<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
It’s impossible not to notice that Australia is shedding blue collar jobs. But what about their white collar equivalents and impacts on CBD office demand?
According to Deloitte Access Economics’ latest employment forecasts, while job growth outside of the nation’s CBDs came to a halt in the second half of 2013, business district office jobs are the only big labour market group adding jobs of late. In fact they actually gained momentum in the second half of 2013.
Yet this growth is small, and the recovery is reliant on the positives of low interest rates, a falling dollar and signs of greater willingness by businesses to take on risk.
Although the news will get better in the next couple of years, nothing like the pre-GFC performance of office demand looks to be on the horizon.
With the exception of Sydney , the nation’s office markets are almost all seeing slow growth, the finance sector is still cutting its headcount and the usually reliable business services sector is losing jobs even faster.
Like Sydney, Adelaide is losing jobs, continuing the worsening trend evident since the GFC and Melbourne is motoring in low gear – also losing finance jobs, but with some business services sector resilience.
There are only two exceptions to the ‘slow growth’ character of Australian office markets: Perth, where growth is still good but slowing as cost cutting by the resources sector takes a continuing toll and the state government tightens purse strings; and Brisbane, where recent job gains have restored some previous losses.
Perth is more exposed to resource-related cutbacks than any other state and things are likely to get worse before they get better. Brisbane is already seeing a tentative recovery underway.
So, with a blue collar slowdown and white collar growth faring better inside CBDs than outside them, where to next?
Overall job growth enters 2014 devoid of momentum, yet there are some positives. One is that employment is a backward looking indicator and the news of late on the economy has been improving – retail sales growth is accelerating, evidence of a recovery in housing construction continues to strengthen, and the news out of the US looks good.
That trend points to a few reasons to expect that better job news lies ahead.
The upshot is that Deloitte Access Economics projects office demand growth to improve further from here, but from a pretty weak starting point. 
Damian Winterburn is the national leader of <a href="https://www.deloittecaplandrealestate.com.au/" target="_blank">Deloitte Capland Real Estate Advisory</a>.
</body></html>

jake-cSmGT7VXVf

All but stagnant CBD employment puts office demand in the slow lane

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
Finance Minister Mathias Cormann’s decision to back away from plans to repeal sections of the Future of Financial Advice (FOFA) reforms is not surprising. Recent comments suggest this may indeed be a complete turnaround in the government’s position, more likely now that Assistant Treasurer Arthur Sinodinos is no longer at the helm.
It’s been a long fought battle to achieve a new standard in financial planning, but more, not less reform is required to ensure financial advisers evolve beyond commission-driven salespeople.
Under the guise of reducing compliance costs, the proposed reforms to FOFA include removing the “opt-in” requirement, where clients of financial advisers must indicate annually that they wish to continue the service. Also up for removal is the need for an annual fee disclosure for clients engaging before 1st July 2013, and a watering down of the “best interest” duty and provisions directed at removing conflicted remuneration, that is the payment of commissions, on general advice.
<blockquote>
The FOFA reforms have been a huge step forward for the financial advice industry to adopt a more professional and ethical standing.
</blockquote>
While these reforms may well reduce compliance costs, they also wind back some of the important consumer protection benefits of FOFA, which has been a real win for investors.
Potential conflicts of interest are ever present in the financial planning industry where the average consumer struggles with the complexity of financial advice, and advisers can recommend options that maximise their own revenue stream. The consequent information asymmetry between clients and advisers warrants regulatory intervention, as cases such as the failure of Storm Financial have clearly demonstrated.
From salespeople to educated advisers
It would appear the pushback on restricting commissions for financial advice is coming from vertically integrated financial conglomerates such as banks, that wish their staff to be “incentivised” to sell a wider range of products to wealth management clients. They would also argue that additional costs of compliance may price financial advice out of the reach of those who need it most.
While the motivation of these organisations is understandable, removing the current restrictions on commissions under FOFA would be a retrograde step, both for consumers and the advice industry as a whole. While admittedly there are a few issues to be tidied up in the legislation, such as a better definition of personal and general advice, a little more time is really required to bed the current processes down.
If further reform is needed in the financial advice industry, surely it needs to be focused on lifting the bar on the minimum educational standard for licensees.
At present one can satisfy ASIC’s minimum educational requirements for a financial services licence by completing a course listed on its website – stated to be “at or beyond the standard required for a Diploma”, that is one year of full-time study or the equivalent to one thrid of a three year bachelor’s degree.
While this standard is widely acknowledged by finance professionals as being woefully inadequate in itself, in practice some courses that are listed as satisfying this criteria can be completed in just a few weeks of study. It is hard to see how the complex matter of financial advice might be adequately addressed in such a short time frame, no matter how intensive the course.
A gaping knowledge gap
The particular difficulty of information asymmetry in financial advice was well demonstrated by ASIC’s shadow shopping study of financial advice in 2012. In this study, ASIC examined 64 financial plans for retirement age individuals. Only 3% of the financial plans examined were found to provide good quality financial advice, while at the same time 86% of participants felt they had received good quality advice and 81% said they trusted the advice they received from their adviser “a lot”.
Hence the dilemma - consumers are often the worst at making an objective assessment of the quality of financial advice they receive.
At a time when we are seeing a rising wave of potential retirees seeking advice to maximise their well-being in retirement, there has never been a greater need for transparent, affordable and scaleable financial advice. Not just for the wealthy, but even more importantly for those with more limited financial means.
The FOFA reforms have been a huge step forward for the financial advice industry to adopt a more professional and ethical standing, focused on providing quality financial advice, as opposed to selling financial products for commission. For many financial planners, however, the FOFA legislation has simply been a codification of existing good practice. The concept of fee for service and advice in the client’s best interest is well established in better practices.
The FOFA legislation has lifted the professionalism of the financial advice industry. The way forward is not to undo what has been achieved here, but rather to move to the next stage of reform in the industry by reviewing the minimum qualification for advisers.
Deborah Ralston is professor of finance and director at <a href="https://www.australiancentre.com.au/" target="_blank" style="line-height: 1.3em;">Australian Centre for Financial Studies</a>.
Deborah is affiliated with Mortgage Choice Financial Planning.
This article was originally published on <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a>.
</body></html>

