Analysis: post SRT, 30+ storey highrise at Lindfield and Gordon is inevitable

My previous post made the case that the NSW state government now has a clear upper house path towards funding and rapid commencement of construction of the second harbour crossing.  Whilst the second harbour crossing will increase rail capacity across the whole Sydney network, it is the North Shore line and the Epping-Chatswood line stations where the greatest capacity addition takes place.  The current combined limit for both of these lines is 20 trains per hour - whereas after the second harbour crossing, total capacity will increase to 40-50 trains per hour on these two lines.

It would be a major failure of urban planning if zoning for additional housing doesn't go alongside such a huge capacity increment.  We have already seen how urban planning and rail infrastructure go hand-in-hand along the Epping-Chatswood line:
* North Ryde station has become an urban activation priority precinct, with 3000 additional apartments planned in towers as high as 30+ storeys.
* Macquarie Park station remains "commercial core" and off limits to residential development, but plans for commercial office blocks of up to 17 storeys have been approved.

* Macquarie University Station has significant development anticipated through the Macquarie University masterplan, Macquarie Centre retail redevelopment, and Herring road urban activation/residential development.
* Epping station is an urban activation precinct, for which mixed use developments of up to 22 storeys is anticipated.
* Numerous stations along the northwest rail-link extension of the Epping-Chatswood line have been rezoned, with 29000 additional dwellings anticipated along the corridor.
* Chatswood, St Leonards and North Sydney have continued to have numerous additional residential towers proposed, approved and under construction.

To date, north shore line stations beyond Chatswood (from Roseville to Wahronga) have "escaped" residential development of the same scale (they did get a number of 5 storey apartments, which as we will see below was not enough, yet used up much precious & scarce station catchment land).  In the absence of a second harbour crossing, this was understandable as the Bradfield-era single existing rail track pair on the Harbour bridge would not be able to cope with the combined passenger load coming from the Epping-Chatswood, Northwest and North Shore lines.  However, once the second harbour crossing is in place, this bottle neck no longer applies, and there will be enormous spare capacity along the upper north shore line.


The Sydney Metro Strategy already has foreshadowed significant urban renewal along major rail lines within 30 minutes commute of the CBD, and the North Shore line will be one of particular focus.  However, it left out detailed numbers on exactly where additional housing will go, deferring this to the subregional planning process and the Greater Sydney Commission, and also I'd imagine, waiting for the election uncertainty around electricity privatisation and timing of the second harbour crossing to be settled.

However, below are the NSW Dept of Planning numbers that the Greater Sydney commission and councils like Kuringgai will be faced with as they put together their subregional plans:
* Population of Kurringgai will rise from 114600 in 2011 to 151100 in 2031.
* Household size in Kurringgai will drop from 2.95 to 2.91 over the same time frame.
* Implied dwelling numbers will rise from 41000 to 54650 over the same time.

So how will Kuringgai's town planners accommodate an extra 13000 dwellings?  Pretty much the same way Hills shire, Ryde and Willoughby have done so: by concentrating high rise development around selected sites in the rail station vicinity, so as to preserve the low density character across the broader local government area.

Working in Kurringgai's favour is that it does have numerous railway stations within it's LGA, although it will really be the more proximal stations of Roseville, Lindfield, Killara and Gordon that will be the focus of rezoning for high rise.  Of these stations, my money is on Lindfield and Gordon, as Roseville and Killara have a residential village character and lack the same degree of development as the former two.  Furthermore, Lindfield and Gordon are the two stations with rail turnback infrastructure and therefore have higher train frequencies than Roseville/Killara, which are stations skipped by semi-express North Shore line trains.

This logic was also reflected in the last available subregional plan, in which Gordon was nominated as a town centre and therefore higher in the hierarchy than other Kurringgai local centres, and the extensive community feedback in the last Local Centres LEP favoured Gordon as the preferred epicentre of residential redevelopment.  Gordon and Lindfield stations also are strategically located on the Pacific highway (which is not the case for Killara), and have the best developed bus interchange infrastructure.  Finally, Gordon is also well served by being located at the intersection of the major arterial roadways of Mona Vale road and Pacificy Highway.  Full disclaimer: I own a house that is zoned R4 high density residential in the Gordon station vicinity.

However, a major challenge which Kurringgai will face is that much of their station catchment areas have already been built upon with 4-6 storey apartment blocks, which in hindsight, used up much of the precious and scarce land around their rail stations (to yield only of the order of 6000 apartments across all their local centres).  This can be seen by looking in detail at Gordon town centre, but similar situations apply to all their local centres:

As seen in the above map, the majority of "high density" zones (which in Kuringgai means 5 storey apartments) have already been built upon.  There isn't much scope to expand the high rise density land areas as the rest of the Gordon station catchment is already taken up by various other uses included heritage/conservation sites, parks/reserves and municipal uses, as seen in the map below:

This means in the coming revised subregional plan, Gordon's town planners will have to give up on trying to keep apartments to just 5-6 storeys, and instead in the remaining few high density sites they have left, looking at 30+ storey apartments.  In fact, there are probably ~5 major sites that are left where 30 storey towers could be easily placed, without too much political heartache for Kurringgai; other additional sites are possible, but will no doubt face some vocal local opposition.

So which are these ~5 major sites which are "easy" to rezone as 30+ storey high rise?  Two sites above have already been outlined: Gordon Centre (the number #1 above), which is owned by Charter Hall Retail, and well over-due for redevelopment, and across the road from this (the number #2 site above), which are the retail shops and Wade lane local carpark (again, very run down and overdue to redevelopment ... hopefully Kurringai's aspirations to underground the carpark and create a park above will still go ahead to create the necessary open space amenity for all this high rise).  There is an existing scope to build up to 12-15 levels at Gordon Centre, but to date Charter Hall hasn't taken up the opportunity ... why would they when they can allocate their capital to 30 storey redevelopment opportunities in St Leonards instead.

Apart from these two sites, there are just 3, possibly 4 other sites that I can think of.  These would be further up the Pacific highway, where there are some run-down office/retail buildings, and also the block on Park road, immediately north of the station, where Kurringgai council owns significant land (the Lifeline building), and the five other residential houses share the same block (along Pearson Ave and Burgoyne St).  The owners of these five houses (at 2-8 Pearson Ave and 1-3 Burgoyne St) look amenable to selling out to developers at the right price (or so my real estate agent contacts tell me).  One interesting possibility is that the Park Ave/Pearson Ave/Burgoyne St block also builds over the railway line (ala Chatswood and St Leonards), which will do wonders for improving the connectivity and amenity of the area.

A third possibility is the Pymble Business park, which is just slightly further up the Pacific highway from Gordon town centre, and but this is now getting quite far away from the station, and also would result in a loss of the only "business park" type employment area available in Kurringgai.

If each of these sites can yield of the order of 300-500 apartments, then they can possibly provide 1500-2000 additional dwellings, which is 12-15% of the 13000 total that Kurringai needs to come up with in it's subregional plan.  If a similar quantum is built in Lindfield then that brings the numbers up to 24-30% of the required dwelling target.  How the Greater Sydney Commission and Kuringgai council deals with fitting in the rest will be interesting to follow.