<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
It’s been two weeks since the category four cyclone, Cyclone Debbie, struck the east coast of Queensland, causing widespread destruction to homes, businesses and the environment.
Hamilton Island faces a five month rebuild following destruction to private homes, luxury hotels and yachts. Across Airlie Beach and Proserpine, roofs were ripped from houses, power lines blown down and trees littered the roads, while Bowen suffered flash flooding and severe agricultural crop damage. 
The natural disaster has now been declared a catastrophe, with the damage expected to cost more than $1 billion. 
To view interactive images of the destruction, click on the links below.
<a href="https://inlapse.com.au/m/l/3ACS4VR" target="_blank"><img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2017/04/11/Screen%20Shot%202017-04-12%20at%208.49.43%20AM.png" alt=""></a>
<a href="https://inlapse.com.au/m/l/3ACS4VR" target="_blank">Hamilton Island</a> above (boats washed on shore near the marina) 
<a href="https://inlapse.com.au/m/l/B2HVTXH" target="_blank"><img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2017/04/11/Screen%20Shot%202017-04-12%20at%208.51.17%20AM.png" alt=""></a>
<a href="https://inlapse.com.au/m/l/B2HVTXH" target="_blank">Hamilton Island</a> above (roofs ripped off) 
<a href="https://inlapse.com.au/m/l/FVZ5B1C" target="_blank"><img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2017/04/11/Screen%20Shot%202017-04-12%20at%208.52.08%20AM.png" alt=""></a>
<a href="https://inlapse.com.au/m/l/FVZ5B1C" target="_blank">Hamilton Island</a> above  (tennis court destroyed) 
<a href="https://inlapse.com.au/m/l/IRPBVXH" target="_blank"><img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2017/04/11/Screen%20Shot%202017-04-12%20at%208.53.07%20AM.png" alt=""></a>
<a href="https://inlapse.com.au/m/l/IRPBVXH" target="_blank">Hamilton Island</a> above (damage to the shopping mall pool)
<a href="https://inlapse.com.au/m/l/LJTTUKV" target="_blank"><img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2017/04/11/Screen%20Shot%202017-04-12%20at%208.53.55%20AM.png" alt=""></a>
<a href="https://inlapse.com.au/m/l/LJTTUKV" target="_blank">Mackay</a> above (river banks flooded)
Nearmap captures, manages, and delivers the most frequently updated location content in Australia to transform how emergency services, government agencies and businesses work by letting them see what is on the ground now, in high resolution, and how it has changed over time.
It’s truly devastating to see the impact Cyclone Debbie has had on communities and businesses across Queensland.
Our high resolution aerial images reveal the true extent of the damage from above, and we hope will prove to be a useful tool to help Queensland communities, insurance companies and the local government as they plan for cleanup and recovery. 
Rob Newman, is chief executive officer, Nearmap, and can be contacted <a href="https://www.nearmap.com.au" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

Cyclone Debbie aftermath: aerial imagery reveals destruction 

<html><body>
Rising household debt levels, the hot Sydney property market and continued low interest rates has made Australian Prudential Regulation Authority Wayne Byres uneasy.
It seems he especially fears a market propped up by artificially low, interest-only borrowing rates.
Last month he decided the trend to over borrow, and then not to repay home loans in the conventional manner of interest and principal, was a likely recipe for a economic uncertainty.
To preserve financial stability, the prudential regulator decided in its latest macro-prudential measure that the interest-only loans fad need to be constrained.
The banks were told that less than 30 per cent of their new mortgages can be interest-only, well below the 38 per cent of total loans currently taken.
With borrowers realising paying interest-only freed up cash-flow, they've dived into interest-only loans which haven't been below 30 per cent since around 2008.
Interest-only loans typically have a period of five years, and then the loan will revert to the normal P&amp;I repayments, with the recent accompanying price growth seeing the investor nicely placed to cope with the higher repayments.
The tax deduction of interest payments in the meantime on these investor loans will have been a big incentive for the investor.
Investors have accordingly snapped up the bulk of interest-only loans, but owner occupied borrowers have been a worrying large 40 per cent share.
As Sydney house prices have surged since 2012, house loan sizes have grown, and for most households who've have experienced limited wage growth, the upsizing to the bigger home has only really worked with getting an interest only loan.
On a $300,000 mortgage over 25 years at a 5% p.a. interest rate, the usual monthly repayment would be $1,754 a month. But if you were making interest-only payments, the monthly cost would be $1,250 a month.
For a $750,000 home loan the monthly repayment of $4,174 drops to $3,325 if only the interest is repaid – which for many Sydney families is the difference between owning a bigger home or not.
The push hasn't just come from borrowers as mortgage broker's commissions are calculated on the size of the loans so they are incentivised to write interest only loans.
ASIC advised this week while interest-only loans may be a reasonable option for some borrowers, for the vast majority of owner-occupiers in particular, an interest-only loan will not make sense.　
The Reserve Bank of Australia has warned for two years that the rise in interest-only loans could amplify the housing price cycle, increase the risk of significant price falls, and may result in households overburdened in debt. 
If house prices do drop, the borrower will likely end up owing more than the house is worth, paying much more interest than they would have otherwise paid, and then coping with the many ensuing dramatic problems.
This article first appeared in the Daily Telegraph.
</body></html>

