<html><body><div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="section">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
CoreLogic undertook analysis of the recent March 2018 quarter consumer price index (CPI) data which confirmed that in inflation adjusted terms, dwelling values are now lower in most capital cities.
<div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="section">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
(Note: consumer price index (CPI), which measures inflation, increased by 0.4% over the March 2018 quarter to be 1.9% higher year-on-year. With the release of this data, it is also possible to look at inflation-adjusted or real changes in dwelling values across the capital cities. When looking at these figures, the inflation adjustment means that value growth is lower).
<div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="section">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
The results showed that national dwelling values fell by -1.0% and were -0.7% lower over the past 12 months, however, Hobart was the only capital city where real values increased over the quarter (+3.0%) with Sydney recording the largest quarterly fall (-2.2%).
<div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="section">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
Over the past twelve months, only Melbourne (+3.4%), Hobart (+10.9%) and Canberra (+1.0%) have seen dwelling values outpace inflation. The largest decline over the year was recorded in Darwin (-9.3%) followed by Perth (-4.3%) and Sydney (-4.0%).
<div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="section">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
Over the past decade, only Sydney (+43.3%) Melbourne (+38.7%) and Hobart (+6.4%) have recorded ‘real’ growth in dwelling values.
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2018/4/26/corelogic%20expert%20obs%201.jpg" target="_blank">Click here</a> to enlarge
<img src="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/c_scale,w_580,q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/po.images/2018/4/26/corelogic%20expert%20obs%201.jpg" alt="">
<div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="section">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
These latest figures really highlight just how narrow value growth has been in the national housing market over the past decade. It also highlights that low mortgage rates alone have not been the key driver of value growth - mortgage rates are the same in Sydney as they are in Perth yet the former has recorded real growth of 43.3% while the latter has seen values fall by -25.0%.
<div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="section">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
With dwelling values dropping over recent months, all capital cities, except Hobart, now have real values which sit below their previous peak. Nationally, values are -2.0% lower than their June 2017 peak and across the combined capital cities values are a slightly greater -2.5% lower. Let’s take a look at how dwellingvalues have tracked in inflation adjusted terms across each capital city.
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2018/4/26/corelogic%20expert%20obs%202.jpg" target="_blank">Click here</a> to enlarge
<img src="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/c_scale,w_580,q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/po.images/2018/4/26/corelogic%20expert%20obs%202.jpg" alt="">
Sydney – values are 5.3% lower than their June 2017 peak.
<div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="section">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
Melbourne – after peaking in December 2017, values are currently -0.9% lower.
<div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="section">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
Brisbane – values peaked back in March 2008 and are currently - 12.5% lower.
<div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="section">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
Adelaide – values currently sit -7.4% below their June 2010 peak.
<div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="section">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
Perth – the city has seen values fall by -28.5% from their peak in December 2006. dwelling values.”
<div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="section">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
Hobart – with values increasing a further 10.9% over the past year, it is the only city where real dwelling values are currently at their peak.
Darwin – real dwelling values peaked in March 2013 and have since fallen by -28.2%.
Canberra – dwelling values are -6.8% lower than their June 2010 peak.
Although the rate of inflation is quite slow and remains below the Reserve Bank’s target range of 2% to 3% annually, value growth is now broadly slower and is expected to remain that way over the coming quarters.
As a result, when looking at inflation-adjusted dwelling values the expectation is that they will continue to fall over the coming quarters which means that as the cost of other items increase and inflation rises, relatively speaking, the cost of housing will reduce. We’ve seen this result occurring in most capital cities for a number of years but is a relatively recent development in Sydney and Melbourne.”
The flow-on effect of value falls remains to be seen, however, it may result in less expenditure elsewhere across the economy, particularly in Sydney and Melbourne which have had strong retail demand over recent years due to the wealth-effect of increasing dwelling values.”
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
CAMERON KUSHER is head of research for CoreLogic. You can contact him <a href="https://blog.corelogic.com.au/about/">here</a>.
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
 
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
 
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
 
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
 
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
 
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div></body></html>

ckusher-ujnxiKuFQs

Hobart the only capital city where real dwelling values sit at their peak

<html><body>
EXPERT OBSERVATION
After many years of strong increases in dwelling values, the two largest housing markets, Sydney and Melbourne, have begun to see values fall over recent months.  While values are declining in both cities the speed of the declines vary greatly, both compared to one another and compared to other recent downturns in these housing markets.
<img src="https://corelogic.com.au/sites/default/files/styles/media_crop/public/2018-04/2018-04-23-blogim1.png" alt=""> 
Since values peaked back in July 2017, Sydney dwelling values have fallen by -3.9% over the following eight months.  If we look at the three previous downturns highlighted in the above chart, in the 2003-06 downturn values had fallen by -5.8% eight months in and went on to decline by -8.2% over 25 months before values started rising again.  In the 2008-09 downturn, values were -4.9% lower eight months in and went on to fall by -7.0% over 12 months.  The 2010-11 downturn saw values fall from their peak to their trough by -3.7% and after 8 months they had fallen by just -1.0%.
<img src="https://corelogic.com.au/sites/default/files/styles/media_crop/public/2018-04/2018-04-23-blogimg2.png" alt="">
 Dwelling values in Melbourne have not been falling as quickly or for as long as those in Sydney.  After the market peaked in November of last year, values have fallen by -0.7% over the four months to March 2018.  In 2003-04, values fell by a total of -3.0% over nine months and were -1.0% lower after four months of declines.  In 2008-09 values fell for 11 months, they had fallen by -3.9% over the first four months and ended up declining by -9.4%.  In the first four months of the 2010-12 period of value falls values were -2.2% lower before they ultimately fell by -8.4%.  Outside of these recent declines, values recorded a peak to trough fall of -8.3% between 1989 and 1992 with values falling by -2.5% over the first four months of this period.
Two other capital cities, Perth and Darwin, have been recording value falls for some time.  Although their declines are somewhat lengthier and different to recent falls in Sydney and Melbourne, it is valuable to analyse how these declines have evolved.
<img src="https://corelogic.com.au/sites/default/files/styles/media_crop/public/2018-04/2018-04-23-blogimg3.png" alt="">
Perth dwelling values increased in March 2018 however, over the period from June 2014 to February 2018 values fell by -11.0%.  There is no guarantee that these declines are over as yet although the pace of these declines has steadied recently.  It is also interesting to note that during the most recent period of value falls the declines began much more moderately on a month-to-month bases than they did in 2006-07, 2008-09 and 2010-11, with the downturn stretching on much longer than any of these previous downturns.  In 2006-07, values fell by -3.7% in five months, in 2008-09 values were -11.0% lower over 13 months and in 2010-11 values declined by -9.1% over 19 months.
<img src="https://corelogic.com.au/sites/default/files/styles/media_crop/public/2018-04/2018-04-23-blogimg4.png" alt="">
 Darwin has only seen two recent period of market downturn, between October 2010 and September 2011 and from May 2014 to February 2018 (values rose over March 2018).  Again, it should be noted although values have risen over the month it doesn’t necessarily mean the downturn is over.  Over the 11 month downturn in 2010 and 2011, Darwin dwelling values fell by -7.9%.  The more recent downturn saw value declines start slower than those in 2010-11 with the downturn stretching for much longer.  As at February 2017 Darwin dwelling values have fallen by -22.3% from its previous peak in May 2014.
While these charts are interesting to consider they don’t provide any particular guidance as to how deep or elongated the current downturns in Sydney and Melbourne may be.  The weak housing market conditions in Perth and Darwin were largely a symptom of weak economic and demographic conditions, while the current downturns in Sydney and Melbourne are occurring against reasonably strong economic and demographic conditions; the slowdown is primarily being influenced by tighter credit conditions.  
What is interesting is that comparing to Perth and Darwin shows that just because they have started falling slower than other housing market downturns doesn’t necessarily mean they won’t end up as a deeper and longer downturn.  Of course the reverse is true as well but it will be interesting to see how deep and how long these current downturns persist for in Sydney and Melbourne and whether they lead to downturns in other cities and regions too.
CAMERON KUSHER is head of research for CoreLogic. You can contact him <a href="https://blog.corelogic.com.au/about/">here</a>.
</body></html>

Are all property downturns the same?

