A COMMITTEE FOR SYDNEY

DISCUSSION PAPER | SEPTEMBER 2016

 On current trends, Sydney’s population will future must have a world class public
transport network to underpin economic
double in size in just over 40 years. We will be a dynamism, we know fundamentally
city of 8 million, the same as London is today. that great urban design and integrated
planning are in the DNA of the best cities.
Crucially, we believe that a credible and
deep commitment to great placemaking
is vital if those who embrace Sydney’s
growth are to enjoy what might be called
a social licence to operate. We have to
The key question is: where and how will Beijing or Bangalore. The key choice show to Sydneysiders that the future is
Sydney’s inhabitants live? Will we live in for Sydney is thus between good and about quality and not just quantity, and
a city that’s 40% of London’s density and bad urban density. The challenge for the public benefits which can flow from
maintain Sydney’s sprawl model? Or will Sydney is not about whether to densify ‘density done well’ if we are to secure
we take another path that is essentially but how. This should not be a cause for deeper community support for growth.
more ‘up’ – higher density living – than anxiety, and indeed we shouldn’t take
For, despite the growing body of
‘out’? Can we, at the same time, make a fatalist view of population growth.
evidence that points to improved
Sydney a city where we all live in ‘Density done well’ means that in
productivity and sustainability, there has
great places? growing our population significantly
been voluble public resistance from an
over the next generation, we can make
On the basis of its own research and activist minority and political reticence
Sydney a city of great places.
the evidence from other global cities, to increasing urban density across
the Committee for Sydney takes the There is a tendency in some quarters metropolitan Sydney and particularly
view that in future decades Sydney will to marginalise urban design and in areas of high housing demand. The
have no choice but to densify. Indeed placemaking as ‘nice-to haves’. This planning reform attempted by the NSW
every city we have reviewed is either is not the Committee view. Although Government in 2012-14 in great part
in the process of intensifying and the Committee believes that transport foundered on concerns about the threat
agglomerating or planning to do so: this infrastructure is a key cityshaper and of increased density development.
is as true of Dallas or Denver as it is of that the successful Sydney of the

1 MAKING GREAT PLACES: DENSITY DONE WELL

This is despite the fact that Sydney principle so clear, why is there strong development either hasn’t been up
is experiencing a phase in its opposition to it in Sydney? In asking to scratch in design quality or hasn’t
development where the two largest this question the Committee does not delivered the community benefits and
demographic cohorts in history – the assume the opposition is groundless. enhanced amenity upon which it was
‘Baby Boomers’ and ‘Gen Y’ – are While some oppose all development promoted. In particular, in many cases
embracing denser, better connected, whatever its design, excellence or population has increased without
more mixed-use city environments in need, often on grounds of perceived any of the enabling infrastructure
which to live and enjoy life; whether threat to property values or their own promised to help manage the growth.
these are infill developments close to amenity, the discussion cannot proceed That is to say that the private sector
CBDs or in the more walkable suburbs. on the basis that all such opposition can design and build a beautiful
A process is underway where residents is irrational. Unfortunately, there has development that conforms fully and
are seeking not just the revitalisation often been a dialogue of the deaf imaginatively with the requirements of
of city centres but also more urbanised between promoters of higher density SEPP 65 – which has raised the quality
suburbs as increasingly people want to development and those who oppose of development in NSW in comparison
get to stores, cafes, community services it in a local community – or where within other states – but the place-
and work by public transport, cycling effective communication occurs, it making around the development falls
and walking. The social and economic only occurs in response to specific short of ‘density done well’. The roads
momentum away from sprawl model – development applications, rather outside the building might be jammed
an international phenomenon reflecting than broader city shaping. If we are with traffic and hostile to pedestrians
new cultural values, smaller families, to get the housing our communities while public transport links are distant.
the greater amenity and convenience and our economy need in the places Provision of schools and GPs often
of higher density urban living and in Sydney in which we need to locate fall way short of demand. Indeed, the
the job opportunities offered by the them – close to jobs, transport and Greater Sydney Commission has been
deeper labour market it enables– is also services and the mix of uses which formed to achieve cross government
strongly supported by the professional make places attractive to residents – coordination of the ‘placemaking’
consensus of architects, planners and we need to take seriously the concerns elements of density. This historical
urban designers. And this is where of the ‘antis’. We can start by being lack of coordination is at the heart of
the Committee for Sydney asks: if the honest that some of what has been legitimate community discontent about
attractions of higher density are in built in the name of higher density higher density.

