Hey! Hope you enjoyed the video. Check out my new Substack here: buildingbeautifully.substack.com/ Check out my Ko-Fi here: ko-fi.com/buildingbeautifully# More social links and sources from the video in the description!
@RAM_845 Thats actually crazy, st. mary's was one of the most flat and boring areas when i lived there, only hosting a football club? i think development over there is the perfect link between the bustling centres of penrith and blacktown, as well as the new metro to the airport thats being built
The bigger issue with the new high rise apartments is that the companies that are contracted to build them are extremely dodgy. There was this apartment in Homebush that very quickly developed cracks and had to be evacuated and a lot of other new apartments all over Sydney look awful after about 5 or so years.
part of the issue with that is that the government allowed like, private inspectors for buildings or some such, for the purpose of speeding up building granny flats that dont need a full on professional inspection and shit some fucking how a 20+ storey appartment complexes count as granny flats though, likely after building companies did abit of convincing the government. so they just barely even require inspections to make sure theyre built to code at all
I once had the option of getting a 4 bedroom penthouse apartment with city views at strathfield station or a 1 bedroom apartment in the city on a lower floor, for roughly the same price. Something seemed suss about that. I bought in the city, because at the time most of the strathfield apartments next to the station were under investigation for poor building. I sometimes wonder what it would of been like but think I made the right decision.
Agree. I also looked into strata fees. Wow! $7,000 to $10,000 per year? How is that affordable? It’s not. High rises are too expensive to own and build and shouldn’t be the only option. I know of many developments with issues/cracks/dangers: Olympic park Mascot Castle Hill Canterbury Homebush Wentworth Point How many more? It’s too risky.
That's a problem with regulation and government. The idea behind it still sound though. It's not transit-oriented idea's fault that the previous government decided to say let them regulate themselves
The unique aspect of Wolli Creek is that the 2 tracks go to Central via the airport lines/out to MacArthur, while two tracks go to Bondi Junction/Kings Cross/Central or down to Cronulla/Waterfall/Wollongong etc. That’s a diverse range of areas you can access from the one station.
Wolli Creek is stupidly two offset stations instead of on top of each other with a short set of stairs connecting the platforms. And it is soooooo ugly, like being at the bottom of a concrete drain!
I do just hope that they don't forget about medium density, my personal favourite. Buildings where you can get to your apartment without _having_ to take a lift (~4-6 storeys max). But in so many of these places, it goes from high density 20+ storey buildings directly to single-family homes. Especially in more historic areas like the Inner West, would love to see more medium density built above the historic shopfronts but for many blocks, as opposed to a couple blocks of brand new high density and then nothing. Consider it a Paris-style way of densifying!
4 is way too small and a waste of money. Perhaps a compromise of 7-9 storeys mixed commercial residential with corner blocks allowed to reach 12-16 storeys. That would boost jobs and businesses and bring a more vibrant future to the area.
@@marcozolo3536 The problem is to go higher, you need to go wider, which makes it harder to fit above existing structures (again the intent is to combine the old and new so you get both the character and the increased density). Also, that would require a lift. I don't want to live in a building where I can't get home if the power goes out!
@@Respectable_Username you can get character by leaving the facades and building the tall structure within. It's what Kensington is doing on its 3 Anzac and Todman Avenue developments. You don't need a row of 100 year plus terraces to achieve that
@@Respectable_Usernamepretty much all high rise buildings have their own power generators. And well designed ones that are large enough may even have multiple lifts with independent power lines and isolation mechanisms, so that if one lift or powerline is taken out of service, the other one would still be available. Redundancy means that it is practically improbable to be left out completely unable to use the lift.
There's a massive point you didn't mention. There are more options than detached houses and high-rise towers. Middle-density options can massively increase the population density without changing the feel of the area or looking too dense from the outside. In the UK we have a lot of terraces. Small housing units with minimal garden space. They achieve decent density while still only being 2-3 storeys tall and still looking like a quiet residential street.
That’s exactly what Sydney needs. Not 30 storey towering chicken coops not fit for any family. You cannot find a decent apartment with space containing 4 or 5 bedrooms (one will be a study for working) with 2 or 3 parking spaces (yes, we still need our vehicles and storage space). Sydney is devoid of options.
You're correct. This is sometimes called the 'missing middle' in North America. I agree that it is a good option to pursue in a lot of places, especially inner-city suburbs that are still mostly detached housing. But the problem is, the NIMBYs that oppose 'high-rise' towers in their city are the same that live in detached home suburbia and think it's great; they don't realise that building high-rises is literally the compromise that lets them keep their suburban hellscapes. If they don't want high-rises then we could remove detached housing and entirely rely on middle-density housing but they'd oppose that as well. In the end it's only about them.
I will confess, I was a bit of a NIMBY myself when apartment blocks started popping up all over Epping and its surrounding suburbs in the mid-2010s. I felt it was ruining the feel of the area and was concerned about what effect the sudden increase in population would have on existing infrastructure. I lamented when I first drove along Epping Road towards Epping and saw apartment blocks in the background where previously I could only see bushland. I also remember looking through a window in one of my old church's halls and seeing new apartment blocks in the background instead of blue sky. That being said, I was glad to see the ugly building on the corner of Epping Road and Langston Place go, being replaced with a much nicer-looking mixed use development. By this point I had mostly gotten used to the new apartments and the new Langston Place development is probably the nicest looking of them all with the IGA local on the bottom level making this a pretty good example of mixed-use development. That being said, the fact that the corner of Blaxland Road and Epping Road still hasn't been redeveloped despite the land being acquired by the government years ago does suggest that Epping's redevelopment may have occurred at too fast a pace and it seems they are now putting further developments along Beecroft Road and Rawson Street on hold until the demand increases. Also, near Cliff Road, you will find a couple of houses which have been abandoned for years but still not completely demolished as the planned apartment block was postponed. Of course, thanks to videos by this channel and several others, I now have a much bigger appreciation for high-rise development assuming it is done properly and is prioritised in locations near train stations. Of course, there does need to be a balance as some people will do whatever they can to avoid suburbs with such high rise developments.
Hello fellow Epping resident! I've lived and grown up here my whole life and seen it change from the mid 2000s from when I was a kid to now in 2023 as a late 20s adult and it has been interesting to say the least. Epping is unfortunately a major artery for train and cars and although the metro has helped, the suburb did not grow with the infrastructure to support thousands of new residents in apartments on Carlingford road and surrounding areas. As you said, the roads surrounding the bridge are horrendous choking points and I do worry about more and more residents being crammed into such a small town centre as Epping. This suburb is really tired. Half the shops on Beecroft road are closed/empty and it's very uninviting. I really do think Epping could benefit from a "Chatswoodesque" type make over if Epping centre (Rawson st. where Coles is) was re-developed and the roads in Epping were actually fixed. Until this point, guess we'll see.
Fellow Epping resident. I love The Langston too! It seems to have been built as somewhere that people would want to live and sold to people who genuinely want to move in. I noticed there were salespeople targeting people getting off work at Epping station, no mention of rental returns anywhere. I thought the high-rises on Oxford and Cambridge street are Ok too… Cambridge St is a lost cause, but Oxford St has become more vibrant with the extra shop frontage and foot traffic. The opposite end of the spectrum is the medium-density wasteland along Carlingford Road. No accessibility, no services, nothing but shoddily designed rubbish being offloaded to small time property speculators who aren’t paying attention. The ones on Pembroke St and around Maida Rd are almost as bad. So people are thinking that medium density sounds like a reasonable compromise, but it seems (at least in Epping though I suspect it’s universal) that the economics means that only a huge tower complex can justify a fantastic location and provide enough concentration to support the mix of businesses that make the area better rather than worse.
@@calebmoore1582 I agree regarding Carlingford Road. The older apartment blocks on the south side of the road are much nicer than the ones on the northern side. And it's not just Carlingford Road, it's also Cliff Road and parts of Kent Street and Hazlewood Pl that have new apartments.
As a Crows Nest part-time "NIMBY" and having interactions with the people who were protesting against the over station development at the new Metro stop, I think the feeling here is the same as yours at Epping. We're not against development, and it's not some kind of elitism (for most, anyway). We know we live in a desirable area, and Sydney needs to stop sprawling, but development has to be appropriate. From 2001 until the Census of 2021, the population of St Leonards (where I mostly lived) went from around 2500 to 7500. That is not including the newer and bigger buildings that have only been finished/occupied in the past 12 months (such as 88/JQZ has 650 apartments alone), and the no-doubt large number of students who normally live here not being counted. Add to that the redevelopment of "St Leonards South" turning around 40 houses into apartment buildings, which will another 2000 new apartments. All walkable to the Metro and St Leonards rail. People aren't excited about it but do realise it's going to happen. The issue with the development over the station was it's scale, and in particular the massive shadowing issues it causes. The building is on a high point of a ridge line (pacific highway follows the ridge all the way to Chatswood), so anything built there will dominate the landscape. Crows Nest has a lot of heritage protected single level row houses and shops (so limited ability to change the design) where light is already an issue. Due to the geography, Wollstonecraft on the other side has even worse access to light as it is. Finally, the Metro will only increase the connectedness of the area marginally. We already have basically turn-up-and-go rail at St Leonards (every 3 minutes during peak, 5 minutes' walk away) and busses to the city every few minutes from Cammeray (next stop Wynyard) or Crows Nest via North Sydney. The Metro is mostly about getting people from the Hills to the city, not the Lower North Shore. A station in the Artarmon industrial precinct would probably have been a better choice, allowing for a Mascot like transformation there.
@@barmstrong8 the lesson to take way from Epping is that it’s only the absolutely enormous developments like the Langston that have been having a positive contribution, with public space, retail, through foot traffic, etc. Its good to want council to moderate development, but size just isn’t a good measure. It should be: 1) public benefit in terms of public areas, courtyards, playgrounds and thoroughfares that are included in the proposal 2) desirability of the housing itself, ensuring that Crows Nest is still regarded as somewhere that people want to live. 3) general quality and finish of the development, ensuring it won’t look terrible in 10 years I’d say the proposed over-metro development gives a better than average score in all of those. You don’t want rows of medium rise, cookie cutter cardboard boxes, which is the alternative.
@@rileyeyeyy difficult to do though - Bondi Junction has to be right up there, with trains at least every 10min all day and every 3min in peak hour, connected straight to Kings Cross, the city and Wolli Creek plus Hurstville. Has a lovely pedestrianised strip, good towers and such. Only complaint is the sheer number of buses that turn up there, its nuts. If only some of them were light rail as done originally, there used to be 2 different tram services to Bondi Beach, a Bronte service and a Randwick and Coogee service.
@@BigBlueMan118 I’m not living in the t4 I live on the t8 ( I’m happy cause 8s my lucky #) but I think MacArthur is a pretty good stop and would have to be up there. Country services, bus interchange, services direct to airport , and city circle every 15 minutes and it had a great location being right in the middle of wsyd Campbelltown campus with a walking bridge to it and MacArthur square which is huge and is connected right to it.
@@rileyeyeyy a HUGE amount of valuable land close to the station is taken up by surface parking though, and North of the station is a wasteland. Also no dense housing. So I would say has good potential, but needs improvement! Castle Hill is similar but better, perhaps with too many roads and cars though.
Another absolute banger from you Sharath, honestly maybe one of your best yet. I really liked the effort you put into making that graph, it definitely did not go unnoticed by me, an avid enjoyer of graphs. Your videos just keep getting better and better, I really liked the funny skits and all the effort you go to to shoot on location and get relevant drone footage. You’re going places for sure!
I think many people prefer European style medium density development over high density towering apartments. I know it's an overused example but look at Amsterdam, they have density and public transit, but still maintain a quiet and leafy feel in most residential areas.
@@abeille3150 1.8m people in about 220km2, vs 6m people in 12,000+km2. If the Dutch and Europeans can “build beautifully” in such a small area, why do we have to make our gigantic city so ugly and broken with haphazard pockets of high density? Medium density everywhere would be far better than building Incongruous Towers wherever there’s a bit of land available.
@@abeille3150 Amsterdam is only a little over 200 square kilometres where Sydney is well over 10,000. Talking in density, they have about 10x the population in the same space.
@@abeille3150 If you take the Randstat/Ring City as a whole i.e. inc. Rotterdam, Den Haag, Utrecht, it is a comparable population - and it works much better as a mult-centre city than what they are trying to do with Sydney.
Your points are exactly why I love areas like Chatswood. Currently living near Rhodes and it's just amazing being able to do everything I could ever want within 5 minutes walking distance and never having to enter a car because I live in the heart of a TOD. The frequency of trains isn't at the standard I'd expect yet but compared to the lifestyle I had in the outer west I'm more than willing to put up with it lol.
Can you please do an episode on the edmonson park/leppington area and greater south-western syndey as whole? i think the development they're taking over there is really interesting and deserves a look
Carlingford is a great example of the problem with so much development. Developers build enormous apartments but the same dingy shopping centre from 1970 remains untouched, and quickly becomes overwhelmed with demand that it can't handle.
Great video which highlighted perspectives. I think the local examples like Chatswood are great at highlighting what’s possible but maybe try comparisons with even more ambitious examples overseas too where really integrated TOD can drive great outcomes. Having shared access to great public infrastructure, commercial developments, facilities and amenities, or even some private shared facilities, can really change perceptions on exactly what people need in terms of size/space within their own homes.
Hey, I think you'd like the Substack! Latest article is about what Sydney can learn from Singapore, and its a great overseas example of how TOD can provide amazing outcomes.
Hopefully Perth keeps going forward with its metro network. It will need it since it is projected to more than double in population over the next 30 years. This is so significant since its the fastest growing city in Australia. Even Sydney is forecast to grow an additional 3 million people in the next 30 years, putting it around the size of present day London at just under 9 million. Perth should be around 5 million by then some putting the upper end of projections as much as 6.4 million by the 2050s. That's a million more than present day Sydney
@@rileythedudeisn’t metronet just doing 1 connection and some line extensions? There’s still going to be massive black zones with no access to trains like south Perth and curtin
The one thing I fear with high density living is if the apartments are poorly built (think Mascot towers, developed by Toplace, ugly cookie cutter) so many people could be screwed. Also yes Carlo gives me nightmares.
The problem with TOD and high density living is that they do not also plan for family community spaces like parks, swimming, playgrounds for different ages. Yes there is some but nothing compared to how many live in the area. Having shopping is not enough for community living. For instance, our area is building 7 apartment blocks within already established neighbourhood, yet the community swimming pool can at max hold 30 people (and thats crowding) and has a public gym with 4 pieces of equipment. This is to be shared amongst roughly 10000+ people.
That is fair that they dont plan enough for it but in theory at least high density means you can have a high proportion of quality public space ideally 30% while still having many more people there. High density should go hand in hand with more public space and amenities than suburbs as the public space functions as people's front yard. We just need planners to commit to allocating sufficient public space like they do in paramatta's new riverside developments
I agree fuzzy. Try finding a decent apartment for a family. You cannot! None 4/5 bedrooms. We also use one bedroom as a study. We need 2 car spaces minimum if not 3. Free standing housing offers this. New developments don’t and that’s a big issue.
Chatswood, the Milk tea capital of Sydney? The people of Cabramatta and Burwood would like a chat with you😂 Another great video as always, its good to see the differing perspectives on TOD, but as you say, change is inevitable (even in my local suburb despite having the 'heritage feel' for so long)
Is change inevitable or not depends how strong can the locals vote? If this Premier keeps ignoring the voice of some LGAs, can this Paety win next term? Regional Areas may not even vote him if he put too much focus in Syd.
