the press release and start looking at the detail -the gaps are apparent. Like Sydney YIMBY’s take on the inner west suburbs of Annandale, Stanmore and Broadway.

Source: Sydney YIMBY

No wonder we are not hearing a peep out of Inner West or the City of Sydney Councils.

5.  Wait – there’s more (holes in the policy)!

Take another case study - Forestville in Northern Beaches LGA.  

Looks impressive – but on closer inspection, the area shown above predominantly consists of land parcels that are undevelopable / extremely challenged. For example:

• A council car park
• A council library
• A council town hall
• A full-size Coles with basement parking
• 2 blocks of existing strata apartments that are already 3 stories
• A swathe of mixed ownership 2 storey shop / commercial buildings

The Government has also established controls whereby a number of town centres (now excluded from the policy) will have lower density than the surrounding areas. We now have the crater effect in some parts of Sydney thanks to the final version of the midrise reforms. Some examples:

1. Devonshire Street Surry Hills has a height control of 15 metres, the surrounding residential areas will now have a height control of 22m
2. Double Bay Commercial Centre - it has a mix of controls for 5 storeys and the occasional 6 storey site. That is now lower than the surrounding area
3. Willoughby Road, Crows Nest – close to the Crows Nest metro will have lower controls than the surrounding areas and these areas were unfortunately excluded from the TOD uplift
4. Oxford Street, Paddington and surrounding parts of Oxford Street will retain their 4 storey development potential, notwithstanding their proximity to the city and Bondi Junction
5. King Street, Newtown - the current controls essentially allow 4 storey development and will now have half the height of the surrounding residential areas along Wilson Street and further south.

It this a stuff up or a conspiracy? It’s hard to tell, but given DPHIs demonstrated focus on housing supply with its efforts on the HDA, we err on the side of “stuff up”.

At the end of the day, our hope is that the policy is a success – but it will be measured against the number of new homes it produces.  The government has forecast 112,000 over 5 years.  Urban Taskforce has called this forecast “heroic”. But we will watch and objectively report on a regular basis.

6. NSW Planning Bill – mostly worthy – but a worry in parts

a.      Local Strategic Planning Statements should require Ministerial approval

Firstly, the proposed removal of state oversight of local strategic planning statements is head scratching to put it mildly. Why would the State remove a safeguard that prevents Councils from adding a spanner in the works when it comes to new housing through local planning controls?

Section 3.9 (3A) of the EP&A Act should remain. Otherwise, NIMBY Councils will get up to no good to thwart housing supply.

b.      Councils should still have to justify affordable housing taxes

Secondly – the proposed legislation strips an important safeguard away preventing councils using affordable housing contributions to block housing supply.  Presently, no affordable housing contribution can be imposed (even if authorised by a state environmental planning policy or local environmental plan) unless at least one of three scenarios applies:

• the consent authority is satisfied that the proposed development will or is likely to reduce the availability of affordable housing within the area;
• the consent authority is satisfied that the proposed development will create a need for affordable housing within the area; or
• the proposed development is allowed only because of the initial zoning of a site, or the rezoning of a site.

This safeguard must remain and force Councils to at least try to justify their fees, taxes and charges which impinge on housing supply and increase the cost of new housing.

7. Ingham scores big win at Tahmoor

The former Government, through the now defunct Greater Cities Commission, inflicted needless damage on housing supply and choice in Western Sydney when they established the formal designation of Metropolitan Rural Areas as part of their "Metropolis of Three Cities Region Plan" in 2018.

As was so often the case with the GCC, this was a clumsy, blanket approach which ignored merit-based applications and excluded wholesale significant peri-urban land from residential development in Western Sydney that could accommodate large lot developments to provide greater housing choice and cater for a rapidly advancing and maturing economy right across Western Sydney.

Urban Taskforce has railed against this “preserve in aspic” approach ever since. Which is why this week’s determination, a site within MRA lands, is so important. The decision noted that the proposal was in accord with the State Government’s priority to deliver housing in appropriate locations.

The proposal was successful as it set a very high standard, with 75 hectares (50% of the entire site) to be dedicated as public parkland along the Bargo River Gorge.

The old “barbarians at the gate” mentality of the (defunct) GCC has suffered a significant blow. Hopefully this sets a positive precedence to help unlock other MRA land across the periphery of Sydney that could cater for a wider range of housing typologies – larger lots, seniors housing and the like.

This is a great result for Ingham after many frustrating years of getting nowhere with local Council. This week’s decision by the Regional Planning Panel means the Planning Proposal will be State led – removing the housing project from the NIMBY predilections of Wollondilly Council.

