Developer Tries to End Affordable Housing Early

Topic: Housing Policy

Friday, 7 August 2026, at 4:42 am

Friday, 7 August 2026, at 5:46 am

Carly Gersling was stressed when she found out Landmark wanted to end affordable housing in her complex early.

In short:

Landmark, a property developer, tried to end affordable housing at one of its Sydney developments two years early.

It stopped the plan, but a regulator found it broke rules about talking to tenants and managing conflicts of interest.

Landmark says it has improved how it communicates with tenants and supports them during planning changes.

A big property developer tried to reduce affordable housing at some of its projects, despite saying it wants to build more low-cost homes.

Landmark tried to end its affordable housing commitment at a Sydney development two years early, citing changes in NSW planning law.

A regulator rebuked Landmark for not following rules about being fair and transparent with residents during this matter.

Landmark also reduced its affordable housing contribution at another development while it was still being built in 2025.

The developer says it is a leader in responding to the housing crisis and has a long-term commitment to affordable housing.

But Carly Gersling, who lives in the affordable housing units, felt insecure in her home after finding out about Landmark's plans.

She only found out about the plans after seeing a notice on the building's entrance in December.

I panicked, she said.

Ms Gersling's rent is lower than the market rate, and she might have had to pay more or leave if Landmark's plan went ahead.

I was stressed, thinking I would have to move again.

Landmark got approval for the 74-apartment development, The Madison, from Sutherland Shire Council in 2016.

As part of its application, Landmark used a bonus scheme to build more units in return for allocating some to affordable housing.

The Madison apartment building is in Caringbah, in Sydney's south.

Landmark agreed to set aside 50% of the units for affordable housing for 10 years in return for increased density.

But last August, it applied to end the affordable housing period early, citing changes in state planning law.

Council planning officers recommended rejecting the application, saying it would worsen Sydney's housing shortage.

The proposal undermines the original consent and would have adverse social and economic impacts, the council said.

Governments offer incentives for developers to build more affordable housing, but there are flaws in the strategy.

Landmark took the matter to court but withdrew its application earlier this year.

The developer said it would have moved affected residents to other affordable housing if its plan was approved.

The 37 affordable apartments at The Madison remain under their existing affordable housing obligations until at least 2028.

Do you know more?

You can use the Signal app to protect your identity with end-to-end encryption.

The NSW Housing Registrar looked into Landmark's handling of the matter after a complaint from a resident.

The registrar found that Landmark did not comply with a national code requiring community housing providers to be fair and transparent.

The registrar said Landmark was reviewing its complaint and tenant communications policies.

Landmark acknowledged the registrar's findings and said it had strengthened its communication and engagement with tenants.

A Four Corners investigation found many affordable rental homes were unaffordable for those who needed them most.

Landmark planned other projects using a NSW bonus scheme that allows developers to build above local height restrictions.

NSW Premier Chris Minns has supported Landmark and attended the opening of one of its developments.

The premier's office said he regularly attends events at the invitation of businesses.

If a company invites the premier to an event, he will generally go.

Chris Minns joined Landmark's Arash Tavakoli at the opening of a development in 2024.

The housing registrar also noted concerns about potential conflicts of interest between Landmark's property development and affordable housing management.

Under NSW rules, developers must appoint a registered community housing provider to manage affordable housing in their developments.

Some developers, including Landmark, have set up their own community housing providers.

Landmark said the housing registrar had reviewed its structure and raised concerns about governance and oversight.

Landmark has updated its governance and conflict-of-interest framework and is making changes to its registration and licensing.

The housing registrar's records show Landmark's community housing subsidiary manages 91 affordable housing units.

The NSW Tenants Union CEO said there is a risk of conflict of interest when developers appoint their own affordable housing businesses.

There's always a question about how much a community housing provider set up by a developer is really acting independently.

Leo Patterson Ross says developers appointing their own subsidiaries to manage community housing raises potential conflicts.

A Four Corners investigation found few properties advertised as affordable were actually affordable for those who needed them most.

NSW Planning Minister Paul Scully defended the state's affordable housing system, including regulations that allow developers to appoint their own for-profit subsidiaries.

They're subject to all the oversights of every other community housing provider, he said.

NSW Planning Minister Paul Scully.

At another development in Caringbah, Landmark reduced its affordable housing offering before the project was completed.

The Caringbah Greens project was to include 50% affordable housing for 10 years under its original plan.

But Landmark won approval to reduce its affordable housing allocation to 21.4% of the development's total floor area for 15 years.

Landmark argued the reduced affordable housing contribution was permitted under a change to state planning rules.

Landmark's Caringbah Greens project was to include 50% affordable housing for 10 years under its original plan.

In practice, this reduced the share of affordable housing but extended the period for which those homes are kept affordable.

The development was still under construction when the modification was determined, so no tenants were affected by the change.

The outcome remains above the affordable housing expectations that apply to comparable projects.

See more ABC coverage in your search results

Promotion