<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/67779/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
Uncertainty about future policy decisions is often identified as major drag on a country’s economy.
Uncertainty about interest rate movements, for example, may see households postpone their consumption, and entrepreneurs wait and see before investing in a business. As a result, aggregate demand naturally weakens, and the economy slows down. 
But how relevant is uncertainty, really? 
Economists need measures of uncertainty to quantify its impact on the business cycle of a country. A trio of US based economists - Scott Baker (Northwestern University), Nicholas Bloom (Stanford University), and Steven Davis (University of Chicago) recently developed an index of Economic Policy Uncertainty (EPU) for a variety of countries, including Australia. 
To create the index, they select country-specific newspapers and perform a search for keywords that are associated with the economy, policy decisions, and uncertainty surrounding such decisions. To the extent that newspapers offer information on perceptions of uncertainty by households and entrepreneurs in that country, this index can be fruitfully used to assess the macroeconomic consequences of spikes in uncertainty. 
The graph below depicts the evolution of the Australian EPU since 1997. 
<a href="/images/2016/11/03/image-20161031-15821-1rstzhw.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2016/11/03/image-20161031-15821-1rstzhw.png" alt="">
Monthly data from Australian newspapers (Times and Financial Times). Data to July 2016. www.policyuncertainty.com, Author provided
Spikes in this index are mostly associated to external events such as 9/11, the second Gulf War, the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers due to the US sub-prime mortgage crisis, the US debt ceiling dispute, and more recently, Brexit. 
Domestic political events also increase the value of the index. Some of the jumps in this EPU index are significant, the largest one corresponding to the Brexit referendum in June 2016. The researchers interpret these spikes as jumps in uncertainty over the policy response of the Reserve Bank of Australia and/or the Treasury to these external and internal events. 
<h2>But Australia’s economy remains strong…</h2>
In spite of these fluctuations in uncertainty, however, not much has been going on in the Australian business cycle. 
The last official recession in Australia occurred in the early 1990s. Recent figures point to a yearly growth rate of Australia’s real GDP of 3.3%, much larger than that of most industrialised countries in the world. 
And Australia’s future is reasonably bright. According to the Reserve Bank of Australia governor Philip Lowe:
"Domestic demand is expected to strengthen gradually as the drag on our economy from the decline in mining investment comes to an end. […] Some pick-up in wages and prices could then be expected. In addition, commodity prices, after having declined over the preceding four years, have increased this year. If sustained, this will boost national income and falls in petrol prices will no longer be having a significant effect on headline inflation."
Recent research conducted by RBA economists makes use of econometric models suited to isolate the role of uncertainty and its impact on Australia’s real activity.
Such research finds uncertainty exerts a negative but fairly small effect on domestic investment and employment growth. 
So, why hasn’t uncertainty affected Australia’s economy much? 
In work conducted with a pool of researchers based at the Melbourne Institute, I found that jumps in uncertainty are particularly harmful for a country’s growth if they hit a country already experiencing a downturn. 
The “uncertainty-recession” multiplier – the negative effects on the overall production of a country due to jumps in uncertainty occurring during a recession – is found to be much larger than the “uncertainty-expansion” multiplier (the negative effects when a country is in a boom). 
Intuitively, a reduction in confidence (which is akin to an increase in uncertainty) is likely to more severely affect households and entrepreneurs when a slowdown in economic activity is already underway. 
Committing to purchase a car or invest in a new machine can be very costly if economic conditions worsen in future. Reselling a car to pay for rent, clothing or food would likely turn out to be a capital loss, more than a capital gain. And why should entrepreneurs buy a new machine during a recession characterised by high uncertainty? Better to wait until the smoke clears. 
On the other hand, during an economic boom any effects of jumps in uncertainty are likely to be (at least) partly offset by expectations of high returns from investment. This means there may not necessarily be a reduction in how optimistic households are, or their consumption.
Monetary policy may also help explain why jumps in uncertainty may be more relevant in other countries than in Australia. Reductions in short-term interest rates can alleviate the negative effects of jumps in uncertainty for the economy by reducing the cost of borrowing. This supports investment by firms and household consumption, helping the country maintain a solid real GDP growth rate. 
However, decisions over consumption and investment are likely to become less dependent on interest rates when economic conditions are severe and people in the economic system prefer to save for precautionary reasons. 
And countries facing near zero or negative interest rates are likely to experience more severe effects of an uncertainty shock due to the inability of the central bank to lower borrowing costs enough to sustain the economy.
Australia’s growth has been reasonably solid even during the global financial crisis. And it is certainly true that the RBA has gradually decreased the cash rate over the years to offer support to the Australian economy. However, with a cash rate currently set at 1.5%, the RBA still has room for a reduction of borrowing costs if required. 
In the absence of a recession or near zero interest rates, it is then not a surprise that uncertainty shocks have not caused major problems for the Australian economy for the last two decades. 
All good, then? Well, as long as growth stays solid, yes. The best way policymakers can tame uncertainty and its effects is to keep designing policies aimed at maintaining our growth at a reasonable level.
Efrem Castelnuovo is principal research fellow, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research - associate professor, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Melbourne and author for The Conversation. He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/efrem-castelnuovo-145615" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

