Questionable ‘heritage’ items are blocking higher density housing
A group of YIMBYs in Ku-ring-gai is fighting for a more “nuanced” approach to heritage listings.
NSW
Don't miss out on the headlines from NSW. Followed categories will be added to My News.
A termite-infested potting shed in Gordon is among the “local heritage items” which could torpedo the Minns government’s signature housing policy.
In the NIMBY council of Ku-ring-gai a group of pro-development YIMBYs are now speaking out, highlighting the homes which are set to be stranded between higher density housing, like the Seattle house which inspired the 2006 Pixar film Up.
While the Minns government’s Transport Oriented Development (TOD) policy will allow higher density housing around transport hubs, items listed on local heritage registers cannot be touched.
This was designed to protect heritage items and allay local concerns, but the value of some “local heritage items” is now being called into question.
The group of pro-development Ku-ring-gai residents recently wrote to Urban Taskforce to highlight “erroneous heritage listings” which are standing in the way of future housing.
The residents were too scared to be identified, fearing retribution from locals and further damage to the value of their properties amid increased TOD-driven development.
One resident of Gordon said that a heritage-listed potting shed at the back of their 2,400 square metre property could prevent them developing their land.
“At the time of purchase the shed was already in a dilapidated state of repair and
had substantial termite damage and wood rot,” the resident said.
“Presently, it is in worse condition because some of the timbers have torn the wall surfaces.”
“Presently, it is in worse condition because some of the timbers have torn the wall surfaces.”
The shed created uncertainty about whether or not the property could be included in higher density developments.
The group has also raised concerns about properties which have been “incorrectly classified as having heritage significance”.
Owners are calling for “low value heritage homes” to be “delisted” so they can be developed.
They suggested a “nuanced” solution including erecting heritage “markers” on sites of local significance rather than preventing properties from being developed.
One resident said their heritage-listed property is “surrounded on all sides by TOD zoned land”.
They said that since the planning reforms were announced, 12 of 18 houses in their street have started the process of being sold off to developers.
The owners fear being left stranded between high density housing.
“For us as it stands, we’re hurtling towards isolation, diminished property value and loss of privacy and amenity,” they said.
“This is the worst possible planning outcome for all parties, and satisfies nobody.
“We believe that including Heritage items in the TOD is the best way to improve outcomes for heritage owners and TOD stakeholders.”
In a statement, Planning Minister Paul Scully said the majority of properties captured by the higher-density planning reforms are not subject to heritage listings.
He said projections of 170,000 new homes being created within TOD area takes into account heritage zoning.
However, he said warned councils not to “use heritage to avoid their responsibility to increase housing supply”.
“If they want to protect one area for its character, then they must find another location in their council area to meet their housing target,” Mr Scully said.
Ku-ring-gai council is trying to fight the government’s Transport Oriented Development (TOD) policy in court.
The council has proposed building 45-storey apartment blocks around Gordon station to meet housing targets while keeping surrounding suburbs untouched.
The content summaries were created with the assistance of AI technology, then edited and approved for publication by an editor.