Three housing market factors making APRA's Wayne Byres uneasy

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
The continuing housing boom in Sydney and Melbourne has driven business confidence to a two year high in the latest National Survey of Building and Construction for the March quarter 2017.
But the most dominant picture emerging is of the growing disparity in activity and confidence between these markets and the rest of Australia. 
Western Australia's builders are doing it particularly tough with some Perth building businesses reporting that confidence is at its lowest in 30 years.
As we approach the May Federal Budget, this should reinforce to policy makers why 'sledgehammer' one-size-fits-all responses to housing affordability are extremely ill-advised. 
Overall, the residential building sector's record run has some way to go with the March quarter survey supporting an expectation of a high level of building activity to extend until the end of the year.   
The survey also shows tentative signs of improvement for builders in the non-residential sector for the remainder of 2017 in line with expectations that the sector has reached the bottom of the cycle.
Despite the non-residential activity index dipping below 50 and the national pipeline of non-residential work remaining unchanged, better approvals data supports a more positive outlook.
Consistent with previous quarters, demand for labour continues to be dominated by the Sydney and Melbourne markets with pressures around availability of some trades reflecting conditions typical in a peaking cycle.
But a new bright spot to emerge in the March quarter was the indication that the majority of South Australian builders intend to hire more staff in the next six months.
It's a good sign for SA's builders and highlights the vital role the industry plays in building a stronger economy and stronger communitie
Matthew Pollock, is national manager, housing, Master Builders Australia and can be contacted <a href="https://www.mbansw.asn.au" target="_blank">here</a>.
 
 
</body></html>

Disparity in two speed housing market widens: Matthew Pollock

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/74698/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">GUEST OBSERVER
If I ask you to picture an economist, what’s the first image that comes to your mind?
I’m guessing it’s a man, probably with grey hair, a suit and a certain air of authority. And that’s not surprising: that is pretty much the public face of economics in Australia.
Very few women have reached the most senior ranks of the profession. Australia has never had a woman federal treasurer or Treasury secretary and only one women has been elevated to the head of a major economic agency at the Commonwealth level (Jane Halton, Department of Finance). We have never had a female chief economist at a Big Four bank, and very few major think tanks have been run by women.
The dearth of women in leadership positions raises a red flag for the quality of Australia’s economic decision-making. Too many “like” individuals reduces the range of perspectives informing decisions. It also means wasted talent: if you bench half your potential team then the one that takes to the field is probably not your strongest.
Those in senior roles now recognise the problem. Reserve Bank head Philip Lowe, Labor Treasury spokesman Chris Bowen and the secretary of the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet and former Treasury head Martin Parkinson are all persuasive advocates for improving the gender balance in economic leadership roles.
Where are things going wrong?
In Australia, like many other nations, the economics profession has a “leaky pipeline”: women’s participation starts off strong but progressively falls through the ranks.
At university, women account for between 35% and 45% of undergraduate economics students. They progress through to honours-level economics at a similar rate to males.
At our most significant economic agencies – Treasury and the RBA – about 40% to 50% of the staff are women. But they account for only around one third of the senior management positions. At the very top of Treasury, there are now two women (Maryanne Mrakovcic and Meghan Quinn) among the six secretary and deputy secretary positions. At the RBA there are two (Michele Bullock and Luci Ellis) in the top seven.
The leakage is even starker in academia where women make up half of research/teaching fellow positions in economics departments, just over a quarter of senior lecturers, but only 15% of associate professors and professors. And at the prestigious Group of 8 Universities, fewer than 10% of economics professors are women.
When it comes to the media, the pipeline nearly dries up. The 2016 Women for Media Report showed that of the people cited as “analyst” or “economist” in major Australian newspapers, just 9% were women. This was lower than the percentage of women cited with the position of CEO or Chair. My own survey of newspaper opinion pages showed that only 12% of opinion pieces in the Australian Financial Review over six months of last year were written by women.
But perhaps most concerning for the economics profession is we may now also have a problem at the source: the share of female enrolments at high school and university is falling.
In NSW, our analysis of data from the NSW Education Standards Authority found the number of HSC economic enrolments has fallen 16% in the past five years – and among female students the fall was 21%. This pattern is repeated in other states.
At universities, our preliminary analysis of student enrolment data from Commonwealth Department of Education and Training suggests the share of females enrolled in economics courses fell from 43% in 2001 to 39% in 2015.
In other words, the economics profession’s “women problem” is now stymieing its ability to attract the next generation.
Why has economics fallen out of fashion with younger women?
Economics teacher at Burwood Girl’s High School, Leith Thompson, has received a scholarship from the Reserve Bank to study this question. She says a number of misconceptions about economics have contributed. “There is a perception that economics is about maths and theory, and that you only study economics if you want a career in finance.”
And teaching methods don’t always help. “Students are not necessarily taught how economics applies to the bigger picture societal issues they are interested in,” she says.
As economics enrolments fall, subjects with more obvious career paths such as Business Studies and Legal Studies have been growing strongly.
The Economic Society of Australia has recently established a Women in Economics Network to tackle these pipeline problems for economics. It aims to broaden people’s view of economists and create role models for the next generation of talented young women. So that just maybe, when your daughter pictures an economist, the first image that comes to her mind might be a woman.
Danielle Wood is a Fellow at the Grattan Institute and author for The Conversation. She can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/danielle-wood-147710" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Women are dropping out of economics, which means men are running our economy: Danielle Wood