Why Brexit and the spectre of President Trump aren’t hurting Australia’s economy

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/67372/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
Opinion polls, statistical prediction models and betting markets are now all predicting a fairly comfortable victory for Hilary Clinton in the United States presidential election.
However, they all said much the same about the prospect of British voters opting to remain in the European Union, before a majority of them actually voted to leave at the Brexit referendum in June. 
In Brexit those wanting “change” felt much more strongly about it and were thus more inclined to vote, than those favouring the status quo. This might also be the case with Trump voters. So the possibility of a Trump victory can’t be entirely dismissed – and the possible economic consequences of such an outcome are worth considering.
Precisely because a triumph for Trump has by now been so widely discounted – including by the financial markets – this outcome would prompt a much larger financial market reaction than a Clinton victory. 
The unexpected outcome of the Brexit referendum saw the London share market fall by more than 5%, and the British pound by more than 8%, in the following 24 hours. And although the share market has since more than recouped its initial losses, the pound is now almost 18% below its pre-referendum level against the US dollar.
The financial market reaction to a Trump victory in the US presidential race is likely to be sharper. As the Reserve Bank of Australia governor Philip Lowe noted earlier this month, “the possible election of President Trump wouldn’t be as benign an event”, as Brexit turned out to be. A paper published this week by Justin Wolfers and Eric Zitzewitz (of the University of Michigan and Dartmouth College, respectively) suggests that the US, UK and Asian share markets could fall by 10-15 percent, and that the Mexican peso would fall by 25 percent, in the event of a Trump victory.
From an historical perspective this is an extraordinary prospect, given that, as Wolfers and Zitzewitz note:
"In almost every case back to 1880, equity markets have risen on the news that Republicans win elections and fall when Democrats win."
This is also because, at least superficially, Trump is proposing policies that are more likely to benefit rich households (who are more likely to own equities), while Clinton is explicitly advocating higher taxes on capital.
These findings are more understandable in the light of mainstream economists’ assessments of the likely implications of the policy proposals put forward by the two main contenders. Out of 414 respondents to a survey conducted by the US National Association of Business Economists, 55% thought Hilary Clinton would “do the best job as president of managing the economy”. 
Only 14 percent thought that Donald Trump would (and that was 1 percentage point less than the proportion who nominated Libertarian Party candidate Gary Johnson). It’s perhaps worth emphasising that this was a survey of business, not academic, economists.
This overwhelming view likely reflects three particularly important concerns to mainstream economists about the Republican presidential candidate’s policies.
<h2>Differences in policies</h2>
Donald Trump’s policies would significantly increase the US Budget deficit. The bipartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB) last month estimated that the combination of tax cuts and spending increases proposed by Donald Trump would add US$5.3 trillion to US public debt over the next decade, lifting it from 77 percent to 105 percent of GDP. 
By contrast, the spending and tax measures (cuts for some, increases for others) advocated by Hilary Clinton would boost public debt by US$200 billion, to 86% of GDP, over the next decade. A more recent analysis of Donald Trump’s tax proposals by the Urban Institute and Brookings Institution’s Tax Policy Center suggests that they would increase US Federal debt by US$7.2 trillion over a decade. 
While both candidates assert that their policy proposals would boost economic growth, which would in turn result in lower (rather than higher) budget deficits, the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB)  calculates that economic growth would need to average 3.5% per annum over the next decade in order to stabilise the debt-to-GDP ratio without further tax increases. According to the CRFB, that would “likely require a level of productivity growth that has not been achieved in any decade in modern history”. Whereas the same objective would require economic growth averaging 2.7% per annum under Hillary Clinton’s proposals.
In addition to this, Donald Trump has consistently advocated a major upheaval in US trade policies, including the repudiation of the North America Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the designation of China as a “currency manipulator”. This is something which under existing US trade laws would allow the imposition of tariffs of up to 45% on goods imported into the US from China. 
The greatest adverse impact of such measures would be on low-income households in the US, as the result of having to pay much higher prices for goods that make up a large proportion of their spending. But there would also be an obvious negative impact on the Chinese economy – since China’s exports to the US account for 18% of its total exports, and just under 4% of China’s GDP. 
It’s also hard to imagine that China wouldn’t seek to retaliate in some way against any such measures by a Trump Administration. In a studypublished by the Petersen Institute, Marcus Nolan, Sherman Robinson and Tyler Moran suggest that in such circumstances, the US economy would experience a recession in 2018 and 2019, with unemployment rising to 8.6%.
It’s hard to imagine how a trade war between the world’s two largest economies, Australia’s largest and third-largest trading partners, could have anything other than negative consequences for Australia.
Another concern for mainstream economists arising from Donald Trump’s economic agenda is his contempt for the independence of the US Federal Reserve. Trump’s suggestion that the Federal Reserve should have been more willing to raise US interest rates this year is not without some basis. 
But his personal criticisms of Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen, combined with the fact that there are already two unfilled vacancies on the Fed’s Board of Governors, suggests that the Fed could quickly become much more politicised in the event of a Trump victory. That would likely undermine confidence in US monetary policy, potentially leading in turn to a weaker US dollar and higher US bond yields. 
<h2>Relationships between the US and other nations</h2>
Beyond these concerns to mainstream economists, the Republican candidate’s attitude to longstanding US strategic alliances – with European countries, Japan and Korea – threatens to create much greater political uncertainty around the world. It may even prompt an “arms race” entailing greater proliferation of nuclear weapons.
Trump hasn’t specifically listed Australia as being among the US allies who “aren’t paying anywhere near what it costs to defend them”. It could be that Australia’s status, as one of the few countries with which the US runs a trade surplus, puts us in a different category. Nonetheless, a deteriorating regional security environment could result in the Australian government concluding that it needs to spend more on defence.
It’s important to note that not all of the foregoing concerns will be completely alleviated should, as seems more likely, Hillary Clinton becoms the 45th President of the United States. If that result were to be accompanied by a “clean sweep” of both the Senate and (less likely) the House of Representatives, left-wing Democrats such as Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders will have a much larger influence on US economic policy. 
The differences between Donald Trump and the left wing of the Democratic Party on trade policy, or on the independence of the Federal Reserve, are in reality quite small. So while a Clinton victory on 8th November is much the better outcome from an Australian perspective, it would not be in Australia’s interests for her to win too well.
Saul Eslake is vice-chancellor’s fellow, University of Tasmania and author for The Conversation. He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/saul-eslake-665" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