<html><body>
EXPERT OBSERVATION
Dwelling values, particularly those in Sydney and Melbourne, have been falling now for a number of months.  The latest ABS housing finance data indicates that the impact of these falls is now seemingly being felt in demand for new mortgages.  
While the value of lending fell over the month for owner occupiers and investors, the slowdown was much more substantial for investors, and the sharp month-on-month fall follows a downwards trend that has been evident across several rounds of macro prudential measures over the past few years.  This isn’t really a surprise given so much of the lending to investors has been focused on Sydney and Melbourne and these cities are seeing values fall and yields at close to historic lows while investors are also incurring higher mortgage rates than owner occupiers, with additional rate premiums they use interest-only mortgages,.
Click here <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2018/5/11/fig1.jpg" target="_blank">to enlarge.</a> 
<img src="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/c_scale,w_580,q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/po.images/2018/5/11/fig1.jpg" alt="">
In March 2018 there was $31.9 billion worth of housing finance commitments which was the lowest monthly value of commitments since August 2016.  Housing finance commitments were split between $21.0 billion to owner occupiers and $10.9 billion to investors.  Owner occupier commitments fell by -1.9% over the month to their lowest value since December 2017.  Investor finance commitments were down by -9.0% over the month, falling to their lowest value since January 2016.  The declining trend in investor housing finance commitments had slowed recently, however, the -9.0% monthly fall was the largest decline since September 2015 when they fell -10.4% over the month as lenders tightened in order to remain under the 10% APRA speed limit in annualised terms.
Click here <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2018/5/11/fig2.jpg" target="_blank">to enlarge. </a>
<img src="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/c_scale,w_580,q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/po.images/2018/5/11/fig2.jpg" alt="">
The $21.0 billion worth of finance commitments to owner occupiers was split between: $1.9 billion for construction of dwellings, $1.2 billion for purchase of new dwellings, $6.3 billion for the refinance of established dwellings and $11.6 billion for the purchase of established dwellings.  Each type of owner occupier commitment fell over the month however, year-on-year the value of lending for construction of dwellings was the only owner occupier finance segment that was lower.
Click here <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2018/5/11/fig3.jpg" target="_blank">to enlarge.</a>
 <img src="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/c_scale,w_580,q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/po.images/2018/5/11/fig3.jpg" alt="">
The $10.9 billion worth of investor housing finance commitments in March 2018 was split between $1.0 billion for construction of new dwellings and $9.9 billion for established dwellings.  The value of lending for new construction was -18.9% lower over the month while the value of commitments for established dwellings was -7.9% lower.  
Click here <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2018/5/11/fig4.jpg" target="_blank">to enlarge.</a>
<img src="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/c_scale,w_580,q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/po.images/2018/5/11/fig4.jpg" alt="">
Looking more broadly at finance commitments for new housing vs established housing shows a decline over the month for both.  The chart also shows how the established market, of which there are substantially more properties, dwarfs the new housing market.  Over the month there was $4.1 billion worth of commitments for new housing and $21.5 billion for existing housing (excluding refinances).  Commitments for new housing fell by -1.9% over the month while commitments for existing stock were -6.8% lower. 
A month’s worth of data doesn’t necessarily indicate a trend but it was quite a substantial fall in the value of housing finance commitments in March, particularly for investors.  CoreLogic has believed for some time that investment in housing, particularly in the most expensive markets of Sydney and Melbourne, made little sense given stretched affordability, yield compression and little near-term value growth prospects with values currently declining.  Despite this, lending finance data (which will be updated next Tuesday) has continued to show investor activity which is well above average levels in NSW and Vic.  We would expect that the coming release will show a further weakening of demand in these two states.
Over the coming months it is anticipated that mortgage activity, particularly from the investment sector will remain weak relative to recent years.  With APRA recently announcing they will lift the 10% speed limit on investment credit growth from July 1, it will be important to watch the trend in investment credit flows.  
There have been recent reports that lenders are starting to reduce the interest rate premiums on some interest only loans and investment loans, however any reduction in rates could be offset by stricter serviceability testing on borrower expenses and incomes as well as the prospect for renewed focus from lenders to reduce their exposure to high loan to income ratio loans as well as maintaining their reluctance to take on high loan to valuation ratio loans.  
CAMERON KUSHER is head of research for CoreLogic. You can contact him <a href="https://blog.corelogic.com.au/about/">here</a>.
</body></html>

Is a crunch in investor mortgage demand now starting to bite?

<html><body>
EXPERT OBSERVATION
In a recent letter to all Australian authorised deposit-taking institutions (ADIs) entitled ‘Embedding Sound Residential Lending Practices,’ APRA indicated that lenders need to limit lending at very high debt to income levels.  
The actual wording of the comment was, APRA expects ADIs to commit to developing internal risk appetite limits on the proportion of new lending at very high debt to income levels (where debt is greater than 6 times a borrower’s income), and policy limits on maximum debt to income levels for individual borrowers.  
This doesn’t suggest that there is any hard limit on loan to income (LTI) ratios above 6 times but it does suggest that there will be less appetite for mortgages which are in excess of 6 times incomes.
Utilising gross household income data that has been modelled by the Australian National University (ANU) Centre for Social Research and Methods we can take a look across the individual capital cities at what the impact of limiting debt to income ratios to six times would be.  
The following charts look at annual gross household incomes with a comparison to median values at the end of 2017.  Incomes are elevated six times for comparison to median prices.  
The high median value relative to incomes implies the typical Sydney household would probably be targeting properties across the lower quartile of values rather than around the middle of the valuation range. 
<img src="https://www.corelogic.com.au/sites/default/files/2018-05/2018-05-25-blogimg1.png" alt="2018-05-25--blogimg1" width="1102" height="480">
 
<img src="https://www.corelogic.com.au/sites/default/files/2018-05/2018-05-25-blogimg2.png" alt="2018-05-25--blogimg2" width="1102" height="480">
Six times the median gross household income in Sydney is calculated at $688,764.  
The median house value in Sydney is $1,058,306 and the median unit value is $774,124.  
What this means is that if a buyer wanted to purchase the median house under this scenario they would need a deposit of $369,542 and for the median unit they’d need a deposit of $85,360. 
<img src="https://www.corelogic.com.au/sites/default/files/2018-05/2018-05-25-blogimg3.png" alt="2018-05-25--blogimg3" width="1102" height="480">
 
<img src="https://www.corelogic.com.au/sites/default/files/2018-05/2018-05-25-blogimg4.png" alt="2018-05-25--blogimg4" width="1102" height="480">
At the end of 2017, Melbourne’s median house value was $832,735 and the median unit value was $574,052.  At the same time, the median gross household income was $1,553/week with six times this annual income was recorded at $605,787.  Based on these figures, at 6 times income, borrowers in Melbourne can still afford the median unit but would need a deposit of $226,948 to be able to borrow below six times their income for the median house.
<img src="https://www.corelogic.com.au/sites/default/files/2018-05/2018-05-25-blogimg5.png" alt="2018-05-25--blogimg5" width="1102" height="480">
  
<img src="https://www.corelogic.com.au/sites/default/files/2018-05/2018-05-25-blogimg6.png" alt="2018-05-25--blogimg6" width="1102" height="480">
Unlike Sydney and Melbourne, households on the median income in Brisbane can still afford to borrow enough for the median valued house or unit.  The borrowing power for someone on the median income is $608,830 which is lower than both the median house ($531,248) and median unit ($383,752) value.   
<img src="https://www.corelogic.com.au/sites/default/files/2018-05/2018-05-25-blogimg7.png" alt="2018-05-25--blogimg7" width="1102" height="480">
 
