A new pathway to displacement? The implications of less-than-unanimous strata renewal laws for vulnerable residents

IF 1.5 Q2 Social Sciences Australian Planner Pub Date : 2020-10-02 DOI:10.1080/07293682.2020.1854798
Laura Crommelin, Hazel Easthope, L. Troy, Bill Randolph
{"title":"A new pathway to displacement? The implications of less-than-unanimous strata renewal laws for vulnerable residents","authors":"Laura Crommelin, Hazel Easthope, L. Troy, Bill Randolph","doi":"10.1080/07293682.2020.1854798","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Multi-unit developments have been a feature of Australian cities for decades, particularly Sydney. As these buildings age, commercial and planning drivers promote redevelopment, but renewing private multi-unit housing poses significant and unique problems, as this housing is typically under multiple ownership (e.g., strata title). Jurisdictions worldwide have responded by changing laws to allow redevelopment with less-than-unanimous consent of all unit owners, meaning a majority of owners can vote their neighbours out of their homes against their will. In New South Wales, legislation introduced in 2015 enabled the redevelopment of strata titled property with the consent of 75% of owners. Research conducted at the time highlighted a range of risks, especially for vulnerable groups like lower-income and elderly residents. With the legislation now due for a statutory 5-year review, it is timely to revisit the research findings and examine subsequent developments, to identify key issues for policymakers when assessing the impact of the law's first five years. These issues should be of interest not only in NSW, but in all three Australian jurisdictions with less-than-unanimous renewal laws, as well as many international cities.","PeriodicalId":45599,"journal":{"name":"Australian Planner","volume":"56 1","pages":"261 - 269"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/07293682.2020.1854798","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Planner","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07293682.2020.1854798","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

ABSTRACT Multi-unit developments have been a feature of Australian cities for decades, particularly Sydney. As these buildings age, commercial and planning drivers promote redevelopment, but renewing private multi-unit housing poses significant and unique problems, as this housing is typically under multiple ownership (e.g., strata title). Jurisdictions worldwide have responded by changing laws to allow redevelopment with less-than-unanimous consent of all unit owners, meaning a majority of owners can vote their neighbours out of their homes against their will. In New South Wales, legislation introduced in 2015 enabled the redevelopment of strata titled property with the consent of 75% of owners. Research conducted at the time highlighted a range of risks, especially for vulnerable groups like lower-income and elderly residents. With the legislation now due for a statutory 5-year review, it is timely to revisit the research findings and examine subsequent developments, to identify key issues for policymakers when assessing the impact of the law's first five years. These issues should be of interest not only in NSW, but in all three Australian jurisdictions with less-than-unanimous renewal laws, as well as many international cities.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
一种新的替代途径?不一致的地层更新法对弱势居民的影响
几十年来,多单元开发一直是澳大利亚城市的特色,尤其是悉尼。随着这些建筑的老化,商业和规划推动了重建,但更新私人多单元住房带来了重大而独特的问题,因为这些住房通常属于多重所有权(例如,分层产权)。世界各地的司法管辖区都做出了回应,修改了法律,允许在非所有业主一致同意的情况下进行重建,这意味着大多数业主可以在违背邻居意愿的情况下投票将他们的房子赶出去。在新南威尔士州,2015年引入的立法允许在75%的业主同意的情况下重新开发分层产权。当时进行的研究强调了一系列风险,特别是对低收入和老年人等弱势群体。由于该立法现在需要进行法定的5年审查,现在是时候重新审视研究结果并检查随后的发展,以便在评估法律头五年的影响时为政策制定者确定关键问题。这些问题不仅应该引起新南威尔士州的兴趣,而且应该引起所有三个澳大利亚司法管辖区以及许多国际城市的兴趣,这些司法管辖区的更新法律并不一致。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Australian Planner
Australian Planner REGIONAL & URBAN PLANNING-
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
期刊最新文献
The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the music industries of Brisbane and an evaluation of the policy response Planning for open space and recreation in new high density areas: a reply to Marriott Practice reflections on the pandemic from South East Queensland Planning with foresight and resilience: the Planning Institute of Australia National Congress in Adelaide 2023 How have South Australian urban planning policies affected Blakeview’s surface temperatures?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1