A Trump presidency could bring a range of economic disasters

<html><body><div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="section">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">GUEST OBSERVER</div>
<div class="column"> </div>
<div class="column">Dwelling approvals dropped 8.7 percent in Sep, larger than the market expectation of a 3 percent fall but within the range of ‘normal’ volatility for month to month reads.</div>
<div class="column"> </div>
<div class="column"><a href="/images/2016/11/03/Screen%20Shot%202016-11-03%20at%208.09.31%20AM.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a></div>
<div class="column"><img src="/images/2016/11/03/Screen%20Shot%202016-11-03%20at%208.09.31%20AM.png" alt=""></div>
<div class="column"> </div>
<div class="column">The detail shows a sharp 16.3 percent drop in units was the main driver in the month – with-in this segment the ‘usual culprit’ when there is volatility - high rise approvals – was down just over 20 percent in the month but down only slightly on a year ago, reflecting the high starting point following a big surge in July. Even with a dip last month, August was the fourth highest reading on record.</div>
<div class="column"> </div>
<div class="column"><a href="/images/2016/11/03/Screen%20Shot%202016-11-03%20at%208.13.02%20AM.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a></div>
<div class="column"><img src="/images/2016/11/03/Screen%20Shot%202016-11-03%20at%208.13.02%20AM.png" alt=""></div>
<div class="column"> </div>
<div class="column">Outside of ‘high rise’ the monthly moves were mixed but mostly hint at an underlying trend softening. Private sector house approvals were up 2.3% but ‘mid-rise’ were down over 10 percent. The combined picture from ‘non high rise’ approvals now show a trend decline for six consecutive months tracking at a 10-15 percent annual pace. The state detail shows this coming through across all the main states – a more convincing though still tentative sign of a broad underlying slowdown.</div>
<div class="column"> </div>
<div class="column"><a href="/images/2016/11/03/Screen%20Shot%202016-11-03%20at%208.14.19%20AM.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a></div>
<div class="column"> </div>
<div class="column"><img src="/images/2016/11/03/Screen%20Shot%202016-11-03%20at%208.14.19%20AM.png" alt=""></div>
<div class="column">
 The signal from ‘high rise’ remains much less conclusive – despite the latest monthly drop it is unclear whether the segment is levelling out or turning down with approvals uneven across the major states as well (up strongly on a year ago for NSW but lacking a clear direction in Vic and Qld).</div>
<div class="column">
 The value of renovation approvals declined 2.2 percent to be down 10.6 percent/yr, pointing to a clear softening heading into year end after strong gains in the first half of 2016.</div>
<div class="column">
 The value of non res building approvals spiked sharply in Sep (+119 percent!). The gain came from a mix of retail, office, hotels and entertainment &amp; recreation buildings – the breadth of the gain a promising sign that it may not be just a 'one-off'. State-wise, all of the gain is coming from NSW and Vic.</div>
<div class="column">
 Overall, the update provides more tentative evidence of an underlying slowdown in non high rise dwelling approvals but the picture on high rise remains very uncertain. The mix still looks relatively constructive for new dwelling construction in 2017 – when the continued ramp up in apartment work looks set to more than offset the slowdown in other segments. The near term path of high rise approvals is more critical for activity in 2018.</div>
<div class="column"> </div>
<div class="column"><a href="/images/2016/11/03/Screen%20Shot%202016-11-03%20at%208.15.32%20AM.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a></div>
<div class="column"> </div>
<div class="column"><img src="/images/2016/11/03/Screen%20Shot%202016-11-03%20at%208.15.32%20AM.png" alt=""></div>
<div class="column"> </div>
<div class="column">The September pull back in this segments falls well short of a decisive signal – it would take similar-sized moves in the next few months to signal the sort of 'break out' weakening that would indicate a sharp wind down in high rise activity is on the way. </div>
<div class="column"> </div>
<div class="column">Matthew Hassan is senior economist with <a href="https://www.westpac.com.au/" target="_blank">Westpac</a>.</div>
</div>
</div>
</div></body></html>