<img src="https://www.corelogic.com.au/sites/default/files/2018-05/2018-05-25-blogimg8.png" alt="2018-05-25--blogimg8" width="1102" height="480">
The typical household in Adelaide can still afford the median house and unit.  As at December 2017 the median house cost $458,806 and the median unit $331,325.  Based on the median gross household income of $1,277/week someone on this income could borrow up to $498,161.  
<img src="https://www.corelogic.com.au/sites/default/files/2018-05/2018-05-25-blogimg9.png" alt="2018-05-25--blogimg9" width="1102" height="480"><img src="https://www.corelogic.com.au/sites/default/files/2018-05/2018-05-25-blogimg10.png" alt="2018-05-25--blogimg10" width="1102" height="480">
  Based on the median household income for Perth, someone borrowing six times their annual income could borrow $616,088.  Based on this figure, a borrower purchasing the median property would be comfortably below six times their annual income whether they’re purchasing a houses ($484,562) or a unit ($408,488). 
<img src="https://www.corelogic.com.au/sites/default/files/2018-05/2018-05-25-blogimg11.png" alt="2018-05-25--blogimg11" width="1102" height="480"><img src="https://www.corelogic.com.au/sites/default/files/2018-05/2018-05-25-blogimg12.png" alt="2018-05-25--blogimg12" width="1102" height="480">
   A borrower in Hobart on the gross household income ($1,248/week) borrowing six times their annual income could borrow up to $486,823.  The $486,823 figure is lower than the median house ($424,251) and median unit ($335,289) value for Hobart. 
<img src="https://www.corelogic.com.au/sites/default/files/2018-05/2018-05-25-blogimg13.png" alt="2018-05-25--blogimg13" width="1102" height="480"><img src="https://www.corelogic.com.au/sites/default/files/2018-05/2018-05-25-blogimg14.png" alt="2018-05-25--blogimg14" width="1102" height="480">
 Median household incomes in Darwin are quite high at $2,200/week.  Based on a borrower’s ability to borrow six times the household income, the median household could borrow up to $858,063.  Median house value ($469,083) and median unit values ($356,992) are significantly lower than $858,063. 
<img src="https://www.corelogic.com.au/sites/default/files/2018-05/2018-05-25-blogimg15.png" alt="2018-05-25--blogimg15" width="1102" height="480"><img src="https://www.corelogic.com.au/sites/default/files/2018-05/2018-05-25-blogimg16.png" alt="2018-05-25--blogimg16" width="1102" height="480">
  Like Darwin, Canberra also has relatively high median household incomes at $2,170/week.  Someone borrowing six times the annual income would be able to borrow up to $846,358 which is significantly higher than the median house and unit values which are recorded at $669,642 and $431,048. Of course median values don’t tell the whole story, as many properties are valued below as there are above however, it is valuable in providing a guide for what impact limiting high loan to income lending would have.  
In Sydney the median household can’t afford the median house or unit if there was a LTI limit of 6 times and in Melbourne the median household can’t afford the median house.  Were hard limits on LTI to be implemented it would have a much bigger impact on Sydney and Melbourne than any other areas of the country.  Any limit would still have some impact on households outside of Sydney and Melbourne, not to mention those that are purchasing properties additional to their principal place of resident.
Also keep in mind that these figures are only looking at a single scenario.  In most instances a lender will not allow a borrower to borrow 100% of the value of a property and if a borrower has a deposit of less than 20% they will need to pay lenders mortgage insurance (LMI).
So far there is no indication of a hard cap on LTI ratios.  What is clear is that APRA would like to see high LTI lending dialled back and that will have an impact on some borrowers, particularly those purchasing more expensive properties and/or those that have multiple properties.
</body></html>

What would lending caps of six times your income look like?

<html><body>
There are many measures of affordability in the marketplace, sadly I believe that many of these measures fail to accurately depict the affordability or otherwise of housing in Australia.  
The main reason being that housing affordability is an extremely complex issue and many factors drive the affordability of housing. In my future posts I am going to investigate some of these factors and tell you what you should really be asking yourself about affordability when purchasing a home.
Can I start by stating that simplistic means of comparing property prices between countries I believe are ineffective. 
Due to different tax regimes, standards of housing and attitudes to property and wealth accumulation there may be perfectly good reasons why a household is prepared to spend more on housing in Australia for example than they are in the United States.  I think common measures such as the median multiple (ratio of household income to property prices) are not necessarily a good way to measure affordability or otherwise, there are a lot more factors at play.
Interest rates
Interest rates are obviously an important component in determining housing affordability.  When interest rates are lower, interest repayments on home loans are lower and as a result ‘affording’ the repayments on a mortgage should be easier.  Of course, as we are seeing at the moment, lower mortgage rates often encourage higher property values. 
So while it’s true that lower interest rates make housing relatively more affordable, if values are rising and sales increase then it can somewhat off-set the affordability benefit of lower mortgage rates.
Furthermore, the typical home loan in Australia is 25 years and the vast majority of home loans are on a variable rate.  As a result, as the Reserve Bank adjusts monetary policy there is virtually an instant effect on household budgets and balance sheets.  For example, at the moment the standard variable mortgage rate sits at 5.95% however, over the past 10 years the variable mortgage rate has averaged 7.27%, over the last 20 years it has averaged 7.45% and over the past 25 years (the typical home loan length) it has averaged 8.47%. Over the past 25 years, standard variable mortgage rates have been as high as 17.0% and as low as 5.75%.
The point is that interest rates can vary greatly over 25 years and over the life of the loan the current interest rate is not a great means of measuring the cost of a mortgage over its lifetime.
Wages / Income
If you are going to take out a mortgage on a home (as most purchasers do) you are going to need an income and you are going to need some savings.  In Australia there are a number of measures of wages/income and it is difficult to know exactly which one is best to use to measure housing affordability.
The National Accounts measure the ‘Real net national disposable income – chain volume’.  This measure does have a number of shortcomings in that it is not an individual measure and that it includes items that one can’t really spend such as superannuation.  Additionally this data is only available from a national standpoint. 
The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) publishes its wage price index each quarter however, it measures wages only and doesn’t measure income captured from other sources.  The Census is undertaken each five years and does report on the median weekly household income however, the shortcoming here is that it is only updated every five years. 
We also have the Household Income Survey from the ABS however it is only undertaken bi-annually and takes a fairly macro view of household incomes
Unfortunately all of these measures have significant shortcomings which need to be considered when looking at any housing affordability measure.
Article continues on next page. Please click below.
<hr class="system-pagebreak">
Labour force / unemployment
Paying off a mortgage eats up a significant portion of a family’s wage.  Undoubtedly if home values weren’t so high and mortgages weren’t so large disposable incomes would be much greater.  Although labour force data or unemployment statistics need not necessarily be an input into any housing affordability measure they are a key consideration for someone looking to purchase. 
The threat of unemployment means that despite the fact housing may seem affordable it is less likely someone would purchase. Obviously if you are unemployed it is going to be difficult to purchase a home.
Another factor to consider is although measures of income show that over recent years wages and disposable income have increased, what they don’t take into account is how many more women are working nowadays.  Labour force data shows that in May 2014, 54.1% of the workforce was male and 45.9% was female, 30 years ago 62.3% was male and 37.6% was female.  Today, 35.5% of full-time workers are female compared to 28.9% 30 years ago. 
The point here is that although household incomes have increased, a big proportion of the increase is due to the structural change associated with a greater number of women in the workforce.  
The rising prevalence of dual income households means that whereas 20 to 30 years ago couples could afford mortgage repayments on a single wage, today they largely require dual incomes.
Home values / prices
Most measures of housing affordability look at median prices or median values. 
The important thing to remember here is that a median is just the middle value so there are just as many homes worth more and less than that figure.  In fact the median price looks only at the middle value of properties which have sold over a period.
This obviously has significant shortcomings because what is predominately selling could be at the affordable or expensive end of the market and this could bias the median one way or another.  Remember that typically only 5% to 7% of total housing stock transacts in a given year.
Another important consideration here is that a national median measure doesn’t really tell you very much at a localised level.  In Australia, 66% of residents live in a capital city with around 55% in Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane or Perth. 
Quite simply many residents don’t have a choice but to live in a capital city so if you are trying to determine affordability in Melbourne, the cost of housing in Mildura is of no valuable comparison whatsoever.
Rental rates
If you don’t own a home or pay-off a mortgage you have to live elsewhere, for the most part non-homeowners rent.  The cost of renting is an important consideration when trying to determine housing affordability.  If rents are increasing but home values are flat or falling purchasing a home may start to look a more attractive prospect. 
Once again the challenge with a measure which compares rents to house price (or mortgage repayments) is that it is not a localised analysis.  For example for the cost of renting in Paddington in Sydney you may actually be able to pay off a mortgage in Guildford but to the renter is the opportunity cost of owning their own home and being further away from the city centre, harbour and the beaches worthwhile? 
Who knows but for anyone looking to purchase these are the sorts of questions they need to be asking themselves.
The other key consideration is that the ongoing costs associated with owning a home as opposed to renting are difficult to determine, but they are much more than renting.  As a renter, the ongoing costs generally include: the rent, the bond, electricity, gas (if applicable), cleaning (if you move rentals) and the cost of moving if/when you move. 
As an owner of a home the costs incurred include: the mortgage, electricity, gas, council rates, stamp duty when you purchase, ongoing maintenance of the property, strata fees (if you own a unit) and agent fees if/when you decide to move.  The ongoing costs associated with owning a home are much greater than the ongoing costs of renting.
Who does housing affordability affect most?
Housing affordability affects everyone.  The high cost of housing acts as a disincentive for people to move to more appropriate locations, discourages people from upsizing and downsizing and discourages movement intra or interstate for employment.  The group most affected by housing affordability however is those who don’t as yet own a home.
Again if we think about many of the measures of affordability used they look at typical or median prices values and compare to interest rates and typical wages.  The problem with this approach is that very few people are actually typical.  As a generalisation, most people that rent are younger, starting out their careers. 
There is a high likelihood that their wage is currently lower than the median (although there is a good chance it will increase as they are promoted or move jobs).  If their wage is below the typical wage then they should not be looking to buy the typical (or median house).
Of course there are plenty of renters that earn above average wages but choose not to purchase as well but when trying to tackle the affordability question I think many of the measures that we look at are far too simplistic, but hamstrung by the quality and granularity of income data. 
Housing affordability is an individual thing and none of the measures really tell the true story about how affordable or unaffordable housing in Australia is.  When determining whether you can afford to buy a home I think the most important things to consider are:
<ol>
<li>What are current mortgage rates and at what higher level would I not be able to repay my mortgage?</li>
<li>How secure is my job and what would happen if I was to lose my job for an extended period?</li>
<li>Over the next few years what is the realistic expectations for my wage, will it rise and by how much?</li>
<li>What impact would it have if I found a partner or lost a partner on my ability to repay the mortgage?</li>
<li>If I plan to have children, children cost a lot what impact would that have on my ability to repay the mortgage?</li>
<li>Compared to my current rent and associated costs, how much more is paying off a mortgage and the other day-to day costs of home ownership really going to be and can I afford this?</li>
<li>What am I willing to sacrifice in order to buy a home; lifestyle, location, overseas travel etc?  What is the opportunity cost of buying a home?</li>
</ol>
I am sure there are many more questions to ask when looking to purchase but I think as a start these questions are essential.  I say that the measures of affordability which are readily available should be taken with a grain of sale. 
It’s more important to ask yourself some tough questions about whether or not you can really afford to be a home owner.  If you have any doubt you really need to consider whether it is worth the risk or not.
For what it’s worth, I think that housing affordability is a significant issue for young Australians, particularly those within our capital city markets.  he major problem is that most Australian’s choose to build wealth through property and 23 years of unabated economic growth has on exacerbated this. 
The challenge now is how can you deliver affordable housing for younger Australians without bringing down the cost of existing housing which politically and economically would be detrimental to the overall health of the Australian economy.
</body></html>

