Developer Typologies in Urban Renewal in Sydney: Recognising the Role of Informal Associations between Developers and Local Government

Abstract

Urban renewal is increasingly identified within Australian metropolitan planning strategies as central in accommodating housing growth. However, there is little understanding of those developers who are responsible for providing new dwellings in middle-and outer-ring urban locations. Using Sydney as an example, this article explores the types of developers operating in these locations, the types of developments they are developing and their tendency to interact with local councils in an effort to gain development approval. In reviewing the operation of developers undertaking urban renewal, it is apparent that informal associations are critical in facilitating development in middle-and outer-ring urban locations.

Flexibility versus Certainty: Unsettling the Land-use Planning Shibboleth in Australia

“…Unsurprisingly, local government challenged the implementation of these new structures, as they were seen to reduce local authority, reduce the amount of funds made available through developer contributions, and change the character of neighborhoods (Ruming, 2009(Ruming, , 2011. Alternatively, the development industry Wendy Steele & Kristian J. Ruming was, in general, supportive of these new measures which remove local autonomy and the capacity to make planning decisions in the context of local characteristics (UDIA, 2009).…”

How National Planning Might Enrich Metropolitan Planning in Australia

“…Indeed, progress towards dwelling targets outlined in metropolitan strategies has to date been slow, patchy and often of substandard design and building quality. The primary failure of current metropolitan planning strategies which promote urban consolidation is in not recognising the role of the broader housing market (Randolph, 2008) and land ownership processes in mediating the renewal process (Ruming, 2010). In particular, it is apparent that the current top-down planning process fails to recognise that individual lot ownership and occupation is the dominant tenure of our cities, not large areas in single ownership.…”

De-risking development of medium density housing to improve housing affordability and boost supply

“…These new homes may be attached or detached dwellings. The producers of these smaller developments are frequently novices and/or 'Mums and Dads' (Ruming, 2010) or 'part-time developers' (Forlee, 2012: 61). In contrast, larger projects of up to 30 dwellings (Ruming, 2010) involve 'full-time professionals' (Forlee, 2012).…”

“…The producers of these smaller developments are frequently novices and/or 'Mums and Dads' (Ruming, 2010) or 'part-time developers' (Forlee, 2012: 61). In contrast, larger projects of up to 30 dwellings (Ruming, 2010) involve 'full-time professionals' (Forlee, 2012). This small scale infill form of development is notable for being highly competitive with low margins (Chandler, 2009) making use of the same construction technologies and business structures as detached house builders, and relying heavily on non-unionised subcontracted trades and labour.…”

“…There is a small body of critical literature on developers. Dowling (2005) and Coiacetto (2006Coiacetto ( , 2009 have examined concentration of firms within the development industry; Ruming (2010) the relationships between developers and local government planners and the impact on planning decisions in Sydney; and Coiacetto developer behaviour in relation to place (Coiacetto, 2000); urban space (Coiacetto, 2007b); and sub-markets (Coiacetto, 2007a).…”