Urban Taskforce

ABS has today released the June data for housing approvals which shows that in NSW, the planning system approved 12.7% in less in June than was approved in May. The Council shut down for elections has started.

Urban Taskforce has warned the NSW Government that they faced a real risk that Councils would ease off on approvals in the lead up to what was to be the September elections.&nbsp; Today&rsquo;s data shows that the Government&rsquo;s light touch on Councils has resulted in precisely that.&nbsp; Worse, the Council elections have now been postponed till December and unless someone holds a blow-torch to the Councils and approval bodies, approvals will drop off further.&nbsp;

[smartcode_project:default project_id=31751]

Even prior to the lockdown, the productivity of the planning system had dropped off. Our economy cannot recover with this drop off in performance.&nbsp; Planning reform and approvals now will deliver a pipeline of work for when vaccinations allow our economy to fully re-open.&nbsp; There is an opportunity to catch up &ndash; but it seems that the planning system has slowed up again.

Urban Taskforce calls on the Government to immediately implement the recommendation of the NSW Productivity Commission White Paper.&nbsp; The GSC has set housing targets.&nbsp; It is up to the NSW Government to ensure that Councils meet them.&nbsp; Targets need to be regularly monitored against performance.&nbsp; There can be no excuse for Councils refusing to accept the targets.&nbsp; LGA Housing Strategies must come with sanctions for those Councils that selfishly refuse to contribute to housing supply, resulting in rising new home prices inflicted on those least able to afford them.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=30049 project_image_fid=162884]

The data shows that NSW housing approvals reached their peak in 2015/16 2016/17 and 2017/18 at around 73,000 approvals each year. Then, in the lead up to the NSW State election (2018/19) approvals dropped off to 58,000 and stayed low in 2019/20 with only 48,000, despite &ldquo;fast track&rdquo; schemes and a flurry of DPIE activity.

The total approvals have risen across all of NSW to 59,000 and this is welcome &ndash; but it remains well short of what is needed.&nbsp; The data reveals the problem.&nbsp; Apartment approvals across NSW have dropped significantly (most of these in Greater Sydney) while new separated house approvals have remained relatively flat.

<img alt="" height="444" src="https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/screen_shot_2021-08-07_at_2.19.12_am.png" width="1180" />

The table above, based on the ABS data, clearly shows that the price escalation is due to a drop off in housing approvals and this is flowing on to a drop off in housing supply.&nbsp;

Further, the time taken to navigate the NSW planning system, even after an approval has been granted, often takes years, adding to risk for the property development industry and additional costs for new home buyers.

The message went out to Councils in 2018 that the NSW Government was going to go soft on them after the Council amalgamation debacle.&nbsp; But the result has been a massive under supply of housing.&nbsp; This will only get worse unless Government can incentivise Councils to deliver an over-supply of new approvals.

Council elections have now been postponed till December and unless someone holds a blow-torch to the Councils and approval bodies, approvals will drop off further. 

max.kwok_55688

ABS housing approvals data spells out why housing prices are going through the roof

The Commonwealth&rsquo;s expansionary budget is the right approach for the times.

The Commonwealth has led the way with support for new home buyers through its &ldquo;First Home-owners Deposit Scheme&rdquo; which effectively under-writes housing loans for first home buyers with only a 5% deposit. &nbsp;However, this, along with record low interest rates and the relaxation of APRA controls has seen a spike in housing demand

The Budget expands this scheme and creates a new category of beneficiaries with the new Family Home Guarantee which will provide single custodial parents with a step up towards home ownership. There&rsquo;s also more flexibility for older Australians (over 60) who sell their house (generally to down-size after children have moved out) allowing them to deposit up to $300,000 per person into Superannuation.

The Budget also includes the expansion of the &ldquo;First Home Super Saver Scheme&rdquo; which increases the funds that can be withdrawn from Super accounts from $30,000 to $50,000. &nbsp;This, on top of HomeBuilder grants all adds to demand for new homes. But without a big boost in housing supply, borrowing from Super just pumps up the price further.