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/76004/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">GUEST OBSERVER
Today’s release of data from the 2016 Census allows us to identify some of Australians' more common characteristics, how they vary across states and territories, and how they are changing over time.
Australia undertakes a compulsory long-form census – where detailed information across several areas is required of every individual respondent – every five years.
So, what did we learn from the first set of results? According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS):
The 2016 Census has revealed the ‘typical’ Australian is a 38-year-old female who was born in Australia, and is of English ancestry. She is married and lives in a couple family with two children and has completed Year 12. She lives in a house with three bedrooms and two motor vehicles.
Australia is getting a bit older; the typical Australian in 2011 was aged 37.
<h2 class="caption">How do today’s results vary across Australia?</h2>
First, age varies by state and territory.
With variables like age, we often find the “typical” value by taking the median. In essence, we (statistically) line everyone up from youngest to oldest, and find the person who is older than half the population but younger than the other half.
In Tasmania, the median age among 2016 Census respondents was 42. But in the Northern Territory, it was 34. Those in Australian Capital Territory were also quite young (median age 35), whereas those in South Australia were relatively old (40).
The NT population’s relatively young age is influenced by the very high proportion that identify as Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander.
While we don’t have updated estimates for that proportion (either for the NT or nationally), the data released today show that the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander population is quite young. The median age nationally is 23. New South Wales and Queensland have the youngest Indigenous population, with a median age of 22.
This release also tells us something about the different migrant profiles across Australia. Nationally, the most common country of birth for migrants is England. And the median age of migrants is much older than for the Australian-born population (44 compared to 38).
The most common country of birth for migrants living in Queensland was New Zealand; in Victoria it was India; in NSW it was China. There may not be too many more censuses until the most common migrant nationally was not born in England.
Ahead of the forthcoming federal budget, there has been a lot of media and policy attention on housing affordability. Today’s release of census data points to some subtle differences across Australia that may influence policy responses.
Nationally, the most common tenure type is owning a three-bedroom home with a mortgage. In Queensland, however, renters make up a roughly equal share of the population. But, in Tasmania and NSW, more people own their own home outright. And in the NT, renting is the most common tenure type.
In a finding that won’t surprise many, the typical female does a bit more unpaid work around the house than the typical male. The most common category for males is less than five hours a week. The most common for females is five to 14 hours.
We won’t know how this compares to paid work for a while yet – or whether these differences vary depending on age.
<h2 class="caption">What future releases will tell us</h2>
The profiles released today offer us limited information. But the census remains one of Australia’s most important datasets.
When detailed data are released in June and then progressively throughout the rest of 2017, we will be able to dig deeper into small geographic areas or specific population groups.
We will be able to ask if there are pockets of Australia with significant socioeconomic disadvantage, and if it is worsening. We will be able to hold governments accountable for the progress we have made on the education, employment and health outcomes of the Indigenous population.
And we will be able to test whether the languages we speak, the houses we are living in, and the jobs that we are doing, are changing.
But those questions rely on a high-quality census.
The attention on the 2016 Census until now has been mostly negative. There was increased concern related to data privacy, the failure of the online data entry system on census night, and staff cuts at the ABS.
In October 2016, the ABS estimated the response rate to the 2016 Census was more than 96%, and that 58% of the household forms received were submitted online. But what matters more than how many people filled in the census and how they did it is whether the responses given were accurate. We therefore need to see a lot more interrogation of the data before taking the results at face value, but we can remain cautiously optimistic.
The ABS will be hoping that now some data is released, attention will shift to what the results tell us about Australian society. It is to be hoped the data will be robust, the insights will be newsworthy, and policy and practice will shift accordingly.
We won’t know this for sure until the first major data release of data June 27 – the data released today were just a sneak peak.
 