I live in Melbourne and stayed in Sydney overnight on our in laws visit to the central coast Sydney is massive! I’ve been to London and Paris and Sydney had the similar multiple CBD’s everywhere. I remember driving on some bridge near Gladesville and the views, I almost crashed, what a massive, often daunting but beautiful city, a world city really.
I feel the affordability side of things should be further addressed. Traditionally homes close to railways stations have always cost more the buy and rent than those further out from those areas, and the TODs you provided as examples are expensive areas, especially those on the north side of the harbour. Where are those on Centrelink benefits and low incomes going to live? Certainly not Wolli Creek, Chatswood or Crows Nest. Building more apartments doesn;t necessarily mean more affordable options, especially when such developments are profit driven.
True, but there is a trickle down effect. When you increase the amount of unaffordable housing, you increase the likelihood that rich people will live in said housing thus reducing the demand for cheaper housing and thus making the cheaper options more affordable.
Wolli Creek and hurstville are south of the harbor, and are arguably inner west. The reason they are expensive is that TODs are great places to live, especially for those of us who don't want to own a car. Wolli Creek was built on old cheap industrial land, close to the airport, right next to a highway, the only reason the place is desirable is because of the TOD. If we keep up with building TODs, and as the buildings get older, prices can become reasonable. Remember the station is only 22 years old, and the suburb only 20 and much of the development is younger still.
I'm super happy about you mentioning the crisis at Crow's Nest. As a resident at Crow's Nest, I can confirm that we finally have the opportunity to say something about the crisis in Crow's Nest. One of the votes released is a vote regarding how Pacific Hwy, 3-15 Falcon Street and 8 Alexander Street will be rezoned to mixed use. Although, I still hate how the Pacific Hwy tears through our friendly area (My Opinion). I really hope the upcoming metro station here can encourage much more TOD, and reduce the need for a highway tearing through Crow's Nest.
Would be interesting to know where all the pacific hwy drivers are going and how these journeys could be altered. At the very least the 1km stretch around St Leonards station and Crows Nest Metro should be 30kmh, if not the entire 3km corridor from North Sydney to St Leonards.
@@BigBlueMan118 im curious about where all that traffic comes from as well. ive lived and worked for many years around north sydney, lane cove etc and commuted by bus, train and foot throughout the area. to my knowledge there is no toll on the freeway between north sydney and epping road? so it would seem the traffic has to be local on that stretch of the pacific highway? though maybe some northern beaches traffic takes it as a detour as i believe the ramps from falcon street are tolled?
The length of the Pacific Highway from North Sydney to St Leonards should be made 1 lane in either direction and speed limit reduced to 30km/h. Kerbside parking should be removed and footpaths widened to make the whole area nicer.
Although I live on the Central Coast, Chatswood is one of my favourite places to visit in Sydney (mostly for the Asian influence - having some great dining options besides the main takeaway chains is amazing.) I think your video highlights a great reason why - the suburb has made itself an accessible, attractive place to live. If only Sydney house prices weren't so ridiculous. Keep up the great work, love watching your videos!
An good example of TOD on the edge of Sydney is Edmondson Park. I couldn't believe such a cool small city centre existed there. Definitely worth checking out!
TOD can be conditionally supported by the community provided that: 1 public units that are mainly for elderly, disabled & long term patients; 2 shopping malls & offices; 3 public facilities like schools, TAFE, hospitals & related units for health care workers; 4 serviced apartments for rent ONLY to bring tourists in to promote public transport & make regular residential dwellings for daily rental less profitable.
Very valid criticism of Carlingford. The council in the area has no idea, Carlingford is a total shithole though it has so much potential. The apartments and houses along Carlingford Road are a disaster, you almost couldnt have done a worse job if you tried and their underground carparks all exit straight onto Carlingford Road rather than the sensible option which would have been an internal access road into a backstreet. Total disaster. The whole region is crap yet has so much potential, you can kind of forgive Sefton for being crap but not the Telopea-Epping corridor. Dunno what can save it now especially if the Light Rail doesnt get extended to Epping and no Metro is proposed to link Parramatta to Epping.
They should have extended the light rail line by 1km and added the terminus station near Carlingford Court. There was even a vacant land on Pennant Hills Rd on the other side of the road from Carlingford Court. Add a sky bridge for pedestrian crossing the busy road so it won't be impact traffic and that is half the problems solved.
@@mark123655 its just awful though. No plans to improve pedestrian amenity, no plans for cycleways anyway, no prioritisation for buses beyond what is already there. Extensing the LR is going to be damn expensive unless you just say fuck it and take a lane off Carlingford Rd, which I would be all for, but which they should have done years ago before all these stupid apartments got built.
@@alyssum28 the Carlingford Rd intersection with Penno Rd doesnt need a slip lane, and doesnt need 5 lanes of cars. I reckon you could remove an eastbound lane and one of the westbound turning lanes plus the slip lane. The irony is that the 3500m corridor from where the current LR terminus is to Epping station would be the highest patronage generator for the LR if done right. There is another alternative though, which is to convert the T5/T2 corridor from Glenfield to Merrylands to Metro then tunnel from Merrylands ditectly under Parramatta and North Parramatta to Carlingford then Epping.
I love how Wolli Creek and Green Square stations were pretty much built many years before any development was done. It shows that there was actually some forward planning. With that being said, the government really need to be strict with minimum standards, because developers care more about profitability (both for themselves and investors) than livability - what's the point of TOD if you can only get a 1-2 bedroom apartment without a proper kitchen, let alone a lounge room?
Glad you brought up green square. I’m a green square resident and I’m surprised Sharath hasn’t done an ep on it yet. It’s got such great walkability and pedestrian-friendly design. I’m a staunch YIMBY, I LOVE the benefits that density has brought to this area, like so much access to shops, restaurants, cafes, amenities all within walking distance. Great planning by City of Sydney council to facilitate this.
I love the substack and I can't wait for your next articles 🥰. I've been trying to look for Sydney based long form articles for a while now and it's maior plus to get the content from a local who loves what they do 😊.
As a Perth guy who regularly travels to Sydney, I am surprised there is space to criticise Sydney's transport development. I mostly stay with family in Yagoona and Bankstown, and as humble as they are, they seem like massive upgrades on anything you'd see in Perth. For us, trainlines come in two flavours - the Midland, Freo and Armidale lines, which are usually ancient brick platforms surrounded by sleepy suburban cottages (great example is Mt Lawley), or in the midst of industrial decay (Ashfield). Major stops are ancient park-and-rides like Bassendean or Midland, with poorly scheduled buses bringing in city commuters from terribly-serviced outer suburbs. The vehicles and stops/stations of these areas of Perth also have serious problems with constant drug addict and antisocial behaviour - in Perth, catching a bus or train outside of peak hour often means sitting alone with someone screaming and swearing at you (where are all of these people in Sydney? I've never seen ONE meth head there). The other flavour is the far newer but equally sad Mandurah to Joondallup lines, which are built along freeways - very inaccessible, poor bus connections, fairly unhappy places. Perth's only Ikea is a few metres from Stirling train station, but because nobody ever walks in Perth, you can only get there via a long 20 minute circuitous route instead of a tiny footbridge or tunnel. The only stop that feels welcoming and well-developed is Subiaco, which seems to have copied the TOD guidebook to the letter - a pedestrianised station surrounded by shops, offices and mid-rise units. Another with potential is the new and only half-built Bayswater station, which looks to be trying to bring renewal to the old and tired town around it. There are far too few buses connecting people to trains and NO shops or amenities nearby stations. Even if you catch the train or bus, you'd still have to drive to wherever you want to go afterwards. Every shop is a big box store with huge carparks and half-hourly buses if you're lucky. Our unis have overloaded buses, yet no plans for large capacity PT upgrades. One of the only areas with high-rises, South Perth, has been clamouring for a train station and been constantly rejected. Midland station, one of the busiest, looks like a rundown brutalist crackden - it looks ready to topple over, entirely uninviting (happily, they are building a new station nearby, closer to the existing shopping and hospital area). Metronet, the huge rail expansion, is great. I love catching the train to the airport, love the new Bayswater station, love the train to touristy nature area Whiteman Park, love to see an entirely new Morley-Ellenbrook line bring transport to the car dependentcy nightmare suburbs out east... But it pisses me off that more than half of this project is expanding Perth EVEN FURTHER outward. It should be infill, not expansion. As far back as the 90s, we've had places like Mandurah and Ellenbrook being developed as suburb towns 2 hrs from the CBD, when we could instead have built some units around some stations and quadrupled Perth's populations. Spend billions building UP, not OUT. Bankstown has units, a shopping centre, schools, parks, a library, offices, even a uni, all within walking distance of a fairly basic train station. What a fantasy scenario for Perth, let alone something crazy like any of the massive shiny complex CBD stations in Sydney. Why isn't Perth building upward? NIMBYism. Why isn't the state government combating it? It has tried, but local councils have successfully resisted state intervention for decades, even taking them to court. Perth is one of the only cities in Australia to not amalgamate its councils into a smaller managable number, with state oversight via a metropolitan body. The large poorer councils begged for it, since they don't have money for services, while the tiny rich councils throw money away on lawsuits. Our state planners and ministers, even the Liberal ones, are fairly forward-thinking, but development is consistently shot down and over-politicised. The reason it feels like the world's biggest country town is because most of its people want it to stay a sleepy 70s suburban dream, which it outgrew several decades ago.
Followed you for a while now and OMG your video and editing quality has improved beyond expectations. I’m so glad you’ve injected your brilliant sense of humour into these too. Keep up the great work!
Lived in Rhodes for 4 years before the recent rent price surge drove me away. It's quite the lifestyle being a second's walk from the station, supermarket, restaurants, doctor, dentist, vet, etc Wish there were more suburbs like it around Sydney - but when I look around it's all houses or apartments that are miles from anywhere relevant. I'm surprised we don't build medium density apartments around transport hubs in this city. To add salt the the wound, the newest constructed apartments in Rhodes and Wentworth point have layouts the boggle the mind. I have seen several where you have a hallway for a living room, others where the bedrooms have glass walls. My current apartment has doors that open into other doors and a smoke detector that is triggered by the shower and, of course, no apartment is insulated. It's such a shame because these apartments get built once and won't be touched for decades, yet they occupy the best locations in Sydney.
Having lived in both Rhodes & Ww Point, I'm glad not to be living there any longer, those places take a toll on your mental health. Crowded, with a toxic past, and just lacking any soul.
The only issue I do have with increased density is the lack of amenities. Parks? Ok that's fine. More People, idm this, but we don't have school capacity. We should be building more mid-rise schools, or mid-rise blocks in schools, and larger apartments for families wanting to live in a TOD
Another great article. There is no doubt that well planned TOD with an excellent train/metro/light rail option is the only way to go for Sydney if it is going to become a liveable city of 10 million. However, having said that, I am glad that I was born in 1943 so that when I was married in the late 1960s we moved into our own detached home in Engadine with a backyard to grow vegetables, have a barbeque and walk in the adjoining National Parks. What an amazing time in which to be born. However, times have changed and that is no longer a viable option. Yes, the Chatswoods and Wolli Creeks are the way of the future. We have no other option if we want a liveable city where people can afford housing and be close to work and other facilities. We have to go down that path now but I am glad that I was born in an earlier era where I didn't have to go down that way.
Unfortunately work has moved too. Many jobs have moved further from the CBD where there are great public transport connections to areas devoid of public transport or just further away to meet stupid obligations. That now creates more traffic.
I used to live in Balmain when I first moved to Sydney back in 2018, in 2020 I moved to Wolli Creek and I love it. The high density housing combined with the mixed used zoning makes it a delight to live in. At max a couple minute walk to any shop, restaurant, doctor, etc. it was my first time living in such a surburb when I first moved and now I never want to move out. Anyone against this really need to try it because it is life changing.
I tried it. It’s fine when you’re single but once you need more rooms for a growing family, forget it. Living on the ground gives me so much joy, happiness and great mental well-being. Balmain is a great example of a great community.
The mass high rise build between 2010-2017 resulted in significant confidence issues around new build apartment quality. Unless some guarantee or quality control can be enforced during development, it will always be a concern for property buyers. Do we just accept that most will be ok??
I work in Mascot, which has a great TOD, or it would have if they ever finish building the station entrance on the western side of Bourke Rd that they started 2 years ago & was supposed to be finished by the end of last year. Oh, and also Mascot Tower, which stubbornly refuses to turn itself into a pile of rubble, despite warnings of its impending collapse & being empty since June 2019. Add to that the roadworks around Mascot & the airport that started in 2016 & are still nowhere near completion & you can't blame the NIMBY's with this as an example. I have friends in the construction & real estate industries who have all warned me not to buy anything built this century. TOD's are great once complete, but unless infrastructure can be completed in a more timely manner & buildings are built to a much higher standard & with more accountability they're not going to be very popular with existing residents. No one wants to live next to a building site for years on end, or the building to be found structurally unsound just after the building warranty expires.
We have talked about repurposing existing low-density housing, but land is still being developed on the fringes. Do we keep making the same mistakes given the sacrifices people feel they have to make to settle in our sprawling capitals while abundant land is available elsewhere? There is no shortage of examples, mainly in Europe, where the question of housing people using less land than we do can be seen without resorting to intrusive high rise. One needs to go no further than TH-cam to learn about them. " Alternatives to Sprawl: Case Studies in Building Better 'Burbs" is an example. But have our subdivision patterns and laissez-faire approach to development condemned us forever to be denied the best solutions? Teaching our government planners is one thing, but when it comes to new broadacre development, the expectations are so ingrained I doubt we will ever see change. And this is despite inner city living on small blocks of land is still popular and highly valued enough to keep the prices high.
Sharath you should read Paul Mees' Transport for Suburbia. It's not enough just to build new homes close to existing public transport. New PT needs to be built close to existing homes. It also needs to be fast frequent with good interchanges and provide easy connections to active transport. Car dependency didn't just happen because cars were cheap. A whole lot of support and subsidies were given while pt was given low priority.
@@BruceMa22 Definetly Rhodes or better Wentworth Point... Beecroft and Killara are in middle of nowhere... You wanna go somewhere, you have to drive... and when you get out of your neighbourhood you just get stuck in traffic...
Never seen this view of Chatswood before - I thought I was looking at Shinjuku (and that's a good thing) - thanks! My completely unscientific measure of "is this poorly planned?" is to see if there's a whole lot of "just mown grass" about (other than playing fields and farms).
As someone who grew up in a house and now lives in an apartment, from my own experience the one thing that you don't get living in a high rise apartment compared to a house is a sense of community. For example knowing your neighbours. Like you know faces and that and say the odd hi here and there, but you don't really get to know people like you do when living in a neighbourhood with houses. Might seem small and trivial to people, but there was something special about it to me anyhow. But apartment living is the future there is no doubting it. Population growth will inevitably mean apartment living is the norm in the future if it isn't already.
Funny isn't it, like you I grew up in a house and barely knew anyone who lived in an apartment - but now most live in little cages. However, it shouldn't be forced on people either.
I noticed that living here. But my parents grew up in Hong Kong, my relatives are in HK and over there they're pretty close with their neighbours. My parents growing up in the 60s talked about how they used to have their doors open and they would walk into their neighbour's unit and vice versa with the neighbour's kids. Maybe Sydney's in a transition phase. Or maybe the past vs now.
