<html><body><div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="section">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
The value of all housing-related lending increased by 0.9 percent in March and annual growth lifted to 5.3 percent.
The value of housing loans to owner-occupiers (excl. refinancing) rose by 1.7 percent and annual growth stepped up to 6.4 percent. 
The value of loans to investors rose by 0.8 percent in March.
Total lending for dwelling-related construction lifted by 4.5 percent and has stabilised in trend terms over the past 4 months. 
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/05/15/Screen%20Shot%202017-05-16%20at%208.29.14%20AM.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2017/05/15/Screen%20Shot%202017-05-16%20at%208.29.14%20AM.png" alt="">
<div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="section">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
Overall lending conditions in the housing market remained firm in March, consistent with both strong auction clearance rates and robust dwelling price growth. Key details below: 
<div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="section">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
Owner-Occupiers (O-Os): Lending growth to O-Os (ex-refinancing) by value 12 has risen for five of the past six months. 
The monthly growth rate averages out at a solid 1.3 percent over that period. By number, however, a 0.5 percent fall was recorded 9 following a 0.8 percent contraction in February. 
A small lift in the average loan size was posted. Surprisingly, the average loan size to O-Os has trended down since late 2016 despite dwelling prices firming. The anomaly is explained, in part, by the big influence that investors and foreign buyers have had on price growth in both Sydney and Melbourne. 
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="section">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
Investors: The value of lending to investors moved a little higher in March after a solid 5.7 percent contraction in February. It looks like growth in the flow of lending to investors has eased after accelerating markedly throughout 2016 as the RBA eased policy twice. Notwithstanding, lending growth to investors was 14.2 percent higher through the year in March. 
We expect to see lending growth to this segment moderate in coming data prints as some tightening in lending conditions to investors has an impact on the flow of credit. We do note, however, that the national auction clearance rate firmed on the weekend to 76.2 percent on stronger volumes. This suggests that there is still a fair bit of positive momentum in the property market. 
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/05/15/Screen%20Shot%202017-05-16%20at%208.30.18%20AM.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2017/05/15/Screen%20Shot%202017-05-16%20at%208.30.18%20AM.png" alt="">
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="section">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
Construction: Total lending for dwelling-related construction has broadly tracked sideways over the past four months. There is still plenty of residential construction to come. Commencement and completions will remain firm throughout 2017 which will help to boost the supply of new dwellings. Lending for alterations and additions lifted in March and has been trending higher. This is consistent with other indicators that show renovation activity is lifting 
<div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="section">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
States: The data on O-O loans by State showed that annual growth in the number of loans has tracked broadly sideways in NSW, Vic and QLD. The number of loans to O-Os in WA continues to trend lower. An update on lending to investors by State will be in Wednesday’s Lending Finance release.
First home buyers: The number of loans to first home buyers posted a big 20.5 percent lift in March. Notwithstanding, first home buyers accounted for just 13.6 percent of all O-O dwellings financed over the month which is very low by historic standards. 
Note that the March housing finance figures predate APRA’s latest round of measures to mitigate risks in the mortgage lending market (announced 31 March). 
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
Gareth Aird is economist at Commonwealth Bank and can be contacted <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://au.linkedin.com/pub/gareth-aird/14/790/905">here</a>.
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
 
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
 
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div></body></html>

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

Overall lending growth in the housing market remained firm in March: Gareth Aird

<html><body>
Melbourne has emerged as having the highest 12 month growth for home values, according to CoreLogic’s latest report.
The property data firm says that over the past 12 months Melbourne’s home value has increased by 12.9 percent.
This is slightly more than Sydney’s growth of 12 percent.
Melbourne achieved this growth despite a weekly decline of 0.7 percent compared to Sydney’s 0.4 percent decline.
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/05/15/Screen%20Shot%202017-05-15%20at%2010.56.26%20am.jpg" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/c_scale,w_580,q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/po.images/2017/05/15/Screen%20Shot%202017-05-15%20at%2010.56.26%20am.jpg" alt="">
Perth is the only locality where the home value has declined rather than increased with a decline of 4.2 percent over the past 12 months.
</body></html>