So Treasurer Josh Frydenberg has a conundrum. &nbsp;Stimulate the economy &ndash; but risk new home prices going up and a backlash from those locked out of the housing market. &nbsp;All of the worthy Commonwealth measures announced in the Budget face particular problem in NSW.&nbsp;

The NSW Planning System dropped the ball and slowed housing approvals down to a crawl just before COVID &ndash; then they failed to use COVID-19 as a chance to catch up. &nbsp;Now there is a massive shortage in supply of land sub-divisions and re-zonings for new homes across Greater Sydney. There is a plan for reform of planning in NSW &ndash; but it won&rsquo;t deliver for years to come. The same bold approach which has driven the Commonwealth is urgently needed in NSW.

What that means is all the extra funding for home buyers just pumps up the price of the existing stock of housing, ironically making home ownership less affordable.&nbsp;

<h2>The real issue for NSW is the supply of new housing.</h2>

The Department of Planning&rsquo;s own forecasts predict 150,000 new homes over the next 4 years in Greater Sydney &ndash; but even this bold prediction, unlikely to be achieved given the Government&rsquo;s refusal to take on NIMBY Councils, falls short of meeting the NSW Government&rsquo;s own Housing Strategy &ldquo;Housing 2041&rdquo; targets which call for 50,000 new dwellings (on average) each year from now till 2041.

The big problem for first home buyers and for the Commonwealth Budget is the NSW planning system.

The Commonwealth needs to get tough with NSW and drive planning reform to increase housing supply. &nbsp;While ever we wait for reform in NSW you can expect that new home prices will continue to rise.

The Commonwealth&rsquo;s increased investment public health, the vaccine roll out, mental health and women&rsquo;s support services is all very welcome indeed.

The Commonwealth investment in in city Infrastructure is also supported &ndash; though one short-coming was the absence of funding to support local infrastructure surrounding the new Western Sydney Airport because the success of this precinct will drive the economy of the nation. With a massive levy of 6.5% (on top of all the other fees and charges) to be applied to the development of employment centres around the airport, the feasibility of development of employment land is called into question and NSW risks missing out on the predicted jobs boom without some support from the Commonwealth.

All up, this is a budget for all Australians. It is very welcome and is strongly supported by the Urban Taskforce.

However, all of the worthy Commonwealth measures announced in the Budget face particular problem in NSW

The Commonwealth’s expansionary budget is the right approach for the times: Tom Forrest

<html><body>
EXPERT OBSERVER

The NSW Minister for Planning has released an analysis of housing demand and supply trends which highlights the urgent need for more and faster housing approvals if massive price rises are to be avoided.

Urban Taskforce welcomes the frank assessment which clearly states the need for more housing and more infrastructure to support our growing and ageing population.

DPIE Housing Demand forecasts are based on the Greater Sydney Commission’s (GSC) 2016 numbers – which find the over the next 20 years (2016 – 2036) the number of new homes in Greater Sydney needed will be 725,000 (36,000 per year).

The Draft NSW Housing Strategy Discussion Paper and Fact Book released by Minister Pavey and Minister Stokes in May 2020 was clear that the forecast for Growth in the population of Greater Sydney had grown and so too had the forecast need for new homes.  The May 2020 document is clear in stating that there will need to be 1 million new homes in the 20 years between 2020 and 2040 (that means 50,000 new homes every year).

The big question is: why is DPIE still clinging to the old data?  The 2020 Housing Strategy documents were based on sound analysis by DPIE staff and were informed by Demographic analysis and by the NSW Inter-Generational Report.

The Planning System was slowed by the focus on Strategic Planning documents.  Councils were not supposed to delay rezoning applications while preparing their new Local Environment Plans and their Local Strategic Planning Statements, but they did.

The data released by Minister Stokes today shows the extent of the problem created by the resultant chronic slowdown in approvals prior to COVID-19.

Between 2015-2018 approvals were going well and this, combined with the extension of construction operational hours and the early declaration of construction as an essential service kept this part of the economy working reasonably well.  However, through 2019, before COVID-19, approval numbers were dropping off in NSW.

As shown in the marked-up table, there is a lag between approvals and the completion of new homes.  The impact of the 2019 slowdown (which got worse in 2020 due to COVID-19) is yet to flow through to household completion numbers – but it will – and this will exacerbate the current rising prices in the Greater Sydney market.