That depends on the community or where you live. Plenty of medium to small units still have a community network especially if owners are part of a body corporate.
i live in a house in suburban western australia and i felt the exact opposite, it feels like no one wants to know anyone here they just want their own giant private space and youll never see them because everyone travels by car so you cant even pass them on a walk or anything
Good video on the need for transit-oriented development and urban density in Sydney. The problems facing your city are pretty much the same as with most of the cities in the U.S. Similar issues such as the desire to have more space for housing, rampant NIMBYism and a car centric culture also hinder positive transit development here.
The T3 segment around Sefton has its own unique issues though - namely, the horribly infrequent rate of service. Few trains run during offpeak hours, and if it weren't for community protests, the government would have shut down the line entirely and replaced it with BRT (Check out the T3 West of Bankstown draft documents).
Sefton needs a very frequent service between Lidcombe and Bankstown. One to each station every 7 minutes all day/every day will make it viable. It does need development but we don’t need to turn in into a highrise dystopia. A mix of terraces, 2/3/4/5 bedroom apartments with plenty of off street parking will help. Currently only 1/2 bedroom apartments are being built with a few 3 bedrooms squashed into highrise with very high strata fees. Nothing for families and nothing truly affordable.
The railway line itself is a barrier to local movement along this line. Perhaps a pedestrian and cycle underpass would help revive businesses around the station. It would enable easier safer walk/cycle trips to work/school in the area. I am thinking more like Artarmon or even Eastwood than Chatswood. BRT could be better if it runs on the existing rail route with more frequent smaller vehicles. A fast direct link to Lidcombe would be good. Is this line still used for rail freight traffic?
I'm a fan of the quarter acre block and places for kids to adventure; but that said, do kids even do such thing now? Nevertheless, higher densities around hub railway stations is a benefit. I think medium density: 5-7 storeys is a more human scaled maximum, with a mix of townhouses and other higher density suburban zones mixed in. The big problem in most Australian cities...and even towns, is the achingly long and expensive approval times. They might appeal to inner-city watermelons who already have high value homes, but they jack up prices for first home owners like crazy.
Fantastic video! Thank you for showing the benefits of my beloved home of Chatswood. The reasons you mentioned are exactly why I chose to move there! As for the NIMBYs, I say this, “Whilst I can understand some of your concerns and by all means, express them. But please don’t be a hindrance to more housing, public transportation and other important infrastructure that other people, especially the next generation will need. Also look at examples like Chatswood, Woli Creek, Rhodes, Hornsby and Hurstville. If it’s done right, it will work”.
Of course, it's rarely done right, so why should anyone put their faith in the visions of a developer or out-of-area politician? Chatswood works because it's co-located with businesses, and close to Sydney's CBD - few other places are really suitable for sore thumb high rise. Epping is bordering on being a bad choice for it.
the thing is, an apartment in wolli creek and chatswood isn't cheap. You can buy a freestanding house that is cheaper in a suburb without any public transport
Oh man. I'm trying to buy a house. I want: - Privacy, peace and quiet - A quality building, unlike any Sydney apartments or "McMansions" developments. - Minimal ongoing costs, unlike Strata - No surprise expenses, unlike Strata - No shared ownership.. unlike Strata - A shed .. unlike Strata. I can appreciate aspects of the apartment lifestyle. But with dodgy construction, dodgy developers, dodgy Government, dodgy corporates .. They're a massive risk. Also. Apartments and planning does more than discourage cars. You're lucky to get a single car space with your apartment. If you live with a partner, you're sharing a car. So it won't just "encourage" people to use public transport, but the pendulum swings so far the other way so as to actually FORCE it. As for "Somewhere else", we would need to emulate the US. The US has lots and lots and lots of cities. Even if you live regional/rural, you're likely never more than a few hours drive away from all the amenity you could need. Australia focuses too heavily on it's 3 eastern seaboard cities while the rest of the continent is barren. The regional areas are too lacking to attract much growth. Why not divert growth into building a new sizable/major city? Not only is it an opportunity to design a whole new city from the ground up (literally) rather than trying to retrofit an old one, but it would mean more options, more amenity for regions, all whilst taking pressure off the existing cities...
If Sydney was a US city, this region will be regarded as many cities. Say you live in beecroft you won’t say you are from Sydney at all, you’ll say your from city of Hornsby. Even the postal address will be 123 road Hornsby NSW not 123 road Beecroft NSW. In the us, if you are in menlo park, ca, you say you are in menlo park, NOT San Francisco. Love the US style.
@@BruceMa22 Well, we already put our suburbs on our post as-is anyway, it's not like people in Beecroft are putting "Sydney" as-is so I don't know what you're trying to say. And sure, while the US definitely does have some very large and significant cities (such as LA, NYC etc) .. sure they might 'techincally' be lots of cities all joined together, most people will still say "I'm from LA" just as we'd say "I'm from Sydney" ... But beyond that there are also a lot of medium and smaller size cities. Look at Texas for instance - you have Austin, Dallas, San Antonio, Fort Worth etc which are all somewhat separated. Whereas here in Aus, it's just about our single capital city per state and nothing else.
@@rakeau US address format = House number and street name + Name of town / city + State abbreviation + ZIP code, Aus address format = Street+Locality (Suburb)+State+Postcode. In the US they don't use neighbourhood/suburb in the address.
@@MrChowTheTroll I have to wonder about "The Bradfield Scheme", which would divert water inland. Imagine how much more livable, and productive, Australia could be if rainwater was better managed instead of just running off into the sea.
Excellent video, Sharath! Couldn't agree less with most of what you said. However, one of the things I've always disliked about rail corridors is how they can appear divisive (my suburb is divided into 2 with only 2 bridges crossing the railway track), but that's relatively minor. Still, this issue can be fixed by densifying the area and building more bridges.
It's probably worth noting that most of the high density housing is occupied by nationalities that are used to high density housing. A large percentage of Wolli Creek and Chatswood are home to Chinese people.
it'd be better if we could force developers to develop WELL and responsibly. good design over profits. it'd make the hard sell to 'nimbys' a lot easier. i don't trust most developers as far as i can throw them - so why is it reasonable to ask those who love their suburbs to trust them? it really, really isn't. untill we unscrew how development happens the risks are just too great for a lot of beautiful existing suburbs, and i certainly understand and sympathise with those who want to protect them from those who simply want profit and nothing else.
Exactly, they just look at a patch of land and think about how much they can make per sq m. They give two figs about the people who will live there, or anyone impacted by their "development".
Exactly why council amalgamation was such a terrible idea. Anyone that has had the misfortune of dealing with council during the development approval process can attest to the fact that these councilors heavily favour developers. I'd go as far as to say that there is corruption going on in many cases (though I have no proof unfortunately).
the biggest issue of the apartment in australia is the rental fee-like body corp fee, communal space restrictions, neighbor noises, major maintenance/refurbishment fees to old buildings, or even depreciation due to aging of the building itself, and for some new apartments, the god damn embedded bills and unnecessary facilities(yeah, freaking pools)! Unless those buildings are in tokyo/HK/SG where there's housing demand is too high, otherwise that's a huge deal breaker if the recent apartments could introduces better business cases, and better engineering to overcome those, MAYBE it could attract more first owners believing apartments aren't consumable but actual real estate, but that could also introduce another sort of costs and not compatible between the outer suburbs' townhouses with adequate bus service/last-mile commuting options AND, Carlingford's case is, if there's some frequent bus transport connecting SCs/nearby station nearby and to serve the commuters, it's still fine to be sleepy suburb overall, as that place really isn't good for heavy rails as far as I can see in your footage.
I grew up near to both Chatswood and Crows Nest (though closer to Crows Nest). While I wouldn’t necessarily consider Chatswood to be the pinnacle of success, that’s partly because I grew up and became bored of the Lower North Shore. Everyone gets sick of where they grew up and I fell in love with the eclectic bohemian high and middle density of the city, the inner eastern suburbs like Paddington and Surry Hills and the inner west. Chatswood felt kind of sterile and manufactured. But I will admit that I always felt it was a bit like that, even before it went super high density. Crows Nest is actually a prime candidate for higher density, and I guess you could call me a Crows Nest YIMBY. It’s always been full of restaurants and near-ish to St Leonard’s train station, but the massive Pacific Highway and Falcon St made it feel artificially quiet and inaccessible despite how many shops and restaurants it has always had. With the addition of the new metro station, I actually think Crows Nest will become super lively and less “old school” in a way that feels natural vibrant like the inner city, but not too big even if it has lots of tall apartments.
one thing you need to consider is the people who move to these public transport oriented areas are choosing to due to a different lifestyle. i choose to live further out due to wanting a house and the ability to park multiple cars and prefer to drive everywhere even if i lived next to a train station. my work place isnt in a centralised location. neither are most of the places i go to visit family or friends. apartment living doesnt suit my lifestyle. while increasing density around public transport is a great way of fitting extra people into sydney, its not going to stop traffic or urban sprawl.
We can solve urban sprawl and traffic by discouraging car usage, which will create higher demand for public transport. With Public transport becoming more desirable, people would therefore want to live closer to hubs. I reckon if we want to discourage car usage...tell people that we will end up like America and Canada where Urban Sprawl and traffic is king, and public transport is looked down upon. Show them the katy freeway in Houston, or the traffic in LA. I guess in that sense...Nimbys should be deported to America and Canada.
Great video as usual. Developers are as much part of the problem as they are the solution. They build the cheapest, smallest apartments they can get away with for the highest prices, and then self certify their dodgy building work. If they had their way they would only cater to 20-something professional couples and ignore any family housing. They also will do anything to stop prices falling - from realising housing slowly, to throwing in perks like solar power. If they reduced the price on one, they might have to do it on more. The horror! This is where master plans become very important.
Love this video man you showcased all the good points about TOD! this video should be shown to all Nimby's! And yes we need to build high density, mid density is really good too and think it has an easier time winning people over. And yes these places can't be uninspired places, they have to have inviting, warm architecture and nature, with activity areas and mixed used!
Chatswood When I was a small kid in the late 50s/early 60s I remember Chatswood as already being a terminus for trams, government buses and private buses as well as a major station on the North Shore line. It had a large shopping centre on both sides of the railway. I wonder if this gave Chatswood a major boost as a TOD location? You could also say something similar for Hornsby. It may not be that other suburbs with railway service failed to grow this was so much as that some had an advantage. High rise How big a population must Sydney have to be sustainable given today's huge public works investments? Has anyone estimated how many more people could be housed if government railroaded everyone within 800m of railway / metro stations into selling their properties around railways stations in favour of high rise towers? As for high density living within 800m of a railway station, this may well be convenient for public transport and utilities and for governments who operate them but not everyone wants to live in a high rise chook battery, no matter how efficient that may be. At the very least these should come at greatly reduced accommodation expense per square metre than free standing homes. Are developers expecting that? I doubt it. Hopefully that would mean that further than 1 km from railways the more traditional free standing houses might not increasingly be bulldozed by government and developer collusion. I suspect that once high rise flats and condos have been imposed everywhere possible within an 800m radius of railway stations, there will eventually be demands to push those radii further. Hopefully with increasing number of people being able to work remotely from home, the pressure on transit to reach more places and carry higher passenger volumes might ease a bit. I do agree with your point that there are artificial incentives that encourage people to see a house as an investment, which only leads to inflated housing costs when IMHO housing should primarily be about shelter, not profit. NIMBYs From the city planning perspective people who live where they live because they like it and exercise their right to protect it from unwanted change through local councils must feel inconvenient. I can see how some might be encouraged to slag anyone who disagrees as NIMBYs. However I see nothing fair and just about forcing people off of their land with rezoning or tax tactics or by simply resuming it by legal force at the government's preferred price, even for a good cause like stuffing more taxpayers into greater Sydney at minimal government transit and utilities expense. People are moving away from Sydney because it's become so expensive to live and the commutes have become costly and tedious. Unless you're wealthy, Sydney is becoming an increasingly unpleasant place to live. Yes, building more rail and poking more people in ever ascending condos near railway stations will help alleviate the commuting unpleasantness, but so will more remote work in an increasingly service oriented society. Will Sydney become a place where people who are able can live in free standing homes while those who can't end up in high rise towers which may eventually end up as Sydney's version of NYC's or London's 'projects'. They too seemed like a good idea at the time.
That’s a very good comment. I feel these developments thrusted onto us are just a tax grab and nothing else. I agree. I’d like to add: there are no new developments built for families. Zero. None with 5 bedrooms and off street parking. As you said working remotely requires a separate room. That’s where the extra bedrooms work wonders. Highrise isn’t cheap to own! Strata fees make it unaffordable. It’s a fallacy. A sick joke to make a few people rich. It’s a shame lower heights aren’t encouraged like more liveable cities in Europe. For every home bulldozed is lost forever. This making the remaining free standing homes more expensive. We have few options. Buy a small 2 bedroom apartment with no study and pay exorbitant strata fees or a home on Mother Earth with no strata fees and no fears of a building collapse. What’s wrong with creating more cities in Australia like the USA instead of cramming people into our 3 largest ones?
I agree, the multi-modal transport interconnections made Chatwood a natural centre. That attracted the shopping malls, high density housing came later. The crowding and traffic has made the bus service much worse and east-west bicycle trips are appalling even before you try to cross the stinking highway. Transport and accessibility options for people living more than 500 metres from the station are much worse than 50 years ago.
@@FKYUNimbys People living in free standing homes have the same right to public transport as people living in hubs. Perhaps it could be adjusted to connect them to major routes in transport hubs.
Nice video mate! I live in the Campbelltown area and while the area has had a railway line for a VERY long time, all stations arguably have pretty poor deployment of TOD, even Campbelltown itself, where's the units but they're not all that close to the station itself. Even more so at Minto and Leumeah where the shops are pretty tired and sporadic, and mainly it's just big commuter carparks nearby to drive and park, which is probably the best it'll get. Stands in very stark difference to Edmondson Park which is rather nice!
Love your videos. I live in the Waterloo/Zetland area in Sydney and I’m glad to be around plenty of public transport options, that’s the upside. Unfortunately, a great deal of the apartments around my area are very low quality and rather ugly, so I can see why the NIMBYs take a look at an area like this and say no thanks, I’ll keep my car and back yard. It’s going to take a long time to change this city sadly.
To effectively address the cost of living and population growth, Transit-Oriented Developments (TODs) should be strategically located along the proposed high-speed rail corridors connecting Newcastle, Sydney, and Canberra. By decentralizing and building TODs along these new fast rail corridors, we can promote better urban planning and infrastructure development that will enable convenient access to transport networks. Moreover, such a move will help to spread the population in a sustainable and equitable manner, while also enhancing connectivity and reducing congestion. Therefore, it is crucial to prioritize the development of TODs in areas with easy access to fast rail networks to achieve a more efficient and sustainable urban landscape.
I agree 100% but unfortunately "TOD" is not a genuine planning principle, it's just a euphemism to disguise and justify high-density next to railways in existing urban areas. Back in the '90s "urban sprawl" became a dirty word - an invented phrase nobody hears anymore. It was due to fear of loss of native vegetation and habitat - beyond the Blue Mountains the landscape is flat and sparse and high-speed rail is a real solution to solve the housing crisis. If it ever happens, there will be some development but it will never be called TOD.
I would agree all these free standing houses are really bad for many reasons. There is nothing more isolating and selfish than suburbia. More medium and high density housing as well as interconnecting buses with rail would be the answer. These free standing houses don’t even have corner milk bars close anymore and are no man’s land for pedestrians. Very unpleasant for anyone not well connected transport wise and lack of public parks or spaces as well. Suburbia is Australia’s mental health nightmare. Suburbia is further isolated by being surrounded by large main roads with limited crossing points and that take forever to cross where there is a crossing.
