In its submission on missing middle housing reform, the Inner South Canberra Community Council proposes that, rather than a one-size-fits-all planning policy for the entire RZ1 zone, a more sensitive and nuanced planned approach should be applied, writes RICHARD JOHNSTON. 

The ACT government’s Missing Middle Housing Reform involves “upzoning” (greatly increasing the potential housing densities) of all residential zones to reduce the need for the city to expand outwards as it grows.

It particularly affects the RZ1 Suburban Zone, which  covers nearly 70 per cent of Canberra’s urban area. 

In figure 71 of the 134-page Draft Missing Middle Housing Design Guide shows what the government expects RZ1 streetscapes to look like – a curious mix of “dual or tri-occupancies, townhouses and terrace homes and low-rise apartments”. 

Proponents of these intentions point to the supposed success of a similar program in Auckland some years ago.  The Auckland Unitary Plan (AUP), introduced in 2016, allowed urban “intensification” across “many established suburbs and some greenfields areas”. 

This was said to have led to a substantial increase in “dwellings consented”. However, according to the Auckland Future Development Strategy Monitoring report December 2024, covering the five years 2019/20 to 2023/24, the “dwellings consented” per year were lower at the end of that period than at the beginning, peaking in 2021/22.

The Auckland Myth: There is no Evidence that Upzoning Increased Housing Construction, by Murray & Helm, in Fresh Economic Thinking, June, 2023, showed there was actually no real change in the upward trend of total dwelling consents in Auckland from about 2012/13 to 2020/21. 

They said: “Auckland’s consent trend, like Wellington’s, looks a lot like a growth cycle spurred by an uptick in migration around 2014, and a normal cyclical boom, one also seen in Australia’s major cities following the post-GFC recovery period.”

Murray & Helm also noted that net additional dwellings completed and connected to electricity two years after approvals were only 69  per cent of consents since 2020.

They say: “We agree that more homes are better than fewer, but good planning matters too. 

“Organising the location and types of dwellings can reduce total infrastructure costs and avoid social costs that cause a net loss of utility.

“The disorderly nature of where post-AUP development occurred is hated even by the most strident supporters of the policy now living through it.”

The Auckland Council’s monitoring report also noted, for 2023/24: “Consenting activity continuing to concentrate in the outer suburbs… with less occurring in the city centre and inner suburbs”.

No doubt this would be due to developers taking advantage of lower land values in outer suburbs, not necessarily where people wanted to live.

The greatest proportion of consents (around 60 per cent) since 2020/21 were townhouses, flats, units and other dwellings (rather than houses or apartment units) perhaps reflecting building costs as well as market demand.

Unlike the ACT government’s intentions, the AUP retained an H3: Residential – Single House Zone. Its purpose “is to maintain and enhance the amenity values of established residential neighbourhoods in a number of locations. 

“The particular amenity values of a neighbourhood may be based on special character informed by the past, spacious sites with some large trees, a coastal setting or other factors such as established neighbourhood character.

“To support the purpose of the zone, multi-unit development is not anticipated, with additional housing limited to the conversion of an existing dwelling into two dwellings and minor dwelling units. The zone is generally characterised by one to two-storey high buildings consistent with a suburban built character.”

In its submission on missing middle housing reform, the Inner South Canberra Community Council proposes that, rather than a one-size-fits-all planning policy for the entire RZ1 zone, a more sensitive and nuanced planned approach should be applied, including:

• Special Character Zones to protect particular high-quality residential areas, including heritage housing precincts, similar to the Auckland Single House Zone.
• Consolidation of existing house blocks to encourage more efficient and higher quality redevelopment, with more dwellings in higher amenity settings including open space and trees – for example, a minimum of four adjoining blocks, with a development plan to be negotiated with stakeholders and potentially subject to a fast-tracked approval process. Block consolidation could be achieved in a number of ways: through a collaborative housing model involving the existing owners directly; by private developers; or by a government redevelopment agency charged with assembling and packaging projects in appropriate locations for on-sale to developers.

Richard Johnston is an architect and town planner, and formerly a senior executive in the ACT Planning and Land Authority. He is a life fellow of the Planning Institute of Australia.

News all day, every day at CityNews.com.au.