Forget affordability measures and ask yourself some tough questions

<html><body>
Investor activity has surged over recent years and now shows that in March 2015, investors committed to $12.9 billion in housing finance.
By comparison, investment mortgage commitments reached a recent low of $6.3 billion in April 2011.
The recent rise to $12.9 billion has seen the value of commitments rise 105% in less than 4 years.
While state data is seasonally adjusted, these markets tend to be a little more volatile. Nevertheless, it shows $13.5 billion worth of commitments in March 2015.
A state by state breakdown shows that nationally, NSW accounted for 46.0% of all investor mortgage commitments. The value of commitments in NSW was greater than the value of all states and territories combined except for WA. Of particular note is the fact that this data largely reflects what is happening in Sydney which experienced a significant rise in investment lending over the past 3 years.
Across all states the recent low in investment lending has been in either January or February of certain years and we’ve found that this time of year is a seasonally slower period for mortgage lending.
After APRA wrote to Australian banks, credit unions and building societies late last year re-affirming sound residential mortgage policies we have recently started to see many banks change their lending policies.
A large focus of these changes has been around investment mortgages and over the coming months we should eventually see investment lending start to slow.
<a href="/images/2015/06/04/700_Statebreakout.jpg" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2015/06/04/700_Statebreakout.jpg" alt="">
 
<a href="/images/2015/06/04/700_lending.jpg" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
 
 
<img src="/images/2015/06/04/700_lending.jpg" alt="">
NSW – in March 2015, investors committed to $6.2 billion in mortgages, a year-on-year increase of 37.2%. Over the past 3 years the value of investment mortgage commitments has increased by 155%. If you remove refinances, investors accounted for 60.0% of all new lending in NSW in March 2015.
Vic – investors committed to $3.1 billion in mortgages in March, a 17.1% year-on-year rise. Investors accounted for 48.6% of new lending in March and the value of commitments is 70% higher over the past 3 years.
Qld – at $2.2 billion in March, investor lending has risen by 43.1% year-on-year and is 69% higher over the past 3 years. Investors accounted for 47.2% of new lending over the month.
SA – investment lending has increased by 28.3% year-on-year to March 2015 to $508.8 million and has increased by 32% over the past 3 years. Investors accounted for 43.0% of new lending in March 2015.
WA – investors accounted for 39.0% of new mortgage lending over the month with $1.1 billion in commitments. Investor mortgage commitments have increased by 4.5% year-on-year and by 31% over the past 3 years.
Tas – investors currently account for 30.5% of new mortgage lending $with a total of $70.8 million. The value of investment commitments is 21.3% higher over the year and has increased by 41% over the past 3 years.
NT – at $103.5 million in March 2015, investment lending is -1.1% lower over the year. Investment lending has increased by 14% over the past 3 years and investors currently account for 55.3% of all new mortgage lending.
ACT – at $168.3 million in March 2015, investment lending is 2.9% higher over the year. Investment lending has increased by 8% over the past 3 years and investors currently make-up 41.8% of all new mortgage lending.
</body></html>

Investment lending set to slow: Cameron Kusher

<html><body>
The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) released housing finance data for August 2015 earlier this week.  
The data broadly showed a further pick-up in owner occupier lending and a slowing in investor lending. It is important to reconcile this against numerous reports that many mortgagees have been quick to advise their lenders that their properties which were formerly investment properties are now in fact owner occupied. 
This is due to the fact that most lenders are now charging a premium for investment mortgages.
<a href="/images/2015/10/09/Chart-11.jpg" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2015/10/09/Chart-11.jpg" alt="">
 
The above chart details the components of those borrowing over time. What’s immediately noticeable is that while there has been a recent surge in lending to investors, over recent months there has been a clear fall in lending to this cohort. 
While investment lending is slowing, owner occupier lending is rising however, there has been very little bounce in lending to first home buyers. For the most part the rise in owner occupier lending is being fuelled by an escalation in both refinances and borrowing for new loans to non-first home buyers. Again, it is important to note some of these figure may be being affected by re-classifications of mortgages.
<a href="/images/2015/10/09/Screen%20Shot%202015-10-09%20at%203.59.33%20PM.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2015/10/09/Screen%20Shot%202015-10-09%20at%203.59.33%20PM.png" alt="" width="785" height="305"> 
In August 2015, owner occupiers committed to $20.8 billion worth of housing finance, a 6.1% rise over the month and a 26.5% year-on-year rise.  Looking at the components of owner occupier lending there was $1.7 billion in lending for construction of dwellings, $1.2 billion in lending for purchase of new dwellings, $6.4 billion in refinances of established dwellings and $11.5 billion for purchase of other established dwellings. 
The 6.1% monthly rise in owner occupier lending was largely fuelled by a 10.4% rise in lending for purchase of established dwellings however, each component rose.  Refinances have typically been the greatest source of growth in owner occupier lending however, they recorded the slowest growth of any segment over the month.  Looking at year-on-year changes, lending for construction of dwellings rose 0.5%, lending for purchase of new dwellings rose 17.6%, refinances of established dwellings rose 26.7% and purchase of established dwellings increased by 32.6%.  
Over the coming months we will be watching closely to see whether the growth in owner occupier lending can be maintained, particularly in the face of falling population growth and no real increase in activity from first home buyers.
<a href="/images/2015/10/09/Chart-31.jpg" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2015/10/09/Chart-31.jpg" alt="">
 
