<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/69199/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
Special interest groups have had much more influence than the wider community on the new regional plan for Southeast Queensland.
A draft of the plan, ShapingSEQ, was recently released for comment. Prior input from the wider community was limited to submitting “thought bubbles”about the region without having the benefit of any report card on how the previous plan had performed. 
This process did not accurately gauge community concerns and submitters were not a representative sample. Perhaps it gave people the feeling they’d “had a say”. The process just as likely reinforced cynicism about government consultation.
Regional planning in Southeast Queensland began in the early 1990s when councils in the region signed up to the Regional Framework for Growth Management. This was a non-binding set of guidelines promoted by the state government to manage land-use change. 
Subsequently, this framework evolved into a statutory regional plan in 2005. It is noteworthy that consultation in the lead-up to the 2005 plan included the public release of discussion papers with options for the region’s future.
The initial focus was very much on getting southeast Queensland councils to accept the need for regional planning. At that time, the role of the wider community was relatively minor. 
A 1990 meeting of representatives from government, business, trade unions, professional groups and community organisations was an important impetus for starting the regional planning process. This “stakeholder” model of community engagement has been the dominant form of consultation ever since.
Stakeholders or citizens?
Stakeholders have particular vested interests – such as protecting the environment, promoting a business sector, or advancing a government agency’s agenda. 
Preparation of the 2016 draft plan involved several of these stakeholder “reference groups”. Participants in these groups were there to advocate for the organisation they represent, often making it more difficult to find “outside-the-box” solutions.
Consultation by negotiating with stakeholders is consistent with the dominant view that explicitly pursuing the public interest is less important than growing the economy. Consequently, an “issue management” approach has been taken, with stakeholders “competing” for influence over which development regulations are put in place. Within this worldview, trade-offs between stakeholders usually take place in a “growth first” framework.
An alternative is to promote informed deliberation by citizens who don’t represent particular interests. The Perth Dialogue with the City process shows how this “citizen” approach can work. 
This was a process of engagement with a large group of demographically representative Perth citizens. They were provided with relevant in-depth information before their deliberations about the city’s future.
Wide consultation overdue
It has been at least ten years since there was either an open performance review of southeast Queensland regional planning, or consultation with the wider community on options for the region’s future. Engagement with the wider community is particularly important now for a couple of reasons.
First, the 2016 draft plan claims to have a 50-year vision horizon, compared to the previous plan’s 20 years. Because of this change, the wider community should have been engaged in developing this new vision rather than being presented with a fait accompli in the draft plan. 
Second, the draft plan represents a significant change of focus from the previous 2009 plan. That plan aimed to reduce the region’s ecological footprint and mitigate climate change by reducing greenhouse gas emissions. In contrast, the 2016 draft seems to be adopting a more “growth first” approach. 
It is noteworthy that virtually all references to climate change in this new draft are about adapting to change rather than reducing greenhouse gas emissions. These significant changes should have been widely debated before the draft plan was prepared.
Independent report card needed
For a debate on future directions to be genuine, the community needs an independent, comprehensive report card on how things are tracking. 
The draft plan has ten indicators, some of which show modest improvement. However, other indicators, such as housing affordability and loss of biodiversity, have gone backwards. And koala numbers continue to decline.
The report card should also acknowledge that Australia (including southeast Queensland) has one of the worst records for resource use and greenhouse gas emissions per unit of economic output of any developed country.
Moving beyond ‘predict and provide’
The draft plan largely takes a basic “provide land for the predicted demand” approach, which assumes that regional planning is a type of technical process best left to the experts.
However, regional planning always involves trade-offs between different economic, social and environmental values. These should be openly discussed through genuine community engagement.
By not providing opportunities for such engagement, the draft plan has failed to give the community a real say in the region’s future.
Brian Feeney is urban planning researcher, The University of Queensland and author for The Conversation. He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/brian-feeney-317083" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

Shaping SEQ regional plan gives ‘stakeholders’ a bigger say than citizens

<html><body>
The Wollongong pub The Figtree Hotel sold at mid-week auction for $5.375 million.
The owner of the nearby Unanderra Hotel, Andrew Denmeade, bought the property.
It has a gaming room, a sports bar, a bistro and a drive-in bottle shop.
There is development potential for the 9300 sq m offer that sold through Ray White Hotels' Andrew Jolliffe.
</body></html>

The Figtree at Wollongong sold

<html><body>
Merivale boss Justin Hemmes has paid $37.05 million for The Tennyson Hotel in Sydney's south.
The auction conducted by auctioneer Damien Cooley for Ray White attracted 250 people including the who's who of the pub industry.
<img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2016/12/02/Screen%20Shot%202016-12-02%20at%2011.54.15%20AM.png" alt="">
The Tennyson, whose design is illustrative of a Sidney Warden-designed inter-war functionalist structure, fetched a record hammer price for hotels. 
The Ray White Hotels Asia Pacific director Andrew Jolliffe listed the Top 100 gaming property, The Tennyson Hotel at Mascot.
 Set on Botany Rd, the Tennyson Hotel is a popular hotel with 30 gaming machines.
"Notwithstanding the latest ranking at 87 in NSW, the hotel requires an upgrade," Jolliffe advised. 
The leading hotel architect Paul Kelly has designed a renovation which has DA approval.
"Only a very small number of Top 100 gaming hotels have changed hands over the past few years," commented Jolliffe.
"The reality is that this should be a Top 50 Gaming hotel," he added.
<img src="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/c_scale,w_580,q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/po.images/2016/11/03/Aerial%20Hero%20Image.jpg" alt="">
The two-level large format hotel is on the busy Botany Road and High St corner.
Its allotment is 1400sqm.
Jolliffe's client, JDA Hotels recently contemplated an unsolicited offer, advised John Feros of JDA Hotels.
<img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2016/12/02/Screen%20Shot%202016-12-02%20at%2011.53.59%20AM.png" alt="">
The hotel, even in its currently unrenovated state, attracts in excess of $8m in annual receipts from predominantly high gross profit margin revenue centres.
 