The future of financial advice needs educated advisers

<html><body>
The top performing capital cities in the March quarter, according to the RP Data-Rismark Home Value Index.
<ul>
<li>
5.4%  Melbourne was the best performing capital city over the March quarter recording a 5.4% rise in dwelling values. With a median dwelling price of $515,000 Melbourne's dwelling values have increased by 11.6% over the past 12 months. 
</li>
<li>
4.7%  Hobart recorded a strong gain of 4.7% in the March quarter. However, this result is tempered somewhat by the year on year stat, which indicate that values in the Tasmanian capital have only increased by 0.9% in that time frame. Hobart remains the country's most affordable capital city with a median dwelling value of $338,000. 
</li>
<li>
4.4%  Sydney continued its strong market gains, ticking up by another 4.4% over the March quarter. The median dwelling price is now $630,000, a year on year rise of 15.%. 
</li>
<li>
2.8%  Darwin recorded the strongest gain in the month of March of 3.3%, contributing to its quarterly gain of 2.8%. Darwin's median dwelling price remains second behind Sydney at $547,000. 
</li>
<li>
2.0% A strong March result of a 2.2% rise in dwelling values, saw Canberra head back into positive territory. The nation's capital posted a 2.0% increase over the March quarter and values are now up by 1.7% on this time last year. 
</li>
<li>
1.5%  Brisbane has been tipped by some experts as the next capital city market to take-off. These forecasts have yet to come to pass and Brisbane values were up only 1.5% in the March quarter. While Sydney and Melbourne have seen values shoot up by 15.6% and 11.6% respectively over the last 12 months, other capital city markets have remained below 5% over the period. Brisbane was the next best, recording a 4.8% rise year on year, while Perth and Adelaide followed shortly behind at 4.7% and 4.6% respectively. 
</li>
<li>
1.2%  Adelaide secured its entire quarterly gain in March when values increased by 1.4%. 
</li>
<li>
-0.6%  Perth was the only capital city to show a negative change in dwelling values over the March quarter. Perth values were up 4.7% on a year on year basis. 
</li>
</ul>
<img src="/images/2014/04/01/rp-data-april-1.gif" alt="">
Source: RP Data-Rismark Home Value Index
 
</body></html>

Melbourne tops the list of best performing capital cities in March quarter: RP Data-Rismark

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
Only 53% of couples and 22% of single people are on track to achieve a comfortable level of retirement income, according to an in-depth study of the adequacy of retirement savings.
The outcome of a collaboration between researchers at the University of Melbourne and Towers Watson, the <a href="https://www.melbourneinstitute.com/downloads/working_paper_series/wp2014n05.pdf" target="_blank">study</a> has found a significant number of Australians are not likely to achieve adequate retirement incomes, even when all sources of savings are considered.
The research sought to address the considerable uncertainty among policy makers and the broader community about the extent and nature of retirement savings deficiencies in Australia. To do so, we developed a set of metrics indicating the adequacy of retirement savings and applied those metrics to a large representative sample of the Australian population.
The clear finding is that most Australians are still not on track towards reaching a comfortable income during retirement, and will continue to draw a large part of retirement income from the age pension. The implication is that, despite superannuation reforms dating back over 20 years, the problem of inadequate retirement savings remains a significant public policy issue for Australia.
An important innovation of our study is that the metrics we developed take into account not only superannuation holdings (and projected growth in superannuation holdings through investment returns and future contributions) and the projected age pension entitlement, but also a variety of other household assets that could be used to fund retirement, including various financial assets and property.
Using this information, we are able to forecast a person’s expected income throughout retirement. We then compare this income to a “target” income, which is provided by the <a href="https://www.superannuation.asn.au/resources/retirement-standard" target="_blank">Association of Superannuation Funds in Australia (ASFA) Retirement Standard</a> for a “comfortable” lifestyle. The ASFA standard for a comfortable lifestyle is a widely used benchmark, and specifies a minimum income of $57,665 for couples and $42,158 for single people.
The ASFA benchmarks are very close to both current average income levels of retirees in Australia and the income levels that pre-retirement Australians on average believe they will need for a satisfactory lifestyle in retirement. While this concordance may seem reassuring, our findings for the projected retirement incomes of pre-retirement Australians were not.
We projected retirement income levels for a large, representative sample of Australians aged 40 to 64 ­– drawn from the nationally representative <a href="https://www.melbourneinstitute.com/hilda/" target="_blank">Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) Survey</a> – and compared our projections to the income required to sustain a comfortable lifestyle.
Based on our calculations, only 53% of couples and 22% of singles are on track to achieve a comfortable level of retirement income.
Our study also shows the relative importance of different sources of retirement income. If we ignore all sources of retirement income other than superannuation, only 15% of couples and 5% of singles are projected to achieve the target. Indeed, applying the <a href="https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/factbook-2013-en/03/02/02/index;jsessionid=1kd80w28k8as0.x-oecd-live-01?contentType=/ns/Chapter,/ns/StatisticalPublication&amp;amp;itemId=/content/chapter/factbook-2013-26-en&amp;amp;containerItemId=/content/serial/18147364&amp;amp;accessItemIds=&amp;amp;mimeType=text/html" target="_blank">OECD poverty benchmark</a> of half median income, most retirees would be living in poverty.
Factoring in the age pension improves projected retirement incomes for many people, but still only 32% of couples and 11% of singles are on track to have a comfortable retirement income.
Our calculations have several implications. First, they show that, for most people, superannuation is not sufficient to fund a comfortable retirement, even if they have contributed to superannuation for most of their working lives.
Second, it is important to take into account all potential sources of retirement income, including non-superannuation assets, when computing the adequacy of retirement savings. Omitting any of these sources will likely lead to substantial under-estimation of adequacy.
Third, single people are particularly under-prepared for retirement, being three times more likely than couples to have severely inadequate projected retirement incomes.
Fourth, there is a gap between expectations about the importance of the different sources of retirement income and the likely reality. <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Lookup/4102.0Main+Features50March%202009">Data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics</a> show that over half of men and two-fifths of women expect superannuation to be the main source of retirement income. However, our projections show that the age pension will provide 61% of the retirement income of single people, and 39% of the retirement income of couples. Moreover, 96% of single people and 89% of couples aged 40 to 64 today are expected to receive at least a partial age pension at some stage during retirement.
Our analyses show that most people need to think ahead to their financial situation in retirement and, if possible, make some changes – the sooner, the better. The first step is to find out whether your savings are likely to be adequate – and you can now do this easily on the <a href="https://www.moneysmart.gov.au/tools-and-resources/calculators-and-tools/retirement-planner" target="_blank">ASIC MoneySmart web site</a>.
The site offers a calculator based on a simplified version of the algorithm we used in our study. It takes less than 10 minutes to enter the required information and obtain an estimate of the adequacy of your retirement savings.
Knowing now whether you need to save more towards your retirement is an essential first step towards a retirement in which you don’t have to fear running out of money.
Roger Wilkins is principal research fellow and deputy director (Research), HILDA Survey, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research at University of Melbourne.
Carsten Murawski is senior lecturer in the Department of Finance and co-head of the Decision Neuroscience Lab at University of Melbourne.
<a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-melbourne"></a>
(Professor Kevin Davis contributed to this study, which began prior to his appointment as a panel member of the Financial System Inquiry.)
This article first appeared on <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-majority-of-australians-are-not-saving-enough-for-retirement-24957">The Conversation</a>.
</body></html>

