NSW government-released housing designs that will allow for speedier development approval have been savaged on social media, with some likening them to “slums” and “ghettos”.
The six pre-approved designs, announced by NSW Premier Chris Minns last week, were selected by a five-person government jury based on criteria such as sustainability, affordability and adaptability.
The pattern book of housing configurations includes designs for three types of terraces, along with three styles of mid-level apartment block.
When announcing the plans, the Premier conceded that NSW was not “building anywhere near what we need to be” and the hope was that the pattern book would allow for faster housing construction.
MORE: Sydney home prices to plummet in 2025
MORE: ‘Walking on water on LSD’ Russell Crowe’s $42m play
The designs will be the “plug and play” solution to the housing crisis, putting builders and developers on the planning fast-track if they choose from the pre-approved blueprints.
Members of the public will be able to see the designs in person before they are rolled out across Sydney, with display homes to be built on government-owned sites.
Early feedback appeared mixed. A Facebook post by the Premier announcing the designs was hit with nearly 3,000 comments, ranging from positive to (mostly) critical of the general look of the homes.
A common theme among those who took issue with the designs was that they were reminiscent of some of the housing styles from the 1960s and 1970s.
MORE: Sign RBA is creating ticking time bomb
MORE: Wild reason these homes cost as little as $35k
There was also a widespread view that the designs echoed some of the styles of housing commission properties built in the mid-20th century.
One response read: “that looks beyond terrible … they are literally matchboxes”.
“They look like the cheap and nasty housing commission houses they built 40 years ago,” another said.
Many commenting online said the houses reminded them of motels. “Looks like a seventies motel”, read one. Another said: “Hang on! That’s the vintage motel from my hometown. Vines and everything.”
Other responses included:
– “Looks like prison. Imagine put (Sic) a bird in a small cage, just decentralise, problem solved.”
– “The new slums of NSW.”
– “Ghettos of the future.”
– “I really don’t get the appeal of living in a shoebox in a shoe store.”
– “Slumville!”
– “I thought this was a satirical or sarcastic post and then I saw where it came from.”
MORE: Rare chance to score homes for half price
– “They forgot to add the mattress pile and the Coles trolley parking bay out the front of this block.”
But others have defended the plans. Stacey Van Harn, director of design agency Hecker Guthrie, told The Daily Telegraph the designs offered good environmental qualities. She applauded the timber and brick finishes.
“I like it because it is like 1970s housing,” she said. “The thing that resonates with me is that these (designs) have good quality materials. If you look at the spaces and forms, it’s a really successful outcome.
“Some people may not like brown bricks because it reminds them of an era passed but a lot of modern design is going to back to some of lessons from the 1960s and 1970s.”
MORE: Hidden cost of appearing on The Block
Ms Van Harn, whose company was not involved in the designs, added that when designing a pattern book of home styles it was important to provide scope for individual residents to make the properties their own.
“When doing multi-residential development, you need to provide the people who live there with a backdrop to layer in their own style. You don’t want five different colours.
“No design firm can do something that will appeal to everyone. If you provide a pattern to roll out to the masses, the homes need to be adaptable to people’s own tastes.
“Some architecture today is about creating loud statements but that’s not the way to make neighbourhoods people feel connected with. People need to feel there’s potential.”
Upon announcing the designs, Premier Minns said the “beautifully designed” apartments and terraces are “innovative, adaptable and functional”.