Photo: Frasers Property

COMMITTEE FOR SYDNEY DISCUSSION PAPER 2

 Because we recognise this, the
Committee, which has in membership
diverse organisations from across the In taking
public, private and not for profit sectors, this initiative,
has decided to find the best examples
of higher density development whether the Committee
in Sydney, Australia or internationally, is confident that
so as to learn best practice and how to
achieve optimal results in our city. We
the skills and
accept a basic proposition: density can commitment exist
and must be done better. So we need to locally to deliver
understand the conditions of success in
great placemaking and higher density ‘density done well’
development to ensure Sydney learns in Sydney
from the best, flourishes as it grows – and
becomes the high quality exemplar for
other cities. Of course, our research will
not be confined to buildings, as high
quality density development also means
we must plan for high quality public
all. He knows that good urban design
realm (the space between buildings)
and deep collaborations are what makes
for best in class infrastructure provision
great cities. This is why he has played a
and transport connectivity. This is about
formative role in creating a body with the
successful placemaking after all.
very purpose of bringing government
And as we believe that engagement with departments together to plan and deliver
the public is vital if we are to attain the a Sydney with great placemaking and
best development, our initiative will also enhanced resilience at its heart. We
be finding out what people opposed to believe the Greater Sydney Commission,
dense development don’t like about it which the Committee played its part in
but also what people already living in it initiating, is a game changer in ensuring
do like about it. In taking this initiative, that we have the integrated land use
the Committee is confident that the and transport strategy approach to
skills and commitment exist locally to urban transformation and placemaking Photo: City of Sydney
deliver ‘density done well’ in Sydney. The values without which a high quality
Committee itself has in membership and inclusive environment for a city
world class companies working in the of 8 million simply cannot be realised.
And with the Federal Government now Clearly, a 20 page document cannot
built environment whether they be
identifying the liveability and accessibility claim to identify all the conditions
planners, urban designers, architects,
of Australian cities as central to their of success in achieving ‘density
engineers, developers or builders. At the
productivity in a knowledge economy done well’. It is intended to promote
same time we have in membership, or
– in which talent can chose to live and debate and provoke others who are
are aligned with, public sector partners
work where it likes and is concentrating similarly passionate and even more
in local councils and state government
in places where density is indeed knowledgeable, to make their own
agencies who are passionate about the
being done well – we have the exciting contribution. To this end, the Paper forms
quality of the city we are building and
prospect of all tiers of government part of a wider initiative and program
deeply experienced at achieving the best
agreeing on the centrality of great which will involve a range of Committee
results in partnership with the private
placemaking to the success of our cities members, stakeholders and indeed, we
and not for profit sectors.
going forward. hope, the public, to bring their ideas
And of course, we have a Planning to the table and how we make Sydney
Minister who is deeply committed to What is required now is to provide some greater still – and a city in which the
ensuring not just that Sydneysiders have key insights, tools and exemplars for benefits of ‘density done well’ are shared
the homes they need but that in doing turning these shared aspirations into by all.
so we create great places. His goal is not transformation on the ground. The
just quantity but quality so that as the Committee’s ‘density done well’ initiative
city grows so do the amenity, lifestyle, is intended as a contribution to the toolkit
leisure and economic opportunities for and initiatives required.

3 MAKING GREAT PLACES: DENSITY DONE WELL

Photo: LendLease

WHAT IS THE some of the reasons why density

done well is resisted and often either
Much is still to be written, and this
is simply the first foray into the
PURPOSE OF opposed by community or blocked by conversation. This requires you, our
THIS DISCUSSION public and private sector challenges.
However, we have only scratched the
members and stakeholders, to engage.
To encourage this, we hope you will find
PAPER? surface and unlike a typical Committee some aspects of this paper provocative,
for Sydney report, there is a distinct others just common sense, and some
We have produced this paper as a lack of recommendations or policy ‘not quite right’. That is as it should
conversation starter. It does not contain proposals. Some of those topics to be be – and we want to hear from you.
all, or indeed most, of the answers to considered include: What have we missed, what have we
this challenge. We intend this to be a got wrong, and where is further detail
launching point for further discussion, •• How the community considers
density, and enhancing the public required? Your reflections are central to
findings and reports. We will collect all our evolving work on density done well.
our findings for publication following this conversation
process, but will continually update and •• What role planning controls play in So write a report, record a podcast, send
reflect back to you our thinking as we go. achieving density done well us an email or a furiously scrawled note –
•• How density done well can achieve we want your thoughts!
What this paper does is collect some lower development costs and/or
initial thoughts on what good density higher sale prices
looks like, and why density done well •• How we can increase the viability
is vital for Sydney. We also consider of mixed-use development through
collaboration and knowledge sharing

COMMITTEE FOR SYDNEY DISCUSSION PAPER 4

 WHY DENSITY MATTERS

Sydney sits at a crossroads.

AMENITY INCREASES AS DENSITY INCREASES
Over the next forty years we will have to accommodate the
Density done well means that we accommodate more
same number of people as we had to accommodate over the
people and homes in the space that we have, while at
past two hundred plus years.
the same time improving liveability. As the images below
show, the benefit of higher densities is that they allow us We took over two centuries to build the Sydney of four million
to create communities where more amenities of a more people. It took two centuries to build all the trains, houses,
specialised nature are within close access to our homes. harbour bridges and skyscrapers we have now. We have only
Higher densities can also sustain better transport forty years to build the equivalent again. Sydney will be a city
connectivity and high quality public spaces. of over eight million people in our lifetime – a city the size of
London today. How we accommodate this growth is both a
great challenge and a great opportunity. If we get it right we
can preserve all the things we value about our city now, while
still ensuring a decent home and job opportunities for all our
fellow citizens. If we get it wrong we could ruin one of the
world’s great cities. One thing is for sure, we can’t manage this
growth in the same way we have in the past.
Until recently, we’ve been able to accommodate population
growth by simply adding new suburbs next to existing
urban areas. Pre-WW2, much of the development of Sydney
was in compact, walkable and dense neighbourhoods,
however from 1950 to 2000 Sydney spread horizontally.
Suburbs rolled across the landscape to the foothills of the
Blue Mountains, South beyond Macarthur and North West
to Richmond. The result is a very low density city, with a
sprawling, car-dependent, population. But we have reached
the limit of how far we can sprawl.

