<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/82892/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
Last Friday, the world’s central bankers and some high profile economics professors will gather in Jackson Hole, Wyoming, for the annual Jackson Hole Economic Policy Symposium.
The Symposium, which is hosted by the Kansas City Federal Reserve, began in 1978. It does allow for discussions, information exchange, and time to reflect on the key issues bearing on monetary policy. But it’s not like the US Fed Chair Janet Yellen can’t talk to the European Central Bank (ECB) president whenever she wants – and vice versa.
More importantly, it provides a platform for Yellen and ECB President Mario Draghi to send very public messages about the future path of monetary policy in their respective jurisdictions.
The theme this year is “Fostering a Dynamic Global Economy”. That sounds like a good thing to have – better than an “undynamic one” – but don’t expect a lot of headline-grabbing comments from Yellen or Draghi.
All the data, and all the recent public statements by Yellen and Draghi, point to things basically going as planned. Cross your fingers. Hold your breath. Pray. Whatever works for you.
Draghi is a very smart guy, but he made a complete unforced error in a speech in June. At a banking conference in Portugal he offered: “All signs now point to a strengthening and broadening recovery in the euro area.”
Markets sure paid attention to those remarks. Bond yields rose, as did the Euro, as investors figured Draghi was going to start unwinding his quantitative easing policy. That led to a cast of ECB members having to tell markets that QE was here to stay for now.
Draghi seems to have learned his lesson. On Wednesday in Lindau, Germany he said: “While forward guidance (a tool used by central banks to influence, with their own forecasts, market expectations) is a useful instrument, recent research has highlighted that its effectiveness can be improved if combined with other non-standard monetary policies.”
Translation: no end to QE for now.
We can expect him to say something equivalently uninformative in Jackson Hole (which is actually a compliment to a central banker).
In the US, the Fed has been slowly, deliberately, and carefully tightening monetary policy in response to low unemployment and improved GDP growth. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), unemployment now stands at 4.3% nationally. Wage growth is still on the low side with average hourly earnings (for private, nonfarm payrolls) at US$26.36, up by 2.5% year-on-year to July. But compare that to Australia’s 1.8% wages growth for private-sector workers.
The main issue for the Fed is that inflation remains subdued. Two weeks ago the US Labor Department released figures showing the CPI was up 0.1% in July, after being unchanged in June. Year-on-year the CPI stood at 1.7%, still below the 2% Fed target.
This is Big Issue One for the Fed. Why is inflation so stubbornly low? Is it really because stuff is cheap on Amazon? It’s fair to say that the Fed’s (and others’) macroeconomic models are having a hard time explaining this fact.
But don’t expect Yellen to wade into the inflation-puzzle waters this week. That’s the sort of thing best done in the post-summer period – the US academic new year. My guess is that Yellen will start addressing that topic publicly some time before Thanksgiving, if she decides to do so at all.
There is, however, always the possibility for some fireworks at Jackson Hole. Not from Yellen or Draghi, but one of the academic speakers.
<h2>Rocking the boat</h2>
At Jackson Hole in 2005 University of Chicago Booth School of Business professor Raghuram Rajan gave a speech that was not popular with then-Fed-Chair Alan Greenspan, but turned out to be prescient.
The title of the paper he based it on was “Has Financial Development Made the World Riskier?” And he answered it in the affirmative. The reaction from many in the room at the time was that Professor Rajan was some kind of financial Luddite. Perhaps he also thought the wheel was a bad invention?
The fact that he was, well, right, is interesting and important, but beside the point for the purposes of this column. The real question is what the equivalent bomb-throwing speech from a participant might be this time.
Hard to say, but it might be to do with 2% GDP growth being the new normal, and what that means for long term monetary policy. This has been discussed by many people, such as former US Treasury Secretary Larry Summers, so it might not be all that new. But it could be made forcefully at the very large megaphone that Jackson Hole provides.
Look for a speech from a noted academic suggesting that inflation targeting should be abandoned; perhaps replaced with targeting of nominal GDP growth.
Such a speech wouldn’t be super new, or very surprising. But it might ruffle some feathers. The Fed has a plan and they’re sticking to it. This is practical macro. I suspect they are not in the mood for an academic seminar.
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/richard-holden-118107" target="_blank">Richard Holden</a> is a Professor of Economics and PLuS Alliance Fellow at UNSW and author for <a href="https://theconversation.com/au" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>.
</body></html>