Retirement prospects not-so-super for many Australians

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
One of the main arguments made by Australia’s banks for the watering down of Future of Financial Advice (FoFA) reforms is that it would reduce the cost of financial advice to consumers.
Specifically, the banks want “general advice” to be exempt from the rules prohibiting conflicted remuneration - in other words, commission.
The presumption is that the cost of financial advice is too high. But what are the costs? The short answer is it varies, depending on the complexity or amounts involved.
At a minimum, a client may expect to pay about $1,500 for a comprehensive personal financial plan and more likely $3,000 or more. Then, an agreement may be put in place to charge an amount for an annual review and monitoring services (in other words – a retainer).
Let’s take an example where a consumer has a relatively small sum of $5,000 to invest. Under the law, a financial adviser is required to treat the consumer for “personal advice”. This means taking into account the person’s details, risk profile and objectives and then completing a “statement of advice” which may run to some 15 pages or more.
To comply with the Corporations Act, the adviser may need to spend some four hours or more to complete the task to the required degree. If an adviser charged $150 per hour (cheap by all accounts) then the cost of providing the service would be about $600 or 12% of the investment amount. If the hourly rate was $300 then the amount would be $1,200 or 24% of the invested amount.
Such cost levels are obscene when considered as a percentage, and have made financial advice inaccessible for people with small amounts to invest.
Prior to July last year, advisers often received commission payments from product providers allowing them to waive or reduce the upfront fees charged for advice. From July 2013 financial advisers were banned from receiving commissions for new advice, in order to ensure the advice was not biased.
A recent example of the effect of the ruling is when a member of an industry superannuation fund retired and wanted to commence a pension from his fund and was charged $1,500 for a financial plan just to make a change to his circumstances. Such a fee can be explained by the rules of compliance under which financial advisers must operate.
The case for simplification
So, in such a context, the government’s proposal to simplify things by reducing the compliance rules makes sense. The new regime would allow some advisers to waive the normal requirements of giving objective advice after considering the consumer’s circumstances by allowing “general advice” to be offered instead.
This means the financial adviser will not have undertaken an account and have recorded all details of the consumer’s personal circumstances, and the recommended investment product will not necessarily be selected for a specific purpose that meets the consumer’s investment objectives. The advice is “general” so it may not be specific for purpose.
The upshot of all this is that some advisers will change their way of doing things to comply with the rules for providing general advice, so they will not be required to complete a client risk profile or produce a time consuming statement of advice. And the benefit to be derived is the payment by way of commission.
In the earlier example of the investment of $5,000, a commission of 3% or $150 may seem to be a saving to the consumer compared to paying $600. But, if the investment was $20,000 then the commission would be worth $600 without the adviser having to comply with the personal advice requirements. If the investment amount was $50,000, then the commission amounts to $1,500. At that level, we might as well return to the old days when selling a product was the objective.
Ongoing commissions are still rife
There is another aspect to financial advice costs that is overlooked in the current debate on whether to wind back parts of FoFA.
The costs of financial advice also extend to the costs applied against the consumer’s investments. Such costs are invariably based on a percentage of the amount invested. In other words, a commission form of fee is involved.
To illustrate: a consumer invests $100,000 via a product provider into an administration platform and then spreads the risk of investment among four or five investment managers. There are a number of costs involved.
The first is an administration fee charged by the platform provider. This is based on a percentage of the amount of funds invested, say 0.8% per annum. There may also be a member fee of say, $10 per month. Then the funds are invested with a range of fund managers who charge a fee based on the size of the investment.
Such a fee can range from a conservative 0.4% to 2.2% or more and some may even include a performance fee as an extra reward to the fund manager for exceeding a performance target.
Another level of fees that may hold back the performance of the consumer’s investment is an adviser’s ongoing fee. Again, in some instances this is also levied by means of an asset-sized fee up to 1% for various adviser services, although some advisers levy a dollar amount for such service rather than an asset-based percentage.
There are many stakeholders involved in the current debate about financial advice fees and commissions – consumers, advisers, regulators and product providers. Notably, the first three are opposed to the changes currently being considered by the government.
Warren McKeown is teaching fellow at the University of Melbourne.
Warren McKeown is affiliated with a company that holds an Australian Financial Services Licence.
This article was originally published on <a href="https://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>.
</body></html>

The one certainty of financial advice is unfettered fees

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
Prime Minister Tony Abbott’s planned repeal of 9,500 redundant regulations and 1,000 Acts of Parliament could loosen dangerously close ties between politicians and developers. While such ties are problematic in many parts of Australia, the recent investigation of the Obeid family by NSW’s Independent Commission Against Corruption has brought this issue to the forefront.
Research that I undertook when I was leading a 2011 bid for a Cooperative Research Centre in Heritage demonstrates that the nexus between politicians and developers in Australia has become perilously close. Over the last decade, red tape involved in the heritage approvals process has resulted in a dramatic increase in direct ministerial approvals for developments.
In New South Wales, for example, the use of ministerial <a href="https://majorprojects.planning.nsw.gov.au/index.pl?action=search&amp;page_id=&amp;search=&amp;authority_id=&amp;search_site_type_id=&amp;reference_table=&amp;status_id=&amp;decider=&amp;from_date=15%2F2%2F2011&amp;to_date=3%2F3%2F2011&amp;x=68&amp;y=17" target="_blank">approvals for major projects or infrastructure</a> rocketed from a total of nine during 2001-2005 to 457 in 2010. Forty-three were approved in the two weeks prior to the state government going into caretaker mode.
Red tape is needed to reduce risk and to ensure transparent and equitable processes. However, too much red tape stifles investment. Moreover, frustrated developers seek greater use of ministerial “call in” powers to circumvent slow approvals.
<blockquote>
There is an economic need for a streamlined information system that reduces the approvals delay and provides certainty for developers.
</blockquote>
Australia’s current heritage approvals process is fragmented across jurisdictions, between agencies and between Indigenous and non-Indigenous heritage. This has produced mountains of uncoordinated, non-standardised data. This data is inaccessible, often redundant and usually incomplete.
Decision-making power is dispersed across numerous agencies. Decisions depend on the interpretation and knowledge of individuals rather than on a solid evidence base. We need integrated data-sets that make it possible to determine what is common from what is rare or unique. Common approaches to data collection, storage and use should produce consistent decision-making.
The escalation of ministerial approvals for major developments in NSW emerged in 2005. The Environmental Planning &amp; Assessment Act 1979 was <a href="https://www.planning.nsw.gov.au/en-us/developmentproposals/developmentassessmentsystems/part3aassessmentsystem.aspx" target="_blank">amended to include Part 3A</a> for major projects of state and regional significance. Part 3A determined that the only planning approval required was that of the NSW planning minister. Each project had a spend in excess of $50 million.
With Part 3A, both concept and project approval from the minister had statutory force. Part 3A projects circumvented local council approval and both state heritage acts. These projects did not need approvals under either the Heritage Act, 1977 or the National Parks and Wildlife Act, 1974. Moreover, Part 3A projects were protected from emergency protection orders and third party legal challenges under state environmental or planning statutes.
While the aim of Part 3A was to provide up-front certainty for long-term or complex projects, this provision was abused. When the Liberal government came to power in NSW Part 3A was replaced by two separate assessment frameworks. One is for state significant development. The other is for state significant infrastructure. Importantly, the new system constrains the “call-in” powers of the Minister.
It was anticipated that the number of applications designated as state significant would drop by half. Nevertheless, the level of ministerial approvals for major development projects is still way beyond what it was a decade ago.
Throughout Australia fast-tracking major projects through ministerial approval has become a viable alternative to following due process. Occasional exemptions have become routine and the nexus between politicians and developers has grown murkier.
A sustainable alternative to relying on ministerial approvals for large developments is to lessen delays in heritage approvals. Reducing red tape is one part of this.
Developers need access to sound information. A standardised, integrated and coordinated information system would support sound decision-making. A comprehensive database would make it possible to assess if a cultural heritage place is unique, or one of thousands. Such a system would make it possible to classify and rank heritage assets. It would provide an evidence base for determining what can go and what needs protection.
Uncertainty over heritage approvals is costing investment and jobs throughout Australia. In the resource sector, for example, <a href="https://www.fraserinstitute.org/research-news/display.aspx?id=20902" target="_blank">The Fraser Institute’s annual Global Survey of Mining Companies</a> consistently identifies uncertainty over the protection of wilderness, parks and archaeological sites as a strong deterrent to investment across Australia.
There is an economic need for a streamlined information system that reduces the approvals delay and provides certainty for developers. Such certainty needs to be based on good, irrefutable data. In addition, decision-making should be informed by community values in order to pre-empt conflict and provide long-term confidence.
Australia’s cultural heritage is recognised globally as unique. It includes the world’s oldest continuous cultural traditions, some of the first evidence for modern human behaviours and rich rock art complexes. In addition, it includes the histories of more than 200 migrant groups.
This important heritage needs to be protected. However, we need to grow Australia’s economy and we can’t keep everything. Decisions have to be made about what we pass on to the next generation as heritage and what we let go. These decisions need to be transparent, fair and consistent.
Reliance on ministerial approvals raises concerns about transparency and challenges the integrity of the system. It is possible that the current corruption cases in NSW are only the tip of the iceberg.
Claire Smith is professor of archaeology at <a href="https://www.flinders.edu.au/" target="_blank">Flinders University</a>.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/24638/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" style="line-height: 1.3em;">
Claire has received research and community project funding from a number of mining companies, including BHP-Billiton and Rio Tinto.
This article was originally published on <a href="https://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>.
</body></html>

