A Positive Vision for Sydney
Joseph O’Donoghue has written in the SMH that “YIMBYs need to know what they’re saying yes to”. Supply and housing affordability have been covered at length in the media, and we think that argument is pretty much won outside a few fringe actors with motivated reasoning. Here we’ll focus on some of the more intangible ways that local opposition has shaped our planning system for the worse, and how we can correct them.
We advocate for cities and everything that makes them complex, vibrant, and desirable. We say yes to mixed-use, medium and high-density homes near public transport, green space, and essential services.
Our opponents might think our ideas are new or strange, but that’s not true. As far back as the 1960s, urbanists like Jane Jacobs argued that a mix of uses underpins the success of urban neighbourhoods. We agree that when people work, live, shop and play in the same area, this steady stream of use creates prosperity, vibrancy and safety.
Every year, Australian tourists flock to visit European cities that are built on this very principle - but it’s time we bring that to our own cities.
Crown Street in Surry Hills and Darling Square in the city are great examples of how these ideas work here at home.
Contrast this with North Sydney’s CBD, where everything closes on weekends because there are no residents. How can this be good for business, or the community? Yet the Mayor, endorsed by our interlocutor, defends “conservatorship of that core for commercial purposes”.
This aversion to mixed-use is not isolated. Rose Bay’s local MP laments that a supermarket with 14 apartments on top would extend into a residential area, “150m from a school”. But living within walking distance of schools, services and shops is ideal; especially when the alternative is adding to Sydney’s traffic.
Instead of copying the success of Paris or Barcelona, Sydney pursues proven planning failures. We cram apartments on the busiest roads, because people don’t object to that. This is fundamentally unfair; while many are subject to noise and vehicle pollution, a few enjoy tranquil backstreets in detached houses.
Flawed ideas like mandatory car parking were thoroughly debunked decades ago. Building for cars rather than people spread things out, making driving the only option to get around. Garage entrances and car parks are kryptonite for street-level interest.
Most planners know this, but demand it anyway, because parking issues are the main driver of NIMBY objection.
Councils often require upper floors of apartments to be progressively set back in an unsightly ziggurat pattern. In doing this they not only reduce density, but architects tell us this significantly increases the risk of defects because every seam or corner is a new place for waterproofing to fail.
Even this seemingly trivial restriction is driven by a fear of urban dynamism. If new developments are visible from the street above existing shops, people might be reminded that cities change over time.
Public housing also falls victim to this ‘stuck’ way of thinking. In Glebe, the NSW Government is demolishing two storey public housing on Wentworth Park Road. The replacement will be a mere four storeys, because that is the maximum permitted by the City of Sydney’s planning rules.
If this demolition is to occur, it is incumbent upon the government to maximise the number of units on such high amenity sites by building much taller than the surrounding community. In doing so they can set a design benchmark for quality high density living.
YIMBYs believe cities are gardens; we should tend them as they grow, not pin them like butterflies to sit on the mantelpiece. We’re not living in the 1960s and 70s, there is no surfeit of cheap inner city housing for new migrants, young artists or working class people looking to start a family. We have to create that new housing, starting near our transport networks.
75% of residential land near Sydney train stations allows only low-density homes. If we use this land better, we can address the housing crisis and reduce traffic and urban sprawl.
As part of the Housing Now! alliance, we advocate for a medium-density “pattern book”, which we think can address concerns about amenity and quality.
This isn’t a new idea and we do not need to look far for an example. Victoria permits five storey buildings near train stations by default if they meet a certain template. This exists comfortably side-by-side with houses on nearby streets.
This positive vision of mixed-use planning and vibrant communities stands in stark contrast to the forces of No.
Politicians and planners need to take their stewardship of the city seriously. Planning needs to consider all residents, including future ones - not just a narrow group of homeowners looking to pull the ladder up after them.
If they can do this, better things are possible. And we say Yes to that.
Justin Simon is the Chair of Sydney YIMBY
