Speech to Chambers

Delivered by Councillor Seal Chong Wah, to the Debate on E&C Committee Report Clause A Tailored Amendment Package To Brisbane City Plan 2014, 9th December 2025

I am speaking to the E & C Report Clause A Tailored Amendment Package To Brisbane City Plan 2014 – ‘More Homes, Sooner – Low-Medium Density Residential Design’.

This amendment would allow a gentle increase to the height limit in low to medium density residential zones, which covers a seventh of Brisbane, and speed up approvals for dual-occupancies that comply with acceptable outcomes in the city plan.  It would allow for smaller subdivisions of lots in this zone, and for low density residential zones within 300 metres of a high street or shopping centre.  Pending proper consultation with Brisbane's residents, this seems positive. 

2 to 4 storey apartments and townhouses sit in the ‘missing middle’, between towers and detached homes.  The Greens have been calling for citywide, gentle density like this for years now.  These buildings make up the bulk of housing in dense cities worldwide, like Seoul, Paris, or Prague.  They’re faster to build, don’t rely on mega-developers, and don’t block the sun and breeze like taller towers. They’re ‘human-scaled’ - people on the top floor are still socially connected to the street. With proper deep planting and setbacks, and adequate public and active transport infrastructure, these buildings can comfortably house more people in our neighbourhoods.

But while positive, this won’t bring down house prices or rent on its own, or ‘fix’ the housing crisis.  I’ve said it repeatedly: this Council must implement ‘mandatory inclusionary zoning’.  Over 11,000 people are on the public housing waitlist in the Brisbane City Council area.  That doesn’t include thousands of renters paying over a third of their income to their landlord. The State government isn’t funding enough public and community housing, but this Council has the power to act.  This Council has the power to implement mandatory inclusionary zoning.

The Greens have been calling for 25% of new multiple-unit developments, with over 10 dwellings, to be public or social housing.  Genuine affordable public and community housing is the only way to guarantee that struggling people can afford to live in this city.

We also must combat land-banking. Zoning changes can allow more dwellings, but dwellings must be built and put to market to impact rent and house prices. If developers don’t build, or hold units off the market, then prices rise anyway. That’s why the Greens have been calling for a vacancy levy. We’d charge owners of vacant lots and properties such high rates fees that they will rent or sell to somebody who’ll use the property. That’s what we need to stop developers artificially raising prices by restricting housing supply.

Finally, we know this Council isn’t funding enough public transport, footpaths, pedestrian crossings, protected bikeways, stormwater drains, parks, and more to support more residents.  Despite rates and infrastructure charges, every Councillor here has seen crucial infrastructure upgrades rejected, sitting on the LGIP for years and years, because there’s no money. 

Whenever this Council changes the zoning of land, the Council creates value for the property owner, but it isn’t capturing any for the public.  That’s why, on top of higher infrastructure charges, the Greens have previously called for a 75% value-uplift charge. When zoning changes increase property value, 75% of the increase would be levied on that lot’s next development approval. This is already used elsewhere, like the City of Sydney.  We need the money to build basic infrastructure for higher density, now. Not in ten or twenty years, but now.

Overall, it’s good to see this Council exploring gentle density citywide. I’m glad to see consensus shifting away from suburban sprawl, and hyper-concentrated development in just a few locations.  But the council’s consultation on these significant amendments is completely inadequate and can bypass impacted residents. 

It’s crucial that Council invests more in consultation that gets to every impacted resident to ensure our community is actually engaged in these proposals.  We need vacancy levies and inclusionary zoning to bring down house and rent prices. We need higher infrastructure charges, and to explore value uplift charges to fund basic infrastructure for new residents.  This is a good change, but it’s just one piece of the puzzle.