LOW-MEDIUM DENSITY
•• Education: A public school in the suburb
•• Health: A Local GP
•• Transport: Primarily car, with some bus access
•• Open space: Primarily private
•• Employment: Some main street retail and small business offices

MEDIUM DENSITY HIGH DENSITY

•• Education: Multiple schools and childcare within the local area •• Education: Multiple schools and higher education within the local area
•• Health: Hospital locally accessible •• Health: Specialist medical care locally accessible
•• Transport: Bus or light rail and cycling, with some walking •• Transport: Integrated public transport with high cycling and
•• Open space: Mostly consolidated communal green space walking use
•• Employment: Ground floor commercial, co-working areas and retail •• Open space: Communal, hard and soft with high quality amenities
•• Employment: Business hub with global reach and supporting services
Source: Arup and Grimshaw Architects

5 MAKING GREAT PLACES: DENSITY DONE WELL

Quite simply, we’re out of new land to put houses on. If we active populations. Transport planners tell us that only high
are going to house our population and give them a place to density neighbourhoods can support public transport and
work and play, we need to start using our finite land far more travel options like cycling and walking. Environmentalists
efficiently and effectively. In short we need to increase our city’s will tell you that higher density neighbourhoods use less
density. We need to go up, because we can’t keep going out. energy, produce less greenhouse gases and help protect our
And that is what successive Governments have been pursuing precious biodiversity. Economists tell us that high density
over the last two decades. Identifying places within our existing neighbourhoods are more productive, creative, and efficient.
urban areas which can accommodate new residential and Government bureaucrats will tell you that it’s cheaper to
commercial development so we can have people and jobs closer provide the necessary services and infrastructure. That our tax
to one another. dollars go further. Most importantly, behavioural psychologists
tell us that we instinctively like high density, ‘people’ places.
This program is backed by evidence. Most academics from
That we are essentially social animals and we crave places with
across a range of disciplines tell us that urban consolidation
lots of other people. That we like to see people, and be seen.
is a good thing. That the benefits of having a more compact
And, of course, if you take a moment to think of examples of
city provides a number of public goods. Health experts tell
urban places you love, invariably they are dense and vibrant
us that areas with higher density hold healthier and more
– great places are generally contingent on density to thrive.

HIGH DENSITY-PRICE CORRELATION

Many instinctively believe that people they behave as if it’s false. The price of Sydneysiders are choosing higher
don’t want to live in higher density of land is a good marker of collective density living and working, over
neighbourhoods and prefer the space preference and reveals the places the alternative. People with choice
and privacy of a large backyard. most people really prize. Places where are literally voting with their feet and
That dense neighbourhoods are too people want to live and work have their wallets for well-designed places
crowded and will result in ghettos, much higher land values than less which provide the economic, health
more crime and anti-social behaviour. desirable areas. Even a vague notion and social benefits of walkable higher
That there is insufficient infrastructure of Sydney’s property prices will tell density. The challenge is to bring
to support the extra people and you that high density suburbs are these benefits to more of Sydney
traffic and congestion will worsen. more expensive then low density ones. – and in ways which reinforce the
No doubt many people consciously Much more. The fact is, that when identity and uniqueness of places
think this is true, but unconsciously given the choice, increasing numbers rather uniformity.

THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT TREND LINKING HIGHER DENSITY WITH HIGHER LAND VALUES IN SYDNEY
VALUE OF DENSITY
160

140

ULTIMO
120
Persons per square hectare

BONDI
REDFERN
100

80 HURSTVILLE
NEUTRAL BAY
WILEY PARK
CAMPSIE BALMAIN
60 PADDINGTON
ERSKINEVILLE
DRUMMOYNE RANDWICK
BANKSTOWN BELLEVUE HILL
MARRICKVILLE
40 LIVERPOOL DOVER HEIGHTS
MOSMAN
MANLY
20

0
$- $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 $4,000 $5,000 $6,000 $7,000 $8,000

Unimproved land value per square metre

Source: NSW Valuer General and profile.id

COMMITTEE FOR SYDNEY DISCUSSION PAPER 6

 WHAT DO WE MEAN
BY “DENSITY”?
Urban Density is a term that refers to has an average density of 390
the relationship between a physical persons per square kilometre.
area and the number of people who This compares with;
live in or make use of that area. • Greater Vancouver at 802/km2
Densification often goes under a
• Greater London at 5,510/km2
number of pseudonyms, (including
Compact City, Intensification, • Singapore at 7,697/km2
Agglomeration, Re-urbanisation and Yet it is often not just residential
Urban Consolidation) all of which population that can determine urban
refer to much the same thing. density. Sydney CBD has just 7,683
It is often expressed as a ratio residents per km2 but over 610,000
of population size or number workers and visitors to the area every
of residential units’ in a square day. Other infrastructure, such as
kilometre. For example the airports and universities can also
Sydney Greater Metropolitan Area drive an agglomeration of people.

