Introduction

1. The spatial, social and market ambiguities of housing densification in SEQ’s TOD’s Mike GillenSchool of Geography Planning and ArchitectureUniversity of QueenslandE: m.gillen@uq.edu.au

2. Introduction Australian cities are currently undergoing demographic and development pressures that will continue to have a major impact on their urban forms for the next 30 years. The drive towards sustainability has resulted in a reorientation of spatial policies towards a more even balance between greenfield and urban infill development. Recently released Australian metro-regional strategies share common themes in the desire for containment, integration and densification, specifically in targeted areas. In SEQ’s regional plan a requirement that up to 50% of future residential development will occur on infill sites over the next 20 years poses a significant challenge. Are such figures actually realisable or are they highly ambiguous? What level of research has been undertaken to support such targets? Key concerns include: Is there spare physical (land and infrastructure) capacity for increased densification? Are sites identified as having physical capacity economically viable? What social impact will densification have in identified target areas? What spatial governance modifications are necessary to realise extra capacity?

5. New Challenges and New Tools The scale and scope of the change and the need to direct development to the most suitable locations in the SEQ region demand new policy considerations. Current tools tend to be based on simple density multiplier mechanisms. These are often a summation of total area of land identified as suitable for development multiplied by housing density ratios to arrive at housing figures. A qualitative understanding of the appropriateness of the sites selected for development and the possible range of constraints and impacts are often absent. New tools that demand significant changes to the existing urban form will require a high degree of public scrutiny and input via transparent and democratic processes. The history of state and local government proposals for increased housing densities in SEQ (but particularly in Brisbane) is however littered with public opposition, emotional arguments and often failure: 1990s Soorley’s ‘Sardine City’ strategy for Brisbane’s inner suburbs 2002 City Plan amendments to increase densities in Holland Park West

6. The Urban Housing Capacity Template • A need exists to improve the channels for meaningful community input and education about the scope and impact of densification if the preferred urban form of the SEQ regional plan is to be both supported and attained. • During 2006 the School of GPA developed and piloted an UHCT on behalf of the Queensland Government’s Office of Urban Management to assess the capacity of transit based activity centres for increased residential development. • The study adopted a set of both quantitative and qualitative procedures that follow 4 basic steps in the assessment of urban housing densification in targeted localities and included: • identification of both the survey approach and potential capacity sources • survey of the unconstrained capacity • assessment of the unconstrained capacity • qualification of unconstrained capacity to give an assessment of realisable capacity • By documenting the variety of assumptions and outcomes necessary in order to assess the feasibility of increased urban housing densities, the UHCT offered insights to possible limits to growth in SEQ and suitable policy responses.

7. Locations under scrutiny in the UHCT

8. Capacity Study Key Stages The UHCT focuses on identifying land/buildings that can be more efficiently used. A priority area survey was undertaken, examining each and every site within a 400m radius of a public transit locus. The focus of the case studies was on redevelopment opportunities, in the belief that these offer the greatest scope for increasing residential densities. The types of redevelopment opportunities assessed include redevelopment of existing land uses, redevelopment of car parks and previously-developed land and buildings. Survey Purpose here is to identify sites which offer unconstrained potential. This includes sites that may be recognised as possessing some form of constraint; thereby ensuring potential is not missed through early decisions to exclude. The basis of the criteria for inclusion includes evidence that a site is underused, inappropriate in its current use and/or reasonably expected to be targeted. The processes for identifying such criteria include a desk based survey and a ground truthing survey, followed by a sieve analysis of the rich data sets to identify potential.

10. Table 2: Survey results Coorparoo Indooroopilly Darra

11. Assessment Here the purpose was to explore the possibility to develop the opportunities more efficiently. A range of scenarios were subsequently assessed based upon the regional plan requirements for TOD’s. These density scenarios are compared to what can currently be achieved under BCC’s City Plan regulations. Table 3: Unconstrained capacity at a range of densities for the case study localities.

13. Qualification Any assessment of capacity needs to avoid a mere recording of unconstrained capacity and thus develop a robust discounting evaluation. Factors which might limit the realization of the unconstrained capacity within the time horizon need to be identified. Discounting is an inherently judgmental process and thus it is important it takes place only once the unconstrained capacity has been identified. At this stage informed qualitative judgments on those issues which may challenge the delivery of increased densities were provided by a range of stakeholders. Issues of infrastructure capability and provision, planning instrument flexibility, developer contributions, amenity provision, market viability and timing were considered in order to assess possible constraints. Attention was specifically drawn to: the fragmented nature of opportunities, size of sites, multiple ownerships and difficulties of parcelling up of allotments. Anecdotal evidence also suggests that there is limited appreciation of such constraints factored into metropolitan and local housing targets.

14. Realisable capacity includes those sites with a probable or marginal development potential, with a time frame of both 2006-2011 and 2011-16. Table 4: Net realisable capacity.

15. Spatial governance modifications Overcoming the variety of constraints can be undertaken in a multitude of different ways, ranging from piecemeal planning and infrastructure actions to the employment of special purpose statutory agencies. An alternative mechanism which might occur under the conventional governance and market arrangements includes a place focused approach. Effectively, this would involve a customised or specialised zoning framework with the development of new development codes. Market Ambiguities The continuing preference in SEQ for separate dwellings continues to have a major influence on urban structure and form. The higher risks associated with overcoming the variable constraints of infill sites and lower profit margin potential are a significant market discouragement. Lack of opportunities for land speculation, cost of retrofitting and necessity for new types of market product make infill development a second preference. Retrofitting existing urban areas is a highly complex challenge. Beyond fixed assets of buildings and infrastructure; fixed attitudes tend to persist amongst host communities. More often than not these attitudes tend to be firmly rooted in NIMBYism and make developing at higher densities, on smaller, infill parcels difficult.

16. Social Implications The size of the dwelling product in infill development tends to exclude families. The market seems to be catering for an affluent, mobile demographic. Housing affordability is NOT being assisted by densification. The jury is still out on the public transport argument. Social sustainability and social cohesion is hardly been fostered where there is little opportunity for children, high buy in rates and a high turnover of apartment dwellers. Conclusions Product, Process and Implications The UHCT provides a ‘snapshot’ of the potential and availability of housing sites and opportunities will change over time. It is recognised that the UHCT will need to be regularly monitored and updated. The UHCT should be used to inform the LGMS and assist the development and review of future housing provision and hence should be reviewed as frequently as the LGMS. It will be necessary to keep under review the assumptions used in any UHCT as they may need to be changed in light of urban development transformations and the emergence of new opportunities.