</body></html>

Merivale's Justin Hemmes pays $37.05 million for Tennyson Hotel

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/66408/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
The story of Perth’s low-density composition and growth is well understood.
The increasingly urgent need to develop infill housing for a growing population that results in a more compact city form have been well communicated and form an inevitable part of the discussion about density. In the last decade, this reasoning has become broadly accepted.
However, understanding the problem is one thing; exploring its potential solutions is another. Economics, stigma, inertia and layers of legislation mean Perth is substantially failing to meet the state government target of 47% infill for new residential development across the metropolitan area by 2031.
The primary mechanism that local governments have used to implement the top-down long-term vision for more infill housing is “upcoding”; that is, identifying and increasing sites with higher development potential. This has a number of consequences:
<ul>
<li>
increasing friction between supporters of market-driven speculation and those calling for affordable housing;
</li>
<li>
the entrenchment of NIMBYism;
</li>
<li>
built-form policies that prevent sites from reaching their potential; and
</li>
<li>
questioning of whether infill density is improving or dismantling the spatial and cultural qualities of our suburbs.
</li>
</ul>
It is debatable whether more or less regulation might help to achieve the infill targets. On the one hand, further top-down regulation may be needed to force targets to be met. On the other, the bluntness of the instruments used for housing delivery may prevent innovative approaches to density and development from appearing.
Is there an alternative? Can regulation ever be expected to deal adequately with the complexities of how people could, should and want to live together? 
Can current regulation become an instrument to support non-standard approaches to achieving density? Can individual buildings be prototypes that permit a range of possibilities for planning legislation? Could density conditions be negotiated rather than preordained? And, if they can be, what might happen?
<h2>A fresh take on density 
</h2>
It is worth considering a project where these questions have come into play.
Built in 1923 as a wool and hide store, the Primaries warehouse in Fremantle was used to stored wool for 70 years until it was purchased for conversion into residential units. In 1993, approval was granted for 17 dwellings on the site. This was in addition to 23 dwellings that had been approved three years prior and subsequently built.
The resultant 40 grouped dwellings doubled the allowable density of the R35 site (the R35 code stipulates a minimum site area of 220m² per dwelling). This was made possible through a density bonus, granted under a clause of the town planning scheme relating to “places, buildings and objects of historical or scientific interest”. 
Council could relax any provision of the scheme, including the density of a site, where part of an existing building deemed to be significant was being preserved. In this instance, it was proposed to retain the roof structure and external walls of the 6,070m² warehouse. As a result, the site density was varied considerably, as were the required setbacks and the private open space requirements.
Brian Klopper, a local architect becoming increasingly known for his canny, idiosyncratic residential projects, was engaged to design both stages of the development. Stage 2 sold in just eight weeks. 
Within the boundary perimeter walls, Klopper inserted three rows of grouped housing and two large open courts. The courts function as inner streets, open to the sky. They allow for pedestrian and car access, for open car parking, for shared gardens, for each dwelling to address.
The houses are built in rows, with party walls at right angles to the perimeter walls and terminated on the inner court ends by full-height curtain glass walls. This is a terrace-house typology, expanded vertically and flooded with light.
Multifunctional and multifarious, the two-and-a-half-storey units have adaptable spaces. Occupants are able to use these as houses or for office or retail purposes, with little or no modification.
The most compelling aspect of the Primaries project, with the most enduring relevance, is its deft balancing of communality and privacy. It is a remarkable exemplar of medium-density development because it maintains the ideals of an individual house – privacy, comfort and customisability – within the compact dimensions of a collective residential cluster. 
The defining feature of the inner courts is public space. Connectivity, so often suppressed in multi-unit developments, is enhanced.
<h2>Flexible rules expand possibilities</h2>
This is a propositional project. It proposes a way of living in the city and of approaching density. The density bonus provision allowed the developer, architect and planners to establish the rules and conditions of the site, rather having to follow rules.
Negotiated conditions were necessary due to the unique nature of the warehouse. It’s worth considering that if the warehouse had not existed on the site, the scheme, even in identical form, would have been unlikely to be approved.
It’s also worth reconsidering subdivision. We are accustomed to subdivision being about land; to density codes being related to minimum site areas and plot ratios. Perhaps density is more about people than buildings; about occupation, not containers. 
We may need to consider new ways of subdividing all sorts of buildings, rather than land. And we may need to build things that are subdivisible from the outset.
It’s possible to imagine other projects initiating progressive planning conditions. It’s possible to imagine height and setback provisions being varied for projects that demonstrate exceptional solar access and ventilation. It’s possible to imagine density bonuses based on performance, adaptability, communality or affordability. 
With these sorts of expanded parameters for density bonuses, at once specific and wide-ranging, initiated and tested by project, new forms of housing may emerge that more effectively serve our contemporary, changing city.
Jennie Officer is senior lecturer in Architecture, University of Western Australia and author for The Conversation. She can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/jennie-officer-305137" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Reinventing density: bending the rules can help stop urban sprawl