Switching the focus to the investor segment, there was $13.6 billion worth of commitments to investors in August 2015. The value of lending to investors was -0.4% lower over the month but 12.0% higher year-on-year. It was also the first time in 13 months that the value of new lending (excluding refinances) was greater to owner occupiers than it was to investors.
Over the month there was $0.8 billion in lending for construction of dwellings and $12.7 billion in lending for established housing. Over the month, lending for construction of dwellings fell -22.0% while commitments for established housing rose 1.4%. Year-on-year lending for construction of new homes is -2.5% lower and lending for established homes is 13.1% higher.
The data appears to indicate that there is a change occurring in the mortgage lending market. Whereas investors and owner occupier refinances have been the primary drivers of growth lately, it seems as if this is now tilting to owner occupier new loans starting to dominate. Given that investment mortgages generally now have a higher interest rate than owner occupier mortgages, it may be playing a role in the tilt towards owner occupier lending. 
Furthermore, value growth has been strong for more than three years in Sydney and Melbourne and investors may be becoming concerned about the longevity of the boom while growth outside of these cities has been sedate. 
Once you also consider a record high pipeline of residential construction accompanied by a record low rate of rental growth and historical low yields perhaps a growing number of investors are looking towards other forms of investment they perceive as less risky at this stage in cycle. It’s still early days for the slowdown in investment lending but we, along with the RBA and APRA, will be watching closely to see whether the slowing in investment lending and the rise in owner occupier lending persists over the coming months. 
It is also going to be interesting to see what impact this has on overall demand for housing over the coming months in lights of evidence of a bit of a softening in the Sydney housing market.
Cameron Kusher is research analyst for CoreLogic RP Data. You can contact him <a href="https://blog.corelogic.com.au/author/cameron-kusher/" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Owner occupier housing finance commitments take a step up: Cameron Kusher

<html><body>
Lending finance data for August 2015 was released by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). 
The latest data paired with the previously released housing finance commitments data shows that lending to investors has slowed sharply over recent months following the regulatory changes from APRA and the subsequent changes to lending policies from most mortgage lenders.
<a href="/images/2015/10/13/Chart-13.jpg" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2015/10/13/Chart-13.jpg" alt="">
The above chart shows the proportion of new lending to investors across each state and territory in August 2015.  Note that when we say new lending we exclude refinances as they are not associated with a new purchase of property.  New South Wales had the greatest proportion of new lending to investors over the month however, we have seen lending to this segment of the market slow across each state and territory.
<a href="/images/2015/10/13/Chart-22.jpg" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2015/10/13/Chart-22.jpg" alt="">
 
Mortgage lending to investors peaked in May 2015 prior to most Australian ADI’s implementing changes to lending policies relating to investment mortgages.  At that time, the proportion of new lending to investors was much higher in each state and territory than it is currently.  In each state and territory there has been a significant decline in the value of new lending to investors between May and August of this year.  Across each state and territory the magnitude of the fall in investor lending has been recorded at: -10.5% in NSW, -14.0% in Vic, -15.2% in Qld, -17.0% in SA, -10.1% in WA, -10.0% in Tas, -35.6% in NT and -23.5% in ACT.
While new lending to investors has fallen away over recent months, there has been a rise in new lending to owner occupiers across some states and territories while others have seen falls across owner occupier lending too.  Between May 2015 and August 2015 the changes in the value of new lending to owner occupiers have been recorded at: +22.1% in NSW, +16.5% in Vic, +4.2% in Qld, +4.1% in SA, -2.4% in WA, -8.3% in Tas, -8.1% in NT and -10.8% in ACT.
As investor lending is slowing in NSW and Vic, lending to owner occupiers is generally picking-up which should help offset some of the slowdown in investment loans.  Elsewhere there has been no significant increase in owner occupier lending, or owner occupier lending has fallen; given this the data release may point to ongoing weaker housing market conditions outside of the two most populous states.
It’s important to note that this data only includes mortgage lending domestically.  What is not clear is to what extent the weakness in investor demand domestically over recent months is being offset by an uptick in demand from overseas.
Cameron Kusher is research analyst for CoreLogic RP Data. You can contact him <a href="https://blog.corelogic.com.au/author/cameron-kusher/" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Sharp dip in investor housing demand since May: Cameron Kusher

<html><body>
<h1 class="title"> </h1>
The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) released housing finance data for September 2015 earlier this week.
<a href="/images/2015/11/12/Screen%20Shot%202015-11-12%20at%2010.10.17%20AM.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2015/11/12/Screen%20Shot%202015-11-12%20at%2010.10.17%20AM.png" alt="" width="623" height="488">
 
The broad housing finance trends show that demand from the owner occupier segment of lending is falling while demand from investors fades.  Of course since late December last year we have seen limits come into effect regarding annual investment credit growth as well as, more recently, higher interest rates for all investment borrowers and lower loan to value ratios for many.  
Given these changes it is no real surprise that demand from this market segment is falling; there is less investment borrowing to be had and lower LVRs mean that for many borrowers negative gearing becomes somewhat less attractive. On the other hand, demand from owner occupiers is rising, largely from upgraders and those refinancing while there is little sign that first home buyer demand is rising. 
Much of the recent refinance activity has subsequently translated into eventual housing investment, it will be interesting to see if the current refinance activity is just home owners shopping around for a better mortgage deal or if it will start to flow to investment in other asset classes.
<a href="/images/2015/11/12/Chart-2.jpg" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2015/11/12/Chart-2.jpg" alt="">
 
Looking more closely at owner occupier lending, the seasonally adjusted data shows that there was $21.0 billion worth of commitments in September 2015.  This represented a monthly increase of 3.0% and a year-on-year rise of 23.1%. The $21.0 billion consisted of $1.8 billion in lending for construction of dwellings, $1.3 billion in lending for purchase of new dwellings, $6.7 billion in lending for refinances and $11.2 billion in lending for purchase of established dwellings. 
Each of the four components of owner occupier housing finance commitments have increased over the month with most having increased year-on-year.  Year-on-year, the changes have been recorded at -1.3% for lending for construction of dwellings, +32.1% for lending for purchase of new dwellings, +30.0% for refinances and +23.0% for purchases of established dwellings. 
Clearly owner occupier demand is rising however, the ABS does note that ADIs are currently making changes to lending classifications which are seeing more investor loans classified as loans to owner occupiers. This will be contributing to a proportion of this rise, how big that proportion is we are unsure.
<a href="/images/2015/11/12/Chart-3.jpg" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2015/11/12/Chart-3.jpg" alt="">
 
In September 2015 there was a seasonally adjusted $12.3 billion worth of housing finance commitments to investors, this was the lowest value of investor lending since August 2014.  The monthly value of lending to investors has fallen by -12.8% from its peak of $14.1 billion in April 2015.  The $12.3 billion figure consists of $0.6 billion in lending for new construction which is the lowest level in a year and $11.7 billion in lending for established homes which is the lowest level since August of last year.  Lending for new construction tends to be volatile however, it has fallen by -42.2% from its recent peak of $1.1 billion worth of commitments in December 2014.  The less volatile investment lending for established homes has fallen by -11.0% from its peak of $13.1 billion in April 2015.  Again, recent reclassifications of lending by ADIs will be contributing to some of the recent weakness however, a changing investment lending landscape is undoubtedly the most significant contributor.
The latest housing credit data shows that the annual rate of investor credit growth still remains above 10% (10.4%) so it is reasonable to expect that investor housing finance commitments will continue to fall over the coming months. With the rate of value growth slowing, higher interest rates and lower LVRs for many investors, the attractiveness of purchasing an investment property is also easing. 
While investment lending has been cooling down, owner occupier lending has been rising however, much of the rise is due to upgraders and refinances.  We anticipate that this trend is likely to continue although probably not rising by the same magnitude as we’ve seen over recent months. Furthermore we anticipate that less of the refinance activity is going to flow back into housing in the form of investment purchasing.
 
Cameron Kusher is research analyst for CoreLogic RP Data. You can contact him <a href="https://blog.corelogic.com.au/author/cameron-kusher/" target="_blank">here</a>.
 
