The national project to fix housing affordability is off to a slow start but, from deposit schemes and negative gearing to immigration and construction delays, the reasons are complex.
He clearly thinks that being the 859th-least-dense city in the world is bad, or at least an opportunity to be denser, but a lot of people would say it’s just fine. One of the world’s densest cities is Giza, in Egypt, where 4.4 million people squeeze into 98 square kilometres, not much larger than the size of Sydney’s Parramatta, where fewer than 300,000 people live.
Maybe not so much sneaky as blatant. Going from the density of Australia to Giza is a bullshit comparison.
So you’re in agreement with Kohler. Least dense city is a metric the NSW Planning and Public Spaces Minister used, Kohler is demonstrating why its a silly metric to use by highlighting complexities and diversity of housing across the world being boiled down to a single metric like the NSW Minister is trying to do with this ‘Least Dense Housing’ yardstick.
I am not. He’s clearly implying that current density is just fine, when the reality is that there is plenty of reason to densify and cherry picking a single extreme example at the other end of the range is disingenuous at best.
There is no implication, you’ve misunderstood why he’s made that comparison.
Think about it this way, if the housing stock of the world is to be considered, what set of that stock is likely to be acceptable to the Australian public? This is why Kohler picked the Egyptian example, do you think Australians are going to want to live in the same kind of housing that Egyptians live in? Its a non-starter.
By creating such a broad and arbitrary yardstick, the NSW Minister has just invited a political and media circus. All because he failed to account for the set of the world’s housing stock that Australians would find acceptable. There are plenty of acceptable denser housing examples to create a set of realistic options out of.
The Minister should be comparing like for like in terms of quality of housing and quality of life that brings, the measure he has chosen won’t do that, and is ridiculous for the exercise. That is Kohler’s not so subtle point.
You’re right. Lots of apartments being built here confound me. Are we building communities, or investments? It looks like the latter to me.
There are examples of good denser living developments, one would be the Claise Brook Cove area of East Perth, very wealthy area though. I cant think of an apartment example though, off the top of my head. But theres surely a couple examples in one of the cities about the place.
Maybe not so much sneaky as blatant. Going from the density of Australia to Giza is a bullshit comparison.
So you’re in agreement with Kohler. Least dense city is a metric the NSW Planning and Public Spaces Minister used, Kohler is demonstrating why its a silly metric to use by highlighting complexities and diversity of housing across the world being boiled down to a single metric like the NSW Minister is trying to do with this ‘Least Dense Housing’ yardstick.
I am not. He’s clearly implying that current density is just fine, when the reality is that there is plenty of reason to densify and cherry picking a single extreme example at the other end of the range is disingenuous at best.
There is no implication, you’ve misunderstood why he’s made that comparison.
Think about it this way, if the housing stock of the world is to be considered, what set of that stock is likely to be acceptable to the Australian public? This is why Kohler picked the Egyptian example, do you think Australians are going to want to live in the same kind of housing that Egyptians live in? Its a non-starter.
By creating such a broad and arbitrary yardstick, the NSW Minister has just invited a political and media circus. All because he failed to account for the set of the world’s housing stock that Australians would find acceptable. There are plenty of acceptable denser housing examples to create a set of realistic options out of.
The Minister should be comparing like for like in terms of quality of housing and quality of life that brings, the measure he has chosen won’t do that, and is ridiculous for the exercise. That is Kohler’s not so subtle point.
More 4-5 story blocks with commercial on the ground floor and real family sized flats, with storage.
Apartments here tend to all be built like they’re ready for AirBNB - no storage, lots of wasted space for pretty bathrooms and foyers.
You’re right. Lots of apartments being built here confound me. Are we building communities, or investments? It looks like the latter to me.
There are examples of good denser living developments, one would be the Claise Brook Cove area of East Perth, very wealthy area though. I cant think of an apartment example though, off the top of my head. But theres surely a couple examples in one of the cities about the place.