“Development priorities are too often determined by opinion not evidence. The approach has led to misplaced priorities and the community not receiving the best value from limited infrastructure funds,” writes planning columnist MIKE QUIRK.

The recently released Housing Supply and Land Release Program outlines land releases to support the development of 26,000 new homes.

Eleven per cent of dwellings identified for release are single dwellings. Forty per cent of the proposed releases are government infill, 27 per cent private sector infill and 33 per cent are in greenfield areas. 

The 2026-27 to 2030-31program, prepared in the context of the 2018 Planning Strategy, is a continuation of compact city policies in operation since the 1990s, aimed at increasing housing choice and supply in existing suburbs and reducing travel, environmental and infrastructure costs. 

While the compact city is the appropriate strategic direction, there has been little assessment of the level of benefit it is delivering. Recent refinements, including the increased infill target of 70 per cent and the limiting of detached dwellings to around 10 per cent of land releases, have not been justified.

Consequently, the program is on a shaky foundation. 

Land for detached dwellings: The 2018 Planning Strategy did not comprehensively assess the suitability of potential greenfield areas for residential settlement. It is unclear why Kowen, in particular, was dismissed as a potential area. Indicative assessments in the early 2000s found it was relatively expensive to service, but it had few environmental constraints and was close to the city. 

The restriction in the supply of land for detached dwellings was introduced without reference to housing preferences. Its undersupply is reflected in the relative increase in prices of detached houses and unit prices across Canberra.

Since 2011 the median price of houses increased from $552,000 to $985,000 while unit prices increased from $405,000 to $600,000. 

The restriction in the supply has led to increased car-dependent development in surrounding NSW. If the development had occurred in the ACT, households would have had better access to public transport and the ACT would have received greater land sales and rates revenue, albeit while incurring higher infrastructure costs. No analysis has been undertaken of the net environmental, financial and social sustainability of the constraint of detached housing supply in the ACT.

Infrastructure priorities: Will there be sufficient resources available to develop the level of housing required? The ACT will be competing with other cities, including the Olympic city Brisbane, for resources. In this resource-limited future, the uber-expensive light rail stage 2B is unlikely to be a sensible choice given there is as effective and less resource-intensive electric bus technology available and the increased ability to work at non-central locations. The development of light rail Stages 1 and 2A was an odd priority given its cost and the major undersupply of public housing. 

Policy review: Development priorities are too often determined by opinion not evidence. The approach has led to misplaced priorities and the community not receiving the best value from limited infrastructure funds. 

Long overdue is the program’s commitment to increase the provision of social housing to 13,200 dwellings by 2030, up from 11,996 dwellings currently.

The supply of social housing has not kept pace with population growth. The ACT population increased by 120,000 between 2012 and 2026 while the social housing stock increased by about 1000. There was a sale of 1288 government housing properties along Northbourne Avenue to help fund the light rail.

The major government infill releases are at the town centres, the Acton waterfront, north Curtin, Hume Circle, East Lake and north Weston.

The government’s reforms to facilitate infill, which include stamp duty and lease-variation concessions, allowing subdivision and unit titling in lower-density zones, the streamlining of approvals processes, will be assisted by capital gains tax changes, limiting the concessions to new, multi-dwelling developments.

While the initiatives will enable the possible development of thousands of new homes, the market and community acceptability (there were widespread objections to dual occupancy development in the early 2000s) will determine the actual level of development.

High interest rates, labour and material shortages have contributed to housing targets not being met. For example, the Suburban Land Authority in 2022-23 and 2024-25 did not meet its targets for land release or revenue. 

There is an urgent need to better understand and manage demographic, technological, social and environmental changes. These changes influence the demand for housing, transport, health, education, commercial and recreation facilities. 

The government, prodded by the Assembly if necessary, should instigate a transparent and independent review of the city’s planning and associated infrastructure plans.

Are our politicians capable of placing the future development of our city on a sound foundation?

Mike Quirk is a former NCDC and ACT government planner.

News all day, every day at CityNewsQBN.com.au.