ALL TYPES OF DENSITY, DONE WELL

There is a common misconception of For many areas of Sydney, high density The reality is that density done well has
density – that proponents of density is neither desired nor required. However, implications for all locations and forms of
only mean high-rise towers, and that we can achieve modest increases development – from green-field to brown-
they intend to place them across the in density to better accommodate field, from major site to single blocks.
entirety of Sydney’s 12,000+ km2. To be the population increases our city
There is a final misconception that
clear: from the Committee for Sydney’s will experience over the coming
must be addressed: that density and
perspective, density done well doesn’t decades. This need not be a painful
height produce poorer public spaces.
mean high density towers in every process – where density is done well,
That doesn’t have to be the case. As
suburb across Sydney, although high the whole community benefits from
the images below demonstrate, well-
density is appropriate in many locations improved places.
designed higher density configurations
of high public transport connectivity and
Similarly, there is a second can deliver not only more dwellings
good social infrastructure. In many cases,
misconception, especially in the but can also improve accessibility,
increased density may mean moving
community, that density is only permeability and open space
from detached homes to terraces, or
important for inner-city in-fill areas. across a site.
terraces to walk up flats.

WITH THE RIGHT CONFIGURATION, INCREASED DENSITY

CAN ALSO UNLOCK ADDITIONAL OPEN SPACE.

LOWER DENSITY MEDIUM DENSITY HIGH DENSITY

130 PEOPLE/HA – 50% OPEN SPACE 365 PEOPLE/HA – 55% OPEN SPACE 600 PEOPLE/HA – 58% OPEN SPACE

Source: Hassell Studio

7 MAKING GREAT PLACES: DENSITY DONE WELL

WHY IS IT SO This Discussion
OPPOSED? Paper seeks to
challenge all of
If we are increasingly voting with our cited by most people who oppose urban us to rethink
wallets to buy homes in higher density, consolidation. That is that the places
better connected neighbourhoods we have been building in recent years, the way urban
and the experts say this is good for the way we’ve been increasing density, consolidation is
us, why then is there such community haven’t lived up to the great promises of
resistance to further consolidation? The the proponents. That we haven’t been
being implemented.
answer to this is complex and varies doing density well. People look at much
from person to person. Some people of what has been built in recent years
just don’t want change, any change. and don’t like it. As the NSW Minister for
Some have a genuine apprehension it Planning, the Hon. Rob Stokes MP, notes
will impact on their lifestyle or property “communities want development to give is being implemented. To identify some
values. Some believe that local services as well as take. Where they don’t feel that of the things we may be doing wrong
and infrastructure will be overwhelmed new development gives back anything and how we can do it better. Over
by too many people – that traffic will get to the community, it’s perhaps not 2016 we will outline some examples,
worse and trains more crowded. Some surprising that they oppose it.” both locally and internationally, to
have a vague collective memory of the demonstrate how urban density
We really need to do density better
high density, disease ridden slums of can deliver on its promise. We will
than we have been, and we can. This
a century ago. There are many, many also try and identify some changes
Discussion Paper seeks to challenge all of
reasons, some altruistic and some self- to our planning and governance
us to rethink the way urban consolidation
serving. But there is one common reason arrangements to ensure it does.

DENSITY DONE WELL

Before we do this, we must deal with But you don’t have to get on a plane to insisted upon by our Governments and
one of the biggest barriers stopping see beautiful or interesting places, we almost never included in our planning
us building better places and that is have plenty in Sydney. Think King Street, codes. When we think of those places
the myth that, when it comes to cities, Newtown, The Spot at Randwick, the and neighbourhoods, whether in Sydney
beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Too bustle of Haldon Street, Lakemba or the or overseas, that are truly interesting
many people believe that our taste in Manly Corso. We can all identify those and exciting place to visit, they all have
buildings and places is subjective, much places in Sydney that are beautiful and several keys features in common. The
like our taste in food and drink. Some interesting. They have something in their obvious commonality is that they are
people like white wine, some like red. DNA that makes them nice places to high density, mixed-use neighbourhoods
Some people have a sweet tooth, others visit and hang out in. And we generally or cities. But it is more than just being
don’t. We believe we all have different agree with each other on what places are high density that makes them great. We
tastes and therefore no one view or interesting. That’s why they’re often full of don’t fly half way around the world, or
opinion is better than another. So if you tourists. But we all know parts of Sydney even just across town, to see a crowd.
don’t like a new building or appreciate a that aren’t so lively and interesting. Places These places do density well. They
particular architectural effort, that’s just and neighbourhoods that aren’t full of aren’t just defined by the buildings in
because you have different tastes to life and don’t attract us (or anyone else) the precinct, so much as the spaces in-
the builder or architect. No one, many to visit. What is it that makes some parts between buildings. They share with each
believe, has the right to determine what of Sydney so interesting and other parts other certain features in common which
is beautiful and what is ugly. not? What attracts millions of tourists to make them interesting, even beautiful. It
Venice, Barcelona and New York? is these commonalities that make them
This seems logical, but is quite wrong.
place great urban places. Yet it is these
We do know a beautiful place from an There are some basic principles that
commonalities which we usually ignore
ugly one, and we generally share the same underpin these beautiful places and
in our planning policies.
view. Given the chance, we all take the rules on how to avoid ugly ones.
opportunity to visit those handful of cities These principles are not subjective, but
that are both beautiful and interesting. objective. They are not just in the eye
Cities like Paris, Venice, New York of the beholder, but are hard-wired into
and Barcelona. our psychology. Yet these rules are rarely