Melbourne overtakes Sydney with the highest 2017 home value growth: CoreLogic

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/76787/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
Australia has few places to capture the spill-over of talented workers priced out of the big cities. Some may leave the country altogether – and where talent goes, capital flows.
If the growth of cities in the 20th century was marked by “white flight”, the 21st century is shaping up to be the era of “bright flight”. The young, highly educated and restless are being priced out of many of the world’s major cities.
They are choosing instead to set themselves up in smaller, regional cities. These offer access to less expensive housing and abundant cheap workspace. The barriers to entering the workforce or starting up a business are lower.
The “metropolitan pressure” of rapid urbanisation is generating a talent spill-over effect, which is setting the stage for a new era of urban winners and losers. This talent leakage is primarily made up of the “forgotten ones” – those who don’t qualify for social housing, but who are unable to afford market-rate housing.
In this age of of hyper-urban migration, where talent goes, capital flows. Cities need to respond to this migration trend and provide adequate housing solutions to retain talent. If not, it could shape up to be a major economic challenge as many are relying on this cohort of knowledge sector and tech-focused workers to lead them into the digital age.
Lessons from the rise of the suburbs
Many will know the urban story, or rather sub-urban story, of the mid-20th century. It was an era marked by “white flight”, the term used to describe the phenomenon of predominantly middle and upper-class Caucasians leaving urban centres to live in the suburbs.
For some, it was a chance to have their dream home in a culturally and ideologically homogeneous neighbourhood replete with white picket fences and enabled by access to cheap debt and favourable tax incentives.
From the cities’ perspective, this migration was devastating. Cities saw their tax revenues drained as higher-income earners fled to the ’burbs. At the same time, these cities required increased investment in social services, housing and education for low-income residents who largely had no choice but to stay in urban centres.
Over a few decades, this exodus led to severe economic and social decay in many of the world’s cities. By the mid-1970s, even New York was on the verge of bankruptcy.
Reversal drives an urban renaissance
This era of “white flight”, however, began to fade in the later part of the 20th century as a new generation of urbanites flocked to cities across the world.
What we are experiencing now is nothing short of a modern urban renaissance. From the very young to the very old, from singles to families, people are moving to cities in droves, drawn by the excitement, cultural diversity, eclecticism and array of employment opportunities that urban living offers.
Global cities like London and New York have rebounded from this era of urban decay better than they could ever have expected. In many ways, however, they have been too successful for their own good. The reverse migration back to the city has placed enormous pressure on our metropolitan regions.
As urban populations grow, so too does the level of investment needed for cities to function well. The investment is required to improve ageing infrastructure, expand mass transit, increase housing supply and extend capacity of civil services.
But making all these upgrades to improve and sustainably grow our cities creates another challenge: it increases competition for space. The more we increase density in our cities, the more expensive land becomes. The more expensive land becomes, the more expensive housing becomes, so people get priced out of their city of choice and move on.
Spilling over to second-tier cities
This pattern has been playing out for a some time now in the US. The spill-over of talent from top-tier cities like New York, Chicago, Los Angeles and San Francisco has flowed into more regional cities such as Seattle, Portland, Austin, Philadelphia and Denver.
These second-tier cities have been the beneficiaries of this new wave of tech-savvy, knowledge sector workers. With all those bright workers around, companies like Google, Facebook, Apple and Amazon soon followed.
As a result, these cities now have some of the hottest property markets in the world. And they are now experiencing their own growing pains as housing prices have soared and the next wave of talent are being priced out.
And so the pattern continues and the talent spills into even more regional cities like Charlotte, Chattanooga and Minneapolis.
What does this mean for Australia?
Today, civic leaders and planning agencies are caught in the vice of balancing the need for increased density and growth while maintaining liveability, affordability and a sense of place.
Unfortunately for many cities, this vice has been tightened too much. We are pushing out the very workers who make our cities function (bus drivers, social workers, teachers), who define their culture (artists, designers, writers, musicians) and who will shape their future (data scientists, software developers, clean tech experts).
For Australia, this issue is much more acute. Unlike the US, which has a multitude of cities for talent to spill into, Australia has only a handful of cities. While places like Parramatta, Geelong and Newcastle will likely benefit from talent capture owing to the pressure build-up in Melbourne and Sydney, many more “bright ones” will likely seek their fortunes overseas and leave the country altogether.
We will rue the day if the companies follow suit, but cities can also take action to relieve some of this affordability pressure. Many cities are enabling innovative housing models such as Baugruppen in Berlin and Pocket Living in London. US cities like Seattle, Austin and Portland are leading the way on inter-generational urban co-housing models.
In Australia, Moreland City Council, birthplace of The Commons and Nightingale housing model, is doing its part to keep talented artists, designers, key workers, young families and downsizers within metro-Melbourne. Co-living models, such as Base Commons in Melbourne, are also making an entry here in Australia as a refreshed, millennial-driven approach to urban co-housing.
Watch this space. And cities: keep enabling housing innovation.
Jason Twill is a Innovation Fellow and Senior Lecturer at School of Architecture, University of Technology Sydney and author for The Conversation. He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/jason-twill-105833" target="_blank">here</a>.
 
</body></html>

From ‘white flight’ to ‘bright flight’ – the looming risk for our growing cities: Jason Twill

<html><body><div class="cq-article-content-paras section">
The budget changes to negative gearing depreciation claim items will see investor demand for recently completed housing fall or flatline - and result in a cooling in the Sydney and Melbourne markets, according to SQM Research's Louis Christopher. 
Investors who own current properties, particularly newly built ones, will especially find it harder to buyers.
The new limits to the way expenses can be deducted against negative geared properties - which need to be legislated - will prove a turning point in the investment property market, he says.
The changes mean owners of any property not bought brand new will no longer be able to depreciate items like air-conditioners, cooktops and dishwashers, or shared equipment such as lifts in apartment complexes. 
Quantity surveyors and analysts said these form up to 50 per cent of depreciation deductions for investors.  
"I think there is enough in it here to slow the market down in the second half of the year," SQM Research's Louis Christopher said. 
"We will see a significant drop off in [investor demand] in the second half.
"I will be expecting there will be less investors in the market."
Christopher is changing his house price forecast with lower numbers to be released next week.  
The federal Treasurer Scott Morrison has confirmed the deduction benefits would be grandfathered but to prevent "double dipping" in depreciation, only the first investor of each new investment property can claim these deductions.
The federal government has also confirmed to The Australian Financial Review that subsequent investors of residential investment properties would not be able to claim depreciation to existing plant and equipment even if that equipment had not reached the end of its effective life. 
Investors could only claim depreciation on plant and equipment they had bought subsequent to their purchase.
Quantity surveyor Washington Brown fears the rules would affect off-the-plan investors who could potentially be unable to depreciate plant and equipment purchased originally by the developer. 
"I suspect that the legislation will be worded such that if the plant and equipment was in situ at the time of purchase, you can no longer claim it," director Tyron Hyde said in his note to clients. 
Christopher urged the federal government to make a swift clarification otherwise decisions would be made on "wrong information". 
"The Liberals have not intended for the policy to be draconian…and while saying they would leave negative gearing alone, have actually done the opposite."
Limiting previously generous plant and equipment depreciation deductions to only those expenses directly incurred by investors will impact on the Quantity Surveyor industry,
The blog of Pete Wargent noted data compiled by MCG Quantity Surveyors showed that their average claim for depreciation deductions was $9,138, up to half of which was typically for plant and equipment deductions. 
"For new individual Mum-and Dad investors - which is most of the landlord market - this is a fairly significant change to tax legislation," Wargent noted. 
"Overall, it may become more tax-efficient to purchase older style properties in order to renovate them, though for properties built before 1987 the building works component would already be fully depreciated over 40 years. 
"Some domestic investors may be inclined to steer clear of new properties for this reason, in turn hurting building approvals and dwelling starts, at least while the dust settles," Wargent advised.
</div></body></html>

Demand and prices of recent new builds to fall after 2017 Budget depreciation negative gearing changes