<html><body><div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
A beachfront home in Bilgola on Sydney's Northern Beaches has won Lifestyle’s property series I Own Australia’s Best Home. 
The Surf’s Up Stone House has oceanfront views, a glass pool and even a basement nightclub.
Lorica and Andrew Clarke bought the original 70’s stone and timber cottage 20 years ago and has undergone renovations lasting two years.
Lorica attended the  event with her architect and said she was ecstatic.
“For our home to be so warmly received by the judges and the viewers is wonderful," she said.
"Our architect Nanna Lesiuk did a masterful job, giving our home its beauty and aesthetic, and it gives me great joy to see this work be recognised.
"The charity that we have chosen to donate the $30,000 prize money is The Kids Cancer Centre, Sydney Children’s Hospital in Randwick as this charity holds a special place in our hearts.” 
Interior designer Tim Leveson said Lorica and Andrew’s Surf’s Up Stone House is the quintessential Australian dream home, with the essence of the property being about fun and family.
<img src="/images/2016/12/01/700_home_Cast.jpg" alt="">
Interior designers Gillian Khaw and Tim Leveson, and architect Nick Tobias were joined by guest judges, interiors expert Neale Whitaker, designer Collette Dinnigan and real estate guru Andrew Winter to discuss which of the properties, voted by the Australian public, should be deemed the best home.
For more information, <a href="https://www.lifestyle.com.au/tv/i-own-australias-best-home/" target="_blank">click here</a>.
</div>
</div>
</div></body></html>

Surf’s Up Stone House in Bilgola wins the title, I own Australia's best home

<html><body>
Two real estate agencies in North Sydney are merging to form one office under the Richardson &amp; Wrench brand.
From today, 1 December, Richardson &amp; Wrench North Sydney will merge with First National North Sydney, making it the largest office of its type in North Sydney.
As well as residential and commercial sales, management and leasing, the merged R&amp;W North Sydney office will have its own project marketing division to be known as R&amp;W Ben Boyd Project Marketing and Developments and R&amp;W Hotels and Leisure, specialising in sales of hotels, motels, caravan parks and boarding house accommodation.
The office will operate under the leadership of principal Mark Smith and managing director Tim O’Halloran.
Mark Smith, who has been principal of First National North Sydney since 2003, said the merger had been instigated by the NSW Government’s demolition of the R&amp;W North Sydney office to make way for construction of the Victoria Cross station on the new Sydney Metro train line.
The business started in 1953 when Peter Hill first opened his office on Pacific Highway, the current location of the Northpoint Tower. 
</body></html>

Richardson & Wrench North Sydney merges with First National

<html><body>
An eleventh hour deal has secured the sale of Alkira, the futuristic property in far north Queensland.
It sold for an undisclosed price on Tuesday night ahead of its no reserve Wednesday auction.
The floating six-bedroom, six-bathroom unique property is located on 30 hectares of land in the Daintree Rainforest.
Its asking prices varied between $8 million and $14 million until the latest marketing campaign by Unique Estates agent Nicolette Van Wijngaarden.
“All I can say is it was a southern buyer who is very excited to use the property as a holiday home,” Ms Wijingaarden said.
It was sold by the stamp collector Rod Perry and his wife, Marider, who had tried to sell over the last three years. 
It was designed by renowned architect Charles Wright, the winner of a 2014 Queensland Architectural Award.
</body></html>

FNQ's futuristic Alkira sold

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/68984/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVERS
Cities are the epicentres of human activity. They cover less than 2 percent of the earth’s land surface but generate about 70 percent of GDP and house more than half the human population. The importance of cities is only going to increase in coming decades as another 2.5 billion people move to urban centres. 
This intense production and consumption requires huge quantities of natural resources. Cities account for more than 60 percent of global energy use, 70 percent of greenhouse gas emissions and 70 percent of global waste. Current practices are depleting the Earth’s finite resources, changing its climate and damaging its natural ecosystems. With our planetary life support system in the red, we need to put cities on a serious resource diet.
<h2>Resources efficiency in the New Urban Agenda</h2>
The New Urban Agenda adopted at the Habitat III conference outlines a vision for sustainable urban development. These global guidelines, along with the related UN Sustainable Development Goals, recognise the need to use resources more efficiently. 
Habitat III included a number of sessions on resource efficiency and associated tools and initiatives. Organisations such as UNEP, UN-Habitat and the European Commission and its research centres typically led these events. The New Urban Agenda includes many references to efficiency and reduced consumption in cities. 
We must now act urgently to translate words into actions. This will ease pressure on ecosystems and produce a range of co-benefits, including health, wellbeing and resilience. 
<h2>How do we create more resource-efficient cities?</h2>
Cities use resources directly, such as burning fossil fuels for electricity and transport. However, indirect uses, such as water for growing food crops, are much wider-reaching. 
It can be overwhelming to consider the resources used for all goods, processes and infrastructure in cities. Yet it is possible to measure this using a systems approach. Instead of considering components in isolation, the entire city is considered as an open system, connected to others. 
This perspective ensures a much broader understanding of complex relationships between scales, resource flows, the built environment, socio-economic factors and ecological outcomes.
There are tools that embrace a systems perspective. For example, the urban metabolism approach considers cities as ecosystems, across which flows of resources (such as energy or water) are measured. Life cycle assessment measures resource use through the entire production, consumption and degradation process of a good or service.
These approaches have been successfully applied at various scales such as cities, neighbourhoods and buildings. This reveals that we are using more resources than shown by traditional assessment techniques (see this example on building energy efficiency regulations). 
But measurement without action has no impact on the ground. How can these tools be used to transform our cities?
Many initiatives are targeting urban resource efficiency. The circular economy paradigm is a good example, where materials are reused, upcycled and recycled. It demonstrates that waste is a human concept and not an inherent property of cities. Waste does not exist in natural systems. 
A range of projects by UNEP, the European Commission and other organisations support local resource efficiency initiatives and encourage local governments to implement related regulations. Blogging, data visualisation and disseminating research all help promote the adoption of resource efficiency concepts. In addition to the pioneering work of groups such as metabolism of cities, the uptake of open data is helping with this.
<h2>Learning from those who already live on less</h2>
Informal settlements provide interesting lessons in resource efficiency. Construction materials in these settlements are typically not very durable. However, because they are in short supply, they are constantly reused or repurposed, almost never discarded. 
Other residents often reuse replaced materials, such as metal sheets, or store them for later use. This practice avoids additional resource use to produce new materials.
Although informal slum areas are often the focus of “upgrading” and improvement, lessons learnt in these settings can enhance material flow management and reduce waste elsewhere in cities.
<h2>Co-benefits of resource efficiency</h2>
More resource-efficient cities tend to result in better health outcomes. For instance, encouraging walking, cycling and public transport instead of car use can reduce fossil fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions, and improve population health through increased physical activity. 
Food systems that promote consumption of fresh, local produce can benefit both the environment and nutrition. Energy-efficient housing reduces energy and water use and can improve occupants’ health at the same time.
Resource efficiency can also contribute to urban resilience. Nature-based solutions use relatively few non-renewable materials to increase resilience to environmental change and natural disasters. For example, a park can be designed to be flooded during storms or a tsunami, reduce the urban heat island effect, support urban ecosystems and provide areas for community activities, recreation and urban agriculture.
Efficiency can also ensure that redundancy – a core principle of resilience – is built into urban systems. This means resources can be repurposed in the event of an unanticipated shock or stress. For example, during the recent blackout in South Australia, a household with solar battery storage was able to maintain power for 12 hours “off grid”. 
<h2>Working together for better solutions</h2>
Although these steps move cities in the right direction, more action from governments, the private sector and civil society is needed to transform our growing urban footprints.
Focusing solely on resource efficiency may neglect opportunities to generate co-benefits across sectors and will not provide robust solutions. We need to look at the entire city as a system and work together, across all disciplines, with effective and strong governance structures that support integrated policy definition and long-term implementation. If we don’t, we might simply shift a problem from one area to another, increase resource demand elsewhere, or create social divisions and tensions. 
Strong leadership, political stability, effective institutions and awareness-raising among citizens are vital factors for success. Urban resource efficiency is critical, but it should be considered along all other pressing issues highlighted in the New Urban Agenda.
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/andre-stephan-14991" target="_blank">André Stephan </a>is postdoctoral research fellow, University of Melbourne.
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/alexei-trundle-11956" target="_blank">Alexei Trundle</a> is PhD candidate, Australian-German Climate &amp; Energy College, University of Melbourne.
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/dave-kendal-180942" rel="author">Dave Kendal</a> is researcher, Royal Botanic Gardens Victoria (ARCUE), University of Melbourne.
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/hayley-henderson-288490" target="_blank">Hayley Henderson</a> is PhD candidate in Urban Planning, University of Melbourne
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/hesam-kamalipour-288498" rel="author">Hesam Kamalipour</a> is PhD candidate and Research Assistant in Urban Design, University of Melbourne
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/melanie-lowe-288493" target="_blank">Melanie Lowe</a> is research fellow, McCaughey VicHealth Community Wellbeing Unit, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne.
All are authors for The Conversation.
</body></html>