COMMITTEE FOR SYDNEY DISCUSSION PAPER 8

 COMMONALITY #1:
STREETS NOT ROADS;
PEOPLE NOT CARS

The first thing all these places have

in common is that they were all built
before the widespread use of the private
automobile. Whether it’s Glebe, Crows
Nest or Potts Point; Barcelona, Chicago
or New York, these places are inherently
pedestrian friendly. Without the car, they
had to be. It’s almost as if we haven’t built
a truly beautiful city or neighbourhood
in over a century. The Committee is not
suggesting that everyone in Sydney
will have to forgo owning a car or that
we all have to get on our bikes. But we
should rethink how much we emphasise
accommodating the private vehicle,
because the more we plan for cars, the Photo: Payce Consolidated
more our public spaces will need to be
given over to traffic. Our planners and
developers spend a lot of time, effort and
money on traffic studies, road widenings and there are few, if any, cul-de-sacs and can explore. The fine grain network of
and parking codes. But perhaps we are dead ends. The street pattern is critically streets and lanes of Venice, with 577
trying to manage traffic by regulating important because it is on the street intersections per square kilometre
the wrong things. Perhaps our efforts where the life of these places is played provides an accessible and pleasant
are undermining what we are trying to out, not in the residential or commercial environment for people to explore the
achieve: density done well. buildings which surround them. Having city on foot; but impossible to explore by
lots of intersections has a significant car. By contrast the large city blocks of
When we look at these pedestrian impact on how we choose to move Los Angeles, with only 58 intersections
friendly neighbourhoods we notice through the urban landscape. per square kilometre makes walking and
certain features about the way they cycling much less attractive. Sightseers in
planned the streets around the buildings. Intersections slow down vehicles,
LA do so from the back of a bus. Taken to
The places in between. The first thing is improving the amenity of the footpath.
extreme is Irving California which has
that the streets are almost universally in Having a grid pattern makes for an easily
only 6 intersections per square kilometre
a grid pattern, with lots of intersections, navigable place. You can walk around
making its residents and visitors
close together. Street blocks are short but not get too lost. It also provides
completely car dependent.
lots of different directions in which you

STREET MAPS AT THE SAME SCALE

Density of intersections improves the urban fabric of places we love to spend time in.

Venice, Italy Crows Nest, Sydney Winston Hills, Sydney Los Angeles, CA
577 intersections/square km 144 intersections/square km 60 intersections/square km 58 intersections/square km

9 MAKING GREAT PLACES: DENSITY DONE WELL

A shared street in Utrecht.
Photo: aseasyasridingabike.wordpress.com

We can see similar examples in Sydney expected demand rather than try and shop or workplace by walking through
where higher car dependency is linked to mange that demand. The result is often the front door. This makes the streets
suburb design. Burwood and Strathfield too much parking in places we are trying both livelier and safer. Developers and
have a grid street pattern, laid out in the to pedestrianise. If we mandate that planners always display montages of
19th Century. You can walk from almost most everyone can have a dedicated future developments with lively streets,
any part of the suburb to a train station car spot should we be surprised when full of lots of people coming and going.
or shops and you can take a variety of they all have a car? Objectors to urban But when the buildings are built the
routes. Castle Hill’s street pattern was laid consolidation regularly point out that the new residents are not on the footpath,
out by developers in the 1960’s. It has a traffic is worse after a neighbourhood has but in their car. They drive to and from
spaghetti-like meandering of streets with been densified, and too often they are their homes. One of the criticisms of
lots of dead ends and cul-de-sacs. There right. However, this confuses causation. urban consolidation is that the new
is often only one or two ways to exit the Removing car spots won’t increase traffic residents don’t mingle or contribute to
neighbourhood and this is through a – rather it will encourage residents to use the surrounding neighbourhood. That
main road. Street blocks can be hundreds alternatives forms of travel. you only ever see them when they are
of metres long. It is almost impossible to driving away. Sadly there is some truth
We are at least lucky in Sydney (unlike
walk or cycle around. In many streets in behind this.
much of Melbourne or Chicago) that
Castle Hill footpaths aren’t even provided.
our soft sandstone makes it easier to
But, roads can be converted to streets. ensure most parking is below ground COMMONALITY #1: STREETS,
In Bondi Junction, a Complete Streets and out of sight. However, not only does NOT ROADS – QUESTIONS FOR
project reclaimed 6 Olympic swimming this come at significant cost, but it can CONSIDERATION:
pools worth of vehicle pavement while sometimes undermine our efforts at •• Are there exemplars of this that should
creating 2.3kms of protected cycle lanes. placemaking. When we ask residents of be considered in achieving density
Re-prioritisation of pedestrians over cars new apartment buildings where they met done well, whether in Sydney or
has created a more vibrant town centre. their neighbours, the majority say they elsewhere?
met them in the carpark underground. •• What policy changes are needed to
How we currently manage car parking achieve this?
That suggests that people are entering
is also undermining our attempt to •• Typically local residents oppose
and leaving their home by car and not
increase urban density. Most Local reducing car parking in new
walking out on to the street. One of
Councils prescribe a minimum amount developments because they believe it
the commonalities of places like Potts
of parking for each new development, will cause parking/traffic issues. How
Point or Kirribilli, or New York or Paris is
usually expressed as a ratio of parking to do we address fears of congestion
that residents, workers and visitors all
bedrooms or parking to shoppers. We try while encouraging streets, not roads?
have to enter and leave their residence,
to ensure we can accommodate the

