Australian cities could be on the brink of a housing revolution, with a bold new report suggesting a simple zoning rule change could slash home prices by a staggering $100,000 in just 10 years. But is this too good to be true, or a much-needed solution to the country's housing crisis?
The Grattan Institute's report proposes a dramatic shift in Australia's capital cities: allowing three-storey townhouses and apartments to be built on all residential land. This, they argue, could be the key to unlocking affordable housing for many, especially younger generations.
But here's where it gets controversial: the report calls for an end to 'nimby-ism', a term that refers to residents opposing new developments in their neighborhoods. It suggests that Australians are open to apartment and townhouse living, but current zoning restrictions are hindering this preference.
Brendan Coates, a director at the Grattan Institute, emphasizes the need for denser cities, stating that Australia has long failed to build enough homes in desirable locations. This has led to a crisis that affects families and young people's prospects.
And this is the part most people miss: the report highlights the success of relaxed planning controls in Auckland, New Zealand, where easing zoning restrictions led to more and cheaper housing. Could this be the model Australia needs?
Grattan's modeling predicts that their proposed reforms could significantly increase housing construction, with up to 67,000 additional homes built annually. This boost in supply could lower rents and reduce the median home price by over $100,000 in a decade.
However, the challenge lies in current restrictions. In Sydney, 80% of residential land within 30km of the city center is limited to three storeys or fewer, and Melbourne faces similar constraints. This has resulted in Australian cities being among the least densely populated globally.
The report suggests that if Sydney and Melbourne were as dense as Toronto and Los Angeles, respectively, they could gain hundreds of thousands of well-located homes. Michael Fotheringham, an urban research expert, supports this, stating that increased density is economically beneficial and can support essential workers.
Recent reforms in Victoria, led by Premier Jacinta Allan, have curbed objection rights to new building projects, a step towards overcoming 'nimby-ism'. But is this enough?
Coates believes that while these changes are positive, they don't go far enough. He suggests upzoning land around transport hubs for higher-density living and reviewing heritage protections. Additionally, streamlining planning processes could expedite the construction of much-needed homes.
What do you think? Is this the solution to Australia's housing woes, or are there other factors at play? Should residents embrace denser neighborhoods, or are there valid concerns being overlooked?