High rise approvals drop after July surge: Matthew Hassan

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/67928/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump recently claimed “phony polling” is suppressing his vote and predicted the outcome of the US election will be “Brexit times five”.
By “Brexit times five”, Trump is referring to the surprising referendum result in favour of Britain leaving the European Union, an outcome that went against the predictions of most polls. Given the unexpected triumph of Britain’s “Leave” campaign, is it possible that Trump could produce a surprise result of even greater proportions?
Many explanations are put forward to account for voting patterns, especially when they don’t match the polls.
Good sampling methodology – that is, how to choose a group of people likely to reflect the characteristics of the broader population – is key to ensuring accurate and useful results. An understanding of likely voter turnout is also important, especially in the US and other countries where voting is voluntary.
But other factors, such as the language and wording used, can also effect the results of any survey, including electoral polls.
One likely factor in the discrepancy between the pre-referendum Brexit polls and the final result was social desirability bias – the human tendency to portray ourselves in the most favourable light. This bias may not necessarily be conscious. It’s common in social surveys, where the need to be seen to be doing “the right thing” can overwhelm honest responses.
For example, it’s socially desirable for people to disagree with the statement “I sometimes feel resentful when I don’t get my own way”, even though it’s likely everybody has felt this way at some time. Self-reporting of alcohol consumption is typically 40-50% lower than actual consumption rates.
In the case of Brexit, the “Leave” campaign became associated with xenophobia and racism. Because this was regarded negatively by mainstream society, it likely resulted in people understating their support for the “Leave” campaign when asked by pollsters.
Social desirability bias is exacerbated by the presence of other people, so it’s more prominent when survey questions are asked directly by an interviewer, either in person or over the phone.
If social desirability was a factor in the inconsistency between the Brexit polls and the final result, we should see a difference between the polls taken by telephone interviews and those conducted online.
Let’s look at the polls from the final week of the Brexit campaign. Out of five telephone polls, none predicted a win for “Leave”. Out of eight online polls, four predicted a win.
This is particularly surprising because one might expect lower polling for the “Leave” vote in online polls, since this method captures younger voters who were (at least publically) more opposed to Brexit. Assuming no other methodological issues were at play, this suggests that social desirability may have been a factor.
Like the “Leave” campaign, Trump’s campaign is associated with the socially negative attributes of xenophobia and racism, as well as sexism and allegations of sexual misconduct. This is likely to cause a social desirability bias with a tendency for people to under report their support for Trump.
Now let’s look at Trump’s “Brexit times five” claim. In both telephone and online polls taken during the last week of the Brexit campaign, the average result was 46.5% for “Remain” and 44.5% for “Leave”. Excluding the undecided voters, this equates to 51% for “Remain” and 49% for “Leave”.
The result of the actual vote was 48% for “Remain” and 52% for “Leave”. On the basis of this simplistic analysis, and with this particular mix of telephone and online polls, we could argue that social desirability bias suppressed the polled support for “Leave” by around 3%.
As of November 1, the US polling aggregation website FiveThirtyEightsays the national averages for the popular vote in the US election are 49.2% for Clinton and 44.5% for Trump, a difference of 4.7% in favour of Clinton.
If Trump is able to achieve “Brexit times five” – that is, gain 15% more votes on election day than the polls would suggest – he would indeed be well-placed for victory. But unlike Brexit, this result would need to be repeated in each state and reflected in the Electoral College votes, rather than just a single national vote.
Although important and often present, the effects of social desirability bias are likely to be relatively minor in polls that are properly conducted, and only likely to cause surprise results in a tight race. The degree to which the polling averages may be misled by social desirability bias depends on the mix of methods used to collect the answers – with a greater reliance on telephone polling more likely to capture a greater degree of bias.
So while it’s possible that Trump’s polling is depressed, and while he may win more votes than expected on Election Day, he’s still unlikely to win the Presidency.
Alex Kusmanoff is PhD candidate, Inter-disciplinary Conservation Science and Research Group, RMIT University and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/alex-kusmanoff-262169" target="_blank">here</a>.
Fiona Fidler is senior research fellow at the School of Global, Urban and Social Studies, RMIT University and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/fiona-fidler-9370" target="_blank">here</a>.
Sarah Bekessy is associate professor, RMIT University and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/sarah-bekessy-94860" target="_blank">here</a>.
All are authors for The Conversation.
</body></html>

What effect will closet Trump voters have on the US Election?

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/66413/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
Everyone knows by now that the current, endlessly drawn-out electoral process in the US is remarkable, even by the standards of an increasingly weird political era.
The consensus is that no matter who becomes the next president, it will be bad. If it’s Donald Trump, though, it could be apocalyptic.
Despite growing concerns about declining American power and influence, the US still dominates the region upon which Australia has increasingly come to depend. Therefore, the election outcome will have potentially major and enduring consequences for Australia and the wider Asia-Pacific region.
<h2>What do Trump’s foreign policies suggest?</h2>
Even though many people have real and understandable doubts about Hillary Clinton’s historical baggage, inconsistency and proclivity for “misspeaking”, most serious analysts hope she wins. The alternative is too awful, unpredictable and frankly alarming to even contemplate. 
Consequently, not many people – including Australia’s foreign policy establishment, it seems – have given much thought to what happens if Trump triumphs.
Consistency and measured reflection are not words often seen in the same sentence as Donald Trump, but it is possible to get some idea of what his foreign policy might look like. Most of it is alarming. And none of it is likely to be good for Australia.
Trump’s policies are frequently described as “neo-isolationist”. They resonate with many who are disillusioned with the supposed failings of the Obama doctrine, and sick of American involvement in seemingly intractable conflicts in places they neither know nor care about.
Many Americans are remarkably ill-informed and uninterested in foreign policy. This is not a unique national characteristic, but some of the widely shared beliefs that inform voting intentions in what is still the world’s most-powerful country are striking.
For example, the average American thinks something like one-quarter of its US$4 trillion national budget is spent on foreign aid. In reality it’s less than a miserly 1%. 
Trump may share this misapprehension for all we know. Either way, he is threatening to make supposedly freeloading allies pick up more of the bill for America’s implicit defence guarantees.
<h2>What might it all mean for Australia?</h2>
Given Australians have made disproportionate sacrifices to underpin its alliance relationship with the US over the years, this is a bit rich.
Australia’s major parties seem to have a policy of not having a policy when it comes to dealing with a possible Trump presidency. The reality would – or should – force a rethink of some of the most enduring foundations of Australian foreign policy.
This is why so many of Australia’s foreign policy and strategic elites are pinning their hopes on Clinton. She wouldn’t welcome the label, but Clinton is clearly the establishment candidate and consummate insider who can be relied upon to do the right thing as far as Australia and the world is concerned.
One assumes this may include rediscovering her surprisingly lost enthusiasm for the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Her habit of being economical with the truth is one of the reasons she is personally unpopular, such an electoral liability, and no certainty to knock off the most unlikely and unpredictable candidate in recent US political history.
As far as our region is concerned, most analysts will be reassured by the prospect of a Clinton presidency. She is one of the architects of the so-called “pivot”, or shift in American strategic priorities to the Asia-Pacific region and response to China’s seemingly inexorable rise. 
Whether she has the will to confront an expansionist China is the big question. Whether smaller countries like Australia would want her to is another question altogether. But this is not an issue that often gets an unambiguous airing here, despite the amount we are currently investing in military modernisation.
The prospects for Australia could be daunting no matter who wins the election. It is conceivable that Trump may follow through on his threat to demand greater self-reliance on the part of traditional allies and simply pull American forces out of the region. This would allow China to assert its dominance, and fundamentally overturn the long-standing basis of Australian foreign policy.
If Clinton wins, though, the options don’t necessarily look any more auspicious, even if they are more predictable. If the US is ever to stand up to China and try to reassert its former dominance of our region, it will have to get on with it.
If we extrapolate from here, it is only a question of time before China overtakes the US on every significant measure of great power status.
Clinton may decide it is her historical destiny to reassert American primacy, not to mention defend the rules-based international order that the US has done so much to develop – if not necessarily abide by – over the last half-century. 
Under such circumstances, Australia’s nightmare choice between its principal security guarantor and its most important trade partner may come one step closer. And that’s the good outcome.
Mark Beeson is professor of International Politics, University of Western Australia and author for The Conversation. He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/mark-beeson-60300" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Trump or Clinton: who will be the best for our region