Nicholas Biddle is a Deputy Director of the ANU Centre for Social Research and Methods (CSRM) at the Australian National University (ANU) and author for The Conversation. He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/nicholas-biddle-10171" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

First results from the 2016 Census paint a picture of who the ‘typical’ Australian is: Nicholas Biddle

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/75703/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
In the first article reviewing The Conversation’s many articles on housing issues, the commentary about fiscal and supply-side issues was consistent. The same is not true for affordable housing due to the diversity of affordability issues.
The issues have to do with the complexity and scale of the affordability problems and possible policies discussed in Conversation articles since January 2016. As it is not possible for one article to cover all the relevant policies, the focus here is on the National Affordable Housing Agreement(NAHA), support for not-for-profit social housing, bond aggregation and inclusionary zoning.
The terms affordable and social housing are sometimes used interchangeably, a potential cause of confusion. Affordable housing is more encompassing – it represents an aspiration for all who cannot enter the market for housing. This includes both ownership and rental.
Social housing is one form of affordable housing. It includes public housing and housing owned and managed by not-for-profit community housing providers. As well as providing housing for those unable to enter the market, community housing providers accommodate, for example, people with disabilities and those escaping domestic violence.
<h2>A ‘hot’ political issue</h2>
Affordable housing is a “hot” issue. Recently, the new premier of New South Wales, Gladys Berejiklian, listed it as one of her top three priorities.
Federal Treasurer Scott Morrison claims supply-side constraints are pushing up housing prices. He targets state planning regulations as the problem.
Federal politicians favour this explanation as supply-side complaints can be used to blame state and local governments. This serves to divert attention from federal fiscal policies, which effectively subsidise home ownership.
<h2>How big is the problem?</h2>
Of the need for public and social housing, authors wrote:
We have modelled the income rules determining eligibility for public housing, and estimate that there are 900,000 households satisfying these income eligibility criteria.
… state-owned-and-managed housing still accommodates around 700,000 of our most vulnerable citizens.
… there are as many as 105,000 people who are without a home and 160,000 households on public housing waiting lists. The overall stock of public housing has fallen from 331,000 units in 2007-08 to 317,000 in 2013-14.
Social housing has nearly 200,000 Australians on a waiting list.
In addition to the public housing stock, not-for-profits provide about 100,000 social housing dwellings.
The scale of the affordable housing problem is highly dependent on mortgage stress. This, in turn, is linked most closely to household incomes and employment levels. This mortgage stress is not especially concentrated in the capital cities. 
Into this affordability mix one might also add some 2 million Australians who “don’t have the resources to bounce back” from unexpected bills.
<h2>Ways to improve social housing supply</h2>
The NAHA, which has been referred to as Australia’s housing policy, is a “national partnership agreement” by the Council of Australian Governments (COAG). Its largest component is social housing. 
Federal government ministers have described the A$1.3 billion-a-year NAHA as an “abject failure”. This is because it has not increased “the number and availability of public and social housing stock”.
In contrast, The Conversation authors agree that spending on public housing is inadequate and declining.
Australia’s social housing system remains grossly underfunded. Currently available resources are inadequate even to properly maintain the existing portfolio, let alone to underpin the new supply needed to keep pace with the growing need.
… the overall stock has been eaten away, through market sale of public housing, and run down, through skimping on repairs and maintenance.
The history of public housing is that housing was briefly referred to as a “right” after the second world war. Public housing was used to accommodate people from various classes; it was not initially a preserve of the poor. Later, that changed:
[Public] housing’s declining share of the housing stock became more tightly rationed to the lowest-income households. This eroded the system’s rent base. At the same time, its ageing buildings and households with greater support needs increased its costs.
When operating expenses are not covered, maintenance is inadequate. When that happens, the number of habitable units declines.
It is feared that the NAHA might not survive the 2017 budget. Likewise it is feared that:
… [Productivity] commission-inspired “reforms” could involve the forced sale of public housing to vulture capitalists unconstrained by enforceable obligations to provide tenant services or to maintain, upgrade and retain housing stock for its current purpose.
… some residents face eviction through large-scale public housing redevelopment by governments that view their homes as key real estate assets.
The fear of eviction from public housing sites with high land value is certainly warranted:
In March 2014, New South Wales government minister Pru Goward announced that all of the 293 public housing dwellings in Millers Point, Dawes Point and The Rocks, as well as the 79 apartments in the Sirius Building built for public housing in the 1970s, were to be sold. Their tenants would be moved.
One of the potential bipartisan ways forward is to scale up social housing provided by not-for-profits. As federal housing minister, Tanya Plibersek proposed in 2009 that:
… not-for-profit community housing providers would be supported to grow to a scale enabling them both to complement and compete with public housing entities.
Social housing critically serves low-income renters. The high cost and limited availability of rental housing is a defining feature of the affordability problem. It also underscores the inequality between owners and renters due to the fiscal policy benefits for home owners.
Funding is needed to scale not-for-profit social housing. In a context of seeking to cut public spending, Morrison is looking to private sector funding of the sector to increase both the supply of affordable housing and the transfer of public housing to not-for-profits.
He is seeking to secure such funding based on a bond aggregator model. This is best explained by the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute (AHURI). It has proposed:
… an Affordable Housing Finance Corporation … designed to aggregate and source large amounts of capital from the bond market so as to provide lower-interest, long-term loans to not-for-profit community housing providers developing housing for lower-income households. The intention is that money would be raised efficiently with reduced financing costs rather than in expensive one-off transactions such as when borrowing from a bank.
AHURI cautions that the not-for-profit need for rental income means that households whose only income is welfare assistance cannot access not-for-profit social housing. The need for rental assistance remains.
Another means advocated for increasing the supply of affordable housing is inclusionary zoning. This approach requires a percentage of new housing projects on rezoned and government land to be affordable housing. An additional benefit is that this improves access to jobs for low-paid service workers. 
Inclusionary zoning has long been practised in Europe, the US and, more recently, in South Australia. The rationale for inclusionary zoning is:
… that the uplift in land value results from public policy changes that allow for housing development or higher-density housing. It is not unreasonable, then, that landowner windfalls should be limited to achieve the important public policy outcome of housing affordability.
The Property Council opposes inclusionary zoning, claiming that it will increase the cost of housing for others. This is doubtful, for the following reason:
If a fixed percentage of affordable housing becomes a condition of rezoning … this will only affect the size of the landholder’s windfall gain. Developers will offer lower prices for the land, based on the mandated requirements for affordable housing.
The Greater Sydney Commission supports inclusionary zoning, which is sorely lacking in Melbourne. In Sydney, the debate concerns the percentage of dwellings allocated to affordable housing. The commission suggests figures of 5 percent-10 percent, whereas The Conversation authors advocate:
… at least 15 percent of housing in new private developments … [and] on publicly owned land, at least 30 percent of new housing developments should be affordable. 
<h2>Fresh approaches and funding needed</h2>
If NAHA funding is reduced, or the NAHA is terminated, the affordable housing problem will sharply escalate. Australia’s “housing crisis” will truly deserve that label. 
It can be anticipated that social housing provided by not-for-profits can scale, but this will take many years. Government rental assistance will still be needed. Inclusionary zoning is desirable and can serve low-income households, but will never be an alternative to the need for social housing. 
The question is what policy alternatives Morrison has in mind and how much he is prepared to spend.
Richard Tomlinson is professor of Urban Planning, University of Melbourne and author for The Conversation. He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/richard-tomlinson-10016" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Affordable housing, finger-pointing politics and possible policy solutions