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

Don’t expect much from the central bankers at Jackson Hole: Richard Holden

<html><body><div class="page" title="Page 3">
<div class="section">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
GUEST OBSERVER
To downsize or to not downsize?
That is the question many older Australians are asking themselves as they weigh up the benefits and disadvantages of each option. 
While downsizing offers more convenience, one major compromise is potentially moving away from friends in your neighbourhood whom you’ve known for years.
As of July next year, older Australians who are thinking of downsizing their family home into a smaller property may have a financial incentive to do so. They will now be able to invest up to $300,000 of the money made from the sale into their superannuation without being taxed. *Please seek independent professional advice when contemplating using this method.
A few years ago, Secret Agent published a ‘How To Downsize’ guide. In this report we will revisit the topic, this time focusing on the inner city suburbs and considerations that need to be made if you are looking to downsize into any of these areas.
CHANGES YOU’LL NEED TO ADAPT TO
As the term implies, downsizing means that getting used to a smaller space is an inevitable part of the equation. By moving into the inner city, you will also have to get used to new neighbours, new traffic patterns, new noises, more lights and new distances from old friends. Two of the greatest challenges downsizers will face is negotiating life in a smaller home, and detaching themselves emotionally from the place they are leaving.
Size
It’s not easy to find a home with enough space so you don’t feel cramped, yet small enough to qualify the move as a ‘downsize’. Going from an expansive four bedroom home to a two bedroom apartment that is barely the size of your old living room is not a good idea, and neither is moving into a double-storey terrace with a backyard. 
This includes an increase in three bedroom apartments on offer as well as whole-level apartments occupying the entire floor, giving residents greater privacy, space and a better outlook. Nowadays more developers are shifting towards targeting downsizers instead of investors, allowing older Australians to continually benefit from this trend over the next few years.
Emotional attachments
Many will find that the hardest part about downsizing is leaving behind the emotional connections made to the family home. Full of memories of special milestones, it can be very difficult to let go of not just the house itself but the neighbourhood too.
On the bright side, you can downsize into another area you feel somewhat at home in, such as a place you have fond memories of as a child or young adult. You may have stayed in university housing in Parkville, or worked during your early days in Richmond. It helps to have some history in the area in terms of replacing one emotional connection with another, however it doesn’t mean that there won’t be huge changes to get used to. As the inner city has transformed dramatically over the past decade and continues to do so, these areas may not be as you remembered them.
INNER CITY SUBURB GUIDE
There are many benefits of moving into the inner city that will help offset some of the more difficult transitions you need to make when downsizing. Secret Agent has put together a guide of the inner city suburbs to assist you in choosing a place that will suit your lifestyle needs.
Fitzroy North
Good access to parks and gardens, Scotchmer St / St Georges Rd amenities, plenty of smaller terraces, family-oriented neighbourhood, quiet and leafy.
Fitzroy
Brunswick St, Johnston St and Gertrude St amenities, close to Carlton Gardens, public transport easily accessible, variety of terraces, low-rise apartments and warehouses to choose from.
Carlton
Close proximity to the CBD and good access to parks, plenty of amenities on Lygon St and Swanston St, walk to Queen Victoria Market, multitude of public transport options. Only 
downside is that it gets quite noisy and busy, particularly around Melbourne University.
Carlton North &amp; Princes Hill
Rathdowne Village amenities, quiet, leafy and wide streets, family-oriented neighbourhood, mostly period terraces. Demographic includes academics and medical professionals. One drawback is the lack of train access, only accessible via tram.
East Melbourne
Exclusive blue chip neighbourhood, quiet, leafy, walking distance to Fitzroy Gardens and CBD. Variety of older style apartments, Art Deco units, Victorian terraces.
North Melbourne
Queensberry St, Errol St and Victoria St amenities, including Queen Victoria Market, walking distance to the CBD. Mostly quiet except near main roads.
Parkville
Adjacent to Princes Park and Royal Park, with period terraces, brick apartments and Art Deco units on offer. Demographic includes academics and medical professionals. Mostly quiet and leafy.
Brunswick &amp; Brunswick East
Gentrifying suburbs with large cultural and amenity hub along Sydney Road and Lygon St. Mix of older and younger population. Most apartments of varying quality located closer to main roads ie. Sydney Road and Lygon Street. Good access via train and tram. Busier and noisier near main roads.
Collingwood &amp; Abbotsford
Smith St and Johnston St amenities, convenient access to Yarra River parks on the east. Accessible via both train and tram. Mix of warehouses, terraces and apartments. Mix of younger and older population.
Albert Park &amp; Middle Park
Established, blue chip suburbs with quiet, wide and leafy streets, family and downsizer population. Mostly well-kept period terraces with a few brick and Art Deco apartments, little to no development in these areas. Walk to the beach or Albert Park. No train access.
Port Melbourne &amp; South Melbourne
Bay St and Clarendon St amenities, walking distance to the beach or several parks. No train access. Mix of newer apartments and townhouses, and older terraces. Generally established, more hustle and bustle than Albert Park and Middle Park and a transient population. 
Richmond
Multiple public transport options across the suburb. Variety of amenities along Victoria St, Bridge Rd and Swan St. Mix of younger and older population, diverse demographic overall. Plenty of apartments, townhouses, terraces and warehouses to choose from.
South Yarra &amp; Prahran
Established, leafy suburbs with a mix of younger and older population. Plenty of amenities along Chapel St, Toorak Rd, Commercial Rd and High St however also quite busy and noisy particularly at night.
OTHER THINGS TO CONSIDER
Besides location, there are other major considerations you will need to make when deciding to downsize into the inner city:
<ul>
<li>Floor plan / layout of the home: With the right design, a small home can feel big; likewise, a big home can feel small if not designed well. Choose one that suits your daily habits at home. If you love to host dinners and have guests over often, you’d want a good kitchen with a spacious dining area. If you have a creative hobby, perhaps you’ll want to convert an extra bedroom into your own studio.</li>
<li>Less cars, less parking space: It may take some getting used to the tight street parking in suburbs such as Carlton and Fitzroy. You may also choose to give up one car (or altogether), as car sharing is popular in the inner city as is collaborative consumption of other items.</li>
<li>Noise: The inner city will always be noisier than a suburban neighbourhood. Consider proximity to trams, restaurants, main roads, and how loud they are when you are indoors with all windows shut. If you have chosen an apartment, how well the walls (and ceiling) have been insulated will also make a difference as to the extent you’ll hear your neighbours.</li>
<li>Light and darkness: A northern aspect provides desirable sunshine during the day! If your bedroom window faces a main road, the blinds or curtains may not be good enough to completely block out the light from a street lamp, which may disturb your sleep. Be careful of potential development sites which may block some of your natural light in the future.</li>
<li>Access: Think about the route from the closest grocer back to your apartment. Ideally, you don’t want to have to walk too far, and a lift may be necessary if you live higher than the first floor.</li>
<li>Storage: No matter how hard you try, a 100sqm apartment will never fit as much in as your double storey suburban mansion. Consider having less things but of a higher quality so they last longer.</li>
<li>Pets in apartments: Your pets may not be happy in an apartment if they are used to having lots of room to run around. Some apartments also have strict rules against having pets in the building.</li>
</ul>
 TRY BEFORE YOU BUY!
If you’ve set your mind on downsizing and you’re not sure how to prepare for the move, start by writing a list of ‘must-have’s that are non-negotiable when searching for a place. These will be the things that are most important to your future comfort. Don’t give in to these non-negotiables! Then write a list of things you will be willing to compromise on.
When you have found an inner city area you think you would like to move to, spend time in that suburb to get a proper feel for it before deciding to buy.
Stay in a hotel or Airbnb for 1-2 weeks to feel what it’s like to live through the weekdays, weekends, mornings and nights.
If you’re not in a rush, you may rent for a few months in that area to ensure that it meets your non-negotiables in the long term. It also gives you an opportunity to try out other property types, for example if you’ve never lived in an apartment, or warehouse conversion.
CONCLUSION
When entering a situation involving both gains and losses,
as humans we tend to focus on the latter. So when making a move into a new environment, like downsizing into the inner city, we need to minimise the impact of the negatives on our lifestyle. If noise is something that is very disruptive to you, then you’d be wise to avoid buying along a busy road, or near a shopping strip. If you don’t like being too close to your neighbours, then perhaps apartment living might not be for you.
With that said, inner city living has never been more popular. As the market continues to make it easier for older residents to settle comfortably near the city, it’s only a matter of time before downsizing becomes less of a difficult choice, and more of a natural transition. 
For more information, <a href="https://secretagent.com.au/">click here</a>.
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div></body></html>