Development Excellence Awards – Entries now open

8. Queensland re-establishes Property Consultative Committee 

The link between property development, budget revenue, infrastructure funding, productivity and planning is a core matter for Treasury and Planning.  It must involve the private sector.  The Queenslanders have got this one right.

Treasury holds many of the kyes when it comes to the nuts and bolts of housing – like infrastructure and broader tax settings. Closer engagement with industry would help feed into that process. The State Treasurer is also a powerful voice in Cabinet and any way of ground truthing policies with his office and the Treasury is critical.

Such a forum in NSW would have certainly backed in the HDA and its industry centred EOI process, as well as warning Treasury the final version of the mid-rise housing reforms was a dud.

9. Big week for housing in Victoria – 4 big areas of planning reform

The Victorian Premier, Jacinta Allan, and Planning Minister, Sonya Kilkenny, announced their proposed housing targets for local government areas, which they say could lead to the construction of 2.5 million new homes by 2051.

Victoria is the leader of the pack when it comes to housing supply, but Premier Allan continues to push the envelope and hold councils to account on their planning performance.

The Premier warned councils that didn’t get with the program:

That was something former planning Minister Rob Stokes said when he sought to enforce early low-ball housing targets on NSW local Councils – but Ku-ring-Gai Council popped that balloon by publicly humiliating the former Minister and simply refusing to acknowledge those targets.

We say that this should be NSW’ approach too. Since the housing targets for individual councils were released last year, there has been deathly silence from most of the NIMBY councils.

NSW has thrown its eggs in the HDA basket to effectively take responsibility for housing supply and the targets.

In further positive news, the Premier of Victoria announced a ‘townhouse code’ whereby a proposal that ticks a number of pre-requirements will automatically be approved within 58 days.

Importantly, there is no right of appeal for NIMBYs - adding greater speed and certainty into the process.

The Victorian Premier also put on notice that her government was looking at a similar code for 4 to 6 storey developments. Watch this space (we certainly are).

The contrast with the NSW low to mid rise reforms is obvious, but perhaps this reflects longevity in office and the toll of bitter experience in dealing with councils.

Concluding a very busy week, the Premier announced the next 25 “activity centres” in Melbourne – served by trams or trains, that will have planning processes streamlined and sped up. The Victorian Government has now identified 60 of these centres across Melbourne. They are finalising the planning rules so again – we eagerly await the details to see how they will deliver on the anticipated 300,000 new homes by 2051 and how they compare to the NSW Government TOD planning reforms.

10. Polls show housing central to voters’ concerns (again)

A new poll shows the cost of housing and rents will be looming large in the minds of voters as they cast their vote in the soon to be called Federal election.

The latest AFR/Freshwater Strategy poll ranked issues in order of importance – top 2 were cost of living (70% most important) and housing (39%).

The interrelatedness of housing and rental costs, labour shortages, and cost of living generally is turning into a Venn diagram that could spell the end of the Albanese Government.

And what’s worse for the Government is the same poll showed a collapse in voter’s perceptions of who was best to deal with housing policy – the Coalition was seen by 34% of respondents as best to manage housing, compared to Labor’s 27%.

Perhaps this is why the Housing Minister, Clare O’Neil was out this week at long last talking up the HAFF?

This week’s ABS data on the monthly CPI indicator showed that rents in particular remain buoyant, inflationary, and continuing to eat into renters’ hip pockets. Rents were up 5.8% in the 12 months to January 2025. Whilst down from the previous months, rents continue to fan the cost-of-living flames.

Unless you are one of the “lucky” few to be the recipient of Housing Australia’s social and affordable housing, the private market is your only option when it comes to rentals. And rental supply continues to track at well below demand.

11. ASIC must tread carefully when it comes to burgeoning private capital and credit sector

The private credit and capital sector are of growing importance in the property development sector given the consistent under-investment in market housing from the financial behemoths – the Australian Superannuation funds, and increasing regulatory pressure on the banks.

The highly regulated financial market is there to protect unsophisticated consumers (the general public) when they take out loans for housing and other goods.

This is not the case in the private capital and credit markets which are regulated by ASIC through AFSLs (Australian Financial Services Licence) and ACLs (Australian Credit Licence), where investors are large, sophisticated and undertake extensive research prior to investing large sums of money in these funds.

We need more competition in the capital markets to solve the housing supply crisis, not less.

A broadly consultative examination by ASIC may conclude there is no need for further regulation. This is the view of the Urban Taskforce.