Our cities need to go on a resource diet

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
<div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
The latest figures from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) for dwelling approvals show a slow down for NSW particularly for apartments and proposed extra costs could slow housing production even more.
Apartment approvals have dropped by 12% between July and October 2016.
The high point of 4,105 new apartments approved in NSW in July 2016 has dropped to 3,620 in October which is a significant decrease. Housing approvals have also fallen but not by the same amount with all homes dropping from 6,500 in July 2016 to 5,945 by trend in October 2016.
There are a number of signals from the NSW Government that are likely to add more costs to developing apartments and houses and this will add uncertainty to those investing in new housing. The release of the District Plans by the Greater Sydney Commission has highlighted a number of new levies to housing.
An affordable housing levy of up to 10 percent is now proposed in the District Plans as well as statements about Value Capture levies. On top of this the NSW Minister for Planning is encouraging changes to Negative Gearing that would reduce the investment interest in new homes that are needed for the rental market and potential changes to the BASIX sustainability program could lead to additional building costs.
There will be an uncertain environment over the next 12 months as the very broad District Plans are discussed leaving confusion over just which planning rules apply. The council elections at the end of 2017 for amalgamated councils could put decision making on hold.
All of this uncertainty is in the context of an increased number of new homes needed in Sydney yet the uncertainty is likely to slow production down. The Department of Planning has indicated that an average of 36,250 new homes are needed over the next 20 years but the highest production has been 30,000 for the last financial year. The government’s high growth scenario would require 41,500 homes a year.
<a href="/images/2016/12/01/Screen%20Shot%202016-12-01%20at%209.51.02%20AM.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2016/12/01/Screen%20Shot%202016-12-01%20at%209.51.02%20AM.png" alt="">
 
Clearly for Sydney the NSW Government must be encouraging an increase in housing supply of around 10,000 more than is currently occurring but the uncertainty over the District Plans, Affordable Housing levies, Value Capture levies, Council Amalgamations and potential changes to BASIX will slow housing supply down.
What is needed is policies that stimulate more housing production like the Urban Taskforce proposal for 4,000 affordable homes a year rather than a raft of new levies, taxes and an uncertain planning environment. The current slow down on housing approvals should be seen as an early warning that support for housing production is needed.
Chris Johnson is chief executive officer of property development industry group Urban Taskforce and can be contacted <a href="https://www.urbantaskforce.com.au/index.php?option=com_content&amp;view=article&amp;id=97&amp;Itemid=126#.Vdaart55dFI" target="_blank">here</a>.
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body></html>