Melbourne inner city downsizing guide: Secret Agent

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/82886/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
The view of Australian banks on the risk that mortgage stress poses to our economy and the banks’ own viability is worrying.
Shayne Elliott, CEO of ANZ Bank commented in this week’s Four Corners report:
"The reality is that housing loans are pretty good because they’re quite diverse in terms of lots of relatively small loans across ah across the country."
This view is in contradiction to research from the United States which finds housing markets there are less diversified than previously thought. This means any house price shocks will likely occur simultaneously across the country, causing large cumulative losses to borrowers and banks via mortgage defaults. Australian housing markets are likely to be even more concentrated than in the US because of the population size of Sydney and Melbourne.
Banking regulator the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) has already issued guidelines to the banks on tracking exposure to mortgages and limiting the growth of loans to investors, in particular for interest-only loans. An independent review by Stephen Sedgewick on behalf of the industry also recommended banks stop paying mortgage brokers based on the volume of loans they secure, in an effort to reduce risks. But these steps might not be enough to ensure security.
Australian bank exposure to mortgage risk
Bank losses during the global financial crisis were in large parts driven by borrowers not being able to make their mortgage repayments. After receiving a loan, borrowers may experience income shocks like loss of jobs or demotion and expense shocks like higher petrol prices or interest rates, that affect their ability to service their mortgages.
Australian mortgage contracts are risky for borrowers in international terms. Unlike other countries, Australian banks offer to lend only up to five years at a fixed rate and the majority of loans are at a variable rate. 
This leaves Australian borrowers exposed to interest rate increases. In the past few years, interest rates were lowered as Reserve Bank of Australia economists targeted low inflation rates.
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/08/24/RentEarnings.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2017/08/24/RentEarnings.png" alt="">
www.rba.gov.au, Author provided
Interest rates are now close to zero, limiting the ability of the RBA to stimulate economic growth. There’s the possibility the RBA could raise interest rates, causing shocks to mortgage borrowers. My research shows this shock could increase bank losses substantially.
At the moment 23% of consumer expenses are housing related and this number is likely higher for mortgage borrowers and could be growing. Interest rate increases, in combination with the current high debt levels, are therefore likely to increase inflation and trigger further interest increases. 
Dealing with the risk of mortgage stress
Current bank portfolios are not well diversified, if 60% of bank assets are in mortgages. Other loan classes such as commercial real estate loans and small to medium enterprise loans are also often property-backed. 
Bank lending standards need to be more consistent to avoid borrowers shopping around for the lender that offers them the highest loan amount. Lending standards should also consider the concentration of housing income and expenses in a borrower’s portfolio.
Banks should promote fixed rate mortgages. This type of mortgage transfers interest rate risk from borrowers to the banks, that are better placed to manage this risk. This may come at an additional cost but should be small compared to the cost borne by consumers should the housing bubble ever burst. 
There also needs to be more scrutiny of the use of offset accounts and redraw facilities, being used as an offset for outstanding loans. Borrowers often use these funds to purchase additional properties and they may not be available in the case of mortgage default. Instead of promoting offset accounts it may be better to give borrowers a prepayment on their mortgage, but not an option to redraw. Should consumers want to draw down on the equity in their homes, they could then apply for a second mortgage. 
Mortgage brokers should act as independent advisers, a tool for consumer information and bank competition, as smaller lenders in particular rely on mortgage brokers. The Sedgwick report suggested the loan to value ratio of mortgages should be considered when paying mortgage brokers. This would mean that loans with high loan-to-value ratios (where the borrower is more likely to default) would earn a lower fee.
The Sedgwick banking review has been a step in the right direction, but the focus should be on banks rather than mortgage brokers, as it’s ultimately the bank that is in a contract with the consumer. 
Some of this may require a fundamental value change. It’s not likely the Australian appetite for property will change but this means we need to hedge our bets against any risks by improving diversification and the way banks finance mortgages.
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/harry-scheule-3573" target="_blank">Harry Scheule</a> is Associate Professor, Finance, UTS Business School, University of Technology Sydney and author for <a href="https://theconversation.com/au" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>.
</body></html>

