It seems to me that if there is something people want to attack about this
major urban development, it's the national population policy that so far is
bipartisan and doesn't look like changing anytime soon. It's not an option
to do nothing and allow the cities to become dysfunctional. And it
certainly ill-behoves anybody already comfortably established with a
residence (now typically worth something north of a million $) relatively
close to a city centre to deny the opportunity for anybody else to have an
opportunity to live in proximity to their work as well, rather than having
to commute from 80 km out, as many service workers and employees now have
to do. That's the worst form of nimbyism and privilege.

Property developers only build residential developments in respond to
demand and guided by the town planning strategies, they don't lead the
demand. There is a great shortage of housing in Sydney. The logical places
to build new and higher-density housing are around transport/activity
nodes, but this is tempered - justly - in inner-city areas by the large
conservation areas, so these developments are relatively limited in such
areas. This type of development also encourages public transport use, I
would think that that aspect is something that should be regarded with
favour on a forum like this one.

Tony P