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/66755/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
The 2016 US presidential election has been unprecedented in several ways. For starters, seasoned psephologists were surprised by Donald Trump’s success in the Republican primaries. 
And while the “fundamentals” of the election would suggest the Republicans would have a significant edge – due to tepid economic growth and an incumbent Democratic president – even one of the key proponents of this model doubts its applicability this year. 
The reason for this doubt is that Trump is an unconventional candidate who has eschewed normal campaign practices such as setting up field offices, building up campaign staff, fundraising, and spending on TV advertisements. 
Trump’s campaign has been built upon controversial statements that have kept his name in the news. This strategy served him well during the primaries, where he received nearly US$3 billion in free coverage. 
Any one of Trump’s major gaffes would have likely been fatal for other campaigns. But he has proven uniquely resilient. Why?
<h2>Trump and populism</h2>
The narrative the Trump campaign has played during the continual turmoil and controversy that has surrounded him is that the elites who have abandoned him or disagree with him are all part of the establishment he seeks to destroy. This is a populist appeal that resonates with a large portion of the population who feel their voices have not been heard.
Trump’s recently revealed disrespectful remarks about women fit with an identity of the alpha-male populist figure who is strong while his opponents are “weak”, “crooked”, and lacking in “stamina”.
The leader is central to the idea of populism. It is the leader who will emancipate the “people” on their behalf, unshackling them from the ills, constraints, and indignities imposed upon them by a corrupt and indifferent elite. 
Populism has been a part of American politics from its inception. The Anti-Federalists were a populist response to the push for the Constitution and the strong national government it created. 
But, as Alexis de Tocqueville observed, Americans have been able to keep populism at bay and avoid the emergence of democratic despotism to the extent that they resist reliance on strong authority figures to emancipate them. They rely more on themselves and their democratic capacities to work together to affect change in some aspect of political life. 
This is the same contrast Barack Obama drew during his speech at this year’s Democratic National Convention between his view of America and the narrative developed by the Trump campaign.
<h2>A slow-moving trainwreck?</h2>
Many Republicans are now abandoning Trump following signs his campaign may be coming off the rails completely. The release of a videoin which Trump describes himself as engaging in sexual assault led to scores of Republicans, including Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, abandoning him. 
However, despite early concerns, they had dutifully fallen in line endorsing him between the primaries and the convention.
One of America’s most-respected journalists, CBS’ Bob Schieffer, described Trump’s handling of himself in the second debate and particularly his threat to jail his opponent as “disgraceful” and beneath the dignity of the office he seeks. 
Yet polling reveals 2016 is one of the most stable races in modern times. The reason for this appears to be growing partisanship. There has been a significant uptick in this since the 1990s. 
Although there has been a consistent story about the level of undecideds and the level of support for third parties in this election, Democrat Hillary Clinton has retained a consistent lead since June 2016.
<h4> </h4>
<h2>Not going away</h2>
In many ways, the populist vein that Trump has tapped into won’t go away.
With a two-term Democratic president in the White House now, pundits have noted that 2016 is a “change election” whereby there is widespread fatigue for the incumbent party and demands for change, which has made the populist message resonate with so many. This has so far sustained Trump’s campaign where others might have failed.
Twitter users tend to cluster in partisan networks. Online networks are often critical for sustaining political rumours, which have played such a big part of the rise of Trump’s campaign. 
But it does not end there. If retweeting is a measure of Trump’s support on Twitter, he does not have fair-weather fans. Rather, they are in for the long haul. 
Consider the comparison between Trump and Clinton’s average tweet metrics in relation to the margin of Clinton’s polling lead. As Trump does worse in the polls, his retweets go up – whereas there is no statistically significant relationship between Clinton’s retweets and her polling margin. 
The conditions that made the Trump campaign possible will persist as long as there is a belief that governments are run by a corrupt and indifferent elite. It is a caution for whoever wins the White House that they will have to find new ways to connect with ordinary citizens.
Michael Jensen is senior research fellow, Institute for Governance and Policy Analysis, University of Canberra and author for The Conversation. He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/michael-jensen-306913" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Why has Trump succeeded where others would have failed?