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/73841/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
As in many other countries, income inequality in Australia has grown over the past two decades.
At the same time, Australia is one of the most urbanised countries in the world, with more than 60 percent of the population concentrated in just six major cities. Incomes in these cities are very spatially segregated, with high and low earners concentrated in different suburbs. 
Do recent trends mean this joke is increasingly likely to be true?
In new research, I used census data to examine these patterns. Focusing on the incomes of men aged 25-54 in our six largest cities, I found that income inequality among men has grown substantially since 1991 – particularly during the 1990s. 
This has been associated with increases in the relative income gaps between different areas within the cities. The share of inequality associated with location has also increased over time – an indicator of increasing segregation. 
To the extent to which people draw on the resources of the people who live in their local area, this spatial segregation has potential implications for social cohesion and intergenerational inequality. There are also substantial differences across cities. Sydney was substantially more unequal than other cities over the whole period.
<h2>The census tells us the gap has widened</h2>
These results are based on detailed tabulations from the five censuses from 1991 to 2011. The focus on men aged 25-54 is partly for data availability reasons, but also permits a simpler focus on those income trends associated with wage growth and workforce-age income support payments. 
The research examines how incomes vary across the local areas in our six largest cities. These areas are defined using the Australian Bureau of Statistics “statistical local areas” (SLAs) designation. 
In Sydney and Melbourne, SLAs correspond closely to local government areas, while they are generally smaller areas in the other states. The income measure is the single census question on the person’s total income (before deducting taxes) – answered in categories. 
Statistical interpolation techniques are used to generate a smooth income distribution and to compensate for a change in the payments of income support between 1991 and 1996. More details can be found here.
The graph below shows trends in city-wide inequality since 1991. 
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/04/11/image-20170306-919-fd0169.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<h4><img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2017/04/11/image-20170306-919-fd0169.png" alt=""></h4>
<h4>
Figure 1: City-wide inequality. Author's calculations from ABS Census data
</h4>
In each city, male income inequality grew substantially during the 1990s. It flattened out after 2001 (generally increasing slightly up to 2006, then falling back a little after the global financial crisis). In all years, incomes were substantially more unequal in Sydney than the other cities, with this gap widening over the period. 
In part, this reflects the larger size of Sydney. However, Sydney is now only slightly larger than Melbourne. Most of the gap is likely due to the high wages in parts of the financial services industry centred in Sydney. 
Within the sub-regions of each city, inequality also increased, following a similar pattern. However, the growth in income inequality within local areas was less than the overall growth in inequality. Corresponding to this, the gap between the average incomes in each region also increased. 
This is indicated in the graph below, which shows a measure of between-region inequality – the extent to which the average incomes in each area differ. Using the “GE(1)” measure of inequality, this more than doubled between 1991 and 2001. It then increased slightly up to 2006 and fell back slightly after the GFC.
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/04/11/image-20170306-926-134dws8.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<h4><img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2017/04/11/image-20170306-926-134dws8.png" alt=""></h4>
<div class="enlarge_hint">
Figure 2: Between-SLA inequality. Author's calculations from ABS Census data
</div>
The overall combination of these trends is that the share of city-level inequality associated with location has grown over the period. For the GE(1) measure, this share increased from about 15% to 18%. That is, spatial segregation between rich and poor has increased over time.
<h2>Are we segregating ourselves?</h2>
One simpler way of describing the spatial concentration of incomes is to consider the situation of the top 10% of Sydney men – those with annual pre-tax incomes of $141,000 or more in 2011. 
What fraction of these rich men lived in the low-income areas of Sydney? If we define low-income areas as the SLAs with the lowest average incomes and containing 20% of the male working-age population, then we find that only 5% of rich men lived in these areas in 2011. 
So while it is true that some rich men live in the areas that have low average incomes (and maybe they might meet poor men), they are four times less likely to do so than the average man (5% vs 20%). And this segregation has increased over time. Back in 1991, 6.2% (rather than 5%) of rich men lived in these poor regions.
The other cities are also segregated, though not quite as much as Sydney. Looking at the top 10% of earners in each city in 2011, the percentage of these who were in poor local areas was 5.6% in Melbourne and Brisbane, 5.9% in Adelaide, and around 9% in Canberra and Perth.
<h2>Dark shades of inequality</h2>
This data also allows us to consider which areas are more segregated or mixed. This is mapped below for Sydney and Melbourne.
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/04/11/image-20170306-898-vhl1on.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<h4><img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2017/04/11/image-20170306-898-vhl1on.png" alt=""></h4>
<div class="enlarge_hint"> Figure 3a: Within-SLA inequality in Sydney. Author's calculations from ABS Census data
</div>
<div class="enlarge_hint"> </div>
<div class="enlarge_hint"><a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/04/11/image-20170306-914-1kme7i3.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a></div>
<div class="enlarge_hint"> </div>
<div class="enlarge_hint"><img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2017/04/11/image-20170306-914-1kme7i3.png" alt=""></div>
<h4>
Figure 3b: Within-SLA inequality in Melbourne. Author's calculations from ABS Census data
</h4>
The darker shades indicate local areas with more within-area inequality – though for small regions such as this, it is more appropriate to use a word with more positive connotations such as “heterogenous” or just “mixed”. The more mixed areas are generally those with higher average incomes (plus some areas with high ethnic heterogeneity). 
This is driven by the fact that most regions include at least some men with low incomes, but high-income men are unlikely to live in the more homogeneous outer suburbs.
The concentration of high-paying employment and the poor transport linkages of Australia’s major cities undoubtedly play a large part in driving this.
Bruce Bradbury is associate professor, Social Policy Research Centre, UNSW and author for The Conversation. He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/bruce-bradbury-6437" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