For transit oriented development to work, the transit has to work. In Sefton the trains are infrequent and they don't go anywhere that you would want to go. Fix that and the TOD will come i.e. regular trains to Bankstown, City, Parramatta (possible via the Auburn Bridge Street link) and Liverpoool.
😂this itself is a negative loop as well, the Carlingford line is a prime example, why wait 30mins or even an hour for a train when I can already drive my way to Castle Hill, Eastwood and Epping to shop and maybe even when I return the train might even not come in case of delays😂, then not a much people take it, then even a less frequent schedule, then it is closed.
Guess I fall into the NIMBY class. There were 7 million people in this country when I was born. Now there are 4 times that many. So I fall into the 'boring old white Anglo-Celtic guy category, a 'Skippy' of 5 generations, convicts included. This country is 3 million square miles, space, fresh air, solitude, scenery and we want to squash into little Hong Kongs around railway stations? Give me a break. De-centralize, move to the regions, move interstate, do a 'sea-change', a 'tree-change'. if the Sydney Basin is all built out. This country was settled by people, especially our Indigenous, spreading out, not huddling together for protection, fast food, brand-name consumerism. This is Australia, not Asia. Oh, and I like your videos. Keep them coming.
People huddle in Sydney because of the job opportunities and culture...unlike in rural areas. Unless you can convince rural Australia to urbanise (good luck), people will just huddle up in the cities. However, maybe its people like you who should move to the regions/interstate. Nimbys like you belong on rural Australia where you have all the space and low density you want.
here's the thing, i want a walkable lively community with good public transport and plenty of oppoturnities, in short I want to live in a city, i can get none of that in the town of nowhere, why dont you live in the regions since you clearly dont want to live in a city like environment
Move to Dubbo and commute to Sydney and see what it is like. Australia needs to multiply its population by 5 by the end of the century. While we all live in transport-connected areas, good look commuting 5 hours to the city to get away from mini-Hong Kongs.
As mentioned in a comment on one of your previous videos, Wolli Creek shouldn’t be held up as the poster child for TOD if you’re taking the broader picture into consideration. It might have had the highest rate of public transport usage in all of Sydney in 2016, and there may be plenty of food and shops in the vicinity (even that’s somewhat subjective), but when you factor moving about the suburb by road into the equation, the overall success of Wolli Creek has to be questioned. At best, it’s little more than a rabbit-warren of narrow streets and dead ends, too many oddly placed pedestrian crossings, a bizarre one-way circuit designed with a focus on bike lanes that are barely ever used, and frequent traffic gridlock due in no small part to a roundabout that’s too close to a major highway and the main point of entry to the suburb, hampered by almost every other element of the surrounding road network, with its effectiveness having been almost completely eroded as a result. Wolli Creek’s success only extends so far.
TOD is a planning failure!! NIMBYs are not standing in the way of high-rise (Crows Nest being the exception). NIMBYs mostly stand in the way of medium-density, that is the real reason why we have TOD. 20+ years ago state gov introduced dwelling targets and councils were expected to demonstrate how they would accommodate more dwellings in their LEPs. Councils didn't want to upset too many locals (nimbys) so the easy option was to plonk high-rise next to stations, rather than allow townhouses & duplexes spread out - this led to "the missing middle". To this day Chatswood still has freestanding houses on 1/4 acre lots very close to the station. High-rise apartments are project-marketed and mostly sold off the plan to overseas buyers who then leave it vacant - this adds nothing to the *available* supply for locals to either rent or own and the housing crisis continues. Yet councils/gov can tick the box to say they've *increased* supply. As good as it sounds, TOD is not a pro-active transport planning concept, it's completely reactive!
Hmm make it so that giving it to overseas buyer doesn't tick the box...... and council have to find another way to meet their quota..... Or even better, if owners want buy one as an investment, make it so they have to rent it out or they forfeit the unit under the value they purchase it.
Every Sydney suburb council needs to sit down and take a hard look at their own train station. This is your priority to develop. Remove all streets around it and build a community hub, focus on mixed medium to high residential commercial buildings, shops, park, plaza, cafes, restaurants, etc. F the Nimby entitled mentality.
One aspect of planning I'd like to see better implemented is active travel infrastructure within 3km of railway stations. With the rise of e-bikes and e-scooters, the 800 metre radius from railway stations becomes less of an issue as you can still get to a station within 10 minutes via active transport if you're within 3km of a station. But the key here is very few Sydney suburbs have this proper infrastructure that enables people to feel safe whilst riding to a station. Even then, secure parking for active transport vehicles is nonexistent except for at major stations
I grew up in Ermington a suburb that was developed post WW2. In the years 1950 thru to the 70’s it was hard to get to the nearest stations of parramatta or west Ryde. A bus route thru the middle of the suburb made it easier but these days the ferry on the parramatta river makes it easier to get to Sydney and the planned tramway from Olympic park to parramatta will hugely improve travel times. My point is how about improving transport around the suburbs to the stations.
i live a stones throw from chatswood already so i cant really complain. but id love nothing more than to live in one of those towers above the station. youd technically never go "outside" to get from your apartment to the train station, or woolworths, or any number of other shops there. cost is always a factor. its all well and good to say hey, live in high density chatswood rather than out in the sticks at north kellyville. but when you can get a property 8x the size for 0.5x the price, its a no brainer for most people.
Another really good example of what not to do is Pagewood Meriton near Eastgardens. There is all this density with inadequate public transport. The surrounding roads (particularly Wentworth Ave) are so congested now and there are two massive towers still under construction. Who knows what it’s going to be like in a few years. Hopefully they extend the light rail.
I always enjoy your content. Keep it up 👍🏻 I worked in Chatswood for over 5 yrs and as someone who doesn’t live there my bias is tht it’s a concrete jungle. I don’t like it. I don’t like how the shops from Westfields to the chase is one long road. However, I actually agree with you. I like TOD, TOD like Chatswood. I just don’t like Chatswood, it’s a bit snobbish- I’m biased 😂
American here...in cities here, if a station is low use, sometimes they will close them if they dont bring up ridership--and they will move the station to a higher density or ridership area down the line...and use shuttle buses to take those from that former station to the newer station. Sefton needs to get it together before your officials move the stop elsewhere,
All these tunnels and interchanges are amazing considering how young Sydney is compared to other developed cities. We like to whine alot here in Sydney (Aus in general) but sometimes we have to sit back and look this aint that bad, yes we need bullet trains and yes hyperloop should be planned for the future but it aint that bad.
Why waste money on slower electric scooters when you can implement a bike share program with dedicated bike infrastructure? Who will pay for the scooters I bet to ask?
Also the trains need to be improved to enourage more usage. I live on metro line and sometimes catch the train to work, sometimes drive. The reason I drive is because its cheaper. I really think the cost of the train fare should be lowered to make it more appealing and affordable. Also improve reliability. Often on the weekends the metro is shut down due to trackwork 😫 So I drive.
Make PT free and charge the cost as part of our tax...lower tax for people who need to drive for work or more often (Tradies, Carers, families with YOUNG children and/or caring for elderly etc....) this punishes/forces drivers who don't need to drive to work as well. However...in saying this...we need frequent bus services that stretch to the outer parts of a suburb and the outer suburbs that connect them to stations/shops.
Sharath, your vlog on Town Hall is a stunner. Can you ask Transport why BUS ONLY lanes are not being used properly. Elsewhere in the world ONLY public transport, Taxis and Emergency vehicles can use these lanes, better times, better speeds, better traffic management. Talk about local council NIMBY ism.
Here’s the thing that I find a little bit difficult to take. Sefton is way out of the city. It is a long train ride in and frequency is not exactly brilliant. Job opportunities, services, etc, all fairly ordinary. On the other hand… we’ve got this land surrounding the city, roughly the area enclosed by L1 light rail. I was in Petersham on Saturday and it’s just as bad as Sefton, despite being far better serviced and 4 times closer to the city. The inner west has 3 rail lines, 1 light rail and soon to have a metro. Any sane country in Asia could have housed the whole Sydney metropolitan population into a space that big and it would be wonderful. Why are we shoving so many people in places like Bankstown where there is one station, when in the Newtown Macdonaldtown Erskineville triangle, there are three, they are surrounded by employment and services and the space is being wasted?
@ibis are not bin chickens! compared to Sefton or Bankstown, yes. Compared to Sydney or Parramatta, both of which are continuously being redeveloped, no. I think it’s mostly political… people in the inner west often associate the grungy vibe of its terraces with something socially virtuous in of itself. They also see their own proximity to work, services and transit as them doing the right thing, which is true to an extent, but ignoring the fact that if their housing was redeveloped it would allow hundreds of thousands more to do the right thing and lead to greater social good. If 10 apartments were built where their three million dollar terrace house how stands, that would be 10 families who could have a 15 minute train ride to winyard as well and wouldn’t need a toll road. You can see this with the action against westconnex, the general attitude was “I’m using public transit, why aren’t these people”, not acknowledging the immense privilege they have in living so close to the core of the city and so many transport options.
Change is always going to happen, human nature will continue as well. A lot of great progress on many fronts has improved Sydney over recent decades. Offer informed perspective and context related to planned development. People are basically reasonable. We dont use the USA as a role model. This is a well appreciated video, well done.😂
Crows Nest is already so well established as a destination with dozens of restaurants and offices. Further development can only improve this already bustling area. It's not Carlingford!
The quote about back in the 50's theyd just clear a chicken farm and build "a few houses" really shows the fact that the people that hold these views dont really have a sense of scale for genuinely how big the city is and how fast it is growing because back then, "far out" would be in the middle of what is now greater sydney.
Chatswood might be successful in terms of the stats quoted, but last time I went there the main streets were virtual wind-tunnels with no sunlight and the aerial shots in this video of the densely-spaced high-rise buildings show why. There may be high public transport use among residents but the place is, frankly, vile as a destination and it will sadly remain so long after the milk tea fad has passed in a couple of years and some other similarly junk-like vendor appears in its wake. The people of Crows Nest and other inner suburbs who have, over the decades, fostered a village-like ambience around their neighbourhood are absolutely right to not want this. As for where else to build? Indeed, further sprawl is not the answer. There is however a plethora of land formerly (or soon to be formerly) in commercial/industrial use in inner- and middle-ring suburbs that is ripe for dense brown-field development. Just look at Zetland for how this can be done without turning the area into the gloomy dive that Chatswood has become. (I haven’t visited Wolli Creek lately, but it maybe it is a success story as the video suggests.) One only needs to look at cities in Europe (eg Paris, Barcelona) that have preserved much of their charming centres while placing well-designed newer and denser development within reasonable distance of their CBD, often on post-industrial land. PS. Sefton is a bit rank, but Mr TAD…he’s kinda hot 👌
The current proposed TOD is like putting cart in front of the horse. Trains serve people or people serve trains. Billions of AUD were spent on budget blow-out projects, like the recent opened Metro was almost double priced, air rights for sale & profits from developers are here to recover the costs of new & on the way giant white elephants.
The most concern of making TOD always populations. Either NIMBY or YIMBY. If there are able to make more population it can make more supplementary public transport service to reduce cars.
I always despise NIMBY, and support high density development in my area. But looking at examples of “beautiful suburbs” constantly featured in this channel (Rhodes, Chatswood, Barangaroo) I can totally see why people don’t want that. IMO those high-rise suburbs are neither beautiful nor lively. Look, I’m a fan of dense walkable cities - that was the primary reason I moved to Europe. Pick any European city (Amsterdam, Paris, Barcelona), people live in dense apartments, but you’d hardly see high-rise residential towers, if at all. That’s just not a thing. Instead, you see lovely apartment buildings densely crammed into walkable streets full of shops and public transports. It’s paradoxical that Chatswood with all those enormous high-rise towers actually feels soulless, compared to the energy of suburbs like Newtown, which despite its lower buildings, feels much denser and also has even higher PT usage and foot traffic. Like European cities, Newtown demonstrates that you can create dense walkable neighborhoods without high-rise towers. I think Newtown can be much denser than it is, and I strongly support many more apartment buildings and social housings in the area, but please, high-rise towers are terrible, not just aesthetically, but also environmentally and socially.
I love Newtown, esp a weekend walk down King St!! And yes, it does feel denser and has a real buzz unlike soulless places like Chatswood or Rhodes. In truth, they can't put high-rise in Newtown/Enmore/Marrickville because it's under the flight path (obstacle limitation surface) so it will never really change that much ;)
Yes, I agree. Sydney had it so right with the terrace houses of Millers Point, The Rocks, Surry Hills, Paddington, Newtown which has the right mix of density, walkability and character.
This really is one of the one of the more interesting programs, great work! (even if the jokes are some of the worst) 😂...(i can sense a huge Macquarie Park episode coming up soon) Cheers - Mark
Hey! Hope you enjoyed the video.
Check out my new Substack here: buildingbeautifully.substack.com/
Check out my Ko-Fi here: ko-fi.com/buildingbeautifully#
More social links and sources from the video in the description!
W!
@RAM_845 Thats actually crazy, st. mary's was one of the most flat and boring areas when i lived there, only hosting a football club? i think development over there is the perfect link between the bustling centres of penrith and blacktown, as well as the new metro to the airport thats being built
brisbane is also doing the same thing, but stupidly enough, building the transit oriented development, but no transit
@@electro_sykes most sane thing Brisbane has done in a while
The "Melty" Capital of Australia as the guy with the speech impediment says
I think it's underappreciated that he actually traveled to dozens of suburbs across Sydney just to film this one video.
what must compel you into parceling suburbia though..?
The bigger issue with the new high rise apartments is that the companies that are contracted to build them are extremely dodgy. There was this apartment in Homebush that very quickly developed cracks and had to be evacuated and a lot of other new apartments all over Sydney look awful after about 5 or so years.
part of the issue with that is that the government allowed like, private inspectors for buildings or some such, for the purpose of speeding up building granny flats that dont need a full on professional inspection and shit
some fucking how a 20+ storey appartment complexes count as granny flats though, likely after building companies did abit of convincing the government. so they just barely even require inspections to make sure theyre built to code at all
I once had the option of getting a 4 bedroom penthouse apartment with city views at strathfield station or a 1 bedroom apartment in the city on a lower floor, for roughly the same price. Something seemed suss about that.
I bought in the city, because at the time most of the strathfield apartments next to the station were under investigation for poor building.
I sometimes wonder what it would of been like but think I made the right decision.
Local councils have members who are family/friends of developers, it needs to be closely monitored
Agree. I also looked into strata fees. Wow! $7,000 to $10,000 per year? How is that affordable? It’s not. High rises are too expensive to own and build and shouldn’t be the only option.
I know of many developments with issues/cracks/dangers:
Olympic park
Mascot
Castle Hill
Canterbury
Homebush
Wentworth Point
How many more? It’s too risky.
That's a problem with regulation and government. The idea behind it still sound though. It's not transit-oriented idea's fault that the previous government decided to say let them regulate themselves
This is why bus services are also important. They should act as feeders to the train stations for people that maybe live a couple of km's away.
trams too
Also bikes would be good for that do people in freestanding houses can also have access to
The unique aspect of Wolli Creek is that the 2 tracks go to Central via the airport lines/out to MacArthur, while two tracks go to Bondi Junction/Kings Cross/Central or down to Cronulla/Waterfall/Wollongong etc. That’s a diverse range of areas you can access from the one station.
Wolli Creek is stupidly two offset stations instead of on top of each other with a short set of stairs connecting the platforms.
And it is soooooo ugly, like being at the bottom of a concrete drain!
@@peterbreis5407 it's a cesspit
@@suave-rider says you
Yeah wolli creek can be pretty painful to use especially when you are travelling from kings cross to campbelltown
I like Wolli Creek, it’s a TOD.