Tackle fast-tracking of approvals to close nexus between politicians and developers

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
Property is a critical element in the construction of any diversified investment portfolio. With characteristics such as relative capital stability, generally higher income and, by the real nature of the asset, a hedge against inflation, property can balance out the volatility experienced through equities and other riskier assets.
When retail and SMSF investors think of property however, their minds immediately turn to residential property, after all this is the asset class they are most familiar with. By not broadening their investment horizon they may run the real risk of generating too much concentration to residential property, exposing themselves to the very risks they were trying to diversify away from.
With an investment in property still an important part of an investment portfolio, investors who wish to include property exposure would do well to consider commercial property.
Investors often dismiss commercial property, believing it isn’t suitable for retail or SMSF investors because of the size of investment required, the possible lack of liquidity and the difficulties in managing a commercial property. But these concerns may be overcome by taking advantage of pooled investment vehicles, such as listed and unlisted property trusts.
Investing into a pooled property trust provides access to experienced, professional property fund managers, is no different to an equities fund. Other benefits of investing in commercial property through a managed fund include obtaining diversity of asset type and geography, a regular valuation cycle, smaller capital requirement for buy-in, greater liquidity through withdrawal facilities and a stable income from a diversified tenancy base.
<blockquote>
With an investment in property still an important part of an investment portfolio, investors who wish to include property exposure would do well to consider commercial property.
</blockquote>
Unlisted property funds are not subject to the share market volatility that listed funds have experienced in recent years. Instead, they exhibit performance that is in line with the underlying investment properties – which is ideally what those investors looking to property for its diversification and performance benefits are seeking.
Unlisted non-residential property in Australia, in particular, has consistently achieved investment yields of around seven percent over the past two years, providing stable and regular returns for investors. This has been at a time when other asset classes have faced headwinds such as falling interest rates and weakness in the share market.
In addition, investors can also gain exposure to individual sectors of the Australian economy through unlisted property trusts, with healthcare property a prime example. The healthcare property sector has been less volatile than other commercial property sectors over the past few years, and has outperformed all property on a one, three and five year basis, driven primarily by strong income returns.
The reason for this is that healthcare properties are relatively scarce, operate in a regulated industry and are typically leased to large, stable and well-resourced operators. The ageing Australian population and increasing need for healthcare services helps ensure high occupancy levels w to higher income yields.
The options for property investment, for retail investors and SMSF trustees alike, are greater than simply looking to residential property. By ignoring a large segment of the property market, and staying with the familiar, investors not only run the risk of investing in residential property at the top of the market, they risk losing the benefits that come from investment in a professionally managed unlisted property trust.
Ryan Banting is head of portfolio management with <a href="https://www.australianunity.com.au/" target="_blank">Australian Unity</a> Real Estate Investment<a href="https://www.australianunity.com.au/" target="_blank"></a>.
</body></html>