What did the rich man say to the poor man? Why spatial inequality in Australia is no joke

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/75544/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">GUEST OBSERVER
Melbourne is Australia's most rapidly growing city, a title it wrested from Perth around 2013-14. Several of Australia's big cities are growing well above the national average population growth rate.
At around 1.5 percent, Australia’s current population growth rate is above the world rate of about 1.2 percent, and among the highest in the OECD.
Net international migration comprised about 55 percent of Australia’s population growth in 2015-16. Natural increase – that’s births minus deaths – makes up the rest.
<h2>Victoria is Australia’s fastest-growing state</h2>
Data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics show that, since about 2013, Victoria’s population growth rate has risen to become the highest of all the states and territories in Australia.
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/04/10/april%20obs%201.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/2017/04/10/april%20obs%201.jpg" width="600" height="299">
<div class="dw-chart-notes">Victoria’s population growth rate (the pale green line) has risen to become the highest of all the states and territories. Western Australia (the black line) was previously the most rapidly growing state but the growth rate has fallen rapidly.</div>
<div class="dw-chart-notes">Source: ABS Cat 3218.0 Regional Population Growth, Australia, 2015-16</div>
<div class="dw-chart-notes"> </div>
<div class="dw-chart-notes">
Western Australia was previously the fastest-growing state but its population growth rate has fallen sharply (by about 70% since 2011-12), likely driven by the demise of the mining boom. Queensland’s growth has declined more gradually.
Victoria’s higher population growth rate is due to it having the highest per capita rate of net international migration of all the states and territories and the largest net in-movement from elsewhere in Australia.
The most important reason for Victoria’s higher rate of net international migration was its higher per capita inflow of international students. Victoria also gained more people due to permanent migration.
After 2012, the net movement of New Zealand citizens to Australia fell rapidly (by 83% in two years). Due to its fall in numbers being shallower, Victoria replaced Queensland as the state receiving the largest net inflow of New Zealand citizens.
About 68% of the precipitous drop in Western Australia’s population growth rate since 2011-12 is because international migration to that state has fallen away. Previously, more people moved to Western Australia from the other states than in the other direction. Now, that trend has reversed.
Decreased net international migration also explains most of the decrease in Queensland’s growth rate over this period.
<h2 class="caption">Big city squeeze</h2>
In recent years, Australia’s population has become increasingly concentrated in its largest cities, and several big cities are growing at well above the average Australian population growth rate.
Melbourne is Australia’s most rapidly growing city, a title it wrested from Perth around 2013-14.
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/04/10/april%20obs%202.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/2017/04/10/april%20obs%202.jpg" width="600" height="372">
Australia’s population has become increasingly concentrated in its largest cities. By 2013-14, Melbourne had replaced Perth as the most rapidly growing city.
Source: ABS Cat 3218.0 - Regional Population Growth, Australia, 
</div>
<div id="footer"> 
Sydney’s population, which the ABS says recently reached 5 million, is also growing at above the national average rate. Net in-migration (people moving to Sydney) is the major component of Sydney’s population growth, as opposed to natural increase (births minus deaths).
Brisbane’s growth has slowed but remains above the national average. In contrast, many already sparsely settled areas in inland Australia are experiencing population decline.
<h2 class="caption">The mix of overseas-born residents is changing</h2>
About 28.5% of Australia’s population was born overseas. People born in the United Kingdom are still the biggest group of overseas-born residents, making up 5% of Australia’s population. That picture is changing, however, as chart 1.2 from the ABS shows here.
The share of UK-born residents in Australia is declining, and the proportion of people born in New Zealand has grown over the last decade. Over the same period, the share of China-born residents has increased, and that’s also true for India-born residents.
Australia’s India-born resident population remain predominantly male (119 males per 100 females in 2016), although not as heavily so as previously.
In contrast to China’s male-dominated population back home, among the China-born residents in Australia females are increasingly outnumbering males (just 80 males per 100 females in 2016).
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/04/10/april%20obs%203.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/2017/04/10/april%20obs%203.jpg" width="600" height="253">
The closer the line is to 100, the more even the sex ratio. So while there's a fairly even ratio of women to men among UK-born, Australian-born and NZ-born residents in Australia, there are more Chinese-born women than Chinese-born men in Australia. Among India-born residents, there are more men than women.
Nick Parr is anAssociate Professor in Demography, Macquarie University and author for The Conversation. He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/nick-parr-5830" target="_blank">here</a>.</div>