<h1 class="title"> </h1>
</body></html>

Investor housing demand continues to fall sharply: Cameron Kusher

<html><body>
The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) has released its quarterly Authorised Deposit-taking Institution (ADI) property exposures data for the March 2016 quarter. 
This data is really valuable as it provides additional insight into the mortgage market, including data which is not available from the monthly housing finance statistics.
<a href="/images/2016/06/01/Chart-1-4-580x207.jpg" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2016/06/01/Chart-1-4-580x207.jpg" alt="">
The data initially focuses on outstanding total values and shows that at the end of the March 2016 quarter there was $906.7 billion outstanding to owner occupiers and $501.3 billion to investors.  While total lending continued to rise, up 8.7% year-on-year, it is interesting to see how the tilt away from investment lending has progressed.
Over the past 12 months, total investor lending has increased by just 0.1% with the total value of investor mortgage lending outstanding down -3.2% from its June 2015 quarter peak.  The data also indicates that investor credit growth now sits significantly below the APRA imposed 10% pa speed limit.  This could lead to a rebound in lending to investors over the coming quarters.  Total lending to owner occupiers has continued to increase and is up 14.0% year-on-year.  In terms of the total value of outstanding mortgages, owner occupiers account for 64.4% compared to 35.6% to investors.  The proportion of outstanding mortgages to investors has fallen sharply from its recent peak of 39.0% in June 2015.
<a href="/images/2016/06/01/Chart-2-3-580x211.jpg" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2016/06/01/Chart-2-3-580x211.jpg" alt="">
Although the total value of outstanding mortgages is rising you can see that growth is generally slowing.  Mortgages with offset facilities account for a record-high 43.0% of all outstanding mortgages and the value of these mortgages has increased 20.4% year-on-year.  Interest-only mortgages account for 39.3% of total outstanding mortgages, with the value having increased by 9.6% year-on-year.  Reverse mortgages account for just 0.5% of all outstanding mortgages with the value of outstanding mortgages up 1.4% year-on-year.  Only 2.4% of the value of outstanding mortgages are for low-documentation loans and 0.1% are other non-standard loans.  Year-on-year the value of outstanding low-documentation mortgages is -16.5% lower and other non-standard mortgages are -4.0% lower.  In fact the total value of outstanding low-documentation and other non-standard mortgages is at a record low.
<a href="/images/2016/06/01/Chart-3-3-580x208.jpg" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2016/06/01/Chart-3-3-580x208.jpg" alt="">
The average outstanding mortgage balance was recorded at $251,900 in March 2016, having increased by 4.8% year-on-year.  At the end of March 2016, the average outstanding balances across loan types were: $307,200 for loans with an offset, $334,400 for interest-only, $96,500 for reverse mortgages, $192,200 for low-documentation and $193,400 for other non-standard loans.  All loan types except for low-documentation (-1.1%) and other non-standard (-7.0%) have seen the average balance increase over the past year: offset (6.3%), interest-only (5.0%), reverse mortgages (2.4%).
To date, all data analysed has focused on total balances outstanding, the following data will focus specifically on quarterly new lending.
<a href="/images/2016/06/01/Chart-4-2-580x208.jpg" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2016/06/01/Chart-4-2-580x208.jpg" alt="">
Over the March 2016 quarter there was $81.7 billion in new mortgage lending, which was the lowest quarterly value of new lending since the March 2014 quarter.  This figure comprises of $56.0 billion in lending to owner occupiers and $25.7 billion in lending to investors.  The value of new lending to owner occupiers has increased by 16.1% year-on-year while the value of investor lending is -25.5% lower year-on-year.  The value of new lending to investors is the lowest since the March 2013 quarter and is -37.7% lower from its peak over the June 2015 quarter.  The data indicates that there has been a significant pull-back in new lending to investors over recent quarters.
<a href="/images/2016/06/01/Chart-5-1-580x207.jpg" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2016/06/01/Chart-5-1-580x207.jpg" alt="">
With the value of new mortgage lending falling, the value of most loan types is now also falling.  Over the March 2016 quarter, 0.3% of new lending was for low documentation loans, 34.9% was for interest-only, 0.1% was for other non-standard loans, 46.5% was originated through third part channels and 3.8% of loans were approved outside of serviceability.  The value of new lending for low documentation mortgages was at a record low.  The value of new interest-only lending was the lowest since the March 2013 quarter.  The value of other non-standard lending was the lowest since the same quarter last year as was loans approved outside of serviceability.  The value of new mortgage lending by third parties was the lowest since the September 2014 quarter.
Higher loan to value ratio (LVR) lending is reducing meaning that borrowers are typically using larger deposits.  In fact, the value of new lending for LVRS above 90% in the March 2016 was the lowest since the March 2011 quarter and has fallen by -22.8% over the past year.  Lending for LVRs between 80% and 90% has increased by 2.7% year-on-year however, it has fallen over each of the past four quarters.  In fact, lending for LVRs above 80% represented 22.4% of all new lending in March 2016 which was its lowest proportion on record and well down from the peak in March 2009 where it accounted for 37.6% of all new lending.
The value of lending to investors is falling sharply as assessment criteria is tightened and investors are typically now charged a higher interest rate than owner occupiers.  Interest-only lending which APRA and the Reserve bank have previously sounded warnings about is also starting to fall and is now at its lowest level since March 2013.  Higher LVR lending which is associated with smaller deposits are also trending lower which indicates less risky lending.  The added benefit surrounding lower LVRs is that if a borrower has a deposit of more than 20% of the value of the property they can typically avoid lenders mortgage insurance (LMI).  New lending to loans outside of serviceability, low documentation loans and other non-standard loans has also been falling over recent quarters which is reflective of less risky lending practices being undertaken.  These emerging trends can only be positives for the stability and security of the Australian mortgage lending market.
Based on the data presented, it is apparent that tighter lending policies by lenders is having a noticeable impact on the mortgage market.
Cameron Kusher is research analyst for CoreLogic RP Data. You can contact him <a href="https://blog.corelogic.com.au/about/">here</a>.
<div class="sharedaddy sd-sharing-enabled"> </div>
</body></html>

Tighter lending policies see a reduction in investor and riskier lending types: Cameron Kusher

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/sunland-group">Sunland Group</a> has officially lodged plans for its first Gold Coast apartment project since the departure of the Abedian family from the company three years ago, unveiling a new high-rise proposal for a prominent Broadbeach corner site on Old Burleigh Road.

The application was submitted by an entity directed by Tom Jamieson, stepson of longtime Sunland leader Soheil Abedian, and Riaz Rezvanipour, brother-in-law of Sahba Abedian, Soheil’s son.

Sunland acquired the 1,283 sqm site on the corner of Old Burleigh Road and Armrick Avenue for $9.5 million late last year and is now seeking approval for a <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/99-101-old-burleigh-road-broadbeach-qld-4218">42-storey tower with 81 apartments</a>.

<img alt="First look: Sunland Group returns to Broadbeach with new Old Burleigh Road tower plans" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="fea2946d-90ee-4cfc-babe-2a8ad5db2cb6" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/pers.png?VersionId=BV0fihJw31nDIQ8ozY_h3GbS8mxDyhnm" />

Designed by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/contreras-earl-architecture">Contreras Earl Architecture</a>, the proposed tower at 99-101 Old Burleigh Road would deliver a predominantly larger-format apartment mix aimed at the owner-occupier market. Plans include 17 two-bedroom apartments, 55 three-bedroom apartments, and nine four-bedroom residences across 35 residential levels.

The development also incorporates three basement levels, four podium parking levels, two levels of communal recreation facilities, and rooftop plant and equipment. A total of 189 car spaces are proposed, significantly exceeding the 90 spaces required under the planning scheme.

The architecture adopts a sculpted, curvilinear form, with deep wraparound balconies and integrated landscaping intended to soften the tower’s vertical expression. The planning report states the building’s “slender footprint/form provides a complimentary yet varied built form within the local streetscape” and contributes to “a varied, yet ordered skyline.”

Contreras Earl noted in its Architectural Statement that from the early stages, the project addressed a fundamental challenge: how to accommodate the required residential yield while avoiding the conventional model of a tower sitting on a rigid, fully resolved parking podium.