COMMITTEE FOR SYDNEY DISCUSSION PAPER 10

 COMMONALITY #2:
FINE GRAIN AND MIXED-USE

When we think of those places in Sydney local Plan from low density residential and not a chore. The buildings are close
or internationally that are interesting (R2 zone) to high density residential (R4 together and dense with no empty
or beautiful there’s another feature zone). The result is often just a high rise spaces between them so there are no
they all have in common: there’s lots to dormitory. Even when we do consider places where nothing is happening.
see, lots to do and a lot going on. They rezoning places to mixed-use (B4 More importantly, the buildings don’t
are busy places. These places aren’t zone) this often just results in the same overwhelm the street. There is high
just dense with housing or dense with residential flat buildings, but with a string density but it is not claustrophobic. We
office buildings, there is a mixture of of (often empty) shops and offices on the seem to find it difficult to impose a ‘fine
both. There are cafes and restaurants, ground floor. Most people still have to go grain’ on new in-fill development and it
businesses and workshops, as well somewhere else to get a job or access a is because of this that the Committee
as homes. service. We promise people a lively and believes we may need to revamp our
interesting neighbourhood but often we planning and approvals system. That
Most of these places are what planners
deliver a sterile and boring one. our system of land use zoning might not
called mixed use. They are not just
be supporting good development, but
dormitory suburbs or just office parks. Another commonality of well-designed
might be getting in the way.
People can live, work, and play in these places is they have a “fine grain” to both
precincts. You can shop, buy a coffee, the buildings and streetscape. This is
get your car repaired and work in an more than just the tight street network. COMMONALITY #2: MIXED-USE AND
office all in walking distance of where Shops and business face the street FINE GRAIN – QUESTIONS FOR
you live. There are a range of activities and have narrow frontages. There are CONSIDERATION:
catering for a range of tastes and lots of different buildings and lots of •• Where are we best achieving fine grain
lifestyles. Sydney’s Newtown provides a different things going on in them. More mixed use development, whether in
good example. There are several smash importantly you see these activities Sydney or elsewhere?
repairers, supermarkets, restaurants, four happening. They aren’t hidden away •• What policy changes are needed to
schools, a hospital, night clubs and bars, behind the reflective glass of an office encourage this?
as well as lots of offices for lawyers and tower. You can see the chef preparing for •• Mixed use and fine grain requires
doctors and all within a short walking the lunchtime rush, people conducting collaboration between practitioners
distance from each other. There is a lot meetings in cafes, deliveries being made across industries. How can we reduce
going on and at all times of the day and and children walking to school. Walking the barriers and increase the benefits
night. Yet too often when we try and the street you pass a variety businesses of achieving this?
increase urban density we don’t plan for and people doing different things. This
a variety of uses. We simply amend the makes walking the street interesting

MIXING USES RESULTS IN BETTER PLACES – AND MORE AMENITY

Often we assume that in order to maximise However, it is entirely possible to mix the This method of fine grain, mixed-use spaces
the density of different uses, we have to types of use within each block without any also increases the amount of public realm and
build in large blocks. In this design, uses are loss of density. In doing so, greater diversity walking/cycling options.
separated, resulting in monotonous spaces, and vibrancy can be achieved.
lacking in public realm and vibrancy.

Source: RobertsDay

11 MAKING GREAT PLACES: DENSITY DONE WELL

People can live, work, and play in
these precincts. You can shop, buy a
coffee, get your car repaired and work
in an office all in walking distance of
where you live.

12
 COMMONALITY #3:
ORDER AND VARIETY

Paris is well known for an ordered overall design, with variety achieved through individual buildings.
Photo: vistaandvoyages.wordpress.com

Hard wired into our psychology is a in the eye of the beholder” but there a comprehensible order, as prescribed
desire for both order and variety. This at exists an art and science for making by the planning codes, but a variety of
first seems contradictory. Isn’t too much great places. buildings and architecture.
order boring and isn’t too much variety,
Paris is a densely populated city but it An example closer to home is the
chaotic? The great parts of Sydney, and
has few tall buildings. Instead almost terraces of the inner city or the federation
cities around the world, get the balance
all the activities of the city are housed houses in suburbs like Haberfield. Think
right when it comes to these two human
in buildings ranging from 6-8 storeys. of a Paddington street, where each
wants. In the video How to Make an
Parisian planning codes prescribe strict house is the same width and height, yet
Attractive City, Alain de Botton argues
height limits on buildings but then allow each has different fenestration, colour
beauty is vital to belonging. According to
the developer the freedom to fill the and ornamentation. Each has a different
de Botton, cities require “order” if they are
building envelope with whatever type design, but all conform to the same
to be perceived as beautiful. Order is the
of building they chose and as densely building envelope. Some are Georgian
reason locals and tourists love Paris and
as they can. Importantly, no one builder some Victorian; some borrow Italianate
New York. However, excessive regularity
or developer is allowed to develop fenestration and ornamentation.
can be “soul destroying, relentless and
a whole city block. Instead there is a Furthermore they reflect each other
harsh.” In other words, people love cities
sub-division pattern to the land which across the street with a nice symmetry,
offering order and variety. Density done
requires different builders and different but not a sameness. There is both variety
well is realising “beauty is not simply
architects for each building. The result is and order, and we instinctively like it.