Investors overlook commercial property at their peril

<html><body>
The Reserve Bank of Australia has a problem.
It is relying upon a United States recovery and hawkish Federal Reserve to bring down the Australian dollar. But although US bond markets are beginning to price interest rates rises in the US, they are only doing so at the short end of the curve. Longer duration bonds are the ones that determine carry trades from cheap US dollars into the higher interest rates of other nations and they aren’t buying what the Federal Reserve is selling.
Friday evening saw more bullish Australian dollar action. It was a night of subtle “risk off” but not for the Aussie, piling on 0.5% and threatening 91 cents again:
<img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-430237" src="https://media.crikey.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/1.jpg" alt="" width="493" height="272">
The long-term chart is now unmistakably bullish, with an inverted head and shoulders bottom and ascending triangle forming:
<img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-430239" src="https://media.crikey.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/2.jpg" alt="" width="490" height="272">
The recent commitment of traders report is also showing large and small speculators covering their shorts:
<img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-430241" src="https://media.crikey.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/3.jpg" alt="" width="560" height="257">
Not yet net long but trending that way. So, what’s going on? Unusual moves in US bond markets is what. Last week saw lots of comment about the Fed’s hawkish shift and its effects on the US yield curve. <a href="https://soberlook.com/2014/03/shifting-focus-in-treasury-markets" target="_blank">Sober Look has a nice summary</a>.
Long bond yields still look more likely to fall than rise; indeed the 10- and 30-year yields both fell 1% and more Friday. The 30-year especially has a bearish chart:
<img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-430242" src="https://media.crikey.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/41.png" alt="" width="593" height="247">
The 10-year not quite so much:
<img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-430243" src="https://media.crikey.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/51.png" alt="" width="593" height="247">
The US bond market is paying attention to a hawkish Fed but is also dismissing its long-term forecasts. Last week the Fed raised its 2016 year-end forecast for the cash rate to 2.25%. The last time the US cash rate was at that level was in March 2008 and the 10- and 30-year yield were at 4%. The time before that, in 2005, both were at 4.5%. But right now, the 10-year and 30-year are only at 2.75% and 3.6% respectively.
US bond markets are pricing the Fed’s attempt to reach its tightening targets but they’re also pricing the failure to get there.
There are reasons to think that the Fed (and RBA) is right and that longer duration bonds will follow. But there is still considerable slack in the US economy — enough to contain inflation — and there is likely to be more dis-inflationary pressure from Chinese tightening and the steady deflation of the commodities complex that is underway as result.
Even if the recovery has enough momentum to reach the Fed’s growth targets there is unlikely to be much inflation. Hence the yield curve may remain flat.
Given the yield spread on the 10-year bond is the dominant benchmark for carry trades, that is the worst of both world’s for Australia because, even though the US tightens, its recalcitrant bond market won’t allow any compression in the yield spread with Australia:
<img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-430244" src="https://media.crikey.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/61.png" alt="" width="405" height="293">
Meanwhile, in Australia, the RBA’s revitalised housing bubble has more and more folks looking “across the valley” of the mining capex cliff to rate hikes. They’re probably wrong, not least because the expectation is self-defeating in that without a lower dollar there’ll be no sustained recovery, but that’s not the point right now.
So long as the US long bond market flips the bird at the Fed then the Australian dollar is going to be under upwards pressure.
The answer is still the macroprudential tools mentioned obliquely in the RBA minutes last week. Temporary prudential controls on credit will allow interest rates to be cut and will bring down the dollar so that the Australian recovery can progress.
This article was originally published at <a href="https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/">MacroBusiness</a>.
</body></html>

How US bonds are putting a rocket under the Australian dollar

<html><body>
Yesterday’s Reserve Bank minutes from its March meeting shed plenty of light on the bank’s current thinking — much of which was missed by the ensuing media commentary. As always, it pays to examine what the bank says, and even the order in which it says it, rather than rely on what the media says it said.
First, the dollar. From “jawboning” the market on the currency’s high value in post-RBA board meeting notes to speeches warning of possible “intervention”, RBA governor Glenn Stevens spent every public opportunity in October, November and December urging the market to take the dollar lower. In an interview with The Australian Financial Review he even nominated the 85 US cent level as his target. In November’s final Statement of Monetary Policy for 2013, the bank made numerous mentions of the pressures the dollar was causing and the need for it to go lower.
This morning the dollar was trading around 91.20 US cents — higher than when it started the year. Apart from a dip in January, it has spent most of the year so far in the narrow range of just under 89 US cents to just under 91 US cents, with the latest breakout starting late last week with the stronger-than-expected February jobs data (the data that forced Westpac chief economist Bill Evans to abandon his shag-on-a-rock forecast of two more rate cuts from the RBA).
But yesterday’s <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.rba.gov.au/monetary-policy/rba-board-minutes/2014/04032014" target="_blank">minutes from the bank’s March board meeting</a> were notable for only the briefest of mentions of the dollar, compared to the virtual barrage of commentary late last year:  “[t]he Australian dollar had appreciated a little, although it remained around 14% below its peak in early April 2013.”
And that was that. Has the RBA have resigned itself to accepting the currency is probably not going to go much lower in the short term?
Second, wages. This is the bank on wages growth:
“Members began their discussion of the domestic economy with the labour market. They noted that wage growth remained subdued, in line with the weak conditions in the labour market and relatively low consumer and union inflation expectations.”
Note that this was top of the agenda when the board came to discussing the health of the domestic economy — not the value of the dollar, not the mining investment boom, not house prices, but the labour market and the way wage costs continue to fall. Again, like the 20-plus times the bank mentioned slow wages growth in its February Statement of Monetary Policy, you’d think the bank was trying to tell us something about its views on an issue that has been the subject of considerable stupidity in the media. As if to reinforce the point:
“The wage price index rose by 0.7% in the December quarter, to be 2.6% higher over the year, the lowest year-ended outcome since the series began in the late 1990s. Wage growth in the public sector over 2013 was around its slowest pace since 2000, consistent with ongoing fiscal restraint. Business surveys indicated that wage growth in the March quarter was likely to remain subdued, which was consistent with liaison reports that firms were having little difficulty finding suitable labour.”
And then there’s the housing boom — especially construction, which will be the main driver of growth for the economy as the mining investment boom fades. The RBA said:
“Members observed that conditions in the established housing market had remained strong. Housing price inflation had declined somewhat from the fast pace recorded in 2013, although the data were less informative around this time of year owing to relatively low turnover. Ongoing strength in the established housing market and low lending rates were expected to support new dwelling activity. Dwelling investment was expected to record a slight decline in the December quarter, but a strong increase in approvals for residential buildings over recent months — both for higher-density and detached dwellings — pointed to a substantial increase in dwelling investment in subsequent quarters.”
That’s important because it means that the bank’s low interest rate settings are feeding not merely into price growth in the established housing market but also into new dwelling construction, a key outcome if we’re to transition to a post-mining investment boom environment without a collapse in growth. And speaking of which, remember that huge and worrying fall in <a href="https://www.crikey.com.au/2014/02/28/capex-figures-makes-hockeys-budget-challenge-that-much-harder/" target="_blank">investment in the December quarter</a>? The RBA isn’t too fussed about it.
“In the first reading for 2014/15, the ABS capital expenditure data suggested that a small improvement was in prospect for non-mining business investment. Members noted that the ABS capital expenditure survey reported that mining investment was expected to decline sharply in 2014/15, which had already been embodied in the Bank’s forecasts for some time.”
That is, don’t panic, things are tracking broadly as forecast. That’s also the tone of the bank’s observations about the soft labour market, despite high-profile job loss announcements, which it acknowledged could affect consumer confidence.
This article first appeared on <a href="https://www.crikey.com.au/" target="_blank">Crikey</a>.
</body></html>