I do just hope that they don't forget about medium density, my personal favourite. Buildings where you can get to your apartment without _having_ to take a lift (~4-6 storeys max). But in so many of these places, it goes from high density 20+ storey buildings directly to single-family homes. Especially in more historic areas like the Inner West, would love to see more medium density built above the historic shopfronts but for many blocks, as opposed to a couple blocks of brand new high density and then nothing. Consider it a Paris-style way of densifying!
4 is way too small and a waste of money. Perhaps a compromise of 7-9 storeys mixed commercial residential with corner blocks allowed to reach 12-16 storeys. That would boost jobs and businesses and bring a more vibrant future to the area.
@@marcozolo3536 The problem is to go higher, you need to go wider, which makes it harder to fit above existing structures (again the intent is to combine the old and new so you get both the character and the increased density). Also, that would require a lift. I don't want to live in a building where I can't get home if the power goes out!
@@Respectable_Username you can get character by leaving the facades and building the tall structure within. It's what Kensington is doing on its 3 Anzac and Todman Avenue developments. You don't need a row of 100 year plus terraces to achieve that
@Repectable Username
Anything built with four floors requires a lift by the building code due to disability access
@@Respectable_Usernamepretty much all high rise buildings have their own power generators.
And well designed ones that are large enough may even have multiple lifts with independent power lines and isolation mechanisms, so that if one lift or powerline is taken out of service, the other one would still be available. Redundancy means that it is practically improbable to be left out completely unable to use the lift.
There's a massive point you didn't mention. There are more options than detached houses and high-rise towers. Middle-density options can massively increase the population density without changing the feel of the area or looking too dense from the outside.
In the UK we have a lot of terraces. Small housing units with minimal garden space. They achieve decent density while still only being 2-3 storeys tall and still looking like a quiet residential street.
That’s exactly what Sydney needs. Not 30 storey towering chicken coops not fit for any family. You cannot find a decent apartment with space containing 4 or 5 bedrooms (one will be a study for working) with 2 or 3 parking spaces (yes, we still need our vehicles and storage space).
Sydney is devoid of options.
You're correct. This is sometimes called the 'missing middle' in North America. I agree that it is a good option to pursue in a lot of places, especially inner-city suburbs that are still mostly detached housing. But the problem is, the NIMBYs that oppose 'high-rise' towers in their city are the same that live in detached home suburbia and think it's great; they don't realise that building high-rises is literally the compromise that lets them keep their suburban hellscapes. If they don't want high-rises then we could remove detached housing and entirely rely on middle-density housing but they'd oppose that as well. In the end it's only about them.
Absolutely!
This is exactly what most of San Francisco is like.
You just described townhouses, which we have plenty of.
I will confess, I was a bit of a NIMBY myself when apartment blocks started popping up all over Epping and its surrounding suburbs in the mid-2010s. I felt it was ruining the feel of the area and was concerned about what effect the sudden increase in population would have on existing infrastructure. I lamented when I first drove along Epping Road towards Epping and saw apartment blocks in the background where previously I could only see bushland. I also remember looking through a window in one of my old church's halls and seeing new apartment blocks in the background instead of blue sky.
That being said, I was glad to see the ugly building on the corner of Epping Road and Langston Place go, being replaced with a much nicer-looking mixed use development. By this point I had mostly gotten used to the new apartments and the new Langston Place development is probably the nicest looking of them all with the IGA local on the bottom level making this a pretty good example of mixed-use development. That being said, the fact that the corner of Blaxland Road and Epping Road still hasn't been redeveloped despite the land being acquired by the government years ago does suggest that Epping's redevelopment may have occurred at too fast a pace and it seems they are now putting further developments along Beecroft Road and Rawson Street on hold until the demand increases. Also, near Cliff Road, you will find a couple of houses which have been abandoned for years but still not completely demolished as the planned apartment block was postponed.
Of course, thanks to videos by this channel and several others, I now have a much bigger appreciation for high-rise development assuming it is done properly and is prioritised in locations near train stations. Of course, there does need to be a balance as some people will do whatever they can to avoid suburbs with such high rise developments.
Hello fellow Epping resident! I've lived and grown up here my whole life and seen it change from the mid 2000s from when I was a kid to now in 2023 as a late 20s adult and it has been interesting to say the least. Epping is unfortunately a major artery for train and cars and although the metro has helped, the suburb did not grow with the infrastructure to support thousands of new residents in apartments on Carlingford road and surrounding areas. As you said, the roads surrounding the bridge are horrendous choking points and I do worry about more and more residents being crammed into such a small town centre as Epping. This suburb is really tired. Half the shops on Beecroft road are closed/empty and it's very uninviting. I really do think Epping could benefit from a "Chatswoodesque" type make over if Epping centre (Rawson st. where Coles is) was re-developed and the roads in Epping were actually fixed. Until this point, guess we'll see.
Fellow Epping resident.
I love The Langston too!
It seems to have been built as somewhere that people would want to live and sold to people who genuinely want to move in. I noticed there were salespeople targeting people getting off work at Epping station, no mention of rental returns anywhere.
I thought the high-rises on Oxford and Cambridge street are Ok too… Cambridge St is a lost cause, but Oxford St has become more vibrant with the extra shop frontage and foot traffic.
The opposite end of the spectrum is the medium-density wasteland along Carlingford Road. No accessibility, no services, nothing but shoddily designed rubbish being offloaded to small time property speculators who aren’t paying attention. The ones on Pembroke St and around Maida Rd are almost as bad.
So people are thinking that medium density sounds like a reasonable compromise, but it seems (at least in Epping though I suspect it’s universal) that the economics means that only a huge tower complex can justify a fantastic location and provide enough concentration to support the mix of businesses that make the area better rather than worse.
@@calebmoore1582 I agree regarding Carlingford Road. The older apartment blocks on the south side of the road are much nicer than the ones on the northern side. And it's not just Carlingford Road, it's also Cliff Road and parts of Kent Street and Hazlewood Pl that have new apartments.
As a Crows Nest part-time "NIMBY" and having interactions with the people who were protesting against the over station development at the new Metro stop, I think the feeling here is the same as yours at Epping. We're not against development, and it's not some kind of elitism (for most, anyway). We know we live in a desirable area, and Sydney needs to stop sprawling, but development has to be appropriate.
From 2001 until the Census of 2021, the population of St Leonards (where I mostly lived) went from around 2500 to 7500. That is not including the newer and bigger buildings that have only been finished/occupied in the past 12 months (such as 88/JQZ has 650 apartments alone), and the no-doubt large number of students who normally live here not being counted. Add to that the redevelopment of "St Leonards South" turning around 40 houses into apartment buildings, which will another 2000 new apartments. All walkable to the Metro and St Leonards rail. People aren't excited about it but do realise it's going to happen.
The issue with the development over the station was it's scale, and in particular the massive shadowing issues it causes. The building is on a high point of a ridge line (pacific highway follows the ridge all the way to Chatswood), so anything built there will dominate the landscape. Crows Nest has a lot of heritage protected single level row houses and shops (so limited ability to change the design) where light is already an issue. Due to the geography, Wollstonecraft on the other side has even worse access to light as it is.
Finally, the Metro will only increase the connectedness of the area marginally. We already have basically turn-up-and-go rail at St Leonards (every 3 minutes during peak, 5 minutes' walk away) and busses to the city every few minutes from Cammeray (next stop Wynyard) or Crows Nest via North Sydney. The Metro is mostly about getting people from the Hills to the city, not the Lower North Shore. A station in the Artarmon industrial precinct would probably have been a better choice, allowing for a Mascot like transformation there.
@@barmstrong8 the lesson to take way from Epping is that it’s only the absolutely enormous developments like the Langston that have been having a positive contribution, with public space, retail, through foot traffic, etc.
Its good to want council to moderate development, but size just isn’t a good measure. It should be:
1) public benefit in terms of public areas, courtyards, playgrounds and thoroughfares that are included in the proposal
2) desirability of the housing itself, ensuring that Crows Nest is still regarded as somewhere that people want to live.
3) general quality and finish of the development, ensuring it won’t look terrible in 10 years
I’d say the proposed over-metro development gives a better than average score in all of those. You don’t want rows of medium rise, cookie cutter cardboard boxes, which is the alternative.
You should make a tier list of Sydney train/metro stations based on criteria such as location, service frequency, TOD, etc.
I would def watch that even if it was like 3 parts
@@rileyeyeyy difficult to do though - Bondi Junction has to be right up there, with trains at least every 10min all day and every 3min in peak hour, connected straight to Kings Cross, the city and Wolli Creek plus Hurstville. Has a lovely pedestrianised strip, good towers and such. Only complaint is the sheer number of buses that turn up there, its nuts. If only some of them were light rail as done originally, there used to be 2 different tram services to Bondi Beach, a Bronte service and a Randwick and Coogee service.
@@BigBlueMan118 I’m not living in the t4 I live on the t8 ( I’m happy cause 8s my lucky #) but I think MacArthur is a pretty good stop and would have to be up there. Country services, bus interchange, services direct to airport , and city circle every 15 minutes and it had a great location being right in the middle of wsyd Campbelltown campus with a walking bridge to it and MacArthur square which is huge and is connected right to it.
@@rileyeyeyy a HUGE amount of valuable land close to the station is taken up by surface parking though, and North of the station is a wasteland. Also no dense housing. So I would say has good potential, but needs improvement! Castle Hill is similar but better, perhaps with too many roads and cars though.
Another absolute banger from you Sharath, honestly maybe one of your best yet. I really liked the effort you put into making that graph, it definitely did not go unnoticed by me, an avid enjoyer of graphs. Your videos just keep getting better and better, I really liked the funny skits and all the effort you go to to shoot on location and get relevant drone footage. You’re going places for sure!
I think many people prefer European style medium density development over high density towering apartments. I know it's an overused example but look at Amsterdam, they have density and public transit, but still maintain a quiet and leafy feel in most residential areas.
Bla Bla Bla Amsterdam Bla Bla Bla they are tiny flat city in tiny country they have rubbish public transport.... Don't call it TOD call it BOD..
Amsterdam has a population of about 1.18million, hardly comparable to Sydney's 2023 of approx. 6+million.
@@abeille3150 1.8m people in about 220km2, vs 6m people in 12,000+km2. If the Dutch and Europeans can “build beautifully” in such a small area, why do we have to make our gigantic city so ugly and broken with haphazard pockets of high density? Medium density everywhere would be far better than building Incongruous Towers wherever there’s a bit of land available.
@@abeille3150 Amsterdam is only a little over 200 square kilometres where Sydney is well over 10,000. Talking in density, they have about 10x the population in the same space.
@@abeille3150 If you take the Randstat/Ring City as a whole i.e. inc. Rotterdam, Den Haag, Utrecht, it is a comparable population - and it works much better as a mult-centre city than what they are trying to do with Sydney.
Your points are exactly why I love areas like Chatswood.
Currently living near Rhodes and it's just amazing being able to do everything I could ever want within 5 minutes walking distance and never having to enter a car because I live in the heart of a TOD.
The frequency of trains isn't at the standard I'd expect yet but compared to the lifestyle I had in the outer west I'm more than willing to put up with it lol.
Can you please do an episode on the edmonson park/leppington area and greater south-western syndey as whole? i think the development they're taking over there is really interesting and deserves a look
Carlingford is a great example of the problem with so much development. Developers build enormous apartments but the same dingy shopping centre from 1970 remains untouched, and quickly becomes overwhelmed with demand that it can't handle.
Great video which highlighted perspectives. I think the local examples like Chatswood are great at highlighting what’s possible but maybe try comparisons with even more ambitious examples overseas too where really integrated TOD can drive great outcomes. Having shared access to great public infrastructure, commercial developments, facilities and amenities, or even some private shared facilities, can really change perceptions on exactly what people need in terms of size/space within their own homes.
Hey, I think you'd like the Substack! Latest article is about what Sydney can learn from Singapore, and its a great overseas example of how TOD can provide amazing outcomes.
Perth > Columbus
Currently over east and yeah it’s great using the public transport here but I seriously miss TransPerth. We are so lucky in Western Australia!
@@justindrew9702 Metronet is actually making the train system insane now!
Hopefully Perth keeps going forward with its metro network. It will need it since it is projected to more than double in population over the next 30 years.
This is so significant since its the fastest growing city in Australia. Even Sydney is forecast to grow an additional 3 million people in the next 30 years, putting it around the size of present day London at just under 9 million. Perth should be around 5 million by then some putting the upper end of projections as much as 6.4 million by the 2050s. That's a million more than present day Sydney
@@rileythedudeisn’t metronet just doing 1 connection and some line extensions? There’s still going to be massive black zones with no access to trains like south Perth and curtin
Gold Coast Surfers Paradise better than both. Australia can do density well.
The one thing I fear with high density living is if the apartments are poorly built (think Mascot towers, developed by Toplace, ugly cookie cutter) so many people could be screwed. Also yes Carlo gives me nightmares.
The problem with TOD and high density living is that they do not also plan for family community spaces like parks, swimming, playgrounds for different ages. Yes there is some but nothing compared to how many live in the area.
Having shopping is not enough for community living.
For instance, our area is building 7 apartment blocks within already established neighbourhood, yet the community swimming pool can at max hold 30 people (and thats crowding) and has a public gym with 4 pieces of equipment. This is to be shared amongst roughly 10000+ people.
That is fair that they dont plan enough for it but in theory at least high density means you can have a high proportion of quality public space ideally 30% while still having many more people there. High density should go hand in hand with more public space and amenities than suburbs as the public space functions as people's front yard. We just need planners to commit to allocating sufficient public space like they do in paramatta's new riverside developments
I agree fuzzy. Try finding a decent apartment for a family. You cannot! None 4/5 bedrooms. We also use one bedroom as a study. We need 2 car spaces minimum if not 3.
Free standing housing offers this. New developments don’t and that’s a big issue.
I wouldn't worry too much about your local swimming pool. Most of the people moving into these apartments don't know how to swim
@@josephj6521you wouldnt need 3 cars if more of what you needed to do was in walking and public transit distance
@@RosalinaSama we have different needs and need our own transportation as public transport works well for work purposes but not family commitments.
Chatswood, the Milk tea capital of Sydney? The people of Cabramatta and Burwood would like a chat with you😂
Another great video as always, its good to see the differing perspectives on TOD, but as you say, change is inevitable (even in my local suburb despite having the 'heritage feel' for so long)
So true, they would like some ChaTime (Chattime?) to go over this issue.
The "Melty" Capital of Australia
Is change inevitable or not depends how strong can the locals vote? If this Premier keeps ignoring the voice of some LGAs, can this Paety win next term? Regional Areas may not even vote him if he put too much focus in Syd.
I live in Melbourne and stayed in Sydney overnight on our in laws visit to the central coast Sydney is massive! I’ve been to London and Paris and Sydney had the similar multiple CBD’s everywhere. I remember driving on some bridge near Gladesville and the views, I almost crashed, what a massive, often daunting but beautiful city, a world city really.
I feel the affordability side of things should be further addressed. Traditionally homes close to railways stations have always cost more the buy and rent than those further out from those areas, and the TODs you provided as examples are expensive areas, especially those on the north side of the harbour. Where are those on Centrelink benefits and low incomes going to live? Certainly not Wolli Creek, Chatswood or Crows Nest. Building more apartments doesn;t necessarily mean more affordable options, especially when such developments are profit driven.