13 MAKING GREAT PLACES: DENSITY DONE WELL

Balgowlah is a good Sydney example of order and variety
Photo: Stockland

Recent moves by the NSW Planning The Committee is not opposed to tall We do, sometimes, try and inject
Minister mean we are starting to see buildings but we recognise it is not the good urban design into the DNA of
the return of well designed, well located only way to achieve greater density. the planning system. We have several
terrace housing in ‘the missing middle’, examples where our planners have
Furthermore SEPP 65 often requires
but more is to be done. been able to impose a grid street pattern
boundary setbacks to allow greater solar
on new precincts, to insist on genuine
Our modern planning codes struggle access for residents. These guidelines
mixed use development and include
to get the balance right between order are important to ensure the places
appropriate controls and heights in our
and variety. We rarely think of the spaces where people eat and sleep are nice,
masterplans. Yet when an entire area
in-between buildings. Good urban design but we too often ignore what’s going
is developed with the same architect,
shouldn’t be seen as a “nice to have”, on around the buildings; where living
the same building materials, the same
it needs to be part of the DNA of the also happens. SEPP 65 was a revolution
tree plantings, the same finishes and
planning process. Instead we put all our in Sydney planning and led to a major
even the same paint, the end result is a
effort into ensuring the buildings are improvement in the quality and design
relentless sameness. There is too much
well designed from an internal point of of residential flat buildings in Sydney; but
order and not enough variety. Critics of
view. We focus on architectural features perhaps we need to develop another
urban consolidation often say the places
or the internal layout and design of the SEPP to guide the design of the spaces in
we are building look like they are out of
buildings. For example, we have detailed between the buildings. Maybe we need a
Lego land.
design guidelines (SEPP 65) for how “placemaking” SEPP.
each apartment should be built and
Critics of consolidation often say the COMMONALITY #3: ORDER AND
orientated. We mandate a minimum
buildings are out of character with the VARIETY – QUESTIONS FOR
requirements for solar access and
surrounding area. That they are a blot CONSIDERATION:
private open space. That’s great for the
on the landscape or sit at odds with the •• Do we need a new SEPP for
occupants, but it often has unintended
existing neighbourhood. The Committee ‘placemaking’?
consequences for the neighbours and
is seeking to extend the principles that •• What other policy or practice changes
the neighbourhood. These requirements
lead to SEPP 65 to the public realm. We are needed to achieve this?
tend to lead towards taller and thinner
ask the question whether suburbs like •• Can order and variety be
buildings. Not all of which fit into the
Potts Point or Paddington could be built simultaneously achieved immediately,
local context and often look out of place.
under our current planning codes. or do they require long-term
adaptability?

COMMITTEE FOR SYDNEY DISCUSSION PAPER 14

 COMMONALITY # 4:
CONNECTIVITY AND
INFRASTRUCTURE
Great cities and places are well Australia, mainly because of the cost of correct when talking about urban sprawl.
connected and well serviced by land. Similarly, when we try to augment It is much harder and more expensive
infrastructure. In many cases it is this our transport systems we often have to service a dispersed population.
connectivity that makes them such to do so through expensive tunnelling Nevertheless, the Committee recognises
wonderful places. They have a variety because going above ground is no that we are not spending enough on
of transport choices so you can get to longer an option in many parts of the public infrastructure and we will need to
and from them and also get around city. New funding mechanisms like value rectify this.
within them. They are well serviced by capture may provide some relief, but we
the sort of private infrastructure we need are going to have to accept that we are COMMONALITY #4: CONNECTIVITY
to live: cafes and restaurants, chemists all going to have pay more to provide the AND INFRASTRUCTURE -
and GP’s, banks and supermarkets. public infrastructure we need to make QUESTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION:
But they are also supported by public our city function. •• What role does infrastructure
infrastructure: trains and buses, hospitals play in encouraging and leading
Critics of urban consolidation regularly
and schools, well maintained parks and development, as opposed to following
cite the lack of infrastructure as a reason
swept footpaths. population growth?
for opposing further consolidation.
In Sydney, providing the private That we are putting in the people or •• What advantages does density offer
infrastructure needed for more dense the businesses but then not supporting in the provision of infrastructure,
neighbourhoods is relatively easy. The them with transport or services and the either through lower costs or
market will respond to the increase result is traffic and congestion. This is improved options?
in local demand and the banks, their most strident and insistent claim, •• How does density encourage the
supermarkets and chemists will follow. but is it also where they are on the agglomeration of knowledge jobs
We also know that many of the jobs weakest ground. This argument is more around hubs?
of the future will be located near their
workforce. We just need to ensure
that there is enough space for them
to get established by insisting that the
precinct is truly mixed use. Too much
residential development will result in a
dormitory suburb.
Yet it is providing the public infrastructure
which is Sydney’s greatest challenge.
Even though we will be increasing our
density over the next forty years we
will still remain a relatively low density
city. This makes our public transport
expensive to provide as it is stretched
across vast distances. Also because we
have used our land so inefficiently in the
past (i.e. we’ve wasted it) it is now very
expensive. The State Government is
finding it very difficult and expensive to
accommodate the demand for schools
in areas which are consolidating. The
new school in Ultimo might well be
the most expensive one ever built in