<img alt="" height="630" src="https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/urban_taskforce_councils.jpg" width="541">

Minister Stokes has sent a clear signal to Councils which are refusing to adopt the GSC 5-year Housing Targets (which are themselves based on the lower 2016 housing forecasts not the more recent May 2020 analysis).  Ryde Council and Ku-ring-gai are the worst offenders. They have publicly rejected the GSC targets. If this flows through to other Councils, housing supply will crash, pushing prices up and costing thousands of jobs in the sector.

The fact that prices are rising despite the drop off in overseas migration reflects the fundamental economic reality: demand is greater than supply, so prices are rising.

The numbers quoted in the Minister’s media release will not meet the May 2020 Draft NSW Housing Strategy forecasts for growth. 

154,550 new home over the next 5 years equates to only 31,000 new homes each year (well below the GSC 2016 forecast requirement of 36,000 per year and a mile away from the 2020 NSW Housing Strategy target of 50,000 new homes per year.

Tom Forrest is the CEO of the Urban Taskforce.

Subsequent to publication Tom Forrest advised The Hills Shires Council had been exemplars in the area of Urban Planning and Housing Supply. 

He sincerely apologised for confusing The Hills Shire Council with Ku-ring-gai in the media statement.

The Council which has been the most opposed to the GSC Housing targets has, of course, been Ku-ring-gai Council.  

GSC set a reasonable 5-year target of 5,000 – 5,500 for Ku-ring-gai Council.  They passed a resolution to change that to 250 (over 5 years).

 
</body></html>

The data released by Minister Stokes shows the extent of the problem created by the resultant chronic slowdown in approvals prior to COVID-19.



Joel Robinson

Minister Stokes lights a fire under NSW council planners to drive housing supply

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
The data analysis on Sydney council housing targets produced by the Greens spokesperson for Urban Growth and Renewal, Jamie Parker, confuses locations where people want to live with ‘overdevelopment’.
The Greens data demonstrates that Sydneysiders prefer to live in amenable areas close to jobs and public transport, and have interpreted this preference to be a symptom of ‘overdevelopment’.
Having people live in accessible areas close to public transport in order to use the train or bus to travel to work delivers positive environmental outcomes by minimising car travel.
It seems strange that the Greens are against this.
Would they rather minimise development around these transport nodes and have more cars on the roads contributing to congestion and air pollution?
The Greens research indicates that the councils which are generally low density, mainly made up of free-standing homes were underperforming in relation to housing targets set by the State Government, while suburbs which encourage apartment buildings are over performing.
The councils that are below targets are Penrith with a deficit of 8,267 dwellings, Campbelltown with a deficit of 17,005 and Camden with a shortfall of 776 while those that are above target are Parramatta with an additional 8,490 dwellings, Botany with 5,141 and Ryde with 3,861.
The clear consumer preference is for apartments in accessible locations close to jobs and public transport over free-standing homes out on the fringes.
Recent data from Domain indicated that the median price for a Sydney house was $1,123,991 while the median price for an apartment was $711,256.
Clearly many home hunters are trading off household size (apartment rather than a house) for location (closer to jobs and amenities).
The Greens statement that councils exceeding their targets are only due to ‘the demands of the developers’ is simply shooting the messenger.
Developers are only responding to the market and consumer preferences on where people want to live. Clearly there can be many benefits associated with new development.
These include additional development contributions that fund libraries, community halls, parks and improvements to the public domain.
The Greens need to understand that as Sydney grows, our population increases and that a more urban environment is inevitable.
If they were forward thinking, they would be advocating for a sustainable, higher-density urban form for Sydney – not just objecting to all development.
Chris Johnson is chief executive officer of property development industry group Urban Taskforce and can be contacted <a href="https://www.urbantaskforce.com.au/index.php?option=com_content&amp;view=article&amp;id=97&amp;Itemid=126#.Vdaart55dFI">here</a>.
</body></html>

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

Green claims of ‘massive overdevelopment’ misunderstand where people want to live: Chris Johnson