True, but there is a trickle down effect. When you increase the amount of unaffordable housing, you increase the likelihood that rich people will live in said housing thus reducing the demand for cheaper housing and thus making the cheaper options more affordable.
Wolli Creek and hurstville are south of the harbor, and are arguably inner west. The reason they are expensive is that TODs are great places to live, especially for those of us who don't want to own a car.
Wolli Creek was built on old cheap industrial land, close to the airport, right next to a highway, the only reason the place is desirable is because of the TOD. If we keep up with building TODs, and as the buildings get older, prices can become reasonable.
Remember the station is only 22 years old, and the suburb only 20 and much of the development is younger still.
There’s really no such thing as new and cheap, nor is there much point in it. Plenty of the new expensive stuff is cheap within 10 to 25 years.
I'm super happy about you mentioning the crisis at Crow's Nest. As a resident at Crow's Nest, I can confirm that we finally have the opportunity to say something about the crisis in Crow's Nest. One of the votes released is a vote regarding how Pacific Hwy, 3-15 Falcon Street and 8 Alexander Street will be rezoned to mixed use.
Although, I still hate how the Pacific Hwy tears through our friendly area (My Opinion).
I really hope the upcoming metro station here can encourage much more TOD, and reduce the need for a highway tearing through Crow's Nest.
Would be interesting to know where all the pacific hwy drivers are going and how these journeys could be altered. At the very least the 1km stretch around St Leonards station and Crows Nest Metro should be 30kmh, if not the entire 3km corridor from North Sydney to St Leonards.
@@BigBlueMan118 im curious about where all that traffic comes from as well. ive lived and worked for many years around north sydney, lane cove etc and commuted by bus, train and foot throughout the area. to my knowledge there is no toll on the freeway between north sydney and epping road? so it would seem the traffic has to be local on that stretch of the pacific highway? though maybe some northern beaches traffic takes it as a detour as i believe the ramps from falcon street are tolled?
@@iris4547 way too much to be local traffic, although Lane Cove is fairly well populated and heavily car dependent.
The length of the Pacific Highway from North Sydney to St Leonards should be made 1 lane in either direction and speed limit reduced to 30km/h. Kerbside parking should be removed and footpaths widened to make the whole area nicer.
@@HappyDays-nk7iq and the traffic is meant to teleport to its destination? solve the source of the traffic not bottleneck it.
Although I live on the Central Coast, Chatswood is one of my favourite places to visit in Sydney (mostly for the Asian influence - having some great dining options besides the main takeaway chains is amazing.) I think your video highlights a great reason why - the suburb has made itself an accessible, attractive place to live. If only Sydney house prices weren't so ridiculous.
Keep up the great work, love watching your videos!
I love asian food but if you live in or near Chatswood that is the only option there is.
Woli Creek is a great example of TOD.
An good example of TOD on the edge of Sydney is Edmondson Park. I couldn't believe such a cool small city centre existed there. Definitely worth checking out!
TOD can be conditionally supported by the community provided that: 1 public units that are mainly for elderly, disabled & long term patients; 2 shopping malls & offices; 3 public facilities like schools, TAFE, hospitals & related units for health care workers; 4 serviced apartments for rent ONLY to bring tourists in to promote public transport & make regular residential dwellings for daily rental less profitable.
Very valid criticism of Carlingford. The council in the area has no idea, Carlingford is a total shithole though it has so much potential. The apartments and houses along Carlingford Road are a disaster, you almost couldnt have done a worse job if you tried and their underground carparks all exit straight onto Carlingford Road rather than the sensible option which would have been an internal access road into a backstreet. Total disaster. The whole region is crap yet has so much potential, you can kind of forgive Sefton for being crap but not the Telopea-Epping corridor. Dunno what can save it now especially if the Light Rail doesnt get extended to Epping and no Metro is proposed to link Parramatta to Epping.
Kind of strange he didn't mention Carlingford Court though. It's not that far away.
Anyway I'm sure a future tower will add a supermarket underneath
They should have extended the light rail line by 1km and added the terminus station near Carlingford Court. There was even a vacant land on Pennant Hills Rd on the other side of the road from Carlingford Court. Add a sky bridge for pedestrian crossing the busy road so it won't be impact traffic and that is half the problems solved.
@@mark123655 its just awful though. No plans to improve pedestrian amenity, no plans for cycleways anyway, no prioritisation for buses beyond what is already there. Extensing the LR is going to be damn expensive unless you just say fuck it and take a lane off Carlingford Rd, which I would be all for, but which they should have done years ago before all these stupid apartments got built.
@@alyssum28 the Carlingford Rd intersection with Penno Rd doesnt need a slip lane, and doesnt need 5 lanes of cars. I reckon you could remove an eastbound lane and one of the westbound turning lanes plus the slip lane.
The irony is that the 3500m corridor from where the current LR terminus is to Epping station would be the highest patronage generator for the LR if done right.
There is another alternative though, which is to convert the T5/T2 corridor from Glenfield to Merrylands to Metro then tunnel from Merrylands ditectly under Parramatta and North Parramatta to Carlingford then Epping.
I love how Wolli Creek and Green Square stations were pretty much built many years before any development was done. It shows that there was actually some forward planning. With that being said, the government really need to be strict with minimum standards, because developers care more about profitability (both for themselves and investors) than livability - what's the point of TOD if you can only get a 1-2 bedroom apartment without a proper kitchen, let alone a lounge room?
Glad you brought up green square. I’m a green square resident and I’m surprised Sharath hasn’t done an ep on it yet. It’s got such great walkability and pedestrian-friendly design. I’m a staunch YIMBY, I LOVE the benefits that density has brought to this area, like so much access to shops, restaurants, cafes, amenities all within walking distance. Great planning by City of Sydney council to facilitate this.
I love the substack and I can't wait for your next articles 🥰. I've been trying to look for Sydney based long form articles for a while now and it's maior plus to get the content from a local who loves what they do 😊.
Marvellous, well explained and presented video. (Speaking as a fellow Hills District resident) Thank you, I’m glad I found your channel.
As a Perth guy who regularly travels to Sydney, I am surprised there is space to criticise Sydney's transport development. I mostly stay with family in Yagoona and Bankstown, and as humble as they are, they seem like massive upgrades on anything you'd see in Perth.
For us, trainlines come in two flavours - the Midland, Freo and Armidale lines, which are usually ancient brick platforms surrounded by sleepy suburban cottages (great example is Mt Lawley), or in the midst of industrial decay (Ashfield). Major stops are ancient park-and-rides like Bassendean or Midland, with poorly scheduled buses bringing in city commuters from terribly-serviced outer suburbs. The vehicles and stops/stations of these areas of Perth also have serious problems with constant drug addict and antisocial behaviour - in Perth, catching a bus or train outside of peak hour often means sitting alone with someone screaming and swearing at you (where are all of these people in Sydney? I've never seen ONE meth head there).
The other flavour is the far newer but equally sad Mandurah to Joondallup lines, which are built along freeways - very inaccessible, poor bus connections, fairly unhappy places. Perth's only Ikea is a few metres from Stirling train station, but because nobody ever walks in Perth, you can only get there via a long 20 minute circuitous route instead of a tiny footbridge or tunnel.
The only stop that feels welcoming and well-developed is Subiaco, which seems to have copied the TOD guidebook to the letter - a pedestrianised station surrounded by shops, offices and mid-rise units.
Another with potential is the new and only half-built Bayswater station, which looks to be trying to bring renewal to the old and tired town around it.
There are far too few buses connecting people to trains and NO shops or amenities nearby stations. Even if you catch the train or bus, you'd still have to drive to wherever you want to go afterwards. Every shop is a big box store with huge carparks and half-hourly buses if you're lucky. Our unis have overloaded buses, yet no plans for large capacity PT upgrades. One of the only areas with high-rises, South Perth, has been clamouring for a train station and been constantly rejected. Midland station, one of the busiest, looks like a rundown brutalist crackden - it looks ready to topple over, entirely uninviting (happily, they are building a new station nearby, closer to the existing shopping and hospital area).
Metronet, the huge rail expansion, is great. I love catching the train to the airport, love the new Bayswater station, love the train to touristy nature area Whiteman Park, love to see an entirely new Morley-Ellenbrook line bring transport to the car dependentcy nightmare suburbs out east... But it pisses me off that more than half of this project is expanding Perth EVEN FURTHER outward. It should be infill, not expansion. As far back as the 90s, we've had places like Mandurah and Ellenbrook being developed as suburb towns 2 hrs from the CBD, when we could instead have built some units around some stations and quadrupled Perth's populations. Spend billions building UP, not OUT.
Bankstown has units, a shopping centre, schools, parks, a library, offices, even a uni, all within walking distance of a fairly basic train station. What a fantasy scenario for Perth, let alone something crazy like any of the massive shiny complex CBD stations in Sydney.
Why isn't Perth building upward? NIMBYism. Why isn't the state government combating it? It has tried, but local councils have successfully resisted state intervention for decades, even taking them to court. Perth is one of the only cities in Australia to not amalgamate its councils into a smaller managable number, with state oversight via a metropolitan body. The large poorer councils begged for it, since they don't have money for services, while the tiny rich councils throw money away on lawsuits.
Our state planners and ministers, even the Liberal ones, are fairly forward-thinking, but development is consistently shot down and over-politicised. The reason it feels like the world's biggest country town is because most of its people want it to stay a sleepy 70s suburban dream, which it outgrew several decades ago.
I can't believe in the long term that high density living is healthy for people. The evolution of engineering solutions is interesting to see.
Followed you for a while now and OMG your video and editing quality has improved beyond expectations.
I’m so glad you’ve injected your brilliant sense of humour into these too.
Keep up the great work!
North Kellyville is full of Nimbys already even though it is a new suburb.
Does north Kellyville have apartments too
@@ausboy2281 lots of apartments
Lived in Rhodes for 4 years before the recent rent price surge drove me away. It's quite the lifestyle being a second's walk from the station, supermarket, restaurants, doctor, dentist, vet, etc
Wish there were more suburbs like it around Sydney - but when I look around it's all houses or apartments that are miles from anywhere relevant. I'm surprised we don't build medium density apartments around transport hubs in this city.
To add salt the the wound, the newest constructed apartments in Rhodes and Wentworth point have layouts the boggle the mind. I have seen several where you have a hallway for a living room, others where the bedrooms have glass walls. My current apartment has doors that open into other doors and a smoke detector that is triggered by the shower and, of course, no apartment is insulated. It's such a shame because these apartments get built once and won't be touched for decades, yet they occupy the best locations in Sydney.
There are a lot of people, from times past as well as today, who should NOT be architects...
Having lived in both Rhodes & Ww Point, I'm glad not to be living there any longer, those places take a toll on your mental health. Crowded, with a toxic past, and just lacking any soul.
The only issue I do have with increased density is the lack of amenities. Parks? Ok that's fine. More People, idm this, but we don't have school capacity. We should be building more mid-rise schools, or mid-rise blocks in schools, and larger apartments for families wanting to live in a TOD
Don't forget shops and entertainment...I like seeing the re-emergence of arcades and bowling alleys throughout the suburbs again...keep em coming
Another great article. There is no doubt that well planned TOD with an excellent train/metro/light rail option is the only way to go for Sydney if it is going to become a liveable city of 10 million. However, having said that, I am glad that I was born in 1943 so that when I was married in the late 1960s we moved into our own detached home in Engadine with a backyard to grow vegetables, have a barbeque and walk in the adjoining National Parks. What an amazing time in which to be born. However, times have changed and that is no longer a viable option. Yes, the Chatswoods and Wolli Creeks are the way of the future. We have no other option if we want a liveable city where people can afford housing and be close to work and other facilities. We have to go down that path now but I am glad that I was born in an earlier era where I didn't have to go down that way.
Unfortunately work has moved too. Many jobs have moved further from the CBD where there are great public transport connections to areas devoid of public transport or just further away to meet stupid obligations.
That now creates more traffic.
These videos keep getting more entertaining. I accidentally learnt stuff without realising
I used to live in Balmain when I first moved to Sydney back in 2018, in 2020 I moved to Wolli Creek and I love it. The high density housing combined with the mixed used zoning makes it a delight to live in. At max a couple minute walk to any shop, restaurant, doctor, etc.
it was my first time living in such a surburb when I first moved and now I never want to move out.
Anyone against this really need to try it because it is life changing.
I tried it. It’s fine when you’re single but once you need more rooms for a growing family, forget it. Living on the ground gives me so much joy, happiness and great mental well-being.
Balmain is a great example of a great community.
The mass high rise build between 2010-2017 resulted in significant confidence issues around new build apartment quality. Unless some guarantee or quality control can be enforced during development, it will always be a concern for property buyers. Do we just accept that most will be ok??
I work in Mascot, which has a great TOD, or it would have if they ever finish building the station entrance on the western side of Bourke Rd that they started 2 years ago & was supposed to be finished by the end of last year. Oh, and also Mascot Tower, which stubbornly refuses to turn itself into a pile of rubble, despite warnings of its impending collapse & being empty since June 2019. Add to that the roadworks around Mascot & the airport that started in 2016 & are still nowhere near completion & you can't blame the NIMBY's with this as an example. I have friends in the construction & real estate industries who have all warned me not to buy anything built this century.
TOD's are great once complete, but unless infrastructure can be completed in a more timely manner & buildings are built to a much higher standard & with more accountability they're not going to be very popular with existing residents. No one wants to live next to a building site for years on end, or the building to be found structurally unsound just after the building warranty expires.
We have talked about repurposing existing low-density housing, but land is still being developed on the fringes. Do we keep making the same mistakes given the sacrifices people feel they have to make to settle in our sprawling capitals while abundant land is available elsewhere?
There is no shortage of examples, mainly in Europe, where the question of housing people using less land than we do can be seen without resorting to intrusive high rise. One needs to go no further than TH-cam to learn about them. " Alternatives to Sprawl: Case Studies in Building Better 'Burbs" is an example.
But have our subdivision patterns and laissez-faire approach to development condemned us forever to be denied the best solutions? Teaching our government planners is one thing, but when it comes to new broadacre development, the expectations are so ingrained I doubt we will ever see change. And this is despite inner city living on small blocks of land is still popular and highly valued enough to keep the prices high.
Why Chatswood, Wolli Creek? The best medium/high density suburbs are Newtown, Surry Hills etc.
Agree.
Sharath you should read Paul Mees' Transport for Suburbia. It's not enough just to build new homes close to existing public transport. New PT needs to be built close to existing homes. It also needs to be fast frequent with good interchanges and provide easy connections to active transport.
Car dependency didn't just happen because cars were cheap. A whole lot of support and subsidies were given while pt was given low priority.
That book looks like a great resource. Booktopia has it for only $220.75, reduced from $273. Is that for real?
@@charlielloyd1080 Yeah it's out of print now. I borrowed mine from the library.
Rhodes is another good example of density with community. There’s restaurants, parks, shopping centres and buses and trains for public transport.
But would you rather living in Rhodes or a big house in say Beecroft or Killara?
@@BruceMa22definitely a house.
@@BruceMa22 Definetly Rhodes or better Wentworth Point... Beecroft and Killara are in middle of nowhere... You wanna go somewhere, you have to drive... and when you get out of your neighbourhood you just get stuck in traffic...
@@BruceMa22 Big Houses should remain in Sydney...just nowhere near train stations, major bus hubs, and shops.
Never seen this view of Chatswood before - I thought I was looking at Shinjuku (and that's a good thing) - thanks!
My completely unscientific measure of "is this poorly planned?" is to see if there's a whole lot of "just mown grass" about (other than playing fields and farms).