<html><body><div class="cq-article-content-paras section">
Do house prices always double every decade? I ponder the well versed notion every time I compare the latest price with its earlier sale.
Sydney's most affordable weekend auction acquisition was a hefty $502,500 for a three bedroom house at Windsor, in the Hawkesbury district.
Having traded at $255,000 in 2008, its price had nearly doubled over its nine year ownership, so mark that result to yes they can.
It had traded at $257,000 in 2005, showing that prices can fall too, albeit not quite off a cliff.
And it was interesting that the cottage's price had exactly doubled in amazing quick time from $110,000 in 2000 to $220,000 in boom time 2003.
These differing price surges nicely illustrate recent CoreLogic research calculating the current boom was actually subdued compared to previous times.
Over the 10 years to January 2016, Sydney home values increased by a total 78 percent - somewhat short of the so-called benchmark doubling over the decade.  
Sitting smack on 100 percent, Melbourne was the only capital city housing market where home values doubled over the decade.
Looking at the 10 years to January 2006, Sydney home values more than doubled but the 138 per cent growth was the lowest performing capital as the 2004 price reversal hit hard.
Melbourne recorded home value growth at 167 per cent, with Perth out front with 175 percent growth in that decade.
There are lessons to be learnt from what’s happened to Perth where property valuer Gavin Heaney recently recalled boom time Western Australia thought it was "infallible."
“They say in the top end of Perth on a quiet day you can hear the property values falling,” a jocular Hegney was cited by www.news.com.au as saying last month.
Some years on after the end of the mining boom, Perth is still on its knees with financial counsellors in demand with people neck-deep in debt coming to them for advice. 
People who were earning high incomes during the mining boom are now struggling to get work and pay their mortgages.
With little wage growth and eratic economic uncertainty, it is likely that even for Sydney there are limits to what people can pay for housing.
It seems Sydney is starting to see common sense and wise economics as we move through the latter stages of the autumn auction market. 
Those many consecutive weekends of 80 percent clearance rates might be a thing of the past.
Meanwhile property investors who paid reckless prices will soon emerge as tax loss selling usually begins in May before the end of the financial year.
I will be watching for how deep they go as this is when investors crystallise capital losses.
The proportion of loss-making resales over the December 2016 quarter sat at 21 percent in Perth, while Sydney saw fewer than 2 percent resale losses.
This article first appeared in the Daily Telegraph. 
</div></body></html>

Tax loss time for property investors to test market 

<html><body><div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="section">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
The latest bulletin from Secret Agent charts the winners and losers in the 2017 Federal Budget with first home buyers, downsizers and renters all appearing on the winning list.
Secret Agent said in Victoria the first home super saver scheme may drive demand for property below $600,000.
"First home buyers will be able to use voluntary contributions to their superannuation to save for a house deposit," the report said.
"Withdrawals will be taxed at a lower rate, but the amount you can contribute is capped at $15,000 a year and $30,000 all up. Both members of a couple can take advantage of the scheme. 
"In Victoria, the state government will abolish stamp duty for first time buyers of homes valued up to $600,000, make cuts to stamp duty on homes valued up to $750,000, and also double the First Home Owner Grant to $20,000 in regional Victoria. 
"With the first home super saver scheme, we may see increased demand for property below $600,000. This will push up the prices of houses and townhouses in outer suburbs such as Cranbourne. Inner city suburbs will be less affected, as average prices are typically above $600,000. 
"Developers will also have to compete more aggressively for development sites that allow sub-$600,000 townhouses to be built and sold in these outer suburbs."
Downsizers 
"A person aged 65 or over will be permitted to make a non- concessional contribution to superannuation of up to $300,000 from the proceeds of selling a principal residence owned for the past ten or more years from 1 July 2018," the report said.
"This is good news for real estate agencies operating in areas popular among downsizers, such as the inner city, as there is more incentive for elderly property owners to sell their home. Developers can also benefit from creating stock in these areas."
Resident Investors 
"There will be new tax incentives for investing in affordable housing; specific incentives for Managed Investment Trust (MIT) vehicles, as well as a CGT concession for resident investors who invest in these schemes," Secret Agent said.
Renters 
"Foreign investors are being slugged with an extra charge for properties left vacant —the Budget proposes an annual levy of at least $5,000 and there will be an increase in their application fees. 
"Combined with the state government vacant tax, these additional costs may bring some rent relief and increase stock available for renters. 
<div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="section">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
LOSERS 
Developers 
"The Budget outlines that foreign ownership of new developments will be capped at 50 percent. To fund a development project, banks normally require more than 50 percent of stock to be presold. 
"Given that many new developments, especially high-rise apartments, have traditionally been marketed to overseas buyers, limiting foreign ownership to 50 percent will put the feasibility of many projects at risk. This effect is compounded when combined with the recent state tax changes, such as the increase in stamp duty on off-the-plan purchases in Victoria. The number of construction jobs available will also decrease. 
"One silver lining is that, together with the new apartment design standards, we may finally see new stock designed to a higher quality to capture the interest of local buyers, who are now equally important to the success of a development project.
Foreign Investors 
"Foreign tax residents and temporary tax residents will no longer be able to access the CGT main residence exemption. Grandfathering will be available until 30 June 2019 for properties held prior to 7.30 pm (AEST) on Budget night. 
"The loss of CGT exemption could push foreign investors to sell their property as most of these investments are negatively geared already. This may eventually lead to disposal of the investment since it is no longer profitable. 
Investors 
"The Government has introduced two new measures to restrict the availability of deductions with respect to depreciation deduction and travel expenses, expecting to save $800 million over the forward estimates. 
"The restrictions on residential investment property deductions will reduce incentives for buyers to make new investments. The implications are more severe for high income earners, who can no longer claim as many deductions on tax. As there will be less demand for depreciation reports, qualified quantity surveyors may also be affected. 
Banks 
"The introduction of a major bank levy from 1 July 2017 could increase cost of funding for larger banks, which may seek to be compensated by increasing mortgage interest rates. "
 
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
For more information, <a href="https://secretagent.com.au/">click here</a>.
 