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
The Federal Government has achieved a good balance between encouraging more housing supply as well as policies that make housing more affordable.
Federal Treasurer, Scott Morrison, has carefully balanced the need to boost housing supply with policy levers that make housing more affordable in this year’s budget.
To unlock housing supply the budget allocates $1 billion for critical infrastructure along with $70 billion for transport infrastructure while working with the states to reform planning systems to speed up development.
To encourage more affordable housing the budget has lifted the Capital Gains tax discount to 60 percent where private investment is made in affordable housing.
This will be a real incentive for the development industry to invest in this area particularly if the bond aggregator through the National Housing Finance and Investment Corporation is available to the private sector.
The proposal to have Managed Investment Trusts to develop affordable housing to hold for rent for more than ten years is another positive move.
The proposal to encourage older people to downsize from large houses through allowing up to $300,000 from the sale of a house to be invested in a superannuation fund is a good way to facilitate this process.
By not overacting in the areas of negative gearing and the potential to reduce capital gains tax reductions on property, the Government has clearly understood the sensitivities in the role of investors in maintaining a viable rental housing market.
To pull policy levers in an aggressive manor could lead to a devaluation in the main asset that many families rely on in their own home.
The establishment of the Western Sydney Airport Corporation with funding of $5.3 billion to drive this important game changer project for Sydney is important in maintaining the momentum for this giant project.
The allocation of $1.7 billion through the Asset Recycling Fund to the Sydney Metro project will help progress this important infrastructure that will underpin where new urban development can be located in metropolitan Sydney.”
We are impressed with the careful balance the federal budget has achieved between stimulating much needed housing supply while developing policies that help with housing affordability.
As indicated in the budget papers the state governments will now need to reform their planning systems to ensure more homes are built more quickly for Australian families.
The Federal Government in working with the states on planning reform must question why New South Wales standards for apartments are so much higher than those in other states.
The well-meaning but expensive standards in the NSW Apartment Design Guide are adding around $100,000 to the cost of an average apartment above that of other states.
The Urban Taskforce is keen to work with the federal and state governments to achieve reforms to planning systems that can speed up development.
Chris Johnson is chief executive officer of property development industry group Urban Taskforce and can be contacted <a href="https://www.urbantaskforce.com.au/index.php?option=com_content&amp;view=article&amp;id=97&amp;Itemid=126#.Vdaart55dFI">here</a>.
</body></html>

2017 Budget a good balance for housing supply and affordability: Chris Johnson

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
The Development Assessment Best Practice Guide issued by NSW Planning Minister, Anthony Roberts, is a positive move to speed up housing approvals but it should also apply to government agencies.
The government’s guide to improve development assessment in NSW Councils says all the right things about speeding up the process.
Words like ‘faster, streamlined and fast tracked’ are used throughout the document and this indicates a genuine move to improve performance.
The adoption of a ‘Fast Track Application’ in the ‘Practice Guide’ for certain projects is a positive approach.
The NSW planning system is generally seen as one of the most complex and slow in Australia and if we want to boost housing supply then this must be streamlined.
The NSW Premier’s target of 90 percent of housing approvals to be determined within 40 days is not the best measure of performance as the other 10 per cent could be the large multi-unit housing projects that include around half the homes.
The measure should really be 90% of dwellings should be determined within 90 days. It is these large housing projects that are the slowest in the approval process.
While the new guide is likely to improve assessment in councils, the Urban Taskforce is concerned that larger projects are often referred to government agencies like Roads and Maritime Services and this often delays the assessment process.
The Queensland Government has established the State Assessment and Referral Agency (SARA) as a one stop shop to efficiently process government agency referrals.
The Urban Taskforce believes there are many requirements for development applications that are excessive and that the number of specialist reports now required is adding to costs and creating delays.
We are keen to sit down with the NSW Government to input our approach to streamlining the process.
The current guide has only come from discussion with councils and not with applicants.
Chris Johnson is chief executive officer of property development industry group Urban Taskforce and can be contacted <a href="https://www.urbantaskforce.com.au" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Faster planning approval guide for NSW councils is positive: Chris Johnson

