NINEWAYS at Broadmeadow has changed shape a few times over the year. Once home to a cinema, the corner that now hosts the Premier Hotel and a service station changed significantly - along with much of the city - during the aftermath of the 1989 Newcastle earthquake.
Plans for a further change, though, have inadvertently landed the suburban hotel squarely in the middle of a debate that spans the state's entire planning and real estate landscape. Put simply, how will the housing crisis end if the reins are too tight on major developments, and conversely, how can we ensure proper processes aren't lost in the haste to deliver?
Sydney-based Thomas Hotels wanted to demolish the Premier and replace it with a 30-metre building with 48 apartments, a new-look ground-floor pub and 16 hotel rooms.
City of Newcastle recommended refusing the $34 million development because of its height and mass.
The Hunter Central Coast Regional Planning Panel said the development application was "premature" given the site would be included in a planning strategy for the identified Broadmeadow Regionally Significant Growth Area.
Property Council Hunter director Anita Hugo said Broadmeadow was a "perfect example" of the Minns government's strategy to boost housing density around train stations.
"We understand processes are there for a reason, but we need to not lose sight of the future while doing this or we will never see changes to the housing crisis we are experiencing," she said.
Logic dictates that the processes that have allowed a housing crisis to eventuate are unlikely to be the same ones that untie the knot of rising demand, soaring prices and lack of supply. It seems the approach must evolve, but it is equally important that proper scrutiny is not trampled in a stampede of developments rushed through purely on the basis of need.
It seems unfair to stymie millions in development on the basis of Hunter Park, a project that appears far from a political priority for the state government and shapes as years away from fruition, at best. Equally, as Ms Hugo points out, parts of the state close to train stations, like Nineways, are being earmarked for in-fill housing. Her concerns about the message the rejection sends to the market are valid, but at the same time, each development must be weighed on its own merits rather than potential ripples further downstream.
The planners involved have obviously considered the matter carefully, and are not responsible for the broader issues with housing approval rates. Ms Hugo and her organisation obviously come from the perspective of the property industry, for which they are advocates. While critics may point to that as bias, it would be as remiss of that industry to stand idly by while property markets stagnate further as it would to rush through sub-par projects behind the fig leaf of rampant demand.
What is clear is that tensions are higher than ever, and there is little time to lose in addressing supply. Brunker Road has transformed significantly in recent years, with many houses giving way to unit blocks. Such transformations are likely to become more common as the city grows, but planners stand with the great duty of ensuring that density emerges in the right place and under the right conditions. There is little doubt Nineways will look different soon, but the system's checks and balances must grind towards compromise for a bit longer.