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div></body></html>

2017 Budget winners and losers: Secret Agent

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
Under pressure to tackle deepening housing affordability problems, Treasurer Scott Morrison has included various housing policy measures in his budget, some relating to Australia’s small sector of social and affordable housing.
One headline-grabber is the creation of a new entity, the National Housing Finance and Investment Corporation (NHFIC). This will source private funds for on-lending to affordable housing providers to finance rental housing development. However, the bigger issue for the sector remains federal and state funding.
This public funding is the money that, along with tenants’ rents, co-funds state and territory housing and homelessness services. Here too Morrison is proposing reform, particularly to the primary federal-state funding arrangement for social and affordable housing, the National Affordable Housing Agreement (NAHA).
A couple of months ago we suggested the NAHA needed a reboot. Recognising the seriously run-down state of the system, we argued for an increase in funding from its present starvation level. Morrison now proposes a new federal-state funding agreement, the National Housing and Homelessness Agreement (NHHA).
The level of federal funding will be the same as under the old NAHA. But the Commonwealth will press states and territories for action in defined “priority areas”. In effect, this looks like a return to a Canberra-led reform agenda for social and affordable housing unseen since the early Rudd government.
Setting aggregate supply targets
In what appears a significant passage, the budget papers reveal the government’s “priority areas” for the NHHA. We’ll consider these in turn, and then the recurring issue of inadequate funding.
Lack of transparency on the costs incurred by state and territory housing authorities in operating their social housing portfolios has been a particular problem under the NAHA. This is an area where federal engagement is welcome.
All levels of government should be pressed to quantify the level and type of need for housing in the community. And they should be made to set clear “new supply” targets for meeting that need.
That said, the federal government should stop pretending to be shocked at the lack of new social housing delivered by those authorities under the NAHA. The shortfall in NAHA funding has been obvious for years. It simply is too low to bridge the gap between the rents low-income public housing tenants can afford to pay and the costs of properly maintaining the system, let alone growing it to keep pace with rising need.
Residential land development
The stress laid on this issue within the budget policy statement reflects the federal government’s stated concern about “the supply side” of the housing affordability problem. It has framed state government planning controls as an impediment to new housing development.
However, merely loosening requirements and offering existing land owners the prospect of greater development does not ensure it will actually happen.
To ensure land owners don’t just sit on development opportunities speculatively, the federal government should use its NHHA leverage. This could include pushing the states and territories to make greater use of land tax, which would spur development and bring under-utilised land and housing to market.
Inclusionary zoning
Inclusionary zoning is a specific type of planning mechanism. It requires housing developments (above a certain size) to include some proportion of dedicated affordable housing. Ideally, this should be rental housing preserved as “affordable” in perpetuity.
Inclusionary zoning is long established in other countries and has long been demanded by housing advocates in Australia. It is now the subject of increasing interest from planning authorities – for example, the Greater Sydney Commission.
The co-financing arrangements for the NHFIC could incorporate active use of land-use planning powers for inclusionary zoning. Development sites – or developer levy proceeds – could be part of state and territory contributions to funding affordable housing development.
A commitment to build into the NHHA incentives for stepped-up use of inclusionary zoning by state governments is, therefore, very welcome.
However, the budget papers indicate that state compliance with this NHHA expectation might involve not only housing dedicated to affordable rental housing, but also “dedicated first home buyer stock”. This seems to raise the prospect of developers meeting inclusionary zoning requirements simply by reserving some newly built units for first home buyers rather than investors.
The best way to enhance first home buyer prospects vis a vis investor landlords would be to level the playing field by winding back investor negative gearing and capital gains tax concessions, not through this kind of tinkering. And to cast such “FHB reservation” initiatives as in any way equivalent to inclusionary zoning for affordable rental housing would be a highly retrograde step.
Renewing affordable housing stock
An interesting inclusion in the proposed terms of the NHHA is a clause about renewing affordable housing stock.
First, it appears positive in acknowledging the need for a public housing overhaul and indicating a new level of federal government interest in making this happen.
At a minimum, states and territories should be required to undertake a comprehensive audit of their existing portfolios. The level of outstanding disrepair has to be costed. They also should identify where renewal can best take place, balancing need for expanded and upgraded housing with sensitive treatment of existing communities.
Second, it indicates federal backing for further transfers of public housing as a growth path for the affordable housing industry. However, as our recent research for AHURI shows, this is feasible only if the operating cost gap is funded.
Past community housing growth through transfers, particularly following the 2009 housing ministers’ commitment to expand community housing to 35% of all social housing, involved an understanding that Commonwealth Rent Assistance, paid through Centrelink to transferred tenants, would help cover that gap.
Without additional funding in the NHHA, a new phase of growth through transfers requires a recommitment by governments to use rent assistance as an effective operational subsidy to community housing providers. A new target and timeframe to replace the 35 percent benchmark also need to be considered.
Homelessness services
Previously the subject of a separate funding agreement (the National Partnership Agreement on Homelessness), homelessness services have struggled for years in the face of that agreement’s pending expiry and short-term extensions.
The NHHA will fund homelessness services on an ongoing basis, which the sector has welcomed.
Funding shortfall remains
As we’ve indicated throughout, the objectives of the NHHA – and of the social and affordable housing system generally – will continue to run up against the reality that decent housing of this kind costs more than low-income households can afford to pay.
This applies especially to people living on the miserable level of benefits such as Newstart. A subsidy is required, both to build up the stock and to keep it in good order.
Clearer targets, more transparent cost accounting, and innovations like NHFIC finance won’t bridge the gap. On the contrary, to successfully use those initiatives to build more stock, both state and territory housing authorities and non-government affordable housing providers need a larger subsidy than present funding provides.
The budget has indexed NHHA funding to wages. It would be nice to think that land and housing prices will increase only in line with wages.
In reality, properly funding the growth and maintenance of our social and affordable housing stock will require more than what the federal government is offering.
Chris Martin is research fellow, Housing Policy and Practice, UNSW and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/chris-martin-203935" target="_blank">here</a>.
Hal Pawson is associate director - City Futures - Urban Policy and Strategy, City Futures Research Centre, Housing Policy and Practice, UNSW and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/hal-pawson-147969" target="_blank">here</a>.
Both are authors for The Conversation.
</body></html>

Budget 2017 charts new social and affordable housing agenda

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
An estimated 300,000 vacant dwellings across Australia will be unaffected by the Budget’s new ‘ghost house’ tax on foreign investors which will do nothing to increase housing affordability.
QUT property economist Dr Andrea Blake said Australia’s empty housing stock was an overlooked resource in an era of high demand for affordable housing.
Some inner city apartment developments have more foreign investors (20 percent) than domestic owner occupiers (19 percent).
While I welcome a vacant house levy being applied to foreign investors as a mechanism to support other affordable housing initiatives, this new tax will do nothing to help the current issues.
This levy will affect only applications for foreign investment made after 7.30pm on 9 May 2017 rather than the more than quarter of a million dwellings we have going empty.
The $5k per annum tax is unlikely to deter an overseas investor. The only thing it could do is put more money into the pot for other housing initiatives.
Another issue could be determining that an apartment is vacant and ensuring compliance.
“Foreign investment in inner and near city markets has driven supply and pushed real estate prices up while much-needed rental and housing stock from the market goes empty when we have a severe affordable housing shortage.”
Dr Blake said the impact of foreign investment on property values in the inner Brisbane apartment markets had caused much debate.
 “In markets such as Hamilton and West End we have seen a price drop of up to 30 per cent on apartments bought in 2011," she said.
This is because strong foreign investment has created a two-tier market - prices for off-the-plan sales are undoubtedly linked to foreign investment and would not be sustainable at the volume or prices for the domestic market alone.
Consequently the impact has been felt by the second tier of the two-tier market - domestic buyers.
The reasons foreign investors buy in Australia are varied. For some purchasers it is part of a future lifestyle plan and so the apartments are left unoccupied, and, in many cases, not even furnished.
“These apartments still deteriorate and bring down the value of the other apartments in the complex, causing owner occupiers and those who do rent out their properties some distress.”
Andrea Blake is senior lecturer at Queensland University of Technology [QUT] and can be contacted <a href="https://staff.qut.edu.au/staff/blakea/" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