RBA relaxed about the dollar and investment

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
The National Rental Affordability Scheme (NRAS) looks set for a major shakeup by the government, following suggestions it has been <a href="https://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/rudds-housing-gift-to-students/story-fn59niix-1226843122005" target="_blank" style="font-family: Tahoma, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; line-height: 1.3em;">hijacked by universities</a> to develop subsidised studio apartments for wealthy international students, and that foreign investors, brokers and small time investors are <a href="https://www.theaustralian.com.au/higher-education/top-end-of-town-rorted-nras-scheme/story-e6frgcjx-1226855021305" target="_blank" style="font-family: Tahoma, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; line-height: 1.3em;">exploiting</a> NRAS tax breaks.
It is true that about 20% of dwellings approved for NRAS subsidies are student accommodation. About 25% of these (5% of all the housing produced, or around 1000 dwellings) are apparently let to foreign students. Whether they are indeed wealthy is another question, though it’s clear some fine tuning of NRAS eligibility might be warranted.
At the same time, it could equally be argued that the increased supply of subsidised units in high rent areas around universities will create some downward pressure on rents to the benefit of all tenants in the area.
Indeed, even if some units are rented to people outside the initial target group, by far the more important concern should be the failure of the scheme to achieve anything like its supply target.
Failing to meet targets
To make a real difference for low income renters in major cities, NRAS needs to impact market rents by providing a genuine alternative at the local level. But against an initial target of 50,000 dwellings, more than six years in NRAS has stimulated construction of only about 20,000 new rental properties nationally. At this scale the supply effect of the scheme is minimal. So we are effectively left with another form of welfare housing – albeit for working households – which also means an emphasis on eligibility and targeting, and thus the worry about overseas students.
<blockquote>
if private investment is to power the housing system then we have to accept that the property investment market is now a global one.
</blockquote>
For more than 20 years governments in Australia have tried to attract private investors in ways that are sometimes creative, and sometimes crude. Examples include public-private toll roads, or the sell-off of once public assets like Qantas. Reducing public debt, increasing efficiency, improved choice for consumers and increased accountability are among the reasons given.
But there are two sides to this ledger, and recruiting market operators to deliver policy objectives carries inevitable costs. This might be in the form and distribution of services, the final cost to consumers, and the ethical behaviour of self-interested investors and providers.
Australia’s skewed housing market
NRAS was designed to induce private investors into providing affordable rental housing. The cost of housing is not just a problem for lower income households unable to afford decent and secure accommodation. Unavailability of affordable housing, especially in Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane and Perth, has much wider social, economic and environmental consequences.
Many lower paid workers are forced to choose between spending more than half their income on rent, or commuting long distances – if they are able to access work at all – and bearing the cost in time, money and family life. When unemployment or family breakdowns happen, the next step is often homelessness, which can so easily begin a cycle of social exclusion.
When the population is growing and there is undersupply of housing, rents rise to meet the repayment commitments of mortgage holders. These in turn are driven upwards by speculation. The same process adds to insecurity for tenants as landlords turn property over to realise their capital gains.
Of course negative gearing already allows investors to reduce the cost of housing investments. By offsetting interest payments, maintenance and other costs, investors reduce their taxable income. Despite plenty of opponents, governments have retained it for fear that investors will desert the rental property sector. But as its critics point out, negative gearing directs the biggest benefits to the most expensive properties and provides an incentive to upgrade property and charge more rent.
NRAS is also a tax benefit, but it provides a fixed rebate of around $10,000 a year for 10 years. Investors can claim the rebate so long as a property is rented through an approved non-profit housing manager at 20% below the market rate. Potential tenants are means tested. In this way NRAS sought to keep investors in the affordable sector for the longer term. If they sell early in order to realise capital gains then the benefit is lost. It also means that low income tenants are less exposed to unexpected rent rises and unscrupulous landlords.
Beware xenophobia
Concerns about international and small investors exploiting NRAS tax benefits appear to be misplaced if not simply mischievous. The main purpose of NRAS is to make affordable housing at least as attractive to investors as short-term capital gains. It was intended to stimulate exactly the kind of activity that its critics describe. Indeed if it was really a “cash cow for canny investors” then a lot more new housing might have been built.
Pointing to international investors and students as somehow ripping off Australian taxpayers through NRAS plays directly into xenophobic fears about Asian interest in Australian property. The question must be asked: is a locally based speculator with an interest in short-term capital gains preferable to an international investor committed to providing affordable rental housing in Australia for at least 10 years?
In his review Minister for Social Services Kevin Andrews should carefully consider whether NRAS should be allowed to fulfil its aim of creating a viable long-term investment option in affordable rental housing.
Should it be expanded so that it puts downward pressure on rents in our major cities, or should it be reduced to another welfare housing program?
If the government prefers closely targeted housing then a market/private sector driven scheme is surely not the way to go, while if private investment is to power the housing system then we have to accept that the property investment market is now a global one.
Michael Darcy is Associate Professor and Lecturer of Geography and Urban Studies at the University of Western Sydney
Michael receives funding from Pacific Link Housing; and the Australian Research Council. He is a former Board member of NSW Shelter and has had a research partnership with the tenants Union of NSW. He is a member of the ALP.
This article was originally published on <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a>. 
</body></html>

Forget international students, NRAS' biggest concern is failure to meet supply targets

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/consolidated-properties">Consolidated Properties Group</a> (CPG) is approaching the launch of its latest Brisbane riverfront development, Castile, on the dress circle Skyring Terrace in Newstead.

VIP buyers are now being engaged, with a full public sales launch coming later this year.

Positioned as the final opportunity to secure a new absolute riverfront residence on the East bank of Newstead, Teneriffe or New Farm, Castile at 47 Skyring Terrace has been designed by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/woods-bagot">Woods Bagot</a> as a timeless addition to the Brisbane skyline.&nbsp;

[smartcode_project:default project_id=150489 project_image_fid=371113]

The name Castile draws on themes of permanence, sophistication and legacy, reflecting a broader vision centred on enduring architecture and timelessness in the rarest of riverfront positions.&nbsp;

CPG Chairman and CEO Don O’Rorke said the project had been envisioned as a future Brisbane icon.&nbsp;

“With 47 metres of direct river frontage and never to be built out views, 47 Skyring Terrace is the definitive address on the Brisbane River,” O’Rorke said.&nbsp;

[smartcode_project:default project_id=150489 project_image_fid=371114]

“Rather than following trend-based apartment design, Castile draws inspiration from Brisbane’s great heritage buildings, reinterpreting classical architecture into a contemporary riverfront landmark designed to stand proudly for the next 100 years,” he said.&nbsp;

The approved development will comprise 227 apartments across a 25-storey tower alongside a boutique six-storey riverfront building of just 12 residences.&nbsp;

Construction is scheduled to commence in September 2026.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=150489]

Joel Robinson

CPG unveils Castile Newstead ahead of upcoming sales launch

Australia’s online shopping habits have shifted dramatically over the last decade. As eCommerce volumes surged, so too did the frustrations that came with traditional parcel delivery: missed deliveries, long Post Office queues, parcel theft and the challenge of being home during business hours.

Australia Post’s Parcel Lockers emerged as one of the more practical responses to that changing consumer behaviour.

What started as a relatively niche delivery option has evolved into a nationwide network of more than 1,400 self-service Parcel Lockers positioned at train stations, shopping centres, supermarkets and Post Offices across the country. The system allows Australians to send, collect and return parcels 24 hours a day, fundamentally changing how many people interact with deliveries.

The appeal is relatively straightforward: flexibility.