Apartment approvals slow in Sydney as more costs are imposed

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
Although the Strata Schemes Development Act 2015 does not yet have a commencement date, Part 10 of the Act, the part dealing with strata renewal is the topic of much discussion. Specifically, lot owners and owners corporations have been asking what is the process for strata renewal?
Note: we use the term strata renewal for both a collective sale (lot owners agreeing to sell to a developer) and a collective redevelopment (lot owners agreeing to refurbish the building and potentially build additions).
Once Part 10 of the Act comes into effect the process is as follows:
Anyone (it does not have to be a lot owner) can give a written proposal to the owners corporation (OC) for a collective sale or redevelopment of the strata scheme. The proposal cannot be the same as, or substantially similar to, a proposal that lapsed within the previous twelve months.
The executive committee (soon to be the strata committee (SC)) must consider the proposal at a meeting no later than 30 days after it is received. There are two options at this meeting:
If the SC decides the proposal warrants further consideration it must no later than 30 days after the meeting convene a general meeting to consider the proposal.
If the SC decides the proposal is not worthy of consideration the proposal will lapse unless lot owners with at least 25% of the unit entitlements of the scheme request the proposal be considered at general meeting.
Assuming the proposal has been deemed worthy of consideration or there has been a qualified request, the OC at general meeting must decide whether the proposal warrants further consideration. This is an ordinary resolution meaning a simple majority is required to pass it.
If the OC decides the proposal is worthy of consideration it:
<ul>
<li>Must establish a strata renewal committee to prepare a strata renewal plan (ordinary resolution required);</li>
<li>Must elect members of the strata renewal committee (ordinary resolution required &amp; note there are eligibility requirements);</li>
<li>May provide the strata renewal committee with a budget to develop the proposal; and / or</li>
<li>May authorise the strata renewal committee to engage professional advisers to assist it in developing the proposal;</li>
<li>If the OC decides the proposal is not worthy of consideration it lapses.</li>
</ul>
Assuming the OC decided the proposal was worthy and elected a strata renewal committee, that committee is to prepare a strata renewal plan. The committee will operate for one year unless it is either dissolved by the OC or the OC by special resolution, votes to extend its time frame. The contents of a strata renewal plan are prescribed and include provision for compensating dissenting lot owners.
Once the committee has a strata renewal plan to its satisfaction it must put it to the OC at general meeting for approval. The OC must, by special resolution, decide whether or not to give the plan to lot owners for their consideration.
If the OC specially resolves to put the plan (or an amended plan) to lot owners for their approval:
<ul>
<li>A copy of the strata renewal plan must be provided to all lot owners within 14 days plus any information prescribed by the regulations, then</li>
<li>A minimum of 60 days after receipt of the strata renewal plan, lot owners may provide a support notice stating they support the plan. It must be signed by each owner and registered mortgagee or covenant chargee of the lot.</li>
<li>A minimum of 75% of lot owners must return a support notice (and not withdraw it) for the strata renewal plan to proceed. If the required support is not received within three months the plan lapses.</li>
</ul>
If the OC decides not to put the strata renewal plan to the lot owners then it may either:
<ul>
<li>resolve (ordinary resolution) to amend the strata renewal plan and put that plan to the lot owners instead: or</li>
<li>resolve (ordinary resolution) to return the strata renewal plan to the strata renewal committee for amendment; or</li>
<li>if it does neither and does not pass the special resolution to put the strata renewal plan to the lot owners, the plan lapses.</li>
</ul>
Assuming 75 percent of lot owners return (and do not withdraw) a valid support notice within the three month period the OC must:
<ul>
<li>provide notification to the Registrar General and each lot owner within 14 days of being advised the required support has been obtained.</li>
<li>meet and resolve to apply to the Land and Environment Court for orders to give effect to the strata renewal plan.</li>
</ul>
If the OC decides (by ordinary resolution) to apply to the Land and Environment Court the OC must provide notice of the decision to do so to all tenants within 14 days.
The Land and Environment Court must review the strata renewal plan and go through a hearing process to consider whether to make orders to give effect to it. The Act prescribes factors that the Court must consider including the relationship between the owners of lots and the purchaser or developer, steps taken in preparing the plan including whether the required notices were served, the compensation value to be paid to dissenting lot owners and the proposed distribution to supporting lot owners. Lot owners (and specified others) may file objections to the application to the Land &amp; Environment Court and be joined to the proceedings.
As you can see, even a summary shows that this is a complicated process. We recommend seeking legal advice before embarking along this path.
Also please note that compensation is problematic. If the plan is for a collective sale it must provide for each dissenting lot owner’s lot to be purchased at not less than the compensation value for the lot. If the plan is for a redevelopment it must provide for each dissenting lot owner’s lot to be purchased at not less than the compensation value of the lot.
The compensation value for a lot is based on section 55 of the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991. This Act however primarily relates to compensating land owners for compulsory acquisition by statutory authorities which arguably has a different effect when used in valuing the lot of a dissenting owner.
The “highest and best use” which is used to determine market value of the dissenting lot owners lot would likely not be the same as the highest and best use that a developer could put that lot to. Section 55 does however allow a component for disturbance in calculating the compensation value. This is likely to include stamp duty, legal costs and relocation fees but may not include costs such as the liability from terminated leases.  We believe this will be an area that is much disputed.
If you or your scheme are potentially looking at a strata renewal program you may find the report “Renewing the Compact City” by UNSW’s City Futures Research Centre of interest. The link to the report is <a href="https://cityfutures.be.unsw.edu.au/research/projects/renewing-the-compact-city/" target="_blank">here</a>.
<div class="entry-content">
Allison Benson is legal practitioner director, Kerin Benson Lawyers and can be contacted <a href="https://kerinbensonlawyers.com.au/">here</a>.
</div>
</body></html>

Property 101: Highest and best usage compensation under new NSW strata laws will be problematic

Developer <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/bottega-property-group">Bottega House</a> has secured council approval for its first Brisbane project - a $270 million luxury residential development on an absolute riverfront site in leafy St Lucia.&nbsp;

The 15-storey project, known as <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/st-lucia-by-bottega-house-180-macquarie-street-st-lucia-qld-4067">St Lucia by Bottega House</a> , will occupy a prime north-facing site at 178-180 Macquarie Street, directly fronting the Brisbane River in the established inner-west suburb known for its rowing clubs, golf courses and sprawling University of Queensland campus.&nbsp;

St Lucia by Bottega House will feature a suite of amenities including dedicated wellness spaces, a mineral pool and cold plunge. The project has been positioned to attract affluent owner-occupiers seeking high-quality, house-sized apartments.&nbsp;

Bottega House has been set up by co-directors Nick Malloch, Louis Mennes and Craig Marsh.

