Forcing density in Australia's suburbs

There is not nearly enough difference in the greenhouse gas emissions of public versus private transport to counter the increased emissions of high-density dwelling. Greenhouse gas emission per passenger km on the Sydney rail network is 105 gm. The figure for the average car is 155 gm - but for modern fuel efficient vehicles is as low as 70 gm.

Adding more people to existing infrastructure results in overload. After 15 years of high-density policies, the quality of Sydney suburban roads, rail service, water supply and electricity has noticeably deteriorated. High-density retrofit is hugely more expensive than laying out new infrastructure on greenfield sites. Infrastructure costs quoted by the authorities almost always omit the cost of restoring the standard of infrastructure back to the level of service people enjoyed before high-density was imposed.

One example of these “forgotten” costs - the augmentation of electricity supplies in downtown Sydney, necessitated by 4,900 additional apartments, will eventually cost $429 million - or $80,000 per new apartment.

The effect of high density policies on the cost of housing has been devastating to the younger generation. In attempting to force people into higher density on existing land, the authorities have drastically cut down the supply of new land for housing. This has resulted in the cost of land now comprising 70 per cent of the cost of a place to stay, instead of the traditional 30 per cent. A new dwelling on Sydney’s outskirts should cost about $210,000 but is actually more than $500,000.

The cost of commercial land in Sydney has also rocketed out of control. Employers take their business elsewhere. Back in 2000, the New South Wales proportion of the national economy was 35 per cent. This has now plunged to barely 30 per cent. The proportion of bankruptcies has increased from 25 per cent to 38 per cent.

Besides ostensible “green” ideology, perhaps the powerful driver for high-density policies lies with the resulting opportunities for infill developers to make huge profits. Over the last five years, the ruling New South Wales Labor Party received donations from the development industry of $9 million while the opposition party netted $5 million. These donations exceeded the total contributions for all political parties over the same period from the gambling, tobacco, alcohol, hotel, pharmaceutical and armaments industries combined.

The political donations gain donors favoured access to government. This inevitably results in policies sympathetic to them, which in turn result in more profits and more donations.

Other Australian states also have implemented high-density policies but not to the degree of New South Wales. Recently in Victoria and in Western Australia carefully couched announcements have revealed that policies are moving away from excessive high-density.

Mistaken ideology and financial rewards to a minority have made high-density an enduring feature of New South Wales planning policy. The results are not pretty: more greenhouse gases, high traffic densities, worse health outcomes, a creaking and overloaded infrastructure, a whole generation locked out of owning their own home and business fleeing the state for the greener, less congested pastures elsewhere.