'Ghost house' tax won't solve housing affordability: Andrea Blake

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/76791/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">GUEST OBSERVER
The budget acknowledges the crisis of affordability for first home buyers, but fails to do enough about demand pressures on prices to put home ownership back within their reach.
In its 2017 budget, the federal government repeatedly stated its preference for a “scalpel” rather than a “chainsaw” or “sledgehammer” approach to demand management in the housing market.
The number of housing measures in the budget are more wide-ranging than in previous budgets of recent times. Policy levers on both the supply and demand side have been incorporated within a raft of housing measures. The government claims this is a “comprehensive package that can make a difference”.
However, do the demand measures go far enough to make much-needed inroads into the housing affordability crisis now facing an entire generation of would-be first home buyers? Or is the so-called scalpel too blunt to make a meaningful difference for them?
<h2>First Home Super Savers Scheme</h2>
The budget’s key housing measure for helping young people gain a foothold on the home-ownership ladder is to allow first home buyers to use up to A$30,000 of voluntary superannuation contributions for a deposit on their first home.
Clearly, the scheme will attract the tax advantages of superannuation. Therefore, in principle, it will help first home savers accelerate their savings to buy a home, thus bridging the deposit gap, while protecting superannuation savings accumulated through compulsory employer contributions.
However, at least two key questions are pertinent.
The first relates to how many first home buyers will likely be well positioned to make voluntary contributions to their super saving account. There appears to be a general reluctance among Australians to make voluntary contributions.
Existing research has found household budget constraints are a major barrier that make it unaffordable for many to make voluntary superannuation contributions. Poor financial literacy and lack of knowledge of the superannuation system are other factors.
The second key question relates to the scheme’s impact on property prices. The scheme does not aim to ease demand pressures in the housing market. It is likely that high house prices will not be curbed, so the prospects of home ownership will continue to fade for many first home buyers.
Existing demand-side levers, including the First Home Owners Grant and stamp duty concessions for first home buyers, have not succeeded in improving the affordability of houses for most young people. Hence, it is difficult to see how an additional demand lever such as the First Home Super Savers scheme is going to have a substantial impact on affordability.
This is not to say that the budget has completely ignored the need to temper demand tensions in the property market.
Demand pressures can be eased via measures that target two other types of property owners – older home owners and property investors. The budget does contain measures that target both groups. Yet again, the question remains as to whether the levers are long enough to produce meaningful impacts.
<h2>Targeting older owners and property investors</h2>
Older downsizers aged over 65 years will be allowed to channel up to $300,000 from the sale proceeds of the family home into their super fund.
Many older home owners are living in larger dwellings than they need after their children leave home. Helping elderly home owners – sometimes coined “last home buyers” – to downsize into smaller dwellings can free up larger homes for first home buyers in earlier stages of life who are forming families.
However, the impediments to downsizing are many. These include financial barriers but also non-financial barriers. Importantly, most elderly home owners have strong emotional attachments to their family home and local community.
However, a lack of appropriate and affordable dwellings in neighbourhoods where older owners would like to stay also poses barriers to downsizing. For downsizing reforms to be effective, financial incentives will need to be accompanied by supply-side solutions that broaden the diversity of the housing stock so older home owners’ housing preferences and needs can be met.
The government has not made any significant changes to tighten negative gearing or capital gains tax concessions to reduce competition from property investors. Concern has focused on the potential contraction of private rental housing supply should investors withdraw en masse from the private rental market. However, a longer-term perspective would take into account second-round effects.
As investors sell off their rental properties, more properties will become available in the market to meet demand from first home buyers. This will not only have the impact of easing tensions in the rental market as more renters become home buyers, but it will also encourage subsequent second property investment as young career-builders seek to accumulate more wealth in their property portfolios after securing their first home.
Such second- and third-round effects need to be incorporated more into policy thinking so that policy design rests on not just short-term, but medium-to-long-term, considerations.
<h2>Is the scalpel sharp enough?</h2>
The budget contains myriad demand and supply levers that directly or indirectly aim to assist young people with their first home purchase. It represents an overdue but welcome acknowledgement on the government’s part that much needs to be done to improve home-ownership prospects for first home buyers.
A package of measures that seeks to influence both supply and demand simultaneously in the housing market is, in principle, a sensible approach to an entrenched policy concern such as housing affordability. However, in practice, policy design matters.
In the case of the 2017 budget, it would appear that the scalpel will need a whole lot more sharpening if it is to make an effective incision into the housing affordability crisis that’s plaguing an entire generation of aspiring home owners.
Rachel Ong is deputy director of the Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre, Curtin University and author for The Conversation. She can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/rachel-ong-113482" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Budget needs a sharper policy scalpel to help first home buyers: Rachel Ong