As someone who grew up in a house and now lives in an apartment, from my own experience the one thing that you don't get living in a high rise apartment compared to a house is a sense of community. For example knowing your neighbours. Like you know faces and that and say the odd hi here and there, but you don't really get to know people like you do when living in a neighbourhood with houses. Might seem small and trivial to people, but there was something special about it to me anyhow. But apartment living is the future there is no doubting it. Population growth will inevitably mean apartment living is the norm in the future if it isn't already.
Funny isn't it, like you I grew up in a house and barely knew anyone who lived in an apartment - but now most live in little cages. However, it shouldn't be forced on people either.
I noticed that living here. But my parents grew up in Hong Kong, my relatives are in HK and over there they're pretty close with their neighbours. My parents growing up in the 60s talked about how they used to have their doors open and they would walk into their neighbour's unit and vice versa with the neighbour's kids. Maybe Sydney's in a transition phase. Or maybe the past vs now.
That depends on the community or where you live. Plenty of medium to small units still have a community network especially if owners are part of a body corporate.
i live in a house in suburban western australia and i felt the exact opposite, it feels like no one wants to know anyone here they just want their own giant private space and youll never see them because everyone travels by car so you cant even pass them on a walk or anything
Good video on the need for transit-oriented development and urban density in Sydney. The problems facing your city are pretty much the same as with most of the cities in
the U.S. Similar issues such as the desire to have more space for housing, rampant NIMBYism and a car centric culture also hinder positive transit development here.
The T3 segment around Sefton has its own unique issues though - namely, the horribly infrequent rate of service. Few trains run during offpeak hours, and if it weren't for community protests, the government would have shut down the line entirely and replaced it with BRT (Check out the T3 West of Bankstown draft documents).
Sefton needs a very frequent service between Lidcombe and Bankstown. One to each station every 7 minutes all day/every day will make it viable.
It does need development but we don’t need to turn in into a highrise dystopia. A mix of terraces, 2/3/4/5 bedroom apartments with plenty of off street parking will help.
Currently only 1/2 bedroom apartments are being built with a few 3 bedrooms squashed into highrise with very high strata fees. Nothing for families and nothing truly affordable.
The railway line itself is a barrier to local movement along this line. Perhaps a pedestrian and cycle underpass would help revive businesses around the station. It would enable easier safer walk/cycle trips to work/school in the area. I am thinking more like Artarmon or even Eastwood than Chatswood. BRT could be better if it runs on the existing rail route with more frequent smaller vehicles. A fast direct link to Lidcombe would be good. Is this line still used for rail freight traffic?
I'm a fan of the quarter acre block and places for kids to adventure; but that said, do kids even do such thing now? Nevertheless, higher densities around hub railway stations is a benefit. I think medium density: 5-7 storeys is a more human scaled maximum, with a mix of townhouses and other higher density suburban zones mixed in.
The big problem in most Australian cities...and even towns, is the achingly long and expensive approval times. They might appeal to inner-city watermelons who already have high value homes, but they jack up prices for first home owners like crazy.
Fantastic video! Thank you for showing the benefits of my beloved home of Chatswood. The reasons you mentioned are exactly why I chose to move there!
As for the NIMBYs, I say this, “Whilst I can understand some of your concerns and by all means, express them. But please don’t be a hindrance to more housing, public transportation and other important infrastructure that other people, especially the next generation will need. Also look at examples like Chatswood, Woli Creek, Rhodes, Hornsby and Hurstville. If it’s done right, it will work”.
Of course, it's rarely done right, so why should anyone put their faith in the visions of a developer or out-of-area politician? Chatswood works because it's co-located with businesses, and close to Sydney's CBD - few other places are really suitable for sore thumb high rise. Epping is bordering on being a bad choice for it.
the thing is, an apartment in wolli creek and chatswood isn't cheap. You can buy a freestanding house that is cheaper in a suburb without any public transport
Oh man.
I'm trying to buy a house. I want:
- Privacy, peace and quiet
- A quality building, unlike any Sydney apartments or "McMansions" developments.
- Minimal ongoing costs, unlike Strata
- No surprise expenses, unlike Strata
- No shared ownership.. unlike Strata
- A shed .. unlike Strata.
I can appreciate aspects of the apartment lifestyle. But with dodgy construction, dodgy developers, dodgy Government, dodgy corporates .. They're a massive risk.
Also. Apartments and planning does more than discourage cars. You're lucky to get a single car space with your apartment. If you live with a partner, you're sharing a car. So it won't just "encourage" people to use public transport, but the pendulum swings so far the other way so as to actually FORCE it.
As for "Somewhere else", we would need to emulate the US. The US has lots and lots and lots of cities. Even if you live regional/rural, you're likely never more than a few hours drive away from all the amenity you could need. Australia focuses too heavily on it's 3 eastern seaboard cities while the rest of the continent is barren. The regional areas are too lacking to attract much growth. Why not divert growth into building a new sizable/major city? Not only is it an opportunity to design a whole new city from the ground up (literally) rather than trying to retrofit an old one, but it would mean more options, more amenity for regions, all whilst taking pressure off the existing cities...
If Sydney was a US city, this region will be regarded as many cities. Say you live in beecroft you won’t say you are from Sydney at all, you’ll say your from city of Hornsby. Even the postal address will be 123 road Hornsby NSW not 123 road Beecroft NSW.
In the us, if you are in menlo park, ca, you say you are in menlo park, NOT San Francisco. Love the US style.
@@BruceMa22 Well, we already put our suburbs on our post as-is anyway, it's not like people in Beecroft are putting "Sydney" as-is so I don't know what you're trying to say.
And sure, while the US definitely does have some very large and significant cities (such as LA, NYC etc) .. sure they might 'techincally' be lots of cities all joined together, most people will still say "I'm from LA" just as we'd say "I'm from Sydney" ... But beyond that there are also a lot of medium and smaller size cities. Look at Texas for instance - you have Austin, Dallas, San Antonio, Fort Worth etc which are all somewhat separated. Whereas here in Aus, it's just about our single capital city per state and nothing else.
@@rakeau US address format = House number and street name + Name of town / city + State abbreviation + ZIP code, Aus address format = Street+Locality (Suburb)+State+Postcode. In the US they don't use neighbourhood/suburb in the address.
The USA is a pain the butt really...... and we don't have the right terrain to spread people out since 90% of australia in inhabitable
@@MrChowTheTroll I have to wonder about "The Bradfield Scheme", which would divert water inland. Imagine how much more livable, and productive, Australia could be if rainwater was better managed instead of just running off into the sea.
Great video! You should do one of how Sydney can revive it's night time economy by having a more interconnected functioning public transport system!
Excellent video, Sharath! Couldn't agree less with most of what you said. However, one of the things I've always disliked about rail corridors is how they can appear divisive (my suburb is divided into 2 with only 2 bridges crossing the railway track), but that's relatively minor. Still, this issue can be fixed by densifying the area and building more bridges.
Eastwood is an strange example to that, its ether first ave or head to epping to cross the rail track lol
great video! I'm 100% support TOD, not to be a selfish NIMBY, we need a plan for our young generations!
It's probably worth noting that most of the high density housing is occupied by nationalities that are used to high density housing. A large percentage of Wolli Creek and Chatswood are home to Chinese people.
it'd be better if we could force developers to develop WELL and responsibly. good design over profits. it'd make the hard sell to 'nimbys' a lot easier. i don't trust most developers as far as i can throw them - so why is it reasonable to ask those who love their suburbs to trust them? it really, really isn't. untill we unscrew how development happens the risks are just too great for a lot of beautiful existing suburbs, and i certainly understand and sympathise with those who want to protect them from those who simply want profit and nothing else.
Exactly, they just look at a patch of land and think about how much they can make per sq m. They give two figs about the people who will live there, or anyone impacted by their "development".
Exactly why council amalgamation was such a terrible idea. Anyone that has had the misfortune of dealing with council during the development approval process can attest to the fact that these councilors heavily favour developers. I'd go as far as to say that there is corruption going on in many cases (though I have no proof unfortunately).
the biggest issue of the apartment in australia is the rental fee-like body corp fee, communal space restrictions, neighbor noises, major maintenance/refurbishment fees to old buildings, or even depreciation due to aging of the building itself, and for some new apartments, the god damn embedded bills and unnecessary facilities(yeah, freaking pools)!
Unless those buildings are in tokyo/HK/SG where there's housing demand is too high, otherwise that's a huge deal breaker
if the recent apartments could introduces better business cases, and better engineering to overcome those, MAYBE it could attract more first owners believing apartments aren't consumable but actual real estate, but that could also introduce another sort of costs and not compatible between the outer suburbs' townhouses with adequate bus service/last-mile commuting options
AND, Carlingford's case is, if there's some frequent bus transport connecting SCs/nearby station nearby and to serve the commuters, it's still fine to be sleepy suburb overall, as that place really isn't good for heavy rails as far as I can see in your footage.
I grew up near to both Chatswood and Crows Nest (though closer to Crows Nest).
While I wouldn’t necessarily consider Chatswood to be the pinnacle of success, that’s partly because I grew up and became bored of the Lower North Shore. Everyone gets sick of where they grew up and I fell in love with the eclectic bohemian high and middle density of the city, the inner eastern suburbs like Paddington and Surry Hills and the inner west.
Chatswood felt kind of sterile and manufactured. But I will admit that I always felt it was a bit like that, even before it went super high density. Crows Nest is actually a prime candidate for higher density, and I guess you could call me a Crows Nest YIMBY. It’s always been full of restaurants and near-ish to St Leonard’s train station, but the massive Pacific Highway and Falcon St made it feel artificially quiet and inaccessible despite how many shops and restaurants it has always had. With the addition of the new metro station, I actually think Crows Nest will become super lively and less “old school” in a way that feels natural vibrant like the inner city, but not too big even if it has lots of tall apartments.
one thing you need to consider is the people who move to these public transport oriented areas are choosing to due to a different lifestyle. i choose to live further out due to wanting a house and the ability to park multiple cars and prefer to drive everywhere even if i lived next to a train station. my work place isnt in a centralised location. neither are most of the places i go to visit family or friends. apartment living doesnt suit my lifestyle. while increasing density around public transport is a great way of fitting extra people into sydney, its not going to stop traffic or urban sprawl.
We can solve urban sprawl and traffic by discouraging car usage, which will create higher demand for public transport. With Public transport becoming more desirable, people would therefore want to live closer to hubs. I reckon if we want to discourage car usage...tell people that we will end up like America and Canada where Urban Sprawl and traffic is king, and public transport is looked down upon. Show them the katy freeway in Houston, or the traffic in LA. I guess in that sense...Nimbys should be deported to America and Canada.
Great video as usual. Developers are as much part of the problem as they are the solution. They build the cheapest, smallest apartments they can get away with for the highest prices, and then self certify their dodgy building work. If they had their way they would only cater to 20-something professional couples and ignore any family housing. They also will do anything to stop prices falling - from realising housing slowly, to throwing in perks like solar power. If they reduced the price on one, they might have to do it on more. The horror! This is where master plans become very important.
Wolli Creek is a very nice neighbourhood. I visit the suburb occasionally in my exercise route and it has always been one of my favourite suburb.
Love this video man you showcased all the good points about TOD! this video should be shown to all Nimby's! And yes we need to build high density, mid density is really good too and think it has an easier time winning people over. And yes these places can't be uninspired places, they have to have inviting, warm architecture and nature, with activity areas and mixed used!
Chatswood
When I was a small kid in the late 50s/early 60s I remember Chatswood as already being a terminus for trams, government buses and private buses as well as a major station on the North Shore line. It had a large shopping centre on both sides of the railway. I wonder if this gave Chatswood a major boost as a TOD location? You could also say something similar for Hornsby. It may not be that other suburbs with railway service failed to grow this was so much as that some had an advantage.
High rise
How big a population must Sydney have to be sustainable given today's huge public works investments?
Has anyone estimated how many more people could be housed if government railroaded everyone within 800m of railway / metro stations into selling their properties around railways stations in favour of high rise towers?
As for high density living within 800m of a railway station, this may well be convenient for public transport and utilities and for governments who operate them but not everyone wants to live in a high rise chook battery, no matter how efficient that may be. At the very least these should come at greatly reduced accommodation expense per square metre than free standing homes. Are developers expecting that? I doubt it.
Hopefully that would mean that further than 1 km from railways the more traditional free standing houses might not increasingly be bulldozed by government and developer collusion. I suspect that once high rise flats and condos have been imposed everywhere possible within an 800m radius of railway stations, there will eventually be demands to push those radii further. Hopefully with increasing number of people being able to work remotely from home, the pressure on transit to reach more places and carry higher passenger volumes might ease a bit.
I do agree with your point that there are artificial incentives that encourage people to see a house as an investment, which only leads to inflated housing costs when IMHO housing should primarily be about shelter, not profit.
NIMBYs
From the city planning perspective people who live where they live because they like it and exercise their right to protect it from unwanted change through local councils must feel inconvenient. I can see how some might be encouraged to slag anyone who disagrees as NIMBYs. However I see nothing fair and just about forcing people off of their land with rezoning or tax tactics or by simply resuming it by legal force at the government's preferred price, even for a good cause like stuffing more taxpayers into greater Sydney at minimal government transit and utilities expense.
People are moving away from Sydney because it's become so expensive to live and the commutes have become costly and tedious. Unless you're wealthy, Sydney is becoming an increasingly unpleasant place to live. Yes, building more rail and poking more people in ever ascending condos near railway stations will help alleviate the commuting unpleasantness, but so will more remote work in an increasingly service oriented society. Will Sydney become a place where people who are able can live in free standing homes while those who can't end up in high rise towers which may eventually end up as Sydney's version of NYC's or London's 'projects'. They too seemed like a good idea at the time.
That’s a very good comment. I feel these developments thrusted onto us are just a tax grab and nothing else. I agree.
I’d like to add: there are no new developments built for families. Zero. None with 5 bedrooms and off street parking. As you said working remotely requires a separate room. That’s where the extra bedrooms work wonders.
Highrise isn’t cheap to own! Strata fees make it unaffordable. It’s a fallacy. A sick joke to make a few people rich.
It’s a shame lower heights aren’t encouraged like more liveable cities in Europe.
For every home bulldozed is lost forever. This making the remaining free standing homes more expensive.
We have few options. Buy a small 2 bedroom apartment with no study and pay exorbitant strata fees or a home on Mother Earth with no strata fees and no fears of a building collapse.
What’s wrong with creating more cities in Australia like the USA instead of cramming people into our 3 largest ones?
I agree, the multi-modal transport interconnections made Chatwood a natural centre. That attracted the shopping malls, high density housing came later. The crowding and traffic has made the bus service much worse and east-west bicycle trips are appalling even before you try to cross the stinking highway. Transport and accessibility options for people living more than 500 metres from the station are much worse than 50 years ago.
Keep all free-standing homes away from hubs...or suburbs without alot of PT.
@@FKYUNimbys
People living in free standing homes have the same right to public transport as people living in hubs.
Perhaps it could be adjusted to connect them to major routes in transport hubs.
Nice video mate! I live in the Campbelltown area and while the area has had a railway line for a VERY long time, all stations arguably have pretty poor deployment of TOD, even Campbelltown itself, where's the units but they're not all that close to the station itself. Even more so at Minto and Leumeah where the shops are pretty tired and sporadic, and mainly it's just big commuter carparks nearby to drive and park, which is probably the best it'll get. Stands in very stark difference to Edmondson Park which is rather nice!
Love your videos. I live in the Waterloo/Zetland area in Sydney and I’m glad to be around plenty of public transport options, that’s the upside. Unfortunately, a great deal of the apartments around my area are very low quality and rather ugly, so I can see why the NIMBYs take a look at an area like this and say no thanks, I’ll keep my car and back yard. It’s going to take a long time to change this city sadly.
To effectively address the cost of living and population growth, Transit-Oriented Developments (TODs) should be strategically located along the proposed high-speed rail corridors connecting Newcastle, Sydney, and Canberra. By decentralizing and building TODs along these new fast rail corridors, we can promote better urban planning and infrastructure development that will enable convenient access to transport networks. Moreover, such a move will help to spread the population in a sustainable and equitable manner, while also enhancing connectivity and reducing congestion. Therefore, it is crucial to prioritize the development of TODs in areas with easy access to fast rail networks to achieve a more efficient and sustainable urban landscape.
I agree 100% but unfortunately "TOD" is not a genuine planning principle, it's just a euphemism to disguise and justify high-density next to railways in existing urban areas. Back in the '90s "urban sprawl" became a dirty word - an invented phrase nobody hears anymore. It was due to fear of loss of native vegetation and habitat - beyond the Blue Mountains the landscape is flat and sparse and high-speed rail is a real solution to solve the housing crisis. If it ever happens, there will be some development but it will never be called TOD.
I would agree all these free standing houses are really bad for many reasons. There is nothing more isolating and selfish than suburbia. More medium and high density housing as well as interconnecting buses with rail would be the answer. These free standing houses don’t even have corner milk bars close anymore and are no man’s land for pedestrians. Very unpleasant for anyone not well connected transport wise and lack of public parks or spaces as well. Suburbia is Australia’s mental health nightmare. Suburbia is further isolated by being surrounded by large main roads with limited crossing points and that take forever to cross where there is a crossing.
For transit oriented development to work, the transit has to work. In Sefton the trains are infrequent and they don't go anywhere that you would want to go. Fix that and the TOD will come i.e. regular trains to Bankstown, City, Parramatta (possible via the Auburn Bridge Street link) and Liverpoool.
😂this itself is a negative loop as well, the Carlingford line is a prime example, why wait 30mins or even an hour for a train when I can already drive my way to Castle Hill, Eastwood and Epping to shop and maybe even when I return the train might even not come in case of delays😂, then not a much people take it, then even a less frequent schedule, then it is closed.
Yes, exactly somewhere else! How many supporters live in Chatswood, Burwood or Balmain?
Guess I fall into the NIMBY class. There were 7 million people in this country when I was born. Now there are 4 times that many. So I fall into the 'boring old white Anglo-Celtic guy category, a 'Skippy' of 5 generations, convicts included. This country is 3 million square miles, space, fresh air, solitude, scenery and we want to squash into little Hong Kongs around railway stations? Give me a break. De-centralize, move to the regions, move interstate, do a 'sea-change', a 'tree-change'. if the Sydney Basin is all built out. This country was settled by people, especially our Indigenous, spreading out, not huddling together for protection, fast food, brand-name consumerism. This is Australia, not Asia. Oh, and I like your videos. Keep them coming.
People huddle in Sydney because of the job opportunities and culture...unlike in rural areas. Unless you can convince rural Australia to urbanise (good luck), people will just huddle up in the cities. However, maybe its people like you who should move to the regions/interstate. Nimbys like you belong on rural Australia where you have all the space and low density you want.
@@FKYUNimbysagree decentralisation is just a stupid concept made by inner city nimbys to avoid densifying the inner cities
here's the thing, i want a walkable lively community with good public transport and plenty of oppoturnities, in short I want to live in a city, i can get none of that in the town of nowhere, why dont you live in the regions since you clearly dont want to live in a city like environment
Move to Dubbo and commute to Sydney and see what it is like. Australia needs to multiply its population by 5 by the end of the century. While we all live in transport-connected areas, good look commuting 5 hours to the city to get away from mini-Hong Kongs.
As mentioned in a comment on one of your previous videos, Wolli Creek shouldn’t be held up as the poster child for TOD if you’re taking the broader picture into consideration. It might have had the highest rate of public transport usage in all of Sydney in 2016, and there may be plenty of food and shops in the vicinity (even that’s somewhat subjective), but when you factor moving about the suburb by road into the equation, the overall success of Wolli Creek has to be questioned. At best, it’s little more than a rabbit-warren of narrow streets and dead ends, too many oddly placed pedestrian crossings, a bizarre one-way circuit designed with a focus on bike lanes that are barely ever used, and frequent traffic gridlock due in no small part to a roundabout that’s too close to a major highway and the main point of entry to the suburb, hampered by almost every other element of the surrounding road network, with its effectiveness having been almost completely eroded as a result. Wolli Creek’s success only extends so far.
TOD is a planning failure!! NIMBYs are not standing in the way of high-rise (Crows Nest being the exception). NIMBYs mostly stand in the way of medium-density, that is the real reason why we have TOD. 20+ years ago state gov introduced dwelling targets and councils were expected to demonstrate how they would accommodate more dwellings in their LEPs. Councils didn't want to upset too many locals (nimbys) so the easy option was to plonk high-rise next to stations, rather than allow townhouses & duplexes spread out - this led to "the missing middle". To this day Chatswood still has freestanding houses on 1/4 acre lots very close to the station. High-rise apartments are project-marketed and mostly sold off the plan to overseas buyers who then leave it vacant - this adds nothing to the *available* supply for locals to either rent or own and the housing crisis continues. Yet councils/gov can tick the box to say they've *increased* supply. As good as it sounds, TOD is not a pro-active transport planning concept, it's completely reactive!
Hmm make it so that giving it to overseas buyer doesn't tick the box...... and council have to find another way to meet their quota.....
Or even better, if owners want buy one as an investment, make it so they have to rent it out or they forfeit the unit under the value they purchase it.
Every Sydney suburb council needs to sit down and take a hard look at their own train station. This is your priority to develop. Remove all streets around it and build a community hub, focus on mixed medium to high residential commercial buildings, shops, park, plaza, cafes, restaurants, etc.
F the Nimby entitled mentality.
North Kellyville should be better serviced with the existing Kellyville Metro Station, more bus services and active transport infrastrucutre.
One aspect of planning I'd like to see better implemented is active travel infrastructure within 3km of railway stations. With the rise of e-bikes and e-scooters, the 800 metre radius from railway stations becomes less of an issue as you can still get to a station within 10 minutes via active transport if you're within 3km of a station. But the key here is very few Sydney suburbs have this proper infrastructure that enables people to feel safe whilst riding to a station. Even then, secure parking for active transport vehicles is nonexistent except for at major stations
I grew up in Ermington a suburb that was developed post WW2.
In the years 1950 thru to the 70’s it was hard to get to the nearest stations of parramatta or west Ryde. A bus route thru the middle of the suburb made it easier but these days the ferry on the parramatta river makes it easier to get to Sydney and the planned tramway from Olympic park to parramatta will hugely improve travel times.
My point is how about improving transport around the suburbs to the stations.
i live a stones throw from chatswood already so i cant really complain. but id love nothing more than to live in one of those towers above the station. youd technically never go "outside" to get from your apartment to the train station, or woolworths, or any number of other shops there.
cost is always a factor. its all well and good to say hey, live in high density chatswood rather than out in the sticks at north kellyville. but when you can get a property 8x the size for 0.5x the price, its a no brainer for most people.
the succession theme at 7:40 is great, keep these coming!!!
Another really good example of what not to do is Pagewood Meriton near Eastgardens. There is all this density with inadequate public transport. The surrounding roads (particularly Wentworth Ave) are so congested now and there are two massive towers still under construction. Who knows what it’s going to be like in a few years. Hopefully they extend the light rail.
I always enjoy your content. Keep it up 👍🏻
I worked in Chatswood for over 5 yrs and as someone who doesn’t live there my bias is tht it’s a concrete jungle. I don’t like it. I don’t like how the shops from Westfields to the chase is one long road. However, I actually agree with you. I like TOD, TOD like Chatswood. I just don’t like Chatswood, it’s a bit snobbish- I’m biased 😂
should interview the Transport Minister of NSW
American here...in cities here, if a station is low use, sometimes they will close them if they dont bring up ridership--and they will move the station to a higher density or ridership area down the line...and use shuttle buses to take those from that former station to the newer station. Sefton needs to get it together before your officials move the stop elsewhere,
All these tunnels and interchanges are amazing considering how young Sydney is compared to other developed cities. We like to whine alot here in Sydney (Aus in general) but sometimes we have to sit back and look this aint that bad, yes we need bullet trains and yes hyperloop should be planned for the future but it aint that bad.
Hyperloops are just unnecessary, expensive and useless
You can increase the 800m radius by allowing and encouraging electric scooters to the station. Some secured parking will help.
Why waste money on slower electric scooters when you can implement a bike share program with dedicated bike infrastructure? Who will pay for the scooters I bet to ask?
Also the trains need to be improved to enourage more usage. I live on metro line and sometimes catch the train to work, sometimes drive. The reason I drive is because its cheaper. I really think the cost of the train fare should be lowered to make it more appealing and affordable. Also improve reliability. Often on the weekends the metro is shut down due to trackwork 😫 So I drive.
Make PT free and charge the cost as part of our tax...lower tax for people who need to drive for work or more often (Tradies, Carers, families with YOUNG children and/or caring for elderly etc....) this punishes/forces drivers who don't need to drive to work as well.
However...in saying this...we need frequent bus services that stretch to the outer parts of a suburb and the outer suburbs that connect them to stations/shops.
Sharath, your vlog on Town Hall is a stunner. Can you ask Transport why BUS ONLY lanes are not being used properly. Elsewhere in the world ONLY public transport, Taxis and Emergency vehicles can use these lanes, better times, better speeds, better traffic management. Talk about local council NIMBY ism.
Here’s the thing that I find a little bit difficult to take.
Sefton is way out of the city. It is a long train ride in and frequency is not exactly brilliant. Job opportunities, services, etc, all fairly ordinary.
On the other hand… we’ve got this land surrounding the city, roughly the area enclosed by L1 light rail. I was in Petersham on Saturday and it’s just as bad as Sefton, despite being far better serviced and 4 times closer to the city.
The inner west has 3 rail lines, 1 light rail and soon to have a metro. Any sane country in Asia could have housed the whole Sydney metropolitan population into a space that big and it would be wonderful.
Why are we shoving so many people in places like Bankstown where there is one station, when in the Newtown Macdonaldtown Erskineville triangle, there are three, they are surrounded by employment and services and the space is being wasted?
@ibis are not bin chickens! compared to Sefton or Bankstown, yes. Compared to Sydney or Parramatta, both of which are continuously being redeveloped, no.
I think it’s mostly political… people in the inner west often associate the grungy vibe of its terraces with something socially virtuous in of itself. They also see their own proximity to work, services and transit as them doing the right thing, which is true to an extent, but ignoring the fact that if their housing was redeveloped it would allow hundreds of thousands more to do the right thing and lead to greater social good. If 10 apartments were built where their three million dollar terrace house how stands, that would be 10 families who could have a 15 minute train ride to winyard as well and wouldn’t need a toll road.
You can see this with the action against westconnex, the general attitude was “I’m using public transit, why aren’t these people”, not acknowledging the immense privilege they have in living so close to the core of the city and so many transport options.
Change is always going to happen, human nature will continue as well. A lot of great progress on many fronts has improved Sydney over recent decades. Offer informed perspective and context related to planned development. People are basically reasonable. We dont use the USA as a role model. This is a well appreciated video, well done.😂
Crows Nest is already so well established as a destination with dozens of restaurants and offices. Further development can only improve this already bustling area. It's not Carlingford!
It will have a good metro station too.
The quote about back in the 50's theyd just clear a chicken farm and build "a few houses" really shows the fact that the people that hold these views dont really have a sense of scale for genuinely how big the city is and how fast it is growing because back then, "far out" would be in the middle of what is now greater sydney.
Chatswood might be successful in terms of the stats quoted, but last time I went there the main streets were virtual wind-tunnels with no sunlight and the aerial shots in this video of the densely-spaced high-rise buildings show why. There may be high public transport use among residents but the place is, frankly, vile as a destination and it will sadly remain so long after the milk tea fad has passed in a couple of years and some other similarly junk-like vendor appears in its wake.
The people of Crows Nest and other inner suburbs who have, over the decades, fostered a village-like ambience around their neighbourhood are absolutely right to not want this.
As for where else to build? Indeed, further sprawl is not the answer.
There is however a plethora of land formerly (or soon to be formerly) in commercial/industrial use in inner- and middle-ring suburbs that is ripe for dense brown-field development. Just look at Zetland for how this can be done without turning the area into the gloomy dive that Chatswood has become. (I haven’t visited Wolli Creek lately, but it maybe it is a success story as the video suggests.)
One only needs to look at cities in Europe (eg Paris, Barcelona) that have preserved much of their charming centres while placing well-designed newer and denser development within reasonable distance of their CBD, often on post-industrial land.
PS. Sefton is a bit rank, but Mr TAD…he’s kinda hot 👌
The current proposed TOD is like putting cart in front of the horse. Trains serve people or people serve trains. Billions of AUD were spent on budget blow-out projects, like the recent opened Metro was almost double priced, air rights for sale & profits from developers are here to recover the costs of new & on the way giant white elephants.
Great video. Would Green Square be considered as a TOD? Guessing with the Metro coming to Olympic Park, this could be considered as a TOD as well
The most concern of making TOD always populations. Either NIMBY or YIMBY. If there are able to make more population it can make more supplementary public transport service to reduce cars.
I always despise NIMBY, and support high density development in my area. But looking at examples of “beautiful suburbs” constantly featured in this channel (Rhodes, Chatswood, Barangaroo) I can totally see why people don’t want that.
IMO those high-rise suburbs are neither beautiful nor lively.
Look, I’m a fan of dense walkable cities - that was the primary reason I moved to Europe. Pick any European city (Amsterdam, Paris, Barcelona), people live in dense apartments, but you’d hardly see high-rise residential towers, if at all. That’s just not a thing. Instead, you see lovely apartment buildings densely crammed into walkable streets full of shops and public transports.
It’s paradoxical that Chatswood with all those enormous high-rise towers actually feels soulless, compared to the energy of suburbs like Newtown, which despite its lower buildings, feels much denser and also has even higher PT usage and foot traffic. Like European cities, Newtown demonstrates that you can create dense walkable neighborhoods without high-rise towers.
I think Newtown can be much denser than it is, and I strongly support many more apartment buildings and social housings in the area, but please, high-rise towers are terrible, not just aesthetically, but also environmentally and socially.
I love Newtown, esp a weekend walk down King St!! And yes, it does feel denser and has a real buzz unlike soulless places like Chatswood or Rhodes. In truth, they can't put high-rise in Newtown/Enmore/Marrickville because it's under the flight path (obstacle limitation surface) so it will never really change that much ;)
Yes, I agree. Sydney had it so right with the terrace houses of Millers Point, The Rocks, Surry Hills, Paddington, Newtown which has the right mix of density, walkability and character.
This really is one of the one of the more interesting programs, great work! (even if the jokes are some of the worst) 😂...(i can sense a huge Macquarie Park episode coming up soon) Cheers - Mark
Can you do a video covering the top 5 or top 10 highrst population density suburbs in Sydney and compare them to places like Hong Kong.
Hong Kong is unique. No other city is so dense. Not even NYC! Comparing us the HK is counterproductive. I’d hate to live there.
Mate you have gangster content, so many gems about Sydney - subscribed
Chatswood station was already a TOD 30 years ago. It’s like it was built to be a TOD from almost day 1.