</body></html>

Three charts on Australia’s population shift and the big city squeeze: Nick Parr

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
Long-term privatisation contracts, most of them closed to scrutiny, lock urban infrastructure into 20th-century formats unsuited for a climate-threatened planet.
The privatisation of urban infrastructure in Australia is an ironic story. The vehicles of urban infrastructure – the utilities and the state-owned enterprises – were so central to the life of cities that they became perfect entities for private sell-off. We now live with the consequences of the sell-off.
The utilities flourished in Australia as a nation-building exercise following the second world war. The Bretton Woods agreements entrenched Keynesian fiscal behaviours across the Western world.
The utilities thrived on the willingness of governments to raise capital for public works. They were also central to the development of state capacity and the assembly of a career-based professional public service. As part of the social compact, the public accepted reasonable user pricing for the availability of water, energy, public transport and telecommunications services.
Hence, the utilities and the state-owned enterprises led the roll-out of urban infrastructure in the second half of the 20th century. This roll-out shaped the nature of Australian urban life, its format and flows.
But then fiscal crisis of the state descended in the 1970s and 1980s. The sell-off of public assets was seen worldwide as a solution to state indebtedness. Arguments that private enterprise could deliver infrastructure services more efficiently added impetus.
A wholesale transformation
Few governments resisted the sell-off urge. Australian governments, state and federal, participated in the sell-off, though in a stuttering manner. Through time, however, the change has been substantial.
Abbott and Cohen calculate that the output of state-owned enterprises in Australia in 1989-90 accounted for 7% of GDP, 9% of total employment, and 14% of gross fixed capital expenditure.
By 2011-12, the output of state-owned enterprises had fallen to 1.3% of GDP. Their gross fixed capital expenditure contributed only 1.8% of the nation’s total. The authors estimate that proceeds from privatisations in Australia since 1987 total around A$194 billion (in constant year 2000 dollars).
The sell-off commercialised and privatised a raft of assets: electricity generation and transmission, gas distribution, airports, ports and telecommunication. New assets went straight to private hands: motorways, public transport, renewable energy generation, and freight handling.
The shedding of public responsibility for infrastructure meant public investment in Australia as a share of GDP fell from more than 5% in the mid-1980s to well below 3 percent by the end of the 1990s.
What’s in it for investors?
There is much to understand about the sell-off. Here I focus only on why private investors are willing to pay extraordinary prices to acquire urban infrastructure assets.
The attraction of investing in an urban infrastructure asset comes from the infrastructure services being embedded in the daily flows of people, water, energy and information throughout a city. The flows of a city are remarkably ordered in terms of volume, direction and timing.
How a city operates is dependent on the co-existence of decisions by infrastructure operators and users. The operators decide how and when services will be available. Households and firms decide what they will be doing across a 24-hour day and therefore how and when they will use the infrastructure services on offer.
Thus, the efficiency of infrastructure provision comes from the predictability of the flows of a city. These in turn come from a historical patterning and sequencing of behaviours by householders and firms as they read off and conform to each other’s movements.
An example is the relatively sympathetic structuring and sequencing of work hours and school hours. This ensures that public transport facilities are utilised more efficiently in peak hours, while the hours that parents and children spend together are made more convenient.
The embeddedness of infrastructure into city life means that revenue streams from user fees for infrastructure services are highly predictable and stable. And because transport, water and energy supply is usually monopolised, the householder has little choice but to continue as a consumer of an infrastructure service.
The books of a utility or state-owned enterprise, then, represent a discrete set of households well trained to pay their monthly bills. This is precisely the type of revenue stream that pension, insurance and sovereign wealth funds seek when faced with the peculiar problem of having surplus cash to lock away for at least the next two decades.
What did we lose in the sell-off?
Perhaps it was clever to have solved a government debt problem in Australia back in the day through a sell-off of assets to a new class of long-term investor. But as a consequence we have lost other things.
Infrastructure as a planning tool to shape our cities is one. Revenue streams to subsidise needy customers or supply to remote locations is another.
And, critically, we have lost the opportunity for the state to revamp energy, water and transport systems to allow for innovative supply and demand formats – such as distributed electricity supply networks – that are more appropriate to a climate-threatened planet.
Long-term privatisation contracts, most of them closed to scrutiny, lock urban infrastructure provision into 20th-century formats.
The difficult task now will be their unlocking.
 