Instead of waiting at home for a delivery driver or rushing to a Post Office before closing time, users can direct eligible parcels to a Parcel Locker location of their choice. Once the parcel arrives, Australia Post sends a notification with a collection code or QR access through the AusPost app, allowing customers to retrieve their package at any time within the collection window.

For apartment residents in particular, the system has become increasingly valuable.

Higher-density living has created logistical challenges around deliveries, especially in buildings without concierge services or secure parcel rooms. Missed deliveries are common, while parcel theft has become an increasing concern as online shopping volumes continue to rise.

Australia Post itself has repeatedly highlighted the growing issue of “porch pirates” during peak shopping periods, encouraging customers to use Parcel Lockers as a safer alternative to unattended home deliveries.

That security aspect is one of the key reasons the Australia Post Parcel Locker network has grown so rapidly.

Parcel Lockers are positioned as secure, monitored collection points that reduce the risk of theft while also improving delivery efficiency for Australia Post. Instead of multiple redelivery attempts, parcels can be consolidated into a single secure destination.

The Parcel Lockers themselves are free to use through a MyPost account and support a range of parcel sizes up to 16 kilograms and dimensions of approximately 35 x 44 x 61 centimetres.

Beyond receiving parcels, the system has increasingly become integrated into the broader eCommerce ecosystem.

Customers can now use Parcel Lockers to return online purchases, while retailers have embraced the model as a way to improve delivery success rates and reduce friction in the shopping process. Australia Post has actively expanded partnerships with major retailers and promoted Parcel Lockers as part of a broader out-of-home strategy.

The timing of that expansion aligns with broader changes in Australian shopping behaviour.

The acceleration of online retail during and after the pandemic placed enormous pressure on delivery infrastructure. Parcel volumes reached record highs, particularly during Black Friday and Christmas periods, with Australia Post delivering more than 100 million parcels during peak festive seasons.

That growth forced logistics providers to rethink the “last mile” of delivery, widely regarded as the most expensive and operationally difficult stage of the process.

Parcel Locker systems have increasingly been viewed as part of the long-term solution.

The concept itself is not unique to Australia. Parcel Locker networks have become common globally, particularly across Europe and Asia, where dense urban environments and apartment living create similar logistical challenges. But Australia’s geography and suburban sprawl made adoption slower initially.

Now, however, the convenience factor is driving mainstream usage.

For commuters, Parcel Lockers near train stations allow parcels to be collected on the way home from work. For apartment dwellers, they remove the uncertainty around access and missed deliveries.

The rise of the AusPost app has also streamlined the experience, centralising notifications, tracking and Parcel Locker access into a single platform. Australia Post has increasingly pushed customers toward app-based delivery management, partly as a way to combat phishing scams and fake delivery notifications, which have become more sophisticated in recent years.

The Parcel Locker model is also beginning to influence property development itself.

Parcel management has become a growing consideration in apartment building design, particularly as online shopping becomes embedded in everyday life. Many new residential developments are now incorporating dedicated parcel rooms or Parcel Locker systems into foyers and communal spaces.

For developers, parcel management is increasingly viewed as part of the broader resident amenity offering, alongside gyms, wellness spaces and communal work areas.

That reflects a wider evolution in how residential buildings are designed.

Apartment buyers are placing greater emphasis on convenience, security and operational functionality, particularly in higher-density urban environments. Parcel delivery, once considered a minor operational detail, has become an increasingly important part of that equation.

Australia Post’s Parcel Locker network sits at the centre of that behavioural shift.

What began as a simple alternative delivery option has evolved into a key piece of infrastructure supporting Australia’s growing eCommerce economy and changing urban lifestyles.

And as online shopping continues to expand, the role of Parcel Lockers is likely to become even more embedded in how Australians live, shop and receive goods.

How Australia Post Parcel Lockers changed parcel delivery convenience in Australia

Perth’s new apartment market recorded its strongest quarter of sales since Q4 2021, with 412 apartments sold in Q1 2026 and a record quarterly sold value of $537 million, according to Urbis’ latest Apartment Essentials results.

Urbis said the March quarter result reflects strong, highly product‑specific demand across both ends of the market, from more attainable projects delivering at scale, through to premium stock being absorbed by equity‑rich downsizers.&nbsp;

David Cresp, Partner at Urbis, said the key story in Perth is not demand, it is the market’s ability to convert demand into delivered housing.&nbsp;

“This is the strongest sales quarter since Q4 2021, and it reinforces that demand in Perth is real and it’s local,” David Cresp said. “But the task now is delivery, turning that demand into projects that can actually be built and completed.”&nbsp;

[smartcode_project:default project_id=110291 project_image_fid=302785]

<h2>Affordable product leads, premium demand remains resilient</h2>

Sales in Q1 were led by more affordable projects, with The Boulevard (SKS Group) recording 115 sales in the quarter, the presentation noting this is only the second time a single project has surpassed 100 quarterly sales. The project was able to offer more affordable housing product right next to a train station.&nbsp;

Palmyra West (Finbar) also delivered strong results with 28 sales in Q1, following 84 sales in Q4, with an average price of under $800,000, underscoring depth of demand for well‑located, attainable new stock.&nbsp;

At the premium end, Urbis said downsizer demand is continuing, with the results highlighting Romeo (Applecross, Finbar) recording 75 sales and reaching almost 50% sold in one quarter.

Jual (Shenton Park, Celsius Property) also posted a strong quarter with 28 sales, reaching 39% sold in one quarter.

Urbis noted that Perth apartment demand is not speculative, not investor‑led, and not uniform, describing it as localised, often equity‑driven and highly product‑specific, a pattern reflected in the polarisation between strong “attainable” performers and premium downsizer product.&nbsp;

[smartcode_project:default project_id=148957 project_image_fid=364102]

<h2>Prices underpinned by costs, and the delivery risk is growing</h2>

Urbis said pricing pressure is cost not demand‑driven: construction costs and delivery risk are now a central constraint, with the results noting build costs remain elevated and volatile, and that energy, fuel and labour uncertainty weigh on feasibility.

David Cresp said a growing challenge for private Build‑to‑Sell developers is simply securing a builder in the current environment.

“Developers are really feeling the pressure from a building market that was operating at capacity and securing a builder is challenging,” David Cresp said, adding that even where a builder can be secured, “trying to get to the price that makes the development financially viable is incredibly challenging in the current market.”&nbsp;

Urbis’ broader WA commentary also notes that industry remains at or above capacity with lot and housing creation, and that many builders are limiting new sales to manage stretched workforces and fixed‑price contract pressures, conditions that flow directly into apartment feasibility and delivery timing.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=108869 project_image_fid=317905]

<h2>Supply: improving later, but still constrained, and Perth lags eastern benchmarks</h2>

While near‑term supply remains constrained, Urbis’ forecast shows completions lifting “Supply is forecast to be back above 1,500 apartments per annum for the first time since 2019”, with 1,775 completions forecast for 2026, and volumes remaining above that level over the following years.&nbsp;

Looking further ahead, completions are forecast to reach 2,500 in 2028, with the report noting 32% of that total is social/affordable, reflecting the role of government‑supported delivery in rebuilding the pipeline.&nbsp;

However, Urbis said Perth remains behind comparable markets on pipeline scale. In a national comparison of projects under construction, the report shows under construction Perth Build‑to‑Sell (BTS) at 3,446 apartments versus the Gold Coast at 7,922. Mr Cresp said “The challenge for Perth is how to we grow the delivery pipeline”.