Banks shouldn’t underestimate the risk of concentration in the housing market

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/82763/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
Big Chinese companies have been on an overseas buying spree in recent years, spending more than US$1.6 trillion scooping up businesses, property and “trophy assets” like football clubs.
But a directive from the Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party puts some of this investment in Australia at risk. The directive specifically restricts outbound investments in real estate, hotels, entertainment, and football clubs. 
One of the big reasons for the crackdown is how these investments are funded. China’s financial system is dominated by banks and bank loans are the major source of corporate funding. But this is also risky - if one of these projects fails it risks the entire banking system.
The changes won’t affect large Chinese holdings in the Australian agriculture and metals sector, or personal investments in Australian property. But there will be an impact on the Australian property market - Chinese developers bought 38% of all residential property development sites in Australia last year. 
As Chinese investment in the Australian property sector will now be curtailed, we should expect money to be diverted elsewhere - into sectors that are still looked on favourably by the Chinese government. Most notably resources, agriculture, and possibly new energy technologies.
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/08/24/Screen%20Shot%202017-08-24%20at%208.43.36%20AM.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2017/08/24/Screen%20Shot%202017-08-24%20at%208.43.36%20AM.png" alt="">
Chinese companies have also been active in the Australian hotel and entertainment industries - Fuwah Group recently purchased the Park Hyatt in Melbourne (among others), and Dalian Wanda bought the Hoyts cinema chain. 
Over the past few years, Chinese companies have splashed out on many prominent properties - China Investment Corporation bought several office buildings in Sydney and Brisbane, and Aqualand purchased waterfront property in Sydney. Dalian Wanda currently has billion dollar developments underway in Sydney and the Gold Coast.
The motivations for these large investments in Australia and elsewhere are mixed. Earning a profit and other commercial goals are undoubtedly behind some of the moves, but others are strategically important for China - such as investing in agricultural land. But we shouldn’t overlook that many of these investments are “trophy assets”, and are about bringing prestige to the companies themselves.
<h2>Why is China cracking down?</h2>
In China, according to People’s Bank of China’s data, bank lending constitutes the vast majority of total financing. Therefore, it is more than likely the bulk of these recent overseas purchases by Chinese companies is bankrolled by Chinese banks. This compares to countries like Australia, where bond markets and sharemarkets play a larger role in financing big projects and investments.
The reliance on bank loans adds risk to the financial system. Should these projects fail, or the Chinese companies be unable to repay their debts, it could destabilise the entire banking system. And as Chinese banks remain state-controlled entities, the state has effective power to direct bank lending.
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/08/24/Screen%20Shot%202017-08-24%20at%208.44.53%20AM.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2017/08/24/Screen%20Shot%202017-08-24%20at%208.44.53%20AM.png" alt="">
The Chinese government’s directive doesn’t just restrict investment in real estate, hotels, entertainment and football. It also encourages investment in other areas - new energy, technology, resources and agriculture. The stated purpose is to ensure that investment aligns with China’s national interest and to set up procedures for monitoring and supervision of the investments.
The Chinese banking regulator, the China Banking Regulatory Commission has also started investigating five huge conglomerates - Anbang, Dalian Wanda, HNA, Fosun, and Zhejiang Rossoneri Investment which have been very active overseas. The Chinese banking regulator has askedmajor banks to provide details of the borrowing position of these companies and the risk associated with their loans.
On paper, all five conglomerates are apparently predominantly privately owned, with the possible exception of Zhejiang Rossoner Investment which was only incorporated in June 2016. Although directly or indirectly, the Chinese government will have some stake and it is hard to trace the ownership structure of large Chinese companies. 
<h2>What comes next?</h2>
There will definitely be an impact as Chinese investment dollars move away from property and prohibited other sectors. This investment currently constitutes a large proportion of Australian property development.
However, it also remains to be seen how else the Chinese government will try to achieve the “national interest”. Whether through regulatory control or through its direct control of the Chinese banking system, the Chinese government might try to influence or direct the operations of the overseas assets of these conglomerates. 
The Australian government has previously shown nervousness about enterprises in areas of national “strategic” importance, passing into the hands of Chinese businesses with connections to the Chinese government, with some acquisitions being blocked by the Foreign Investment Review Board. Increased Chinese interest is only likely to provoke increased Australian apprehension.
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/he-weiping-163918" target="_blank">He Weiping</a> is lecturer in Law, Monash University and author for <a href="https://theconversation.com/au" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>.
</body></html>