Malloch said the project drew inspiration from its Brisbane River setting and leafy inner-west surrounds, while responding to the demands of discerning locals looking to transition from freestanding homes into apartment living.&nbsp;

"With an expansive river frontage and lush green surrounds, we knew we had to create something special that reflects the natural beauty of the location while offering residents masterfully crafted homes," said Malloch.&nbsp;

"Our intent was to complement the project's quiet, private setting by introducing residences that offer a calm retreat and sanctuary from the everyday. The result is a harmonious blend of architecture, interiors and amenity that emphasises wellbeing, comfort and beauty without excess."&nbsp;

Malloch added that project consultants had been carefully selected in alignment with Bottega House's commitment to care, quality and attention to detail. The design team includes architects <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/plus-studio">Plus Studio</a>, interiors practice <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/interior-designers/mim-design">Mim Design</a> and landscaping by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/urbis">Urbis</a>.&nbsp;

Three-bedroom apartments are expected to start around $5 millio. Selling agents Keenan &amp; Byrne said the pricing strategy for the project was anticipated to achieve upwards of $25,500 per square metre.&nbsp;

The project's development approval this week follows the success of Bottega House's inaugural Queensland project - a 22-storey collection of full-floor sky homes at Broadbeach on the Gold Coast which included the sale of a two-storey penthouse at a record price for a beachside residence.&nbsp;

St Lucia by Bottega House is expected to launch to market in November, with construction anticipated to be completed mid 2029.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=151826]

Joel Robinson

Bottega House to make Brisbane debut with St Lucia riverfront apartment development

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/sherpa-property-group">Sherpa Property Group</a> is advancing its affordable apartment model into Brisbane with the acquisition of another site at Cordelia Street in South Brisbane for $27 million.

Sherpa, which has a $1.7 billion pipeline across Southeast Queensland, intends to bring a cohort of apartments exclusively for first homebuyers into its proposed 186-apartment project to be built at 2 Cordelia Street.

The Sherpa model has already been incredibly well received from their Gold Coast projects, where Sherpa Group set aside a number of apartments exclusively for first homebuyers.

The new $320 million project marks Sherpa Group's second development in Brisbane, following its $255 million Symphony project, also on Cordelia Street, which is currently under construction.

Symphony will deliver 146 apartments across 28 levels, offering a mix of one, two and three-bedroom apartments. With 114 already sold, construction by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/builders/lps-group">LPS Group</a> is scheduled for completion in 2028.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=7574 project_image_fid=351654]

Sherpa Founder, Christie Leet, said the company was excited to be venturing into Brisbane for its second residential project.

“We’re big believers in the future of Brisbane as we lead into the 2032 Olympics and beyond,” Leet said.

“The success of Symphony has guided us into what will be our second project and we look forward to submitting our plans with council soon so we can deliver yet another quality project to the inner city residential market.

“Our Flourish model has been very well received both in Brisbane and the Gold Coast, and we’re excited to be able to offer some of these apartments again exclusively to first homebuyers to help get them into the property market.

“The model has been extraordinarily well received in our previous projects and it is something we are committed to moving forward.”

2 Cordelia Street will be designed by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/hal-architects">HAL Architects</a> &amp; Finegrain and will include Sherpa’s signature residential amenities including pool, gym, recreation, wellness and work from home spaces.

The project will feature ground-floor commercial space, creating a vibrant amenity for residents and the surrounding community.

A development application will be lodged with Brisbane City Council in August on the code compliant site and will be launched to the market early 2027.

Sherpa acquires new site for second Brisbane apartment tower

One of North Sydney's best-known commercial buildings could become hundreds of new homes, with insurance giant Zurich Australia lodging a State Significant Development Application (SSDA) to transform 5 Blue Street into a mixed-use residential development above North Sydney Station.

Rather than demolishing the existing building and starting again, Zurich is proposing an adaptive reuse project that would convert the landmark office building into a 15-level residential development delivering 62 apartments, 86 affordable co-living dwellings, activated retail and significant upgrades to the Blue Street Plaza.

The proposal reflects a growing trend of commercial property owners repositioning ageing office assets into residential housing as Sydney grapples with housing supply shortages and changing workplace demand.

<img alt="Zurich" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="0bba7d12-06dc-4375-aad7-238c94b21ac5" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-07-22%20at%2010.42.05%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=NJl5oLAEBDGuPmY3RnyliKODjMc8lvRh" />

Located directly above North Sydney Metro and train station, the 3,051 sqm site occupies one of the most strategically positioned parcels of land on Sydney's Lower North Shore.

Designed by fjcstudio, the proposal seeks to retain and adapt much of the existing structure while creating a contemporary residential address that better connects with the public domain surrounding North Sydney Station.

The application proposes two basement levels, ground floor retail, affordable co-living accommodation across the podium levels, and apartments above, while preserving and enhancing the publicly accessible Blue Street Plaza.

Rather than pursuing maximum apartment numbers, Zurich has opted for a housing mix heavily weighted towards larger owner-occupier residences.

The proposal includes 62 build-to-sell apartments comprising 12 one-bedroom, 19 two-bedroom, 29 three-bedroom apartments and two premium penthouses. It also incorporates 86 affordable co-living dwellings, which would be managed in perpetuity by a Community Housing Provider.

That balance between traditional apartments and affordable housing reflects the NSW Government's push to increase housing diversity around major transport infrastructure.

The proposal has been lodged concurrently with a rezoning application, with Zurich arguing the site is ideally positioned to support additional housing given its immediate proximity to public transport, employment and services.