Urbis’ conclusion is that Perth’s market is increasingly defined by product discipline and delivery certainty, with the research identifying “delivery certainty is key” and calling out builder risk and procurement models as core success factors, alongside “timing and staging”.&nbsp;

Perth apartment sales hit strongest pace since late 2021 as builder capacity tightens

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/sammut-developments">Sammut Group</a> has secured development approval for its latest Brisbane apartment project, marking the Sydney developer’s next step in expanding its Queensland pipeline following the success of its debut Gold Coast development, Coast.

The approved project at <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/44-glen-road-toowong-qld-4066">44 Glen Road, </a><a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developments/toowong-qld-4066">Toowong</a> will deliver a 15-storey riverfront apartment building with 42 residences, significantly increasing the scale of the site’s previous approval for a smaller luxury scheme. Designed by Bureau^proberts, the development will comprise a mix of predominantly four-bedroom and two-bedroom apartments positioned to maximise Brisbane River and city views.

Sammut Director Julian Sammut said the group had been actively searching Brisbane for several years before identifying Toowong as the right fit.

“Brisbane was the right step for Sammut,” Sammut said.

“With the success of Coast we thought we should definitely look to do more in Queensland alone. We then pushed up to look at Brisbane. We've been looking for I'd say two to three years actually and it was hard to find the right location.”

<img alt="Sammut makes Brisbane apartment play" data-entity-type="" data-entity-uuid="" src="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/f_auto,c_limit,w_1440,q_75/https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/field/image/Screenshot%202025-12-23%20at%203.27.14%E2%80%AFPM.png?VersionId=dYAVIL7qdcGA8ojvkslSrLjczXFejSSx" />

Sammut said suburbs including New Farm and Teneriffe were considered before the group ultimately focused on Toowong due to its strong downsizer demographic and limited supply of developable riverfront land.

The site was acquired off-market after what Sammut described as a lengthy negotiation and planning process, with the developer pursuing an uplift to the original approval.

“We are DA approved now which is very exciting,” Sammut said.

“We've had our change approval come through and we've obviously doubled the height, 15 storeys plus rooftop. We've got 42 amazing apartments that are going to be coming to market soon.”

<img alt="Sammut makes Brisbane apartment play" data-entity-type="" data-entity-uuid="" src="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/c_scale,w_580,dpr_2.0,q_auto:good/https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202025-12-23%20at%203.27.26%E2%80%AFPM.png?VersionId=ohkRkY0dIZlqdfME2EZePsCQavRiBadE" />

Bureau^proberts said the design responds to Toowong’s evolving urban character, balancing contemporary apartment living with the area’s established residential identity.

“A place where traditional Queensland living has taken place for centuries; Toowong is seeing a shift of contemporary influence, commercial and retail hubs mixed with well-considered residential offerings – all the while maintaining its character and charm,” the architect noted in planning documents submitted to Brisbane City Council.

The architecture practice said the project’s form was shaped by its riverfront setting, flood considerations, neighbouring building scales, and view corridors.

“They said the mix of four and two-bedroom apartments capture the ‘fundamental qualities of Queenslander living,’ translated into the context of a contemporary subtropical building.”

The development sits just off Coronation Drive within walking distance of Toowong’s retail precinct and the upgraded Regatta ferry terminal, while also benefiting from proximity to the incoming green bridge connection to West End. Sammut said the accessibility and amenity offering were central to the site’s appeal.

The approval adds to growing residential activity along the Toowong riverfront, joining nearby projects including Consolidated Properties’ Monarch Residences and Spyre Group’s ARC Residences.

Sammut secures approval for debut Brisbane apartment development in Toowong

Developer Lanevick is heading back into Sydney’s apartment market after focusing more heavily on the luxury townhouse and terrace sector in recent years.

Lanevick, founded and directed by Steve Maroun, is expecting to receive approval in the coming months for a new apartment development in Gladesville, with the aim to launch it to the market later this year.

The 51-apartment project, designed by Studio Johnston, will comprise a mix of one-, two-, and three-bedroom apartments positioned toward the Hunters Hill downsizer market.

“Traditionally it’s been difficult for people in that market to downsize because there just hasn’t been the right product available,” Maroun said.

“We’re targeting buyers who might have 30 to 40 per cent of their house value sitting in the bank after downsizing.

“They still want good spacious entertaining areas, they still want quality design, but they also want flexibility and the ability to enjoy life a bit more after working hard for a long time.”

The project sits near Boronia Park and within close proximity to the Parramatta River foreshore, an area Maroun says offers more of a Hunters Hill lifestyle than a traditional apartment precinct.

“From a lifestyle perspective, it’s really more Hunters Hill than Gladesville,” Maroun said. “You’re close to the foreshore, close to parklands, and still connected back into the village precinct.”

From level four and above, apartments will capture water views&nbsp;toward Sydney Harbour. Communal amenity will include rooftop entertaining areas, wellness spaces, and a gym tailored toward owner-occupier buyers.

“We’ve really designed these apartments around that buyer coming from the Hunters Hill LGA and what they’re actually looking for in their next chapter.”

The proposed development has also been designed to respond to the changing character of the broader Gladesville town centre, where a growing number of mixed-use and residential proposals are expected to emerge over the coming years.

“Gladesville presented a rare opportunity to deliver a genuinely design-led residential project within an evolving lifestyle precinct, just moments from the growing Gladesville town centre, and we’ve approached the project with a strong focus on architecture, liveability and long-term community value,” Maroun said.

Maroun said Lanevick saw a first-mover advantage within the precinct as planning controls continue to evolve to accommodate greater housing density.

“We think there’s a real opportunity there that hasn’t really been serviced properly yet,” he said.

“There’s going to be a broader evolution of the whole Gladesville village precinct over time, particularly with more activation and mixed-use outcomes.”

The Venus Street proposal will include a commercial and retail component at ground level designed to contribute to that evolving streetscape activation.

“A big part of the thinking was how do you activate that area properly and create more vibrancy and amenity, which is what Hunters Hill has been looking for,” Maroun said.

Lanevick’s focus since 2020 has largely been on smaller-scale luxury townhouse and terrace developments. The developer recently completed Royale Randwick, also designed by Studio Johnston, where prices reached $3.65 million. The project was featured in the UDIA NSW 2026 Professional Development Prospectus and was also named a finalist for Development of the Year.

&nbsp;

Jacob Robinson

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News