“The most direct response would have been to consolidate parking into a singular, flat podium and extrude a repetitive tower above,” the statement said. “While efficient, this approach would result in a consolidated built form with limited engagement with the surrounding landscape and public realm.”

Instead, the conventional podium model was “deliberately rejected”. The architects described the base of the building as “a landscaped architectural condition where structure, planting and circulation are integrated”.

“Rather than presenting a continuous built mass, the base of the building is articulated through a series of concrete planter elements that organise the podium into a fragmented system,” the statement said. “This approach reduces the perceived bulk of the lower levels while establishing a more permeable interface with the streetscape and adjacent open space.”

<img alt="Sunland" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="923fad8d-c960-4527-8fbe-975cf1ddf88d" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-05-25%20at%2010.32.03%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=pngwb0hYOIUpq9vDw6F2EsOiVuHF3DiX" />

&nbsp;

The site sits within the High Density Residential Zone and inside the City of Gold Coast’s unrestricted “HX” building height area, where the planning framework anticipates intensified residential development tied to the expanding light rail corridor. The planning report notes the area is undergoing “transition toward more intense development forms” given its proximity to Broadbeach, Surfers Paradise, and high-frequency public transport infrastructure.

Positioned directly opposite Broadbeach Park and within walking distance of Florida Gardens light rail station, the development would sit among a rapidly evolving stretch of Old Burleigh Road that has become one of the Gold Coast’s most active apartment development corridors.

The application joins a growing pipeline of luxury residential projects reshaping Broadbeach, including nearby developments by 5Point Projects, Polycell, and Graya.

The planning report argues the project contributes toward the Gold Coast’s long-term housing targets under the South East Queensland Regional Plan, which forecasts the need for more than 100,000 additional high-rise dwellings across the city by 2046.

<section data-scroll-anchor="false" data-testid="conversation-turn-4" data-turn="assistant" data-turn-id="request-WEB:84a2af5e-d7cf-4ddf-922a-f4d44d6c6caa-1" data-turn-id-container="request-WEB:84a2af5e-d7cf-4ddf-922a-f4d44d6c6caa-1" dir="auto">
The Abedian family departed Sunland Group in late 2023, ending a four-decade association with the company, and subsequently established the private development firm Abedian &amp; Co. The group is currently delivering <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/greenmount-residences-cnr-hill-street-and-marine-parade-coolangatta-qld-4225">Greenmount Residences</a> at Rainbow Bay and recently launched <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/18-mary-avenue-14-18-mary-avenue-broadbeach-qld-4218">18 Mary Avenue</a> in Broadbeach.
</section>

Joel Robinson

First look: Sunland Group returns to Broadbeach new apartment market with new Old Burleigh Road tower plans

The Minns Labor Government has established the new Bays West Delivery Authority to lead the development&nbsp;of the Bays West Precinct and Blackwattle Bay Precinct.&nbsp;

The Authority is charged with creating Sydney’s newest precinct, a thriving, connected, sustainable hub with White Bay Power Station as its cultural heart. Its vision is to build on the area’s natural, cultural and industrial history to shape a vibrant new neighbourhood.

The precinct will deliver up to 8,500 well-located homes, including a minimum of 10 per cent affordable and essential worker homes. Combine new housing with public open space, opening public access to the waterfront for the first time in more than 100 years, while retaining important deep-water facilities to support Sydney’s working harbour.

Located just minutes from the Sydney CBD and connected to a world-class metro, ferry, walking and cycling links, the Bays West precinct will rebalance housing growth towards well-serviced inner-city locations and help tackle the state’s housing crisis.

The Bays West Delivery Authority,&nbsp;an agency of the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure, will report to the NSW Minister for Lands and Property who already has oversight of major precinct renewal projects including at Blackwattle Bay and Barangaroo.

As part of the broader Bays West transformation, the Minns Government recently announced that a proposal from Lendlease to redevelop part of the Bays West Precinct has progressed to Stage 2 of the NSW Government’s unsolicited proposals process.

<img alt="Sydney" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="2ed71eb9-d8e8-4fa7-b9d1-de4531dcf2f3" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-05-25%20at%209.42.31%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=IDryFIbped9SNDg72LEN_EecvhUsOPvp" />

The Minns Labor Government has also confirmed the Bays West precinct will have a new suburb name. This will be the first major suburb built in close proximity to Sydney’s CBD in decades and will encompass the area currently being referred to as Bays West, including Glebe Island and the White Bay Power Station. Served by a new Metro station just five minutes from the CBD, it will become one of the most populous suburbs in the Inner West and one of Sydney’s premier cultural destinations.

An early works program is taking shape, which&nbsp;includes the first stages of an international design competition.&nbsp;

The aim of the Bays West&nbsp;International&nbsp;Design Competition is to&nbsp;ensure design excellence is embedded in the project from the start. The competition will deliver an&nbsp;urban framework that defines the character, ambition and long-term identity of&nbsp;this&nbsp;former industrial precinct as it transitions to a vibrant, inclusive and sustainable residential&nbsp;neighbourhood.

The competition will be led by the Bays West Delivery Authority in partnership with Government Architect NSW.&nbsp;

It will launch with an invitation for a global Expressions of Interest, before moving to an invitation-only stage that will be assessed by a panel that&nbsp;will provide advice to Cabinet who will select a winner.

Premier of NSW, Chris Minns said the establishment of the new Authority is the first step in transforming the Bays West precinct into a vibrant, livable suburb minutes from the Sydney CBD and two stops from Hunter St Station on the Metro West line.

“The Authority will deliver well-located homes close to the heart of the city and integrate the new precinct with Blackwattle Bay and the new Sydney Fish Market.

“This is a generational opportunity to build a new suburb on the city’s edge and open the harbour foreshore to the public for the first time in a century.”&nbsp;

Minister for Lands and Property Steve Kamper said the new Bays West Delivery Authority established by the Minns Government will turbocharge the development of Sydney’s newest suburb.

“The Authority is working at a record pace to deliver an international design competition, planning pathways and a financial model so that this development benefits Sydney with well-designed homes in a central location, close to public transport, jobs, entertainment and essential services.

“If we want Sydney to stay liveable and affordable, we need to be bold about using underutilised government-owned land to deliver homes for the future while making sure essential working harbour functions can be accommodated.”

Bays West Delivery Authority established to "turbocharge" Sydney’s newest suburb

Around 400 additional homes could be built at Southwark Grounds on Port Road, lifting total site capacity from 1300 to around 1700 dwellings.

A recently approved code amendment would allow apartment towers of up to 14 storeys in some areas of Renewal SA’s redevelopment of the former West End Brewery.

Renewal SA Acting Chief Executive Shane Wingard said he welcomed the code amendment, with the increase in heights and homes making a positive impact on the supply of high-quality, well-connected housing close to the city.

“By going higher across some parts of Southwark Grounds, we are adding a substantial number of very well-located homes with little impact on project delivery time or planned open space,” Mr Wingard said.

Since the project officially launched in 2025, Mr Wingard said more than 12,000 enquiries had been received about living at Southwark Grounds.

“The very strong early interest we’ve seen since homes were first released in the precinct reinforces our plans to create more housing opportunities,” he said.

The Southwark Grounds code amendment was launched in December last year, with community engagement undertaken over five weeks from January.

It proposed increasing maximum building heights from eight to 14 storeys on the eastern section of Southwark Grounds, and to 12 storeys across the remainder of the site, with minimum building heights ranging from two to four storeys.

The code amendment was implemented through an Early Commencement policy in late January, allowing developers to quickly explore the viability of increased height and housing yield while other planning processes continue.

One of the first developers delivering apartment sites have already finalised redesigns to increase the number of apartments following the code amendment.

Samaras’ development adjacent to the future Colonel Light Park is now planning to deliver 125 apartments across 11 storeys, significantly greater than original plans of around 50 apartments across four storeys.

The developer is also exploring the potential for additional affordable housing outcomes.

Most of the apartments at Southwark Grounds will be delivered within a master-planned precinct on a large parcel of land on the eastern portion of the site, covering around two-thirds of its 8.4 hectares.

Wingard said detailed precinct planning over the coming months may identify further opportunities to increase yield further that could see total apartment numbers at Southwark Grounds, exceed this number.

Affordable homes at Southwark Grounds will also see a net increase, with Renewal SA maintaining its commitment to a minimum of 20 per cent affordable housing across the development.

