The recent Not-In-My-Back-Yard (NIMBY) and Yes-In-My-Back-Yard (YIMBY) debate on social media and the tabloid press has highlighted the fragility of Heritage Conservation Areas in Sydney. Never before, has the policy of establishing large Heritage Conservation Areas to protect intrinsic heritage values been questioned in such a manner. In the past, NIMBYism has worked in heritage’s favour. The listing campaigns of the 1970s-1980s were, in part, influenced by a determination to preserve, respect and uphold heritage values for future generations.

But now, we are facing the worst housing crisis in our history. Is it possible, for heritage practitioners to contemplate letting some of these areas go, or be rationalised?

Such a concept has rarely been given serious thought. Since the mid-1980s, the number of Heritage Conservation Areas within the Sydney Metropolitan Area have accumulated in an uncoordinated manner. Each council has gazetted these areas. The State Government has allowed these areas to grow without questioning their pervasiveness.

However, we have seen Heritage Conservation Areas coming under pressure due to a need for more available housing. The current housing crisis has generated a number of negative impacts, such as new homeowners having to look for housing options many kilometres away from their place of work. Families are forced to live further apart, and younger people are unable to afford adequate housing. Socially, the negative impacts of the housing crisis have riven our society into two factions, i.e., those that can afford to live in the Eastern Suburbs, and those who cannot.

What can be done to address this heritage and housing issue?

To the best of my knowledge, I do not know if any serious studies have been made to meticulously sift through Heritage Conservation Areas, in order to identify which properties represent contributory, neutral or detracting buildings. Some councils have determined which classification is given to all the properties within a Heritage Conservation Area, but many have not, for the obvious reason that everything is presumed to be contributory, unless proven otherwise. Conceivably, the detracting items can be identified and struck out of the Heritage Conservation Areas to better facilitate new housing on those properties. Arguably, the neutral ones could also be examined, to better assess what contribution they make to the chief characteristics of the Heritage Conservation Area.

In this fashion, it might be possible to single out the contributory items within Heritage Conservation Areas and allow new builds to occur on these properties. Naturally, there would need to be DCP guidelines by way of model situations, in which new buildings meld with the contributory heritage stock. Potentially, the Government Architect could develop models and controls for new housing within Heritage Conservation Areas. Currently, the DCPs have acted as unbending controls, but, we need guidelines that are general, not specific. There are many ways in which new buildings can be facilitated in Heritage Conservation Areas.

In the UK, there is the National Planning Policy Framework (2023) and the British Standard change to heritage buildings (BS 7913:2013). Also, there is a publication called Good Design and Heritage by The Office of the Victorian Government Architect (2016). These guides are far more general than our DCPs. Our heritage DCPs are so inflexible that they do not encourage innovative design by young and keen architects. Surely, this must change.

Don’t get me wrong, I am avowedly in support of heritage conservation. But I cannot ignore the extremely negative effects (culturally, economically, politically and socially) of the housing crisis. YIMBYism has demonstrated that the needs and priorities of NSW communities have changed. The demand for housing supply over heritage is dire.

I adopt the principle that not everything in a Heritage Conservation Area is worth keeping. Some detracting and other neutral items can be removed to address the crisis. Heritage practitioners need to turn their minds towards critically analysing each and every property by way of rationalisation so that more properties are available for additional housing.

Further, we need to encourage more public and online discourse to address this pressing issue. By allowing more discussion, heritage and housing to find a way together, rather than being in opposition to one another.

Paul Rappoport

Conservation Architect and Heritage Planner

17 July 2024

Image References:

Evans, Ailan. Housing Prices Hit Highest Rate Of Growth Ever Recorded. Graphic. Tampa Free Press. June 29, 2021. Housing Prices Hit Highest Rate Of Growth Ever Recorded (tampafp.com)

Turner-Cohen, A. Investment banks make chilling rates rise prediction with ‘aggressive’ strategy to persist. Photograph. News.com.au. June 23, 2023. RBA to hike interest rate three more times to 4.85 per cent by April, investment banks predict | news.com.au — Australia’s leading news site

Vyshnya, Tara. Surry hills residential suburb in Sydney inner city – aerial top down view on a bright sunny day over streets and terrace houses. Photograph. Alamy.com. May 8, 2021. Surry hills residential suburb in Sydney inner city – aerial top down view on a bright sunny day over streets and terrace houses Stock Photo – Alamy