"The proposal aims to respond to the housing challenges facing Sydney through the delivery of diverse housing types in a highly accessible location," the design report by fjcstudio states. It also seeks to improve pedestrian amenity through upgrades to Blue Street Plaza while creating a high-performing residential building that responds to the surrounding context.

<img alt="Zurich" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="36082e15-c636-4481-bb68-5a5f6443fe39" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-07-22%20at%2010.41.36%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=5P6VD.fvmqjQfIG3TWWMRXxQWiQBjeFB" />

Rather than replacing the commercial building, fjcstudio has developed a design that works with the existing structural framework above the rail corridor, an approach that significantly reduces demolition while allowing the site to be repositioned as a mixed-use residential precinct.

The existing structural constraints have informed much of the building's design, including its relationship with Blue Street and surrounding public spaces.

The building has been designed as a slender tower rising above a clearly defined podium, with vertically expressed façades intended to reduce the perceived bulk while reinforcing North Sydney's emerging skyline.

According to fjcstudio, the architectural language responds directly to the surrounding commercial towers while maintaining a finer grain expression more closely aligned with the neighbouring Lavender Bay streetscape.

The tower incorporates articulated façade elements, landscaped podium edges and recessed upper levels to soften its appearance and improve pedestrian amenity below.

A significant component of the proposal is the revitalisation of Blue Street Plaza.

The existing public space has long served as one of the primary pedestrian connections between North Sydney Station, Greenwood Plaza and Blue Street, yet its role is expected to become even more important following the opening of Sydney Metro.

Zurich's proposal seeks to strengthen that role by improving landscaping, introducing new retail frontages, enhancing pedestrian permeability and creating more active edges throughout the day and evening.

Ground floor retail would wrap the plaza, while separate residential and co-living entries have been designed to improve wayfinding without reducing street activation.

Landscape design has been integrated throughout the podium and public realm, softening what is currently one of the most heavily urbanised parts of North Sydney.

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

fjcstudio has carefully oriented apartments towards Sydney Harbour and the CBD while using privacy blades and articulated façades to minimise overlooking between neighbouring buildings.

Large framed openings along the western elevation maximise harbour outlooks, while the eastern apartments have been angled towards the south-east to improve privacy from neighbouring development.

The project forms part of the continuing transformation of North Sydney from a predominantly commercial CBD into a genuine mixed-use city centre.

Since the completion of Victoria Cross Metro Station, developers have increasingly shifted their attention towards residential projects capable of leveraging the area's unparalleled transport connectivity.

&nbsp;

FiveX recently lodged plans for a 61-storey, 490-apartment tower that would become one of the tallest residential buildings in North Sydney if approved.

Aqualand continues to expand its Lower North Shore presence following the completion of AURA on Walker Street and its recent St Leonards and Roseville proposals.

Developers are also progressing projects throughout Walker Street, Miller Street and the Victoria Cross precinct as demand for well-located owner-occupier apartments continues to strengthen.

First look: Zurich targets North Sydney office conversion with 148-unit proposal above Metro station

Busy developer Aqualand Prestige has formally taken the next step in its expansion across Sydney's Lower North Shore, lodging a State Significant Development Application (SSDA) for its long-held Archer Street site in Chatswood.

The application covers <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/51-55-archer-street-chatswood-nsw-2067">51-55 Archer Street</a>, a 1,767 sqm amalgamated site on the eastern edge of the Chatswood CBD, where the developer is seeking approval for a 45-level mixed-use tower delivering 114 apartments, including a significant affordable housing component, alongside retail, commercial space and six basement levels of parking.

The SSDA marks the latest milestone for a project Aqualand has been quietly progressing over the past two years. The developer first secured the site for its Aqualand Prestige platform before undertaking an alternative design excellence process with PTW Architects, ultimately avoiding a formal design competition through the Housing Delivery Authority pathway.

The proposal has evolved considerably from Aqualand's original concept. The revised scheme has been designed around larger owner-occupier product, with an unusually high proportion of three and four-bedroom apartments, targeting the more affluent buyer profile, and downsizer, emerging across the North Shore.

<img alt="Archer St" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="0171204c-5811-41b5-9b09-2335d1b7c3d0" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-07-22%20at%208.52.48%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=6YTuxfq.puZo7k2wbfgemcO5K3QfXYGQ" />

The 114-apartment mix comprises six studios, 27 one-bedroom apartments, 18 two-bedroom apartments, 50 three-bedroom residences and 13 four-bedroom homes. A quarter of the building will be dedicated to affordable housing, well above the mandated 15 per cent&nbsp;

PTW has structured the building vertically, with affordable housing across levels one to six, premium apartments through levels seven to 31, duplex skyhomes on klevels 32 to 43, a penthouse on level 44, and a rooftop plant level above. Six basement levels will provide resident parking and servicing.

The tower is proposed to reach approximately 154 metres, placing it among a growing collection of residential high-rises transforming Chatswood's skyline.

Rather than competing purely on height, PTW says the design has been driven by creating a slimmer tower capable of delivering significantly larger apartments.

"The primary objective of this project was to create a distinctive building that stands out from the recently approved or built structures in the Chatswood area," the design report states, noting the structural efficiency allows greater investment into apartment quality and resident amenity.

Residents would have access to more than 450 sqm of communal open space including landscaped gardens, swimming pool, rooftop entertaining areas, fitness spaces, community gardens, children's play areas and barbecue facilities.

A major focus of the design has been the public domain.

The ground plane has been opened up through landscaped terraces inspired by Willoughby's sandstone ridges, with native planting, public seating, artwork, retail activation and a series of gathering spaces intended to soften what has traditionally been a hard commercial streetscape.

The landscape strategy references Blue Gum forests once common throughout the area, while incorporating Indigenous storytelling, public art and lighting installations to strengthen the connection to Country.