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

Civil works have begun across the site, with construction under way on the first new roads surrounding a townhouse precinct in the south‑west corner of Southwark Grounds. This includes Renewal SA’s 17 Founder’s Row homes, which are on track for completion by Christmas.

“We expect to have people living at Southwark Grounds by the end of the year, so delivering roads and public spaces for those residents is among our highest priorities.”

Construction of 40 townhouses off Anderson Street, known as West Village and being delivered by Contour, is forecast to begin in mid‑2026. Kolabb’s Anderson Lane development will follow shortly after, delivering a further 26 townhouses.

Southwark Grounds is a state government‑led urban renewal project now set to deliver around 1,700 homes over the next decade.

Homes will be supported by a supermarket, a range of retail and hospitality offerings anchored by a revitalised Walkerville Brew Tower, a childcare centre, car parking and well‑connected public spaces.

400 new homes planned for Adelaide's former West End Brewery site

Brisbane developer&nbsp;<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/cavcorp">Cavcorp</a> has lodged plans for a new mixed-use residential development at <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/55-wyandra-street-teneriffe-qld-4005">55 Wyandra Street</a>, Teneriffe, anchored by an 85-metre public laneway designed to reconnect the suburb’s riverfront with the Gasworks precinct.

The buildings, known as Teneriffe House and Teneriffe Lane, would replace the existing Queensland Cotton head office site with a 15-storey residential tower transitioning to eight storeys toward Helen Street. The project has been designed by Plazibat Architects and lodged as a code assessable development application for 93 apartments across a 3,401 sqm mixed-use site within the Newstead and Teneriffe Waterfront neighbourhood plan.

Central to the scheme is the transformation of an existing service easement into a publicly accessible cross-block connection linking Wyandra and Helen Streets. Cavcorp says the new laneway will act as both a pedestrian shortcut and a landscaped civic space between the Teneriffe Riverwalk, ferry terminal, and Gasworks precinct.

<img alt="First Look: Cavcorp unveils Teneriffe House and Teneriffe Lane plans for landmark wellness tower in Teneriffe" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="26e7f058-b065-4de8-b13d-a2b8cb64dfcc" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/bldg.png?VersionId=sELS0ZKYi361oYipUa1BIKfe_.DLZoFV" />

“The revised proposal delivers a legacy public-realm cross-block link, permanently secured for community use, transforming an existing private easement into a safe, high-quality pedestrian connection between the Teneriffe heritage riverwalk and the Gasworks–Long Island precinct,” the planning report states.

The laneway will sit beneath a large subtropical loggia integrated into the podium levels of the development. The design incorporates deep landscaping, water gardens, lobby spaces, business lounges, and ground-floor apartments to create what Cavcorp describes as a climate-responsive “urban verandah.”

The tower itself has been designed as a slender form with recessed floorplates and curved translucent corners inspired by contemporary Japanese architecture. The building height aligns with the Commercial Road precinct controls, which permit towers up to 15 storeys within proximity to Longland Street.

<img alt="First Look: Cavcorp unveils Teneriffe House and Teneriffe Lane plans for landmark wellness tower in Teneriffe" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="a8a17d40-43b6-4718-b3fd-67676fcbb485" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/pers%202_1.png?VersionId=i3VwDtp5AmL_8InW7w4qRbDFEpb744Jt" />

The project will comprise a mix of larger-format apartments aimed at owner-occupiers, downsizers, and families. The proposed apartment mix includes 11 loggia apartments across the lower levels, 50 four-bedroom Sky-Terrace apartments from levels three to seven, and 32 Sky-Pool Homes occupying the upper tower levels. The Sky-Pool Homes will feature private thermal plunge pools integrated into oversized balconies.

According to the application, the apartments are intended to reinterpret the scale and character of Teneriffe’s woolstore conversions and Queensland homes within a vertical residential format.

“The sky-pool homes build on Cavcorp’s previous projects and introduce a distinct apartment typology to Teneriffe, informed by both local and international precedent and responding to an identified market demand for enhanced safety, space and amenity,” the planning submission notes.

A major focus of the proposal is its five-level wellness and lifestyle offering, extending from the basement through to the rooftop.

Amenities proposed include a rooftop Swim &amp; Racquet Club with a 25-metre Olympic lap pool and tennis court, coworking spaces and libraries, golf simulators, wine storage, concierge facilities, business lounges, pet wash areas, and rooftop longevity-focused wellness spaces with spas, outdoor fitness zones, and landscaped terraces.

<img alt="First Look: Cavcorp unveils Teneriffe House and Teneriffe Lane plans for landmark wellness tower in Teneriffe" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="944b352c-49b9-4247-a4c6-5967b4b69fda" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/amenity.png?VersionId=Ed_qKjAtMwFT.5gfl3jiA9QwdWxSMsaX" />

All parking will be concealed within basement levels accessed from Wyandra and Helen Streets. Cavcorp says the deep-basement engineering approach allows the entire ground plane to prioritise landscaping, pedestrian movement, and active frontage rather than vehicle infrastructure.

The development continues Cavcorp’s concentration in Newstead and Teneriffe, where the Brisbane developer has delivered a number of apartment projects including Lucent, Le Bain, and Luminare, as well as the Long Island Wellness Precinct nearby. Several of those projects have received national design and architecture awards, including recognition under Brisbane’s “Buildings that Breathe” program.

Cavcorp unveils wellness-focused Teneriffe House and Teneriffe Lane apartment buildings

Focus Group Investments has lodged plans for a new apartment development at <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/64-70-hanover-street-fitzroy-vic-3065">64–70 Hanover Street</a> in Fitzroy, seeking to utilise the Victorian Government’s recently introduced Great Design Fast Track pathway to accelerate approvals for the project.

The proposal is among the latest developments to emerge through the state-led initiative, which was established to fast-track well-designed residential projects in activity centres and transport-connected inner-city locations. The pathway allows qualifying developments that meet elevated design and housing benchmarks to bypass traditional council planning timeframes and instead be assessed directly by the Department of Transport and Planning.

Designed by SJB, the development will comprise a mix of apartments above activated lower levels, with a strong focus on architectural articulation, landscaping, and communal amenity. The design response seeks to balance the industrial character of Richmond’s former warehouse precincts with a more contemporary residential form.

<img alt="First look: Focus Group Investments taps Victoria’s Great Design Fast Track for Richmond apartments" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="abea51cc-d85b-479e-9aef-a589f3b37ca7" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/ground.png?VersionId=e1Kf8EyPWwyiVumtqQ4rM5S4GpOR3CCz" />

Proposed are 63 new dwellings, a wide ranging mix of studio, one-, two-, and three-bedroom apartments, and townhouses and duplexes. They will be spread across a part-three, part-eight storey building.

The Planning and Urban Context Report by Tract says the development is of an "exemplary architectural standard" and has been carefully crafted by SJB Architects.

"Dwellings&nbsp;will benefit from excellent access to natural light, cross-ventilation opportunities and extensive communal space," the report noted.

The architectural material highlights the project’s integration of landscaped elements and communal spaces throughout the building. The proposal also incorporates sustainability initiatives aligned with the Victorian Government’s push for higher-performing apartment developments under the fast-track program.

The Great Design Fast Track was unveiled by the Victorian Government in 2024 as part of a broader housing supply strategy aimed at accelerating the delivery of new homes. Projects assessed through the pathway must demonstrate high-quality architecture, sustainability outcomes, and housing diversity while being located close to public transport and existing infrastructure.

<img alt="First look: Focus Group Investments taps Victoria’s Great Design Fast Track for Richmond apartments" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="afdbe834-8dc4-4a77-a943-ba07bc927348" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/site_11.png?VersionId=0J657j.TaChAZfp93wqJYBTqSsnREJx2" />

Focus Group, founder and led by Paul De Lutiis, is increasingly active across Melbourne’s inner suburbs, targeting well-connected urban renewal locations suited to medium and higher-density residential development. The Fitzroy proposal continues that strategy, leveraging the area’s strong transport links, established retail amenity, and proximity to the CBD.

Fitzroy has been one of the most popular spots for developers and buyers in recent years. The likes of PACE Development Group, SMA Projects, Crema Group and Chapter Group, currently selling projects in the suburb.

Cameron Kusher

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News