Phillip O'Neill is Director of the Centre for Western Sydney at Western Sydney University and author for The Conversation. He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/phillip-oneill-125643" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Living with the legacy of the great infrastructure sell-off: Phillip O'Neill

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/75200/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
Recent reports estimate that by 2020 1.55 billion workers will be responsible for work that does not confine them to a desk. Already, up to 80 percent of employees work at least one day a week out of the office.
Co-working, where employees and the self-employed share workspace, ideas and knowledge, started in 2005 in San Francisco. Once the domain of techies working on start-ups, co-working spaces continue to evolve rapidly.
In 2017 it is estimated over one million people will work from co-working spaces. In 2016, a single co-working company recorded a valuation of US$16 billion dollars, highlighting the growth of an industry that didn’t exist just over a decade ago.
Users of co-working spaces often report feeling that they are part of a social movement. In co-working spaces, helping each other out, even those you have just met, is the norm. Indeed, the co-working movement prides itself on a set of core values, community, openness, collaboration, sustainability and accessibility.
This can be a refreshing change for many employees where the design of the workplace and the politics of their organisation means they are simply too tired, stressed or distracted to help their colleagues. Globally, organisations such as Merck, GE and the Guardian newspaper are regularly using co-working spaces for their employees. Research shows that users report increases in learning, new networks and the benefits of working close to the users of their services or products.
The promise of these anecdotal stories is now being supported in emerging research. In a study reported in Harvard Business Review, researchers from the University of Michigan found that users of co-working spaces experienced greater meaning from their work, and experienced thriving at work far more than their office based colleagues. Additionally, with many choosing to work from co-working spaces closer to home, commuting times and traffic congestion are reduced.
Some research however indicates that the inherently social nature of co-working spaces may lead to similar issues experienced by regular office users such as distraction and lack of privacy. Another study found that the co-working space itself was not enough to encourage connections and collaboration, and that a space host may be necessary to catalyse these relationships.
These changes to the way we work are bringing a focus on both the role of the stand alone workplace, and the design of cities. As co-working spaces evolve to meet the demand of workers for flexible, autonomous and creative work environments, broader changes are occurring in how we work and live.
Co-working spaces offer the potential to address other challenges facing our future cities as they provide accessible space for individuals to work, attend learning events and become part of a like minded community. This is important given predictions regarding changes to the urban landscape.
The Australian Bureau of Statistics predicts a 65 percent increase in the number of single person households in Australia. For Australia particularly, housing affordability continues to be a significant issue. As governments and cities grapple with ways to address these issues, new projects in the collaborative economy are showing promise in addressing a number of these issues.
In London, the world’s largest co-living community opened its doors to 550 residents. While residents have their own units with bedroom, bathroom and kitchenette, the project offers all inclusive rent with access to a restaurant, co-working spaces, wifi, gym, cinema, spa, larger kitchens and dining rooms. Aside from convenience and flexibility, early indications suggest that co-living residents are attracted to the sense of community.
While empirical research on co-living is yet to emerge, 96 percent of residents of co-housing communities report increased life satisfaction according to research.
As similar projects are underway globally, research suggests this trend will increase as solutions are offered for adults at all life stages.
Libby Sander is lecturer, Bond Business School, Bond University and author for The Conversation. She can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/libby-sander-143232" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Co-working is evolving to combine co-living

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