Why China is cracking down on overseas investment

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/81034/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
Any public conversation about on-road cycling in Australia seems to have only one metaphor for the relationship between drivers and cyclists: equal reciprocity. 
An utterance like “Drivers must respect cyclists’ space on the road” must inevitably be followed by something like “For their part, cyclists must ride responsibly and obey the road rules.”
For instance, the campaign promoting a new road safety law in New South Wales tells us:
"Drivers, bicycle riders and pedestrians all need to Go Together safely. We should all respect each other’s space and ensure that everyone stays safe."
Most cyclists hardly need to be reminded to respect the space of a two-tonne vehicle travelling at 80km/h just centimetres from their elbow. Yet the wording, as well as the fines imposed, suggests cyclists have as much power to disrespect drivers’ space as vice versa. 
The idea that the space someone’s car occupies on the road is personal space, where the car is treated as a proxy body with its own right not to be molested, shows just how far this notion of reciprocity has gone. 
Locked into a way of thinking about equality
Why does the metaphor of equal reciprocity so powerfully organise our thinking about a relationship that is so clearly asymmetrical? One explanation is that these debates go on in a public sphere subject to a simplex version of philosophical liberalism wherein all things must be treated as equal.
As Patrick Stokes argues for hierarchies of racial difference, attributing an abstract equality to human beings tends to erase real differences in power and privilege. Public conversations about cycling in Australia erase the reality that cyclists’ safety is to a very large extent not in their own hands, but in those of drivers.
David Graeber observes that reciprocity is our default way of thinking about equality. It’s synonymous with:
"… the sense of equity, balance, fairness and symmetry, embodied in our image of justice as a set of scales."
Graeber adds:
"Almost everyone continues to assume that in its fundamental nature, social life is based on the principle of reciprocity…"
If we think of the road in this way, it seems reasonable that all cyclists have to do to “earn the respect” of drivers is to conspicuously obey the road rules and not complain too much when “equal” penalties are applied. Many cyclists feel this way. For me, however, they are suffering the lycra equivalent of Stockholm syndrome.
For what if the road is not democratic and egalitarian? I don’t deny that driver-cyclist interactions are very often co-operative, respectful and convivial. But all too we see other kinds of relations played out, based on hierarchy, marginalisation, othering, domination, exclusion, intimidationand violence. 
When we try to make sense of this within a reciprocity mindset, we usually say such behaviour is deviant, involving anti-social individuals. It’s a partial explanation, but not a total one.
Automobility rules the road
The fact is the Australian road is not a neutral space. It is ordered by what sociologist John Urry calls the system of automobility. 
Urry argues that this is the most transformative system the world has ever seen, one that puts the motorised vehicle at its centre. All other forms of travel, he says:
"… have to find their place within a landscape predominantly sculpted by the car system."
As well as all the economic and political interests invested in this system, both public and private, we need to consider the social and cultural meanings these produce around the automobile. 
In Australia, ideas of maturity, freedom and autonomy are powerfully entwined with the mythos of the car. These “cultural preferences” are so strong that they often act to erase cyclists’ legal rights and status not only on the road, but also in the courts and when dealing with police.
When cyclist meets driver on the road, both are notionally equal individuals encountering each other in a democratic, rule-governed and neutral public space. But only if the driver chooses to make it like this. Otherwise, they are in a deeply asymmetrical relation, both physically and culturally. 
 
At times as a cyclist among the cars I feel like an insurgent in hostile territory. By now some readers might assume I am advocating cyclist rebellion and lawless riding. I’m not. Cyclists should do their best to be civil and rule-abiding on the road, at least where it doesn’t put us in danger.
At the same time, we can’t expect great or immediate results from this offer of reciprocity to the drivers around us. To suggest that the person at the wrong end of a heavily unequal relationship can gain recognition and equality simply by offering to “respect the space” of the dominant subject is wishful thinking.
I despair that mainstream bicycle advocacy has to be limited to something like the “metre matters” law. For me, this is the political equivalent of pleading “Please don’t kill us!” – and this law has been applied only a handful of times to penalise drivers.
Many who support this law concede it is mainly useful as a means of publicity and driver education rather than as a legal tool. Courts having long had other means to punish at-fault drivers in car-on-bike crashes if they so chose. 
Law should reflect on-road realities
While at first glance the one-metre rule may seem like a special legal protection for a class of vulnerable road users, it in fact functions as a wishful attempt at recognising and enacting rights and protections that have long existed in law.
I ride daily in Canberra and know many cyclists. Anecdotally, the new law hasn’t made a jot of difference to how people drive or to how police and courts deal with cyclists who get hit or harassed.
Readers may object that the law can do no more than extend equal rights and protections to all road users. But that’s not true. Strict liability legal regimes go beyond this to offer special rights and protections to vulnerable road users.
Policymakers in all but five European Union nations accept that all road users are not equal. They recognise the failure of a principle of one-to-one reciprocity whereby we’re all safe because we all have the same formal status and follow the same rules. 
These jurisdictions prefer a communitarian approach that acknowledges some groups need “special treatment” to create a level playing field.
There’s little doubt a strict liability regime is at present “politically impossible” in car-centric Australia. However, attempts to fix things that assume voluntary reciprocity can work are also destined to fail. 
I certainly don’t have the answers, but I do believe we need to think outside the box of mutual reciprocity to make progress.
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/ashley-carruthers-383971" target="_blank">Ashley Carruthers</a> is Lecturer in Anthropology, Australian National University and author for <a href="https://theconversation.com/au" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>.
</body></html>