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/76793/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">GUEST OBSERVER
The bond aggregator by itself cannot create a housing development pipeline. It needs co-investment from government to make it feasible.
Following Treasurer Scott Morrison’s outburst in April over the meagre supply outcomes delivered by state housing agencies, cool Treasury heads have prevailed in the budget.
The Commonwealth has not withdrawn its support. Rather, it will negotiate clear targets under a new national agreement, and aim to ring-fence capital investment to improve social housing outcomes. This will now complement the government’s new strategy of issuing bonds to finance affordable rental housing.
Morrison has already set up a taskforce to fine-tune a new bond aggregator, which the budget proposes to roll into a larger National Housing Finance and Investment Corporation (NHIFC). Establishment funding of A$9.8 million and a $1 billion loan facility will get things moving.
This is safe policy territory and sound strategy. The social housing sector and all major parties have supported housing bonds and a special-purpose intermediary since the 2015 report of the Senate Inquiry into Housing Affordability. It demonstrates the explicit, long-term government commitment required to shore up investor confidence.
If the taskforce gets the design right, the intermediary will provide lower-cost, longer-term financing for affordable rental housing. This will mean public investment goes further and is recycled to build more affordable homes for those who need them.
Yet investment-ready social housing still has several requirements for success. These include good transparent planning, equity, revolving loans, and adequate revenue from rents and rent assistance. Appropriate national regulation is vital, which is also flagged in the budget.
However, without conditional public co-investment and good regulation, the government will miss its own targets and under-invest in this much-needed social infrastructure.
<h2>No silver bullet – feasibility depends on subsidy</h2>
The bond aggregator by itself cannot create a development pipeline. It needs co-investment from government to make it feasible.
Community housing providers can only afford the amount of debt that modest rents and rent assistance can support. Modelling for a 2016 feasibility study found that about 45% of the cost of dwelling construction can be raised when operated as social rental housing, even with the lower rate and longer term of finance the aggregator can provide.
Thus deeply affordable social housing will always require public subsidies. This takes the form of grants, soft loans, or land allocated via public land corporations or planning requirements.
<h2>Policy orphan finally gets Treasury’s attention</h2>
Writing for The Conversation, Chris Martin and Hal Pawson summed up past performance:
It should be no surprise that Australia’s social housing has been largely static for 20 years. Everything we know about the system tells us it is not funded to even cover the costs of its ongoing operation, let alone growth to meet the needs of an expanding population. Aside from a one-off boost under the 2009 federal economic stimulus plan, social housing has been on a starvation ration for decades.
National governments in Austria, the UK, France and the US have made up for shortfalls in social housing funding with good regulation and by attracting private finance since the 1990s. They have done so by establishing a market for special-purpose bonds, government guarantees, special intermediaries, tax credits and supporting circuits of investment in affordable and social rental housing.
These measures often favour not-for-profit housing providers, but can also revitalise public housing agencies.
Meanwhile, Australian social housing policy turned inward. Governments frittered away their skeletal public housing stocks, narrowly targeted the rest and diverted much-needed capital to reduce operating deficits.
This ultimately bankrupted state housing agencies, which were all but given their marching orders by Morrison in April and earlier by his assistant minister, Michael Sukkar, in February. They ran into strong opposition from community and public housing providers (and the for-profit private sector) – which are eager to play a more active role in social housing supply.
Recently, though, Treasury’s “debt and deficit” doctrine has been making way for a new vision of productive public investment to boost both economic and social development. Investment in social housing should be an integral part of urban plans. It needs to be part and parcel of every infrastructure strategy, Smart City Plan, or City Deal. Bringing housing and infrastructure together under the new NHFIC could help, within an overarching plan with strategic housing targets.
Co-operative leadership and national funding remain essential. Morrison and Sukkar seem to appreciate that a coherent and efficient approach to setting standards and creating funding certainty will induce financial institutions to invest in social housing.
<h2>Wanted: dedication to social housing growth</h2>
Investment not only reduces public housing waiting lists most directly, it ensures fairer allocation of housing opportunities. At the same time it provides a shock-absorber for the economy, especially as it transitions from the resources boom, to build more productive and resilient cities.
Social housing creates jobs for the construction industry and uses local commodities, with many social and economic spin-offs.
Well-designed social housing, such as revitalised public and green community housing mixed with a range of housing types, provides a tangible infrastructure asset and a vital community service. It’s especially important for tenants who are elderly, have disabilities, or were formerly homeless.
Emergency services, health care and homelessness shelters, among others, bear the much higher costs of neglecting these households. This ultimately harms both the budget bottom line and our social fabric.
Morrison has directed the Affordable Housing Implementation Taskforce to report on the bond aggregator in July. The taskforce comprises three senior (former) public servants. They are advised, as usual, by one of the big four accounting firms.
It must be hoped their work contributes towards a broader vision for social housing growth. It should draw on international best practice as well as AHURI’s advice on an Affordable Housing Finance Corporation. Government policy needs to embrace the notion that social housing is not only good investment but essential social infrastructure.
Julie Lawson is a Honorary Associate Professor, RMIT University and author for The Conversation. She can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/julie-lawson-108364" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Bond aggregator helps build a more virtuous circle of housing investment: Julie Lawson

Sydney developer Hyecorp's roots on the Lower North Shore stretch back three generations, and that deep understanding of the market continues to shape where and how it develops today.

From high-rise towers to boutique apartment projects, the family-run developer has built its reputation by focusing on a part of Sydney it knows intimately. Founded by Michael Abolakian in the early 1990s, Hyecorp is now led by his sons Stephen, Troy and Patrick.

Stephen Abolakian, joint managing director alongside Troy, has spent more than two decades in the business, overseeing development, planning, finance, marketing and sales.

Abolakian says the developer's disciplined focus on where it chooses to operate has been, and continues to be, one of Hyecorp's greatest strengths.

“We know the buyer profile exceptionally well,” Abolakian says.

“The demographics between places like Willoughby, Chatswood, St Leonards and Roseville are very similar. There are nuances between suburbs and projects, but culturally and from a buyer perspective, there’s a strong overlap.”

That buyer has historically been overwhelmingly owner-occupier driven.

Unlike many Sydney apartment developers that have traditionally relied heavily on investor demand, Hyecorp’s projects have typically attracted downsizers, upsizers, rightsizers and family owner-occupiers seeking long-term homes rather than short-term investments.

“Historically, investors have been a much smaller portion of our demand profile,” Abolakian says.

“We design for owner-occupiers. We don’t design for yield, we design for comfort, amenity, family living and long-term usability.”

That philosophy extends well beyond apartment layouts.

From landscaping and communal gardens to shared amenities and circulation spaces, Hyecorp’s developments are designed around how people actually live, something Abolakian believes has become increasingly important in Sydney’s apartment market.

“There was probably a period where having an approved project in market was enough,” he says.

“There wasn’t as much competition and if you built it, buyers would come. That’s no longer the case.”

“There’s more supply in the pipeline now, particularly with TOD precincts and low and mid-rise reforms opening up opportunities across Sydney. Buyers have more choice, so if you get the product wrong, they’ll simply go elsewhere.”