Chatswood has been one of Sydney's busiest apartment markets over the past 12 months, with a steady pipeline of both new project launches and fresh development applications.

Hyecorp recently launched Celine, a 122-apartment development just along Archer Street, while Changfa and Huirong Group are progressing The Anderson, an 84-apartment project on Anderson Street.

Develotek recently secured approval for a 101-apartment tower on Pacific Highway, while Tian An LFD received the green light for Hammond Greens, its apartment development on the edge of the Chatswood Bowling Club.

Commercial property developer FiveX is also making its move into the residential market. Last month it lodged plans for a 61-storey tower with 490 apartments, which, if approved, would become one of the tallest residential buildings in Chatswood.

Read more:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/news/nsw/first-look-fivex-targets-chatswood-skyline-with-61-storey-tower-after-north-sydney-plans">First look: FiveX targets Chatswood skyline with 61-storey tower after North Sydney plans</a>

Aqualand is also expanding its development pipeline following the launch of its luxury residential brand, Aqualand Prestige. The developer has delivered a string of high-end apartment projects across Sydney's affluent suburbs over the past decade, most recently AURA by Aqualand on Walker Street in North Sydney.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=30959 project_image_fid=292863]

It has since quietly assembled its next wave of projects.

Earlier this year Aqualand launched Boronia in Roseville, a boutique 111-apartment development on Larkin Street. The project is one of the first significant apartment developments to launch in the suburb ahead of what is expected to become one of Sydney's most active new housing precincts under the NSW Government's Low and Mid-Rise Housing reforms, which allow greater density around train stations.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=152095 project_image_fid=373685]

The developer has also lodged plans for a two-tower, 413-apartment development on Herbert Street in nearby St Leonards, further strengthening its presence across the Lower North Shore.

Beyond that, Aqualand remains behind the final stage of Barangaroo, where plans will deliver a five-hectare mixed-use precinct comprising new homes, retail, hospitality and community facilities, alongside a new Metro entrance and more than two hectares of public open space, completing the Barangaroo precinct.

Read more:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/news/nsw/central-barangaroo-development-takes-big-step-with-concept-proposal-approval">Central Barangaroo development takes big step with concept proposal approval</a>

Read more:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/news/nsw/first-look-aqualand-joins-st-leonards-apartment-party">First look: Aqualand joins St Leonards apartment party</a> 
&nbsp;

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

First look: Aqualand pushes ahead with Chatswood apartment tower as SSDA lodged for Archer Street

Mass timber is becoming an increasingly popular construction material in apartment developments, but Adelaide developer <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/otello">Otello</a> is taking the approach a step further.

At its new <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/flowe-bowden-18-gibson-street-bowden-sa-5007">Flowe Bowden</a> development, the exposed cross-laminated timber (CLT) structure isn't just about reducing the building's environmental footprint. It also forms the foundation of a broader wellness strategy, influencing everything from indoor air quality and natural materials to the way residents move through and experience the building.

The 115-apartment mixed-use development, designed by Melbourne-based architecture practice Fieldwork, will occupy a prominent island site opposite Bowden Village Reserve, combining one, two and three-bedroom apartments with retail and a dedicated wellness destination.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=152022 project_image_fid=375528]

Wellness isn't confined to a gym or shared resident facility at Flowe. Instead, Fieldwork embedded the concept into the building itself.

The development has been split into two residential wings connected by a naturally ventilated central breezeway, replacing traditional enclosed corridors with open-air walkways that improve natural light, encourage cross ventilation and create more opportunities for neighbourly interaction.

"Rather than treating wellness as something that only happens on the ground floor, our response integrates it throughout the building, which led us to ask what it really means to design a healthy building," Fieldwork Director Quino Holland said.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=152022 project_image_fid=375531]

The building's architecture also reflects Bowden's industrial heritage. The lower podium references the area's historic brick and sandstone buildings, while the upper levels transition to exposed CLT, allowing the timber structure to become a defining feature throughout the apartments and shared spaces.

The use of mass timber sits alongside a range of sustainability initiatives, including a fully electric, gas-free design, rooftop solar and a targeted 5 Star Green Star rating.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=152022 project_image_fid=375524]

Inside the residences, the focus remains on natural, durable materials. Blackbutt engineered timber flooring, exposed CLT ceilings, porcelain surfaces and warm timber joinery create a calming interior palette, while low-VOC finishes and responsibly sourced materials have been selected to improve indoor air quality.

Kitchens have been designed as the centrepiece of each apartment, featuring porcelain island benchtops, timber-look cabinetry and brushed steel tapware, with layouts that maximise natural light and ventilation.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=152022 project_image_fid=375530]

The more traditional interpretation of wellness comes in the form of Level Eleven, a two-storey wellness club spanning the ground floor, mezzanine and first floor.

The facility will include a gym, yoga and reformer Pilates studios, Finnish and infrared saunas, magnesium hot and cold plunge pools, and dedicated recovery spaces. Unlike many residential wellness facilities, Level Eleven will also operate commercially, allowing the broader Bowden community to access the venue while giving residents exclusive membership benefits.

The ground floor has also been designed around everyday living. A café overlooking Bowden Village Reserve will activate the street frontage, while a bike workshop with tool storage, co-working space and dog wash has been incorporated to support daily routines and encourage interaction between residents.

"Flowe brings together my two biggest passions, creating places and creating healthier lives," Otello founder Daniel Harris said.

"We wanted to create something Adelaide hasn't seen before, a genuinely healthy building, where the way you live is lifted without even trying."

Flowe is positioned directly opposite Bowden Village Reserve and within walking distance of Bowden Railway Station and the Adelaide Entertainment Centre, placing future residents just minutes from the Adelaide CBD while remaining connected to one of the city's most established urban renewal precincts.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=152022]

Jonathan Chancellor

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News