Cars, bicycles and the fatal myth of equal reciprocity

<html><body>
There are nascent signs Chinese foreign buyers have tuned down their enthusiastic buying of Sydney property.
There are three pinpointed causes.
Firstly Beijing has narrowed the window for capital outflows to Australia.
At the same time, Australian banks have tightened lending criteria to Mainland China investors due to APRA regulatory requirements, and in some cases won't lend to foreign investors at all.
This week Chinese local and international estate agents reported a sharp drop-off in sales over the last six weeks as new property taxes took effect after the NSW State Budget.
From July 1, NSW doubled the stamp duty on foreign buyers to eight per cent and increased the land tax surcharge from 0.75 per cent to two per cent.
It's a little too early to say the allure of Australian property has gone, but the Chinese language property portal Juwai.com calculated searches on Australian property for sale are down a third in the first six months of 2017 compared with the second half of last year, while global searches were up.
The emerging trend coincides with a warning from a former US Federal Reserve official that our economy could be at risk from a housing market downturn if Chinese buyers retreat from residential property.
Dr Nellie Liang, who was in Sydney recently to share her views on financial stability with the Reserve Bank of Australia, said a "trigger" could be a reversal in international capital flows.
Dr Laing suggested "when you have the outsiders buying properties, if the outside money pulls out and prices fall, there's innocent bystanders who took on debt and end up underwater, which could lead to defaults."
“China is such a big economy now, and they have links to other countries, including to Australia and Canada through the housing markets, that people need to be thinking about," said the senior fellow at the Brookings Institution in Washington. 
Twenty per cent moves in house prices isn't crazy anymore, Dr Laing even suggested.
The National Australia Bank property expert panel calculated foreign acquirers in the combined established and new property markets represented 17 per cent of all apartment buyers and 11 per cent of house buyers in the June quarter. 
Chinese buyers make up the largest percentage.
Some experts believe official figures underestimate the real extent of foreign money pouring into Australian real estate because Chinese Australians and permanent resident holders act as conduits to buy property for friends and family back home.
Sydney has certainly enjoyed a stellar run with Chinese purchases, but a 50 percent sales outcome at last weekend's major Sydney CBD off the plan offering was the lowest take-up in many years.
And there are still record numbers of new apartments approved and likely to come onto the market. 
Hopefully the cooling trend in Chinese buying interest is more a pause rather than a conclusion.
This article first appeared in the Daily Telegraph.
</body></html>

Signs Chinese foreign buyers have tuned down their enthusiasm for Sydney property

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/81824/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
By the time you’ve finished reading this article, roughly 20 people will have moved from the country into a city somewhere around the world. In any given week, millions of people head into cities.
Cities are growing well beyond anything their founders could have imagined. At the same time, the resources available within cities are not scaling up at the same rate. Many are looking for solutions to these problems; one being proposed is the “smart city”.
“Smart cities” can encompass concepts in urban design, or focus on the engineering required to support a city. But it’s very easy to use the term without really saying what it actually means in terms of improvements people will see.
Transport, aged care and parks are three areas where existing projects and available technology are making cities and suburbs better places to live. These projects are real and happening now. In Adelaide, experts from across the University of Adelaide’s five faculties are part of the newly launched Australian Smart Cities Consortium.
Adelaide’s Australian Smart Cities Consortium aims to tap into vast amounts of data to make life better for city residents.
More efficient transport
The car has dictated much of the way we live in modern cities. One way we can improve everyone’s lives is to make transport networks better.
By Australian standards, Adelaide has quite low levels of traffic, but it still suffers from traffic jams and congestion. This leads to frustration and makes everyone’s lives less pleasant.
One way we can make this better is by understanding our traffic flows better. We can use this information to adjust how cars move through busy areas.
But not everyone drives – so let’s also look at public transport and pedestrian crossings.
Putting GPS tracking on buses allows riders to know when the bus is coming, and if they have to run because one is about to come around the corner. With better traffic monitoring and control, we can build bike lanes that are safer and integrate with existing traffic, or change the way that pedestrians cross the road.
We can show pedestrians a countdown timer for the time left to cross, or give elderly citizens more time to cross on demand – as seen in Singapore with smart cards.
The computing and monitoring capability to do this has existed for some time, but the smart city focus lets us pin down problems of city living and identify where we can put our resources to help.
South Australia’s Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure uses vast amounts of sensing data and planning information to build transport networks that will support the next phase of Adelaide’s growth.
Better care
Health issues and the provision of health care are a constant issue for governments. Up to one-third of Australian state budgets goes to health care and hospitals. And with an ageing population, we are going to need to care for more and more people over time.
Current work in Adelaide on smart ageing provides ways to look after elderly and isolated citizens without robbing them of their privacy. Non-intrusive monitoring can see if someone has fallen over or hasn’t got out of bed that day. We can combine this with data privacy to let only doctors or close family know what’s going on.
Sometimes, just knowing the temperature of someone’s house and being able to notify a contact or care worker if it’s too hot or cold can make the difference in saving a life.
Being able to care for someone, giving them autonomy and dignity in their own home, will help us look after the growing number of ageing people over the next few decades.
Well-kept green spaces
Cities need a combination of spaces to make people happy. Some we work in, some we live in, some we move through, and some, like parks and green space, we linger in and enjoy as part of leisure and play.
Parks, gardens and playgrounds make cities and suburbs more liveable but have upkeep and repair costs. Non-camera-based sensors in a park can tell us how many people are using it and whether a certain piece of play equipment is being avoided because it is broken.
So, instead of having to send someone around to see whether something has happened, we can send someone out to fix something when it happens.
We have a lot of great resources in and around Australian cities. In Adelaide, and in many other cities, Smart Cities projects are taking place right now that make these growing urban centres more liveable for everyone.
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/nick-falkner-394488" target="_blank"></a>
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/nick-falkner-394488" target="_blank">Nick Falkner</a> is Associate Professor and Director of the Australian Smart Cities Consortium, University of Adelaide and author for <a href="https://theconversation.com/au" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>.
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/nick-falkner-394488" target="_blank"> </a>
</body></html>