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
Planning approval of the Sydney Metro from Chatswood to Sydenham is great news, however there is a lack of certainty for development around the stations and areas around the rail corridor.
The planning approval of the Sydney Metro including tunnels under the harbour demonstrates the commitment of the Baird Government to an extensive metro network across metropolitan Sydney.
Along with the Metro West line between Sydney and Parramatta the Metro network sets the framework for extensive areas of urban renewal around the new stations, which will help boost must-needed housing supply.
The Urban Taskforce is concerned, however, that planning for the urban renewal of areas around the rail corridor is taking far too long.
Developers have no certainty and cannot proceed with housing projects as strategic land use planning around the metro is lagging far behind.
An example is the Sydenham – Bankstown Urban Renewal Corridor Strategy.
The draft Strategy was exhibited by the Department of Planning in October 2015, however rezoning proposals for areas along the Corridor are on hold until local councils prepare detailed planning controls.
This could take an additional 2 years, even more if the council is subjected to an amalgamation, before the local environmental plan is complete.
Developers simply cannot sit on land for that long with no outcome.
Until planning around these corridors comes up to speed, the NSW Government must fast track plans around metro stations, or develop a process where land owners and developers can obtain a development approval or rezoning in significantly less than 3 years.
The Department of Planning’s Guide to Preparing Planning Proposals issued in August 2016 states that the rezoning proposals have merit ‘if they are consistent with relevant district, corridor or precinct plans applying to the site, including any draft regional, district or corridor plans released for public comment.’
It seems that the Greater Sydney Commission Planning Panels are not following this guide.
Boosting Sydney’s housing supply is absolutely critical if we are to alleviate the housing affordability crisis.
It is an excellent time to fast-track planning proposals for new housing around proposed metro rail stations.
Chris Johnson is chief executive officer of property development industry group Urban Taskforce and can be contacted <a href="https://www.urbantaskforce.com.au/index.php?option=com_content&amp;view=article&amp;id=97&amp;Itemid=126#.Vdaart55dFI" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Urban renewal process around Sydney Metro taking far too long: Urban Taskforce

<html><body>
EXPERT OBSERVER

Urban Taskforce chief executive Tom Forrest has welcomed the National Housing Finance and Investment Corporation (NHFIC) first flagship report producing five-year projections for housing supply and demand across Australia’s major cities and regional areas.

The report identifies some tough choices for politicians.

The Report identifies some short-term affordability improvements for renters and prospective first home buyers as a consequence of lower population growth coupled with COVID-19 stimulus measures.

However, the report also warns that affordability could deteriorate if supply is not responsive to the rebound in demand once migration returns to earlier levels.  This is the biggest risk for the NSW economy and it falls at the feet of the Planning Department.  This is our dilemma. NSW Planning has responded well to COVID – but as 2020 closes it is yet to progress any significant planning reform and many within it would prefer less housing supply, not more.

Housing supply and population growth through migration cannot be seen as an either/or policy choice. We need both and our political leaders should be capable of developing a policy package which supports both. 

The challenge for Sydney’s economic growth is migration. Sydney’s migration levels must return to pre-COVID-19 levels and above to keep the economy moving and generating the tax receipts that we need to pay for the care of the aging population (the baby boomers) many of whom do not have large superannuation balances.

Simply halting the decline in tax-payers as a proportion of the total population requires migration.

Our economic future, and that of hundreds of thousands of workers in the property and construction sector, depend on population growth. Population growth drives economic growth. 

Without significant migration numbers, the ageing of our population (the baby-boomer phenomenon) will leave us with a lower and lower taxpayer base trying to support a bigger and bigger tax bill.

Governments need to re-open borders to investor immigration, skilled immigration, and the return of foreign students; WHILE still supporting a pipeline of housing supply.

The NHFIC report finds the longer term trends of declining affordability are likely to persist, particularly if supply is not responsive to demand when it recovers.

Housing supply also needs to be dramatically increased to create downward pressure on prices. This will mean some tough decisions for Minister Stokes and the Department of Planning.  The local character of suburbs will need to change – or they will change by themselves – as a result of the progressive decay of the city arising from the decline in the economy.
</body></html>

