Greens planning spokesperson Jo Clay says Canberra has reached a stage of maturity where it needs to set limits on growth. Photo: Michelle Kroll.
The decision to set a limit on urban growth in Canberra means the ACT Government must do more to boost housing within that footprint, the Property Council of Australia has warned.
On Thursday (10 April), the Legislative Assembly passed a motion from the Greens’ Jo Clay calling on the government to set an Urban Growth Boundary for Canberra, with legislation to be introduced by June 2027.
The Property Council says the decision to draw a line under future urban sprawl must avoid shutting the door on well-located greenfield opportunities and be matched with meaningful reforms to unlock more homes within existing suburbs.
Property Council ACT & Capital Region Executive Director Ashlee Berry said the decision only sharpened the need to tackle long-standing barriers to infill development – starting with Lease Variation Charges (LVC) and third-party appeal rights.
“Ruling out future greenfield growth would mean we have no choice but to get smarter within the existing footprint, and right now, the system is standing in the way,” Ms Berry said.
“We need all options on the table to fix Canberra’s housing crisis. Restricting supply, particularly in areas already under investigation for future growth, may prove short-sighted.”
Ms Berry said the current investment and tax settings in the ACT deterred urban renewal, with Council research showing LVC were making many infill projects financially unviable, and third-party appeals – particularly to ACAT – creating delays and uncertainty that discourage investment.
“The ACT needs 165,000 new homes by 2060, and that won’t happen unless we unlock more housing supply, including in the ‘missing middle’ – terraces, townhouses, and low-rise apartments,” she said.
“We support the vision of a compact, sustainable city. But we can’t meet our housing goals with one hand tied behind our back. It’s time to remove the barriers, unlock more land – both infill and greenfield – and build the homes our growing city needs.”
In a deal with the Greens that sidelined the Opposition, Labor supported the motion, but the Canberra Liberals attacked it as tokenism and a missed opportunity to have a genuine discussion about how and where Canberra should grow.
The motion also called on the government to consider the need to preserve land of environmental value, the future land needs of the Territory, the need to protect the Western Edge, and the need to preserve agricultural land use, such as in the Majura Valley, as established in the Eastern Broadacre study.
Ms Clay told the Assembly that endless growth was unsustainable, caused permanent damage to the environment and increased the cost of city services such as transport.
“We’re losing biodiversity and habitat, and offsets can’t compensate for it,” she said.
Ms Clay said sprawling cities left people a long way from their jobs, schools, and the services they needed.
“Distant homes, greenfield development is also expensive to build,” she said.
“It costs the ACT Government significantly more to build than infill as it requires new roads, new sewerage, new stormwater networks, new schools.
“The average cost to government in Whitlam was $68,000 per dwelling compared to $6500 per dwelling in Woden, and of course, those costs are going to be passed on to the buyer.”
Mr Clay said setting a boundary was the sign of a mature city, would provide certainty for developers, and the ACT would still have the homes it needed, particularly the needed missing middle.
Liberal planning spokesperson Peter Cain said the government was hypocritical about urban sprawl. Photo: Thomas Lucraft.
Planning Minister Chris Steel said the Territory had a limited amount of land remaining for new suburbs.
“We can’t rely on new greenfield suburbs alone to house our growing population, and we also can’t accept unrealistic political promises of new far ranging suburbs to address the future housing needs in Canberra, like a new suburbs that were proposed during the election campaign by other parties in Kowen,” he said.
Mr Steel said the current investigation into the Western Edge was vital to understanding what a future urban growth boundary could look like
“We didn’t want to rule out no change, which could be a change to protect the key areas and environmental values, and that is a decision that needs to be based on studies that are under way,” he said.
Mr Steel said the government’s planning reform work to enable infill housing, especially the missing middle, should also be considered in setting an urban growth boundary.
“That means making sure that there are opportunities for sustainable development within the urban footprint, the existing urban footprint that we have, and that work is well under way, so it does make sense now to look at what that urban boundary might look like,” he said.
Canberra Liberals planning spokesperson Peter Cain told the Assembly it was hypocritical of Labor to talk about urban sprawl when it would be building new suburbs across the border in Ginninderry.
Mr Cain said Labor’s reforms had so far yielded very little new infill housing, with just 30 applicants as a result of its dual occupancy changes.
“We believe in exploring sensible and respectful options for filling in the current footprint,” he said.
“But the Canberra Liberals also believe in exploring the potential for the areas around Canberra, without necessarily drawing a line.”
Mr Cain said the Greens had compromised on its own policies and the motion was part of the deal to secure support for Labor to govern in minority.