Lessons from Adelaide in how a smart city can work to benefit everyone

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/82206/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
Renewable energy is driving profound changes in cities.
It’s happening much more quickly than was expected even five years ago. Responding to climate change, networks of decision-makers, such as the C40 collective of major cities, have begun adopting strategies to promote the uptake of renewable energy. Yet land use planning has seemingly begun to lag behind.
As an example, few, if any, planning codes in Australia prevent overshadowing of rooftop solar systems (photovoltaic and hot water). Instead, disputes are being decided in the courts.
Effective guidance on the retrofitting and redesign of built environment energy systems must occur across scales, from rooftops to wider electricity grids. We need reliable institutional and policy guidelines to improve investment certainty and limit negative outcomes.
So what is the role of planning? What challenges and actions must planners consider for the renewable energy transition to be effective?
Renewable are proliferating
Historically, cities have been built on fossil fuels. These power buildings, lighting, transport, air conditioning, water supply systems, sewage treatment and more.
Technological change and concerns about climate change threats, energy security, air pollution reduction and fossil fuel power costs have recently driven huge advancements in renewable energy options for cities. As renewables rapidly gain market traction, the costs are falling dramatically relative to fossil fuel options.
Many different types of renewable energy have the potential to radically transform built environments. These include solar (both photovoltaic and molten salt), wind, tidal, biogas, biofuel, pumped hydro and potentially even nuclear fusion – though the latter may still be some time away.
At present, this technological growth appears to be outpacing land-use planning systems, and many planners seem to be fighting a rear-guard action.
What role can planners play?
Traditionally, planners have assessed the acceptability, or otherwise, of different types of development. Land uses that were deemed incompatible were separated into different zones.
Infrastructural and technological provisions associated with developments are usually strategically planned in advance. Site-specific issues are then assessed through development approval processes.
There are, however, still relatively few land use planning policies and guidelines for engaging effectively with renewable energy. This is a global problem, though some jurisdictions are ahead of others.
A front-runner is the UK, where the Department for Communities and Local Government issued planning practice guidance for renewable and low-carbon energy in 2013. This was a welcome early response. And perhaps surprising, given the comparative lack of sunlight in the UK.
Conversely, Ireland still lacks a strategic plan for solar farm development. This seems remiss given Ireland has an almost identical planning system and roughly the same amount of sunlight as the UK.
In sunnier Australia, the signs are that things are beginning to change. For example, the New South Wales government recently issued guidelines on the approval of solar and wind farms. Queensland has a wind farm state code and guidelines. The City of Melbourne now provides planning guidance for solar energy.
California is forging ahead with solar leasing and is experimenting with mandatory solar for new buildings. The state is also making strides in wind energy.
How should planning systems adapt?
We urgently need more renewable-friendly planning systems to capture its potential benefits and avoid overshooting the 2°C target for global warming. This will mean finding ways to “fast-track” energy generation deemed to be low risk with manageable impacts.
As well as developing practical guidance, planners need to ask some key questions. Are these technologies safe? Might they disrupt other land uses? Does large-scale uptake potentially have unintended consequences?
An easy win for planners is to devise codes and planning scheme provisions to protect rooftop solar installations from overshadowing. Rooftop solar is becoming an integral part of the energy mix in many areas, with surplus production often feeding back into the grid.
A failure of planning to manage a simple issue like overshadowing will result in a loss of potential electricity production, with negative implications for householders and grids.
Medium-scale commercial solar PV farms, providing 1-10MW generating capacity, are likely soon to be a common feature of many suburbs and communities. However, these facilities can present challenges when placed in urban areas. Again, clear planning guidance is needed.
The planning implications of these solar PV farms are only beginning to be understood. The issues include, but are not limited to, site selection, (re)zoning, stakeholder engagement, visual impact minimisation and mediating social, economic and/or ecological constraints.
Even as planners begin to engage with the issues of current renewable technologies, newer technologies are quickly encroaching. This adds to the urgency of the planning challenges; constant reappraisal is needed.
Where to next?
Soon we will likely have to better consider emerging technologies such as solar windows, integrated solar roofs, backyard biogas generators and even algae biofuel farming.
For example, could using backyard waste-to-biogas systems create issues with hygiene and infectious disease? What about maintenance? Will microgrids, which can help transitions to a grid with significant volumes of renewable energy, be able to handle demand?
We’ll need effective land use planning to answer these questions and many more. In times of intense transformation, planners will have to provide clear guidance. They must not let themselves fall behind the pace of urban energy transitions.
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/tony-matthews-234160" target="_blank">Tony Matthews </a>is Lecturer in Urban &amp; Environmental Planning, Griffith University.
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/jason-byrne-6066" target="_blank">Jason Byrne </a>is Associate Professor of Environmental Planning, Griffith University.
Both are authors for <a href="https://theconversation.com/au" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>.
</body></html>