ASIC needs to tread carefully here lest capital flows dry up as a result of over-regulation and associated cost. Private capital is an increasing part of the housing supply jigsaw puzzle, so caution is warranted.

ASIC must work closely with the private sector in exploring the pros and cons of more regulation in this space.

Nonetheless, a discussion paper is an appropriate place to start.

12. Quote of the week – NZ Housing Minister*

NZ Housing Minister, Chris Bishop, made no apologies for his pro housing approach as a fundamental cornerstone to reinvigorating an economy - saying yes where bureaucracies once said no …  

* The CEO of the Urban Taskforce is from New Zealand

 13. The bigger picture for the Sydney Town Hall - look behind you!

While the Town Hall Square matter continues to drag on and the Lord Mayor still dreaming of addressing the masses from the steps of Town Hall in years to come, Council should be turning around and looking at the hulking monstrosity squatting on the corner of Kent and Druitt Streets.

Council staff could be relocated to Green Square during (and even after) the redevelopment and return the CBD centre to the people.

How about redeveloping this site, introducing mixed use which will help pay for this and the vision of Town Hall Square?

14. New CEO for St George Community Housing

Currently CEO at Magenta Living — which manages 13,000 social and affordable housing properties in the North West of England – Ms Marriot-Levy was previously Group Executive Director for Affordable and Supported Housing at Places for People, overseeing 77,000 properties and a turnover of £400 million. Under her leadership, the organisation established a strategic focus on mixed communities, combining social, private and shared-ownership housing.

Ms Marriot - Lavery comes to SGCH at a critical time. We wish her well.

15. Urban Taskforce in the news

2SM and its radio syndicates covered Urban Taskforce’s disappointment with the mid-rise reforms as a missed opportunity with local planning controls set to stymie housing. Tom pointed out another problem with the reform (on top of those mentioned in stories 3, 4 and 5.)

16. Council Watch

North Sydney

2 weeks in a row – one can always rely upon North Sydney Council to be doing the wrong thing when it comes to housing.

This week we note the pitiful turn around times for North Sydney in accepting DAs.

It is beyond comprehension how a Council can take 44 days from the uploading of a DA Submission onto the portal until the DA is accepted by Council, particularly given that in FY 23/24 North Sydney Council only received 6 medium density residential flat building DA’s. In FY 22/23 NSC received 24 medium density residential flat building DA’s.

 Given the lack of DA’s being lodged, one would have thought Council would have more resources to accept and assess DA’s in a quicker timeline.

North Sydney and Willoughby are the slowest Sydney Councils for this metric… who’d have thought it!

With the strategic location of North Sydney and the mismatch between its potential and the myopic vision of its council, we again suggest it is time for the Minns Government to either sack this council or at least remove its planning powers! 

17. Members in the news

*Please note these articles may be paywall protected

“…Ingenia Communities said revenue and profit picked up over the six months to December ...read more... 

To read more, click here:                    AFR, 27 February

"… Developers Sekisui House Australia and HankyuHanshin Properties have opened expressions of interest for stage 5 of the project.​​​​..read more...

To read more, click here:                       The Daily Telegraph, 26 February

"… Traders in Purple director Charles Daoud highlighted the NSW government’s density bonus for affordable housing as a game-changer.​​​​..read more...

To read more, click here:                      The Urban Developer, 27 February

SOLVED: HDA auto-correcting to HAD

How to stop ‘HDA’ becoming ‘HAD’ in Microsoft Word

Word automatically ‘corrects’ the term "HDA" to "HAD", as there is an AutoCorrect entry causing it. This entry can be removed, allowing for nothing to be changed after one types “HDA”. Follow these steps to remove it:

Step 1: Open AutoCorrect Options

1. Open Microsoft Word.
2. Click on the "File" menu (top-left corner).

3. Select "Options" (near the bottom of the menu).

Step 2: Access AutoCorrect Settings

4. In the Word Options window, go to "Proofing" (left-hand panel).

5. Click on the "AutoCorrect Options" button.

Step 3: Find and Delete the AutoCorrect Entry

6. In the AutoCorrect tab, locate the "Replace" field.

7. Type "HDA" (this will highlight the replacement rule causing the issue).

8. Click "Delete" to remove the AutoCorrect rule.

9. Click "OK" to save your changes.

Step 4: Test Your Changes

10. Go back to your document and type "HDA"— and enjoy the tranquillity that comes with "HDA" no-longer being automatically ‘corrected’ to “HAD”.