<html><body>
A 7,103 sqm vacant building block at Mount Macedon is for sale for $400,000 plus.
Located at <a href="https://www.realestate.com.au/property-acreage+semi+rural-vic-mount+macedon-120667077" target="_blank">38 Boundary Road</a> this is a opportunity to build a dream home where a permit for planning is already in place.
It has views across the renowned Macedon Lodge which the Melbourne Cup winning horse owner Lloyd Williams listed two years ago.
The property is situated close to the Mount Macedon hotel, train station, the trading post general store and schools.
This is offered through Kennedy and Hunt agent Jason Kennedy.
</body></html>

Vacant property with views across from famous Macedon Lodge

<html><body><div class="cq-article-content-paras section">
The 1860s home of colonial architect Edmund Blacket will not be overshadowed by a tower block after the NSW Land and Environment Court agreed with the City of Sydney that Vision Land should not get permission.
They proposed a complex including a seven-storey tower on the grounds about 10 metres behind the historic building.
The court found that while Vision Land's plan formally satisfied height and other numerical guidelines, it involved "unacceptable impacts on existing views" of the residence, the Australian Financial Review reported.
The court said the "height and bulk" of the proposed tower would "dominate the existing building and adversely impact on its setting".
It said the development had failed to fit "within the view shadow of the [Bidura House] group so that it does not challenge the legibility of the Bidura House group" when seen from the front.
Blacket, the architect for the University of Sydney and St Andrews Cathedral in Sydney, designed, built and lived in Bidura.
Vision Land's plan to demolish a prison building in brutalist 1980s architectural style in Bidura's backyard were approved.
The court found that there was no heritage reason not to knock down the remand centre behind Bidura because its "late-brutalist" architecture was only of "local significance". 
A spokesman for the City of Sydney said that the Lord Mayor had asked the NSW Heritage Minister Mark Speakman to protect the remand centre. 
It was listed by the NSW state government in 2014.
</div></body></html>

Bidura House, Glebe court decision

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
The Reserve Bank has left the cash rate unchanged despite a weaker than expected underlying inflation result last week.
Financial comparison site <a href="https://mozo.com.au/https://mozo.com.au/">Mozo.com.au</a> shares the five need-to-know numbers after the RBA’s Melbourne Cup Day rate decision:
<img src="/images/2016/11/02/3.35.png" alt="">
With experts forecasting a rate cut as early as February after today’s decision, home borrowers shouldn’t rush to fix their home loan as they’re better off making the most of a competitive variable rate from as low as 3.35 percent.  
<img src="/images/2016/11/02/167.png" alt="">
This is the difference in monthly repayments for a home borrower on the average variable rate compared to the most competitive rate on the market. 
 <img src="/images/2016/11/02/2996.png" alt="">
If you’d rather haggle than refinance, Mozo’s annual mystery shop of the Big 4 banks reveals the average home borrower can save up to $2,996 in repayments annually simply by asking their lender for a better deal.
<img src="/images/2016/11/02/1.45.png" alt="">
Investors claimed the largest discounts in Mozo’s annual mystery shop with lenders offering up to 1.45% off the standard variable rate compared to last year when no additional discounts were offered. This suggests the banks are now open to negotiating on investor rates again.
 <img src="/images/2016/11/02/87%20bps.png" alt="">
The difference between the average one and two year term deposits and the average ongoing savings rate is sizeable - up to 87 bps. Savers should hedge their bets by putting extra cash away in a competitive term deposit before the next rate cut.
Kirsty Lamont is director, Mozo, and can be contacted <a href="https://mozo.com.au/" target="_blank">here</a>. <a href="https://mozo.com.au/" target="_blank"> </a>
</body></html>