[smartcode_project:default project_id=110379 project_image_fid=311393]

The shift has forced developers to become more sophisticated in how they approach apartment design, particularly as owner-occupier expectations continue to rise.

For Hyecorp, that means thinking beyond who the buyer is today and designing for who they may become in five or 10 years' time.

“People buying now often aren’t moving in for several years,” Abolakian says.

“You might have a young couple buying today, but by the time they move in they may have children, older children, or changing lifestyle needs. You’ve got to think about how families evolve.”

That thinking also shapes Hyecorp’s approach to amenity, which positions wellness at the forefront.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=149594 project_image_fid=362634]

While resort-style facilities have become increasingly common marketing tools across Sydney apartment developments, Abolakian says the challenge is ensuring amenities are genuinely usable and appropriate for the scale of the project.

“If amenities are done right, they can materially improve the living experience,” he says, adding however that if you&nbsp;overdo it or get it wrong, you can end up with facilities nobody uses that simply create ongoing strata costs.”

That balance is something Hyecorp is aiming to strike with projects like Roseville Avenue, one of the group's upcoming Lower North Shore developments, which Abolakian describes as bringing a resort-style living experience into a metropolitan setting.

“It’s about creating something that feels special without being excessive,” he says.

“Good gardens, quality apartments, thoughtful amenity. Creating that resort feeling in a metro location.”

<img alt="Hyecorp" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="13c4c0f3-b1b7-44cf-9344-0b3d1d07797a" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-06-02%20at%2012.14.57%E2%80%AFPM.png?VersionId=9OLWjyj2bYkDV35F78WJnyMSPfc2bJ2z" />

The focus on owner-occupier product comes as Sydney’s apartment market continues to navigate a difficult development environment.&nbsp;For Hyecorp, maintaining an in-house operating model across construction, sales, marketing and development management has become increasingly important in navigating that environment.

“We’ve always believed in keeping a lot of the process in-house,” Abolakian says.

“It creates efficiencies, but it also creates quality control. You can make faster decisions and ensure the end product stays aligned with the original vision.”

Despite the challenges, Abolakian believes demand for quality owner-occupier apartments across Sydney remains strong beneath the surface, particularly across established Lower North Shore suburbs where downsizers continue to seek new housing options close to existing communities.

“There are definitely people waiting,” he says.

“Once some of the broader uncertainty settles, whether that’s the global environment or some of the local economic noise, I think the right projects will perform very strongly.”

Hyecorp currently has three residential developments on the market across Sydney’s Lower North Shore.&nbsp;Audrey, St Leonards, positioned opposite Newlands Park, is nearing completion and preparing to welcome its first residents, with the project now almost sold out.

Hyecorp has also recently launched&nbsp;<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/celine-chatswood-37-archer-street-chatswood-nsw-2067">Celine Chatswood</a>, an architectural tower, while continuing to deliver&nbsp;<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/juliet-roseville-64-pacific-highway-roseville-nsw-2069">Juliet Roseville</a>, a more boutique scale of development with just 34 apartments.

Joel Robinson

Why Hyecorp continues to back Sydney's Lower North Shore apartment market

South East Queensland’s apartment market is entering a new phase defined by rising prices, constrained affordability, and mounting pressure on the construction pipeline, according to RPM Group’s latest SEQ Apartments &amp; Townhomes Market Report.

The May 2026 report highlights a widening divide between what buyers can afford and what developers can viably deliver, with detached house prices continuing to push more buyers toward apartments across Brisbane, the Gold Coast, and the Sunshine Coast.

RPM says Brisbane’s median house price has reached around $1.5 million, accelerating the shift toward higher-density housing as buyers are increasingly priced out of the detached market.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=135094 project_image_fid=356540]

Median unit prices rose across all three major SEQ markets in the March quarter. Brisbane City recorded the strongest annual growth, with median unit prices climbing 21 per cent to $862,000, while the Gold Coast reached the highest overall median at $950,000, up 17 per cent year-on-year. The Sunshine Coast followed at $870,000, representing annual growth of nine per cent.

RPM noted the affordability gap between houses and units remains significant, with detached homes commanding premiums of 67 per cent in Brisbane and 68 per cent on the Gold Coast relative to apartments.

The report suggests this price disparity is increasingly consolidating buyer demand within the apartment market, particularly among downsizers and owner-occupiers.

“Demand is real. Supply is moving. But they’re operating on different timelines and the gap between what’s being built and what buyers can afford is the defining tension in this market right now,” RPM Queensland and NSW Managing Directors Peter Neale and Clinton Trezise said in the report.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=150787 project_image_fid=366230]

While approvals and commencements are strengthening, RPM argues the delivery pipeline remains constrained by construction costs, labour shortages, and extended build timelines.

Apartment approvals across Queensland increased 86 per cent over the year to February 2026, reaching 12,682 approvals, the highest level recorded since 2016. Brisbane overtook the Gold Coast as the state’s most active apartment approval market, with nearly 5,000 apartments approved over the past 12 months.

Unit commencements also strengthened considerably, rising 48 per cent year-on-year to 5,453 commencements in the December 2025 quarter, the highest level since 2018.

However, RPM’s research found apartment delivery timeframes have expanded sharply compared to the previous cycle. Projects are now averaging around 30 months from approval to completion, compared to roughly 20 months a decade ago.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=143932 project_image_fid=367515]

The number of units under construction has climbed to approximately 31,530 dwellings, nearing the previous 2016 peak, though projects are remaining in the pipeline for considerably longer.

Construction costs continue to weigh heavily on feasibility. RPM found the average apartment construction cost in Greater Brisbane reached $630,000 per dwelling in 2025, exceeding both Sydney and Melbourne. Coastal Queensland markets, including the Gold Coast and Sunshine Coast, were even higher at an average of $817,418 per apartment due to the prevalence of larger premium product.

The report also points to increasing pressure from Olympic-related infrastructure spending ahead of Brisbane 2032, with labour competition expected to intensify over the next several years.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=150017 project_image_fid=370960]

ANZ Associate Director of Property Daniel Gradwell said the underlying demand drivers across South East Queensland remain strong, supported by interstate migration, downsizers, and population growth.

“The challenge is bringing enough supply to market to meet that demand, and nothing on the horizon makes that straightforward,” Gradwell said.