Photo: Parramatta City Council

15 MAKING GREAT PLACES: DENSITY DONE WELL

COMMONALITY #5:
DIVERSITY OF PEOPLE
AND EXPERIENCES

Vivid Sydney Photo: Stockland

The final commonality great cities Think of Surry Hills. While it has a Yet our planning codes make places like
and places have is that they are not relatively high residential density, Surry Hills difficult. Too often our zoning
monocultures. There are a lot of things 11,500 per square kilometre, much system tries to separate land uses, with
going on and there are a lot of different of the suburb has retained office places set aside for residential, others as
people doing different things. They have accommodation providing work for entertainment precincts, and still others
lots of housing, but are not just dormitory designers and start-ups as well as for employment uses. In some cases this
suburbs where people sleep but don’t Government Departments. The non- is sensible, we don’t want people living
work or play. They are employment residential buildings provide a diversity of next to an oil refinery and airports need
centres, but not just office parks, full of office spaces to accommodate different buffers. Yet when we seek to increase
workers during the day and ghost towns sized companies and industries, from the urban density, too often we only plan
at night. They have lots of entertainment large floor plates for multi nationals and for one predominant use; high-rise
and things to do, not only when the small, shared offices for small businesses dormitories or office buildings. The critics
game is on or the show is in town, but all and start-ups. There are over 4,000 of urban consolidation often state that
the time and every day. Great cities and people working there on any given day. the places we are building are sterile and
places somehow manage to achieve all So great is the demand for more office boring. They’re too often right. We can do
three of these in one. You can work, rest space that it is not uncommon now for better than this.
and play. million dollar terraces to be converted
for office space for architects or galleries COMMONALITY #5: DIVERSITY
But not only do they have a mixture of
for artists. It also has a late night OF PEOPLE AND EXPERIENCES -
things happening, they combine this with
economy providing some of Sydney’s QUESTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION:
a mixture of people. They have places
finest restaurants, bars and live music •• Can we make good, dense places
for the elderly, but are not retirement
venues. One quarter of the residential while maintaining affordability for all?
villages. They are home to people from
housing stock is owned by Government, •• How can we best encourage a
different socio-economic statuses and
providing social housing for those most multitude of uses across day and night
backgrounds, but are neither ghettos
in need. The private housing stock also for places?
nor enclaves. They have affordable
comes in many shapes and sizes. There •• Can achieving these outcomes also
homes suitable for people at all stages
are large four and five bedroom terraces deliver financial benefit to developers
of life. There are families with kids, single
as well as apartments ranging from and improvements for existing
households, shared houses and more.
three bedders, to studios and bed sits. residents?
There are also boarding houses, student
accommodation and backpacker hostels.
There really is a place for everyone.

COMMITTEE FOR SYDNEY DISCUSSION PAPER 16

 CALL TO ACTION:
GREAT CITIES DON’T
HAPPEN BY CHANCE

The critics of urban consolidation and truly beautiful or interesting. In the citizens and governments to join in a
densification are growing louder and past century we have made enormous genuine dialogue about how to make
gaining more attention and influence. advances in science and technology, Sydney better.
The Committee recognises that some we are wealthier and healthier than
This is because great places are
of their claims are, at least partially, ever before, we are more educated and
collaborations – they don’t happen
grounded in truth. However the critics organised, yet we seem to be unable to
by chance. Whether it’s government,
rarely offer any constructive solutions or replicate the grand neighbourhoods and
the private sector and communities
alternative ideas for how we can manage precincts which make some cities truly
or planners, transport specialists and
the issues Sydney will have to address great. It’s as if we’ve forgotten something.
social entrepreneurs – great places need
over the coming decades. Continuing
Over the next few months the everyone contributing to their creation
urban sprawl is not an option. Doing
Committee will be seeking to identify and evolution.
nothing is not an option. For all the
what it is we’ve forgotten. Why it is
faults in the way we have been trying to We call on our members, from all walks
that with our wealth of expertise and
increase our urban density, it is still the of life to get involved. This is too big a
talent we are not building places and
best solution to housing our population topic to cover in a single document, or
neighbourhoods that live up to the
growth. The Committee believes that indeed to leave simply to the written
standards of an earlier era. We’ll be
even if our population wasn’t growing word. We will be visiting places of
asking questions about whether we
we would still be supporting greater excellent density, hearing from experts,
are getting the planning right. Whether
urban density. We just have to ensure producing policy on specific aspects of
our zoning prescriptions, development
we do it better. density and building a dialogue on how
standards and controls, are even
we make Sydney greater still – and a city
It is somewhat surprising that we have capable of delivering density done
in which the benefits of density done well
built so few places over the past century well. In doing this we are asking our
are shared by all.
(in Sydney, or anywhere else) that are

Sydney Festival Summer Sounds in the Domain 2014. Photo: Daniel Boud

17 MAKING GREAT PLACES: DENSITY DONE WELL

THE COMMITTEE
FOR SYDNEY’S
CALL TO ACTION

We invite you to get involved. Here are a

selection of the questions we are considering
– how are you and your organisation
responding to these challenges?
• What does density done well look like? How
can we measure it?
• Are you involved in a project that is doing
density well?
• What policy changes are needed to achieve
density done well?
• Do the existing governance structures of
the city encourage density done well? What
needs to change?
• How do we get local communities to
demand density done well, rather than
opposing all density?
 Our thanks to members and friends
who have engaged in the creation of
this Discussion Paper, including:
Sean Macken
HASSELL Studios
Arup
Grimshaw Architects
Payce Consolidated
RobertsDay
Stockland

“The Committee for

Sydney is a fantastic body
adding to public debate
in the city. It is exactly the
The Committee for Sydney
organisation it needs to Level 10
201 Kent Street
be – engaged, constructive Sydney
and challenging.” NSW 2000

sydney.org.au
@Committee4Syd
committee@sydney.org.au
THE HON. MIKE BAIRD MP, NSW PREMIER +61 2 9320 9860