Mozo's five numbers you need to know after the Cup Day RBA decision

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/67942/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
It wouldn’t be too unkind to suggest that Western Australia is not considered as the national benchmark of sophisticated public policy.
Indeed, the state has recently attracted much attention – and derision – for the way its policy making elite squandered the wealth generated by the resources boom.
True, we now have more sports facilities than you can poke a stick at, not to mention a major makeover of the city foreshore – albeit noticeably empty of the promised high profile developments that were supposed to succumb to its irresistible allure. But you can’t accuse the Barnett government of not having big ideas. 
Funding them has been another issue. Quite how WA managed to emerge from the once in a lifetime mining boom with an estimated debt burden of $40 billion by 2020 and a projected budget deficit of $4 billion is one of the West’s great mysteries. Or not, if you bother to look at what happened to all the <a href="https://www.academia.edu/27612380/Booms_busts_and_parochialism_Western_Australias_implacable_political_geography">riches the boom generated</a>.
WA Nationals leader Brendon Grylls certainly has, and that’s why he’s launched a rather lonely campaign to make the miners pay more tax. Even though this fiscal horse has long since bolted, he’s got a point. Not only did the big miners pay a measly 25 cents per tonne royalty to the WA government – a rate fixed in the early 1960s – but the WA government actually subsidised the miners throughout the boom.
According to the Australia Institute, taxation revenue across Australia in 2013-14 (before the collapse in prices) only accounted for about 5% of government revenues. In WA this situation was made worse by a subsidy regime that gifted the big miners some $6 billion at the height of the boom. No surprise that Grylls is on the warpath given his signature ‘Royalties for Regions’ program has been an early casualty of a more austere era.
Was this wasted opportunity and fiscal failure inevitable? Absolutely not. Not only have we been here before and should have learned similar lessons from the boom and inevitable bust of the 1970s, but other countries have been much cleverer in the way they have handled their good fortune.
Every policymaker in Australia should be made to read Paul Cleary’s excellent analysis of the way Norway handled its boom: <a href="https://www.theaustralian.com.au/arts/review/norway-resources-the-good-oil-on-a-trillion-dollar-miracle/news-story/02c157d020b2e26aa506323ae07803d4">Trillion Dollar Baby</a>. The experience could hardly be more different and the comparison would be laughable were it not for the fact that future generations will come to rue the folly and myopia of our current leaders.
The key lesson that emerges from Cleary’s analysis is that even small states can have a big say in determining what happens to the windfall revenues booms generate - but only if they understand what is happening at present and have a plan for the long term future of the country.
Norway had both. First, they had a capable government and skilled bureaucrats (yes, they are valuable and important) who quickly realised that Norway’s oil boom had to be managed for the benefit of Norway, not the multinational oil companies. This meant not being intimidated by powerful multinational corporations and recognising the inherent bargaining strength of national governments. You can only exploit resources where they are. Host governments can - and should - determine how they are developed.
In contrast to successive state and federal governments in Australia, this is precisely what the Norwegians did. First, they compelled the oil majors to build their required oil platforms in Norway, developing a world class manufacturing capability in the process. Secondly, and in another unflattering and revealing contrast to Australia, they ensured 90% of the windfall revenues derived from the oil boom in Norway remained there. 
Norway’s “problem”, unlike ours, has been what to do with the astounding amounts of wealth generated as a direct consequence of its activist and enlightened policies. A third critical innovation was establishing a sovereign wealth fund.
Sovereign wealth funds serve two purposes. First, they put aside the windfall revenues of today for future generations – a possibility our own leaders seem incapable of contemplating given their truncated political horizons. Second, by investing most of the wealth overseas, they put downward pressure on the domestic currency, allowing other domestic industries to survive.
At a time when we are collectively waving farewell to much of the manufacturing sector, this is another sobering lesson – especially for the young who will not benefit from all that squandered wealth and may wonder where they will actually work. 
The current debate – such as it is – in the West will likely go nowhere. Kevin Rudd’s demise is a reminder of what happens to politicians in this country who dare to take on the miners. The WA Labor Party is unlikely to be any braver or far-sighted on these issues than its federal counterparts. In short, don’t look to the West for a revolution in public policy. But if you want somewhere spacious and well equipped to kick a footie around.
Mark Beeson is professor of International Politics, University of Western Australia and author for The Conversation. He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/mark-beeson-60300" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Western Australia provides a masterclass in what not to do with a resources boom

Developer <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/bottega-property-group">Bottega House</a> has secured council approval for its first Brisbane project - a $270 million luxury residential development on an absolute riverfront site in leafy St Lucia.&nbsp;

The 15-storey project, known as <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/st-lucia-by-bottega-house-180-macquarie-street-st-lucia-qld-4067">St Lucia by Bottega House</a> , will occupy a prime north-facing site at 178-180 Macquarie Street, directly fronting the Brisbane River in the established inner-west suburb known for its rowing clubs, golf courses and sprawling University of Queensland campus.&nbsp;

St Lucia by Bottega House will feature a suite of amenities including dedicated wellness spaces, a mineral pool and cold plunge. The project has been positioned to attract affluent owner-occupiers seeking high-quality, house-sized apartments.&nbsp;

Bottega House has been set up by co-directors Nick Malloch, Louis Mennes and Craig Marsh.

Malloch said the project drew inspiration from its Brisbane River setting and leafy inner-west surrounds, while responding to the demands of discerning locals looking to transition from freestanding homes into apartment living.&nbsp;

"With an expansive river frontage and lush green surrounds, we knew we had to create something special that reflects the natural beauty of the location while offering residents masterfully crafted homes," said Malloch.&nbsp;

"Our intent was to complement the project's quiet, private setting by introducing residences that offer a calm retreat and sanctuary from the everyday. The result is a harmonious blend of architecture, interiors and amenity that emphasises wellbeing, comfort and beauty without excess."&nbsp;

Malloch added that project consultants had been carefully selected in alignment with Bottega House's commitment to care, quality and attention to detail. The design team includes architects <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/plus-studio">Plus Studio</a>, interiors practice <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/interior-designers/mim-design">Mim Design</a> and landscaping by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/urbis">Urbis</a>.&nbsp;

Three-bedroom apartments are expected to start around $5 millio. Selling agents Keenan &amp; Byrne said the pricing strategy for the project was anticipated to achieve upwards of $25,500 per square metre.&nbsp;

The project's development approval this week follows the success of Bottega House's inaugural Queensland project - a 22-storey collection of full-floor sky homes at Broadbeach on the Gold Coast which included the sale of a two-storey penthouse at a record price for a beachside residence.&nbsp;

St Lucia by Bottega House is expected to launch to market in November, with construction anticipated to be completed mid 2029.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=151826]

Joel Robinson

Bottega House to make Brisbane debut with St Lucia riverfront apartment development

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/sherpa-property-group">Sherpa Property Group</a> is advancing its affordable apartment model into Brisbane with the acquisition of another site at Cordelia Street in South Brisbane for $27 million.

Sherpa, which has a $1.7 billion pipeline across Southeast Queensland, intends to bring a cohort of apartments exclusively for first homebuyers into its proposed 186-apartment project to be built at 2 Cordelia Street.

The Sherpa model has already been incredibly well received from their Gold Coast projects, where Sherpa Group set aside a number of apartments exclusively for first homebuyers.

The new $320 million project marks Sherpa Group's second development in Brisbane, following its $255 million Symphony project, also on Cordelia Street, which is currently under construction.