RPM’s analysis found the affordability challenge is becoming more pronounced in the new apartment market itself, with only three per cent of surveyed new apartments priced below $1 million.

Instead, the market is increasingly concentrated in higher price brackets, with the most common new apartment price band across SEQ sitting between $1.5 million and $1.75 million. Around half of all new apartment stock surveyed is priced below $2 million.

The report suggests developers are not necessarily avoiding lower price points by choice, but because current construction economics make delivering affordable apartments increasingly difficult at scale.

Rental conditions also remain tight across the region. Median rents for one-bedroom apartments rose 12 per cent in Brisbane over the past year to $580 per week, while Gold Coast one-bedroom rents increased nine per cent to $630.

Despite rising rents, RPM noted bond lodgements have generally trended downward over the past five years, indicating more apartments are being absorbed by owner-occupiers rather than retained as investor-held rental stock.

Looking ahead, RPM expects projects targeting the mid-market owner-occupier segment between $1.25 million and $2 million to remain the most viable part of the market, while premium projects in highly constrained coastal or riverfront locations continue to attract demand.

“Construction costs are rewriting the feasibility rulebook across Greater Brisbane, and with little relief in sight, only projects in the right price band, right location, and with presales secured early will make it through,” the report concludes.

SEQ apartment demand outpacing affordable supply as construction timelines stretch: RPM

Camberwell Junction has long been the epicentre of amenity in Melbourne’s Boroondara region.

For nearly a century, it has drawn both locals and visitors, anchored by the Camberwell Sunday Market, which first operated in 1929 and quickly became a fixture of the suburb’s identity. Over time, the Junction evolved into one of Melbourne’s most established retail and lifestyle precincts, now comprising more than 400 stores and over 300 commercial businesses.

Despite that depth of amenity, one thing has remained notably limited: the supply of new apartments.

In a suburb defined by its heritage streetscapes and tightly held residential stock, new development opportunities have been scarce, particularly within the core of the Junction itself. That lack of supply has left a gap in the market for larger, design-led apartments suited to downsizers and owner-occupiers wanting to remain in the area.

Boutique developer Above Zero identified that gap when it secured a prime site on Burke Road, in the heart of Camberwell Junction.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=4896 project_image_fid=368543]

The site has a long planning history. Various proposals have been put forward over more than a decade, many of which were knocked back by the City of Boroondara, with initial applications dating back to 2015. Above Zero acquired the site in 2022 and returned with a revised scheme, refining both the building’s height and its ground-level interface to better align with Council expectations.

That process has culminated in approval for Camberwell House.

The Cera Stribley-designed development will deliver 57 residences on a 1,950 sqm site within the Camberwell Activity Centre, placing it directly within one of Melbourne’s most established retail and transport hubs.

It is expected to be one of the only new apartment developments to launch in the Junction in recent years, reinforcing the rarity of new supply in the precinct. Currently, there are just a handful of projects on the market in Camberwell, underscoring the significance of a development of this scale and positioning.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=4896 project_image_fid=368544]

Camberwell House has been conceived with a clear focus on larger-format apartments. The project will offer a mix of two-, three- and four-bedroom residences, alongside a limited number of penthouses, targeting owner-occupiers seeking scale rather than volume-driven product.

The building’s vertical presence will also set it apart.

Positioned on Burke Road, the development is set to become one of the taller buildings in its immediate context, allowing for elevated outlooks across Melbourne’s CBD skyline and toward the Dandenong Ranges. In a precinct characterised by lower-scale built form, that height provides a point of differentiation, particularly for buyers seeking outlook and natural light.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=4896 project_image_fid=368568]

Architecture has been led by Cera Stribley, with interiors by GOLDEN and landscape design by Florian Wild. The design approach centres on material consistency and restraint, with residences oriented to maximise light, ventilation and connection to outdoor spaces.

Full-height glazing and generous terraces form a key part of that strategy, allowing apartments to extend beyond their internal footprint and engage with the surrounding environment.

Beyond the private residences, a significant component of the project is its amenity offering.

Above Zero has positioned Camberwell House as a “complete living environment”, incorporating a full floor dedicated to resident facilities. At the centre of that is a wellness zone, including a 12.5-metre lap pool, spa, sauna and treatment spaces, alongside a gym and recovery-focused amenities.

This level of amenity is more commonly associated with inner-city developments, rather than established middle-ring suburbs like Camberwell.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=4896 project_image_fid=368588]

Additional shared spaces include a private library lounge, dining and entertaining areas, and an indoor golf simulator. A self-contained guest suite has also been incorporated, allowing residents to accommodate visiting family or friends without impacting their primary living space.

The inclusion of these facilities reflects a broader shift in buyer expectations.

As more downsizers look to transition from larger family homes into apartments, there is increasing demand for developments that offer not just a residence, but a lifestyle. That includes access to wellness, social and entertaining spaces within the building itself, reducing the reliance on external amenity while still maintaining proximity to established precincts.

Camberwell House is positioned to benefit from both.

Its location places it within immediate walking distance of Camberwell Junction’s retail and dining offering, as well as public transport connections, including tram and train services. That combination of internal amenity and external convenience is central to its appeal.

<section data-scroll-anchor="false" data-testid="conversation-turn-150" data-turn="assistant" data-turn-id="request-WEB:55d7c6ac-8e6d-4881-ad49-0ed9bf66d1cc-74" dir="auto">
Jellis Craig Projects Director Stephen Bowtell is handling sales for the project and says Camberwell House offers a rare entry point into one of Melbourne’s most tightly held markets.

“Buyers are recognising that Camberwell House offers something they simply haven’t seen before in Boroondara,”&nbsp;Bowtell&nbsp;says.

“It combines a level of resident amenity and service typically associated with Melbourne’s premium inner-city developments, while being positioned right in the heart of Camberwell Junction.

“The response to the concierge offering has been particularly strong. Buyers appreciate not only the convenience, but also the sense of security and peace of mind that comes from having a dedicated presence in the building every day.

“When you combine that with the wellness facilities, the exceptional arrival experience, and panoramic views across both the CBD skyline and the Dandenong Ranges, it creates a lifestyle proposition that is genuinely unique within the local market.”
</section>

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=4896]

Above Zero launches Camberwell House in undersupplied Camberwell Junction precinct

<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, <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/castile-47-skyring-terrace-newstead-qld-4006">Castile</a>, 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]

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.

Jonathan Chancellor

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News