6 days ago
2
Developers are increasingly using the NSW government’s fast-tracked Housing Delivery Authority pathway to revive or expand projects previously refused or constrained by local planning authorities – often returning with proposals significantly larger than first planned.
What was introduced as a response to the state’s housing crisis is now drawing criticism for enabling developers to increase the scale of projects that were previously approved at lower densities or rejected outright under long-standing planning controls.
Since its establishment in January 2025, the Housing Delivery Authority (HDA) planning pathway has declared 325 projects as state-significant developments, allowing developers to bypass local councils and seek approval directly from the NSW government.
Many of the proposals are not entirely new. Instead, they are revised versions of earlier schemes – some previously approved at lower densities, others refused – reworked to deliver substantially more apartments and building height under the HDA framework.
From mid-rise to high-rise
One of the most striking examples is at 1 King Street in Concord West. An earlier proposal sought approval for 698 apartments across buildings of four to 12 storeys. Under the HDA, developer Billbergia has returned with a new plan for a 1300-unit precinct featuring towers up to 38 storeys.
Billbergia development director Saul Moran said the project had struggled to remain viable under the previous density settings, adding the HDA had removed “local politics” from the planning assessment and decision-making process.
“Without the HDA, this project was borderline unfeasible at the lower densities proposed by local planning authorities, which can be influenced by community sentiment rather than independently assessing proposals on merit,” Moran said.
In Campsie, developer HYG has submitted plans for a 26-storey, 425-unit complex under the HDA, exceeding previous council height limits, arguing a smaller development would “severely underutilise” the site.
In Macquarie Park, a 21-storey, 231-unit development approved in late 2024 has been replaced by a 46-storey tower containing 438 apartments as part of a new HDA proposal.
A project on Anzac Parade in Kensington has increased from 197 to 357 apartments under the pathway. Planning documents for the site stated the redesign followed “further design testing to maximise opportunities in response to the current NSW government’s priority for additional housing density in well-located areas”.
The Eastlakes Shopping Centre site is also proposed for a 1000-unit redevelopment under the HDA, more than double the 428 apartments approved by the NSW government just three years ago.
Resurrecting the refused
Perhaps the most controversial aspect of the HDA is its use to revive projects previously rejected under local planning controls.
In Kellyville, a proposal for 826 apartments at 301 Samantha Riley Drive was refused in May last year by the Sydney Central City Planning Panel for breaching height limits and creating “unreasonable visual amenity impacts” on surrounding land.
Under the HDA pathway, developer Level 33 has returned with a significantly larger proposal: 1208 apartments in towers up to 38 storeys.
Level 33 managing director Eddy Haddad defended the revised proposal, arguing the site’s proximity to public transport justified the greater density.
Local government leaders say the system is effectively allowing developers to circumvent long-standing local planning laws by resubmitting larger proposals once they enter the HDA system.
Community backlash grows
Matthew Stewart, chief executive of Canterbury-Bankstown Council, said developers often “walk out” of council negotiations after projects are rejected and “head straight to the HDA”, returning with larger proposals.
His council alone has received 17 HDA proposals totalling more than 5200 apartments, with projects growing from 20 storeys to as high as 39.
“We’ve spent years trying to get standards right on development sites and, after all that, developers have walked away, gone to the HDA and come back with double the yield,” Stewart said.
“What it’s done is take voice from the community and take decision-making away from local government.”
The rapid escalation in project scale has sparked opposition in several communities, particularly where tall buildings are proposed in areas that have historically been defined by low-rise housing density.
In the Blue Mountains, a proposed 214-apartment HDA development at Katoomba has become a flashpoint for residents concerned about bushfire risks, environmental impacts and changes to the region’s character.
The Narrow Neck Road site, originally intended for a hotel, is now proposed as a residential complex of eight buildings.
Blue Mountains mayor Mark Greenhill described the proposal as an “unprecedented threat to local planning controls, community safety and the landscape”, citing its proximity to the World Heritage-listed national park.
Annette Cam, president of the Blue Mountains Conservation Society, said packed community meetings reflected concerns the development could set a precedent for taller buildings in the area.
“There’s nothing here of that height in the Blue Mountains and it would completely change the character of the area,” she said.
In the Hills Shire, Mayor Michelle Byrne questioned why recently introduced Transport Oriented Development controls were being superseded by even taller HDA proposals. In Bella Vista, a site identified for 22 storeys is now the subject of a proposal approaching 40 storeys.
“How can you spend all that time and money completing detailed planning studies, only to then throw everything out?” Byrne said.
NSW Planning Minister Paul Scully has defended the HDA as a key measure to address housing shortages and meet the state’s target of 377,000 new homes by 2029 under the National Housing Accord.
He said more than 1000 expressions of interest had already been lodged under the HDA scheme to date, with the potential to deliver more than 102,000 homes.
“The impact of the HDA on the housing supply pipeline is undeniable,” Scully said, adding that all projects undergo full merit assessment and community consultation.
Urban Taskforce chief executive Tom Forrest backed the pathway, arguing opposition to higher-density housing in established suburbs had contributed to the current supply shortage.
“Community concern is now rightly focused on the impact of undersupply – rising rents and unaffordability,” Forrest said.
Approval is only the first hurdle
Industry leaders warn, however, that planning approval alone does not guarantee projects will proceed to construction.
Property Council NSW executive director Anita Hugo said developers still face major obstacles including rising construction costs, labour shortages, taxes and financing constraints.
Even Saul Moran of Billbergia acknowledged that feasibility remains a “challenge”, particularly in western Sydney where household incomes can limit borrowing capacity and affect pre-sales required to bankroll construction.
Under the HDA process, developers first submit an expression of interest, after which the planning minister determines whether to declare the project state-significant. Developers then have nine months to lodge a full development application, including an environmental impact statement, before the proposal is publicly exhibited and assessed.
The pathway is also enabling developers to reimagine sites previously earmarked for other uses.
In Wolli Creek, a proposal to build an ice-skating rink site on the former Legion Cabs site on the Princes Highway has now turned into a 22-storey, mixed-use development incorporating a ground-floor skating facility and 170 apartments.
Similarly, the Mortdale RSL site, once considered for medium-density housing, is now the subject of a 175-unit development as part of an application lodged with the HDA, despite earlier proposals deemed to lack “strategic merit” by the Sydney South Planning Panel.
Start the day with a summary of the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter.