Symphony will deliver 146 apartments across 28 levels, offering a mix of one, two and three-bedroom apartments. With 114 already sold, construction by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/builders/lps-group">LPS Group</a> is scheduled for completion in 2028.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=7574 project_image_fid=351654]

Sherpa Founder, Christie Leet, said the company was excited to be venturing into Brisbane for its second residential project.

“We’re big believers in the future of Brisbane as we lead into the 2032 Olympics and beyond,” Leet said.

“The success of Symphony has guided us into what will be our second project and we look forward to submitting our plans with council soon so we can deliver yet another quality project to the inner city residential market.

“Our Flourish model has been very well received both in Brisbane and the Gold Coast, and we’re excited to be able to offer some of these apartments again exclusively to first homebuyers to help get them into the property market.

“The model has been extraordinarily well received in our previous projects and it is something we are committed to moving forward.”

2 Cordelia Street will be designed by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/hal-architects">HAL Architects</a> &amp; Finegrain and will include Sherpa’s signature residential amenities including pool, gym, recreation, wellness and work from home spaces.

The project will feature ground-floor commercial space, creating a vibrant amenity for residents and the surrounding community.

A development application will be lodged with Brisbane City Council in August on the code compliant site and will be launched to the market early 2027.

Sherpa acquires new site for second Brisbane apartment tower

One of North Sydney's best-known commercial buildings could become hundreds of new homes, with insurance giant Zurich Australia lodging a State Significant Development Application (SSDA) to transform 5 Blue Street into a mixed-use residential development above North Sydney Station.

Rather than demolishing the existing building and starting again, Zurich is proposing an adaptive reuse project that would convert the landmark office building into a 15-level residential development delivering 62 apartments, 86 affordable co-living dwellings, activated retail and significant upgrades to the Blue Street Plaza.

The proposal reflects a growing trend of commercial property owners repositioning ageing office assets into residential housing as Sydney grapples with housing supply shortages and changing workplace demand.

<img alt="Zurich" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="0bba7d12-06dc-4375-aad7-238c94b21ac5" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-07-22%20at%2010.42.05%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=NJl5oLAEBDGuPmY3RnyliKODjMc8lvRh" />

Located directly above North Sydney Metro and train station, the 3,051 sqm site occupies one of the most strategically positioned parcels of land on Sydney's Lower North Shore.

Designed by fjcstudio, the proposal seeks to retain and adapt much of the existing structure while creating a contemporary residential address that better connects with the public domain surrounding North Sydney Station.

The application proposes two basement levels, ground floor retail, affordable co-living accommodation across the podium levels, and apartments above, while preserving and enhancing the publicly accessible Blue Street Plaza.

Rather than pursuing maximum apartment numbers, Zurich has opted for a housing mix heavily weighted towards larger owner-occupier residences.

The proposal includes 62 build-to-sell apartments comprising 12 one-bedroom, 19 two-bedroom, 29 three-bedroom apartments and two premium penthouses. It also incorporates 86 affordable co-living dwellings, which would be managed in perpetuity by a Community Housing Provider.

That balance between traditional apartments and affordable housing reflects the NSW Government's push to increase housing diversity around major transport infrastructure.

The proposal has been lodged concurrently with a rezoning application, with Zurich arguing the site is ideally positioned to support additional housing given its immediate proximity to public transport, employment and services.

"The proposal aims to respond to the housing challenges facing Sydney through the delivery of diverse housing types in a highly accessible location," the design report by fjcstudio states. It also seeks to improve pedestrian amenity through upgrades to Blue Street Plaza while creating a high-performing residential building that responds to the surrounding context.

<img alt="Zurich" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="36082e15-c636-4481-bb68-5a5f6443fe39" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-07-22%20at%2010.41.36%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=5P6VD.fvmqjQfIG3TWWMRXxQWiQBjeFB" />

Rather than replacing the commercial building, fjcstudio has developed a design that works with the existing structural framework above the rail corridor, an approach that significantly reduces demolition while allowing the site to be repositioned as a mixed-use residential precinct.

The existing structural constraints have informed much of the building's design, including its relationship with Blue Street and surrounding public spaces.

The building has been designed as a slender tower rising above a clearly defined podium, with vertically expressed façades intended to reduce the perceived bulk while reinforcing North Sydney's emerging skyline.

According to fjcstudio, the architectural language responds directly to the surrounding commercial towers while maintaining a finer grain expression more closely aligned with the neighbouring Lavender Bay streetscape.

The tower incorporates articulated façade elements, landscaped podium edges and recessed upper levels to soften its appearance and improve pedestrian amenity below.

A significant component of the proposal is the revitalisation of Blue Street Plaza.

The existing public space has long served as one of the primary pedestrian connections between North Sydney Station, Greenwood Plaza and Blue Street, yet its role is expected to become even more important following the opening of Sydney Metro.

Zurich's proposal seeks to strengthen that role by improving landscaping, introducing new retail frontages, enhancing pedestrian permeability and creating more active edges throughout the day and evening.

Ground floor retail would wrap the plaza, while separate residential and co-living entries have been designed to improve wayfinding without reducing street activation.

Landscape design has been integrated throughout the podium and public realm, softening what is currently one of the most heavily urbanised parts of North Sydney.

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

fjcstudio has carefully oriented apartments towards Sydney Harbour and the CBD while using privacy blades and articulated façades to minimise overlooking between neighbouring buildings.

Large framed openings along the western elevation maximise harbour outlooks, while the eastern apartments have been angled towards the south-east to improve privacy from neighbouring development.

The project forms part of the continuing transformation of North Sydney from a predominantly commercial CBD into a genuine