Table of Contents
A proposal to streamline the approval process for secondary homes on large rural properties in New South Wales is gaining momentum, potentially easing the state’s housing crisis while sparking debate over local council control and the future of agricultural land. The move comes as families like the Waltons, who reside on a sprawling 40,000 square metre property in Yarramundi, face significant hurdles in building additional homes to accommodate multi-generational living.
Pamela Misius, 77, currently shares her Yarramundi home with her daughter, son-in-law, and their four children. The arrangement began when her daughter, Haley Walton, and her husband, Phil, moved back to assist with the care of Ms. Misius’s late husband, who was suffering from dementia. “Then they stayed on because I couldn’t see living here on my own with just the upkeep of the property,” Ms. Misius explained.
As the family grew, the Waltons sought approval from Hawkesbury City Council to build a second dwelling on the property, envisioning a setup where they could provide care for Ms. Misius while receiving support with childcare. However, their initial application in January 2019 was rejected, followed by a subsequent renovation proposal denied in November 2021. Frustrated with the bureaucratic process, Phil Walton, a 40-year-old stonemason and construction company owner, undertook an unauthorized renovation, ultimately leading to a legal battle with the council.
Despite the legal challenges, Walton ultimately prevailed. “There is no merit or jurisdictional reason not to grant development consent,” ruled Commissioner Elizabeth Espinosa of the Land and Environment Court. However, the victory came at a steep price. “We’ve spent $200,000 fighting this,” Walton stated.
A Proposal to Cut Councils Out of the Picture
The Walton’s experience has fueled a broader inquiry into the feasibility of bypassing council authority for secondary dwellings on larger properties. A NSW parliamentary inquiry is currently investigating whether to create a new provision within the state’s planning laws, potentially overriding local council decisions. This proposed “blanket rule” would apply to properties exceeding 20,200 square metres – of which there are an estimated 240,000 across the state – zoned for rural (RU1 to RU6) or environmental (C3 and C4) use.
John Ruddick, chair of the Select Committee on Rural Housing and Second Dwelling Reform, argues the change is necessary to address the state’s housing shortage. “It’s not gonna cost the government anything, and it’s going to help with the housing crisis,” Ruddick said. He believes excessive “red tape” is currently hindering property development and limiting opportunities for families to live together. The committee’s formation enjoyed unanimous support in the Legislative Council, though the government is not obligated to adopt its recommendations.
Multi-Generational Housing as a Solution?
The proposed reforms are predicated on the idea that facilitating multi-generational housing could alleviate pressure on the housing market, reduce the burden of aged care, and lower childcare costs. This model of communal living was once commonplace in regional Australia. The NSW government acknowledged the potential benefits, stating in a submission that the proposed reforms “have merit, but steps must be taken to ensure additional dwellings minimise adverse impacts.”
One key benefit of building a second home on an existing lot is the elimination of land costs. Ruddick identified the Hawkesbury, Orange, Bega, and Port Macquarie as areas likely to see the most activity, with potential for growth in the Mid North Coast, Shoalhaven, Snowy Monaro, and Tamworth regions. He noted a shift in societal norms, stating, “It used to be standard practice to leave home when you’re a late teenager, early 20s. It’s now almost becoming a standard practice to delay that 10 years.”
Concerns Over Affordability and Rural Land Use
However, not everyone is convinced the proposed changes will significantly improve housing affordability. Nicole Gurran, professor of Urban and Regional Planning at the University of Sydney, argues the policy is insufficient. “This is not a measure that’s going to address housing affordability,” Gurran said. “It’s talking about simply making it easier to do something that you can already do.” She maintains that councils should retain their decision-making powers, emphasizing the complexity of rural land development. “It’s almost impossible to have a blanket policy for developing on rural land. We’ll have to deal with exceptions as they arise, which they will.”
Local councils share these concerns, stressing the importance of individually assessing building plans in relation to their surroundings. Local Government NSW (LGNSW) argues that any reforms must allow councils to tailor requirements to local conditions. A significant concern revolves around the financial implications for councils, as additional dwellings could become “unratable” – meaning they wouldn’t contribute to local revenue. LGNSW stated that any reforms must be accompanied by “rate reform that reflects the true cost of servicing properties with multiple dwellings.” Philip Walton indicated a willingness to contribute, stating he would be happy to pay 50% more in rates if a second home were permitted.
Furthermore, LGNSW warns that allowing homes on farmland could lead to future zoning changes from agricultural to residential use. Professor Gurran echoed this concern, stating, “You want to avoid cutting up that rural land, you know, by stealth or in an unplanned way. Once you change a land used from being primarily agricultural and shift it towards being more residential, then the future of that land starts to get locked in place.”
However, the NSW Farmers Association countered that the lack of housing is actually hindering agricultural productivity. Rebecca Reardon, vice president of the association, explained that farmers struggle to find accommodation for workers, impacting succession planning and making it difficult to attract essential personnel like teachers, nurses, and police to rural communities. She advocated for greater flexibility, suggesting farmers should be able to build second or even third dwellings to address these needs.
The inquiry’s report is due in February next year, and its findings will likely shape the future of rural development and housing policy in New South Wales.
Related reading
- Why Santa Fe Could Change Forever in 2026 (news-usa.today)