Pace of renewable energy shift leaves city planners struggling to keep up

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/80956/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
A recent suggestion that new housing on inner-city public land should start from a presumption of 100 percent social housing prompted indignation in government circles. “We can’t condemn another generation of Victorians to live in housing poverty,” huffed the housing minister, Martin Foley.
It’s curious, then, that we heard barely a peep about the latest government announcement that the height of an apartment tower associated with the Queen Victoria Market makeover will be reduced by removing the original affordable housing component to a separate, smaller development.
It is tempting to conclude that both responses accord, naturally, with the interests of the developers of private housing. But that would be to over-simplify the complex issue of social mix. It is increasingly clear there is no one-size-fits-all.
The principle of social mix now routinely drives public housing estate renewals and new housing builds on surplus public land. This is usually expressed in a 50:50 mix of social (public and community) and private housing, though the social component is often much smaller. As the stock of public land is ever diminishing, and affordable housing is in such short supply, this is problematic.
I have argued before that government commitments to social mix are often disingenuous. They are more likely to be driven by an ideological imperative to privatise public assets, or at best to secure upgrades to public housing without having to fund them directly.
What does the evidence tell us?
Soon-to-be-published research by Abdullahi Jama and I on the Carlton public housing estate redevelopment supports these conclusions.
Our findings show that public and private residents on the new estate are not mixed. They are divided into separate buildings with separate gardens, explicitly with a view to increasing the value of the private apartments.
The case that normally follows from such a finding is that public and private households should be “salt and peppered” through new apartment buildings to encourage social mixing. While Abdullahi and I agree this is a necessary precondition for social mixing, this is not the entirety of our argument. We question the very basics of the policy orthodoxy on social mix.
The rationale for building upmarket private housing in low-income areas draws on the neighbourhood effects thesis, which says that concentrations of poverty exacerbate its effects.
This might be the case in large areas of disadvantage, such as the US Rust Belt cities, parts of the UK and even some outer suburbs of Sydney and Melbourne. But it doesn’t stand up in highly resourced, gentrified inner cities where community facilities and opportunities for interaction are plentiful.
Even where poverty is widespread, studies from Toronto, Vancouver, Amsterdam and London show that imposed social mix disrupts support networks and social structures. Involuntary displacement from a neighbourhood often has serious effects on physical and mental health.
Minority communities may benefit from concentration in terms of safety and maintaining their cultural heritage. A substantial body of research shows that social mix policies do not replace the social capital they displace.
So, are there good reasons to introduce social mix?
The strongest argument is the reduction of stigma that for some people comes with public housing. If the public housing is indistinguishable from private housing, the public tenants’ wellbeing is considered to be improved.
It’s not entirely clear, however, whether this is due as much to the housing being new and decent as to having private residents as neighbours. Also unresolved is the question of whether stigma is felt as keenly on estates in gentrified cities, which are islands of public housing in seas of inner-city privilege, as it may be in widely disadvantaged neighbourhoods.
There is certainly evidence that, for some people, being thrust among others from different class and socio-economic groups can increase feelings of inadequacy, discomfort and sometimes hostility.
So how do we provide affordable housing?
These issues vary across place, time and individuals. What is clear is that different responses are needed accordingly.
It is also clear that, with dire shortages of affordable housing in so many cities, all opportunities should be seized to build as much affordable housing as possible. That’s not just public and community housing, but “key worker” housing, “below market rent” housing, co-op housing and community land trusts. Models for all these exist and should be encouraged and explored.
A diversity of housing types must include diverse sources of funding, with a range of support programs. Involving future residents in design and ensuring they know what they’re moving into, and enabling people to organise their own housing, are far more effective ways of building social harmony than enforcing a rigid notion of mix.
Separate buildings for social tenants and private residents next to the Vic Market might be a perfectly reasonable response. But it should come from nuanced public policy and optimal use of public resources, rather than the developers and their sales people.
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/kate-shaw-39629" target="_blank"></a>
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/kate-shaw-39629" target="_blank">Kate Shaw</a> is Future Fellow, University of Melbourne and author for <a href="https://theconversation.com/au" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>.
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/kate-shaw-39629" target="_blank"></a>
 
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/kate-shaw-39629" target="_blank"> </a>
</body></html>

Social mix in housing? One size doesn’t fit all, as new projects show

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
The lumpy result in monthly building approvals data continues, with total dwelling approvals up by 10.9 per cent in the month of June 2017.
However the longer term trend shows sustained weakness with total approvals down by 2.3 percent over the year to June, particularly for apartments.
Given the boom in apartment construction in the past couple of years it is to be expected that the fall in approvals is predominantly coming from this segment of the market.
Approvals for apartments and town houses fell by 6.6 per cent over the year-to June 2017, while approvals for detached housing actually increased by 1.4 per cent.
A result in line with Master Builders forecast outlook for a fall in apartment commencements over the next four years.
But there remains a housing shortage in Australia of around 100,000 dwellings and it would be concerning if the current weakness in approvals turns into low housing commencements leading to supply constraints that can push up house prices.
We can’t lose sight of the fact that increased population growth and other factors of underlying demand mean we need to build at least 180,000 new homes each year for the next five years.
Matthew Pollock is Master Builders Australia’s National Manager for Economics and Housing and can be contacted <a href="https://www.masterbuilders.com.au/Home" target="_blank">here</a>.
 
</body></html>

Approvals show apartments are taking the brunt of the fall

<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;

Jonathan Chancellor

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News