Property Boundary Change for Residential Development: a Study of Brisbane, Australia
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Property Boundary Change for Residential Development: A study of Brisbane, Australia Rachel Gallagher LLB (Hons IIA); BSc (Geographical Sciences) A thesis submitted for the degree of Master of Philosophy at The University of Queensland in 2018 School of Earth and Environmental Sciences 1 Abstract To help counter the negative impacts of urban sprawl, the Queensland Government has introduced a policy of urban consolidation whereby Brisbane has a target of 94% of new dwellings being from infill development (Department of Local Government, Infrastructure and Planning 2017). Infill is the development within existing urban boundaries, and to reach such a level requires not only a transformation of the dwelling types being constructed (for example, a change in preference for detached houses to apartments), but also a transformation of the urban structure of the city. Like many metropolitan strategies, however, greenfield development within existing local government boundaries is included as meeting urban consolidation targets. Undeveloped land within existing urban boundaries is a finite resource meaning that, once such greenfield sites are utilised, infill of existing residential areas, or greyfield development, will be crucial at meeting urban consolidation targets by redeveloping existing urban areas at higher densities. Despite overarching planning schemes aimed at densifying existing urban areas, infill development in Australia is generally informal, lacking any specific government policy focus or intervention. Little scholarly research is available on how urban consolidation targets and infill are to be achieved in a practical sense. Multiple dwellings such as apartment buildings are denser and taller, therefore requiring larger footprints than a single dwelling. Due to the small size of existing residential lots, amalgamation is often required if properties are to redevelop at higher densities. Land amalgamation is a process where smaller parcels of land are merged to create larger parcels, effectively reverse subdivision. This alters the highly fragmented existing cadastral pattern and creates lots more suitable for redevelopment. This research uses two sets of property boundary data to compare the property boundary change occurring over a ten-year period to facilitate infill development in the Brisbane suburbs immediately south of the Central Business District. Amalgamation of properties for higher density residential developments are a specific focus of this study, as it is amalgamations that will be required to meet urban consolidation targets once more easily developed sites, such as former industrial or commercial areas, are no longer available for development. This study identified 182 boundary changes, a boundary change being an event of amalgamation, subdivision or reconfiguration, regardless of how many lots were involved. Changes occurred on two percent of lots within the study area, with greyfield development forming 66.5% of all redevelopments. These results, however, varied significantly between suburbs. For example, greyfield development formed most redevelopments in both East Brisbane and Kangaroo Point, but the former was generally a subdivision resulting in additional detached houses, whereas the latter was generally an amalgamation resulting in the replacement of detached houses with an apartment building. The 2 majority of all residential apartment buildings across all suburbs were constructed on brownfield sites (62.5%), often following the amalgamation of lots. In fact, amalgamations were the most common form of property boundary change (51.1%), but lots that experienced an amalgamation only had an average combined land size of 1,423.0 square metres. This is not much larger than the traditional quarter acre block (1011.7 square metres) that dominated suburban subdivisions in the period following the Second World War. The size of these amalgamated lots does not allow for the best practice, coordinated and largescale residential development that allows for community areas, greenspace and other benefits. The results of this study indicate that ad hoc redevelopment in Brisbane’s inner suburbs is proceeding without guidance from regulatory bodies. Our findings show that most redevelopment occurs on properties with a detached house, which are attractive to smaller developers or owner- developers. Largescale developments, often undertaken by development companies, continue to occur predominately on brownfield land. The results also show that the construction of detached houses continues to fragment Brisbane’s cadastral pattern, even within two kilometres of Brisbane’s Central Business District. This will make urban infill development more difficult when vacant or industrial land with large lot sizes are no longer available. We conclude by questioning the assumption that there is suitable land available for further development and highlight the need to change the way land use planning and redevelopment occurs. Much of the change required is institutional, and more direct involvement from authorities is required to rectify current urban development trends to ensure that the desired outcomes of existing local and state government planning schemes are achieved. This includes the state playing a more active role in site acquisition and amalgamation to ensure that developments meet community expectations. This is a way of guaranteeing that the planning schemes introduced at a government level are implemented in practice, as well as ensuring the construction of a mix of housing (social housing as well as private developments) and necessary infrastructure. Such an outcome could also be achieved by more directed and incremental zoning through the upzoning of individual lots, rather than whole areas, so that higher density redevelopment occurs in an incremental, coordinated and organised way. These changes will work to avoid the ad hoc and piecemeal redevelopment that has characterised current attempts at urban redevelopment. 3 Declaration by author This thesis is composed of my original work, and contains no material previously published or written by another person except where due reference has been made in the text. I have clearly stated the contribution by others to jointly-authored works that I have included in my thesis. I have clearly stated the contribution of others to this thesis as a whole, including statistical assistance, survey design, data analysis, significant technical procedures, professional editorial advice, financial support and any other original research work used or reported in my thesis. The content of my thesis is the result of work I have carried out since the commencement of my higher degree by research candidature and does not include a substantial part of work that has been submitted to qualify for the award of any other degree or diploma in any university or other tertiary institution. I have clearly stated which parts of my thesis, if any, have been submitted to qualify for another award. I acknowledge that an electronic copy of my thesis must be lodged with the University Library and, subject to the policy and procedures of The University of Queensland, the thesis be made available for research and study in accordance with the Copyright Act 1968 unless a period of embargo has been approved by the Dean of the Graduate School. I acknowledge that copyright of all material contained in my thesis resides with the copyright holder(s) of that material. Where appropriate I have obtained copyright permission from the copyright holder to reproduce material in this thesis and have sought permission from co-authors for any jointly authored works included in the thesis. 4 Publications during candidature No publications. Publications included in this thesis No publications included. Submitted manuscripts included in this thesis No manuscripts submitted for publication. Other publications during candidature No other publications. 5 Contributions by others to the thesis None. Statement of parts of the thesis submitted to qualify for the award of another degree None. Research Involving Human or Animal Subjects No animal or human participants were involved in this research. 6 Acknowledgements I would like to acknowledge my supervisors, Dr Thomas Sigler and Associate Professor Yan Liu, for their advice, guidance and encouragement in the completion of this research. I would also like to thank my family, my husband Zachary, my parents Jeanine and Peter, and my grandmother Margaret. If not for their unwavering support and patience it would have been impossible. Thank you. 7 Financial support The purchase of data for this research was supported by the University of Queensland’s School of Earth and Environmental Sciences. 8 Keywords Property; Amalgamation; Real Estate; Planning; Urban Geography; Cadastre Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classifications (ANZSRC) ANZSRC code: 160404, Urban and Regional Studies, 100% Fields of Research (FoR) Classification FoR code: 1064, Human Geography, 100% 9 Contents 1. Introduction .............................................................................................. 19 1.1 The Research Problem ............................................................... 21 1.2 Outline of Study Area ................................................................ 22 1.3 Thesis Aim ................................................................................. 23 1.4 Thesis Objective ......................................................................... 23