Ku-ring-gai Council
Speech by Michael Clayden
To Ku-ring-gai Council Public Forum
13 February 2024
Thank you for granting me the opportunity to stand before you today. My address concerns the council’s current stance on GB.18, specifically regarding the Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) and the ‘Diverse and Well-located Homes’ State Environmental Planning Policies (SEPPs). I stand before you to oppose the council’s response to these policies.
I am a university student and a 23-year-old who has been living in Ku-ring-Gai with my family since we moved to this area and Australia 17 years ago. With the housing crisis as it is, I struggle to see how I will ever be able to afford a home in the local area I grew up in.
At the heart of dense housing lies the principle of providing choice. This freedom is vital to building a vibrant, inclusive community where everyone can access suitable living options. Moreover, the importance of dense and diverse housing extends to affordability. Increasing the supply of homes in sought-after areas can make housing more accessible to more people.
The federal and state productivity commissions, reserve bank, multiple parliamentary inquiries and a large volume of academic research all agree that new supply, particularly in places like Ku-ring-gai, is critical to lowering rents and prices.
This brings me to an essential point regarding inclusivity in our planning processes. Consider the situation in Kuringgai, where the median house price is $3 million, and the median rent is approximately $915 per week. These figures are staggering, especially considering Ku-ring-gai does not offer amenities like those in the city. This discrepancy raises a crucial question: How can Kuringgai’s planning be considered inclusive when a significant portion of the population is priced out of the housing market?
Furthermore, it is time for the council to look beyond the outdated assumptions that have guided previous planning efforts. The future demands a new approach to planning that lessens our dependency on cars, enhances urban mobility, and promotes development that integrates seamlessly with our desire for a healthier, more accessible lifestyle. Not everyone can afford or even needs a car today, and the assumption that everyone will still require a vehicle to move around is a distorted and misguided approach to planning for the future. This is especially critical considering the Productivity Commission’s recent findings, emphasising the benefits of denser housing near infrastructure.
Given these considerations, I urge the council to reevaluate its stance on the TOD and the ‘Diverse and Well-located Homes’ SEPPs. Embracing a forward-thinking approach to housing and urban development offers us unprecedented opportunities to create an inclusive, sustainable, and resilient community.
Let us commit to a future that not only meets the immediate needs of our residents but also lays the groundwork for a thriving, equitable community for generations to come.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