Politicians must “chew gum” and “skip rope”: Urban Taskforce's Tom Forrest

<html><body>
EXPERT OBSERVATION
Despite a pre-election anti-development environment in Sydney there are many quality examples of urban renewal with-in Sydney as well as Singapore, London and New York. Local politicians should learn from these projects.
The Creating Communities Conference attended by over 300 people last Friday demonstrated many examples of how to create quality development that give a positive rebuttal to the anti-development rhetoric that is occurring in the lead up to next year's NSW election.
It was very timely to see so many excellent urban developments from around the world to remind us in Sydney that growth and new developments can add excitement and positive new places for communities to live, work and relax.
Gordon Adams, the Head of Planning at the Battersea Power Station Development Company, explained the importance of political leadership to drive this massive urban renewal project in London. The projects size was large enough to get the London Underground's Northern Line extended to the site and this has generated a ripple effect of urban renewal in the surrounding areas.
Ultimately Battersea (pictured above) will have 3,500 apartments, 15,000 jobs including the biggest Apple office in the UK, parks, child care, restaurants and community facilities.
The combination on metro rail, a centre for jobs and a large number of new homes has created a new city within a city.
Marianne Kwok, Design Director, Kohn Pedersen Fox in New York was the key master planner for that cities major urban renewal project at Hudson Yards over underused railway yards. A new station was added to the New York subway and the famous elevated pedestrian network of the High Line weaves through the site and the buildings.
<img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2018/10/17/Hudson.JPG" alt="">
Hudson Yards (pictured above) will have 4,000 new homes, 1 million square feet of office space, three new parks, child care, shops and restaurants and some amazing public art works.
Rahul Mittal, Director Design, Cistri Singapore gave a detailed overview of how similar Singapore was to Sydney in population terms but that Singapore was much denser but still very liveable.
He positioned Singapore as an example of how the balancing of new development with an extensive metro rail network and a strong greening policy can lead to positive results.
The mood at the Creating Communities Conference was very upbeat about how quality new development can add value to the residents and workers in new precincts and how a level of excitement can occur with new stimulating developments.
A number of emerging Sydney urban renewal projects were presented that matched the quality of the international examples.
Dominic Sullivan outlined the rationale behind PAYCE's Melrose Park proposed development, Neil Arckless from Lendlease presented the mixed use precinct of Darling Square. Sasha Kovic and Scott Clohessy from Frasers Property outlined the concept behind the Ivanhoe project that will house social, affordable and market housing as well as a new school and parklands.
The greenfield housing development at Willowdale was presented by Stockland's Sophie Pickett-Heaps along with Stockland's focus on building communities. Toga's Fabrizio Perilli gave an excellent outline of his Surry Hills Village project that carried the laneway culture of the suburb into this new development.
With a multitude of quality urban renewal projects presented from different world cities and from different parts of Sydney there is no doubt that the development industry is making a very positive contribution to the future of urban living.
The current negative debate about over development in Sydney needs to be balanced by the very positive examples of how other cities have passed through this growth phase and by the emerging examples of quality development across Sydney.
The Urban Taskforce calls on all politicians in the lead up to the NSW election next March to take a positive approach to quality new development rather than encouraging the fear of change in their electorates that will create an ant-development attitude to garner short term votes.
Sydney needs politicians that are committed to the long term future of Sydney for future generations. 
Chris Johnson is the Urban Taskforce CEO
</body></html>

cjohnson-8xfqfuuCSq

Political leaders must learn from quality urban renewal projects: Chris Johnson

<html><body>
EXPERT OBSERVER
The latest data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics indicates a sharp drop in apartment approvals in NSW and Victoria.
The overall housing approval figures are falling in NSW and Victoria with the major falls being in the apartment market.
House approvals in NSW have dropped from 2,504 based on trends in March 2018 to 2,336 in August 2018 while house approvals in the smaller state of Victoria were more robust at 3,174 in August 2018.
It is the apartment market where approvals are falling fastest with NSW having 3,764 in September 2017 but this has fallen to 3,041 in August 2018. The Victorian apartment approvals have fallen even further from a high of 3,542 in December 2017 to less than half of this in August 2018 at 1,642 approvals.
It appears that confidence in the apartment market in both Melbourne and Sydney is slowing rapidly with many developers indicating that presales are much less than a year ago.
The Urban Taskforce urges governments to develop policies that support new housing supply as population growth targets have not changed. The pre- election environment in NSW has led to back downs on a number of planning policies including the ‘Missing Middle’ code, the Sydenham to Bankstown Planned Precincts and planning proposals in Ryde.
The concerns by some community groups about the extent of new development in Sydney seems to have led to a move away from housing supply targets and this is lowering confidence in the development industry.
Chris Johnson is the Urban Taskforce CEO
</body></html>

Urban Taskforce

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Urban Taskforce

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News