Councillor Chris Harris

Sydney developers appear to have found a new way around size and parking restrictions for new unit blocks.

First they ‘change the mix of units’ in a proposed block, losing some or all of the small, affordable units in favour of expensive three-bedroom units. Then they request a drastically increased number of parking spaces because the buyers of such units will ‘require’ two spaces each.

This in turn pushes the site beyond its allowable floorspace.

The result: Sydney ends up with more cars and less affordable housing - a double whammy to sustainability - and the developer ends up with more profit.

This was the scenario for two Development Applications (DAs) before Council last week, one in Onslow Street Elizabeth Bay, the other on the old Children’s Hospital site in Camperdown.

In both cases, Council staff recommended approval of the developer-driven changes. Three of the Clover team also went along with them.

With Onslow St, the DA has been held over for a special meeting between councillors and the applicant. The Camperdown DA was passed when three of the Clover Moore team voted with Labor and Liberal.

If this is a trend, it is a worrying one for Sydney. There are rules for parking ratios and the ’social mix’ of units in a new development.

The Onslow Street DA comes under former South Sydney Council controls that limit parking spaces in this case to 14. Yet the developer is looking for 22 car spaces - eight over the limit.

The South Sydney controls require 63% of the mix to be one-bedroom or smaller, 29% two-bedroom and only 6% with three bedrooms.

Yet all units in the proposed ten-unit block on Onslow Street are three-bedroom.

Council staff brushed this aside: “Given that the total number of units is low at ten units, the proposed mix is considered reasonable…”

Mix? What mix? All those desperate singles queuing up every Saturday to inspect scarce one-bedroom rental units at the affordable end of the market might not agree with Council Staff.

Given the problems caused by traffic in the City and the need for affordable housing, one would think that the City would be pursuing policies designed to attract people who are less reliant on a car. The recommendations put forward by staff and voted for by independent councillors do exactly the opposite. They will do nothing to ease congestion and reduce Greenhouse gas emissions - in fact they will aggravate the problem.

Perhaps the Lord Mayor should explain to Crs. Black, Hoff and Kemmis - who voted in favour of more parking - the connection between increased parking spaces and more cars on the road.