Why granny flats are the latest front in Sydney’s housing wars

Councils and rural landholders are at loggerheads over plans to allow more granny flats and self-contained homes on Sydney’s urban fringes as part of the latest proposed shake-up of state planning laws.

A NSW parliamentary inquiry will look into proposed changes that would make it easier for rural landholders to build secondary dwellings via a streamlined approval process.

The overhaul has been met with support from many rural landholders who say permitting small dwellings such as granny flats on their land would support multi-generational living, provide accommodation for seasonal workers, and allow farmers to make extra income from rent.

Multiple councils on Sydney’s urban fringes have flagged objections, including concerns a surge in development activity in rural areas could strain infrastructure and cause conflicts with the city’s agricultural land uses.

Under existing laws, rural landholders seeking to build secondary dwellings are subject to strict council planning restrictions that vary between local government areas.

Hornsby Council caps the size of secondary homes in rural areas at 120 square metres – about the size of an average Sydney unit – while at Hawkesbury Council the limit is 110 square metres or 20 per cent of the floor space of the principal dwellings, whichever is greater.

Freemans Reach resident Janette Purdon, who has spent the past year trying to build a granny flat on her rural block, said she “gave up” after failing to gain approval from Hawkesbury Council.

“I’m at the age where I’m thinking of where I want to live in my older years and all I’ve been trying to do is have a small granny flat at the back of the home where I’d be able to live after I retire, and then my daughter could move into my current home,” she said.

“I don’t want anything big – just a small house that I could live in and that would enable us to keep the property and provide that sense of security as I get older.”

Philip Walton, who lives on rural acreage in Yarramundi on Sydney’s western fringes, faced similar barriers trying to obtain approval for a secondary dwelling on his property for his children.

He questioned why residents in urban areas can build granny flats on residential blocks as small as 450 square metres, but rural landowners living on more than 10 hectares in size cannot.

“We have four kids, and it’s on the cards that they’re going to be living at home until I can afford to help them into a property,” he said.

“All we’re asking for is the same rights as people have in the city but there doesn’t seem to be any flexibility in the planning process.”

Draft planning changes due to be considered as part of the inquiry include limiting secondary dwellings to no more than two homes on a single rural lot for the use of either permanent housing, rental accommodation or family accommodation.

If adopted, the laws would apply to more than 350,000 NSW properties.

Many councils on Sydney’s urban fringes have also raised concerns that an increase in development activity in outer metropolitan rural areas could cause conflicts with land uses that supply about 20 per cent of the city’s food needs.

Blue Mountains Council, in a submission to the inquiry, argued a blanket planning approach could trigger inappropriate development in land susceptible to bushfires or flooding, resulting in “poor development outcomes and significant environmental impacts”.

The Hills Shire Council – which has more than 27,600 hectares of rural zoned land, or 70 per cent of the local government area – has warned population growth in other parts of Sydney has meant the role of the rural areas to “provide fresh produce and building materials for Sydney and the wider region should not be undervalued”.

Planning changes to be considered by the inquiry include permitting secondary dwellings through a “complying development certificate” process which would negate the need for landholders to lodge detailed development applications to local councils.

Housing Institute of Australia executive director Brad Armitage estimated that streamlining planning approvals could cut $15,000 from the cost of development.

The peak body for councils, Local Government NSW, has cautioned against such an approach, instead calling for councils to “retain flexibility with the power to adopt provisions that reflect local circumstances”.

Hornsby Council acting general manager Glen Magus said rural areas had specific issues that needed to be considered as part of the development process, including on-site sewerage management requirements.

Despite those concerns, NSW Farmers Association president Xavier Martin said the planning changes could increase the viability for farming communities by permitting housing options that would facilitate multi-generational living and accommodation for seasonal workers.

In a statement, Planning Minister Paul Scully said the NSW government supported the inquiry, adding that “secondary dwellings are an important component in the suite of responses necessary to address the housing challenge in rural NSW”.

Hawkesbury councillor Nathan Zamprogno has downplayed concerns over the impact on agricultural land, saying targeted controls would “balance” environmental factors in rural areas while providing housing options for landholders.

The inquiry is due to report back to NSW Parliament in February next year.

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.