Speaker
Description
Australian cities are generally large and sprawling, predominantly located in coastal zones—thus vulnerable to several climate change impacts, including but not limited to floods, storm damage, cyclones and bushfire. In addition to climatic vulnerability, Australia has some of the largest and most unaffordable housing in the OECD. The 4 million people conurbation of South East Queensland (SEQ), which includes Australia’s 3rd and 6th largest cities (Brisbane and the Gold Coast) is characterised by predominately low density housing; with approximately 71% detached houses. The area is also characterised by consistently high population growth. Continued expansion into greenfield areas, however, is neither environmentally nor socially desirable, especially given the region is a prime food growing area, with many environmentally sensitive areas, including Ramsar sites and World Heritage Listed parks.
This ongoing research aimed to explore innovative ways to both provide equitable housing for all, while considering the difficult future conditions posed by climate change. Using a large local government—City of Gold Coast—as a case study, we used spatial analysis tools (ArcGIS Pro, Google Earth Engine, satellite imagery and Artificial Intelligence deep learning models), to calculate the proportion of single residential zoned lots in the urban footprint with sufficient space available for small to medium scale infill, such as ancillary dwellings, granny flats, and tiny houses. The total coverage of built infrastructure (houses, garages, swimming pools and the like) was calculated for each lot and estimates made on how much remaining land was suitable for a small dwelling (within planning scheme setback limits). Additional data, such as planning scheme zones and environmental overlays, bushfire and flood risk mapping and slope analysis further refined the list of suitable properties. Finally, we included comparative change in demographics between the 2016 and 2021 Census as well as some results of a decade of research into the tiny house movement in Australia.
We found that, within the City of Gold Coast, there were up to 70,000 suitable properties for low to medium density infill, that have few or no constraints. Infill development such as this not only protects greenfield land from development but adds to the housing supply and allows for improved access to essential services such as employment, schools, public transport and healthcare. An important additional benefit is a relative lack of NIMBY pushback on this type of development, as opposed to other urban densification models, especially high-rise apartments. Counter arguments to this are that it further entrenches socio-economic disadvantage by increasing the property value of existing homeowners, and like all urban infill projects, can negatively impact urban greenspace. Nonetheless, in the short to medium term, this type of infill has promise to not only provide more and diverse housing, allow ageing in place, and help counter historical social objections to denser cities in Australia.
References
See comments
| Keywords | Infill housing; tiny houses; GIS; spatial analysis; missing middle; affordability |
|---|---|
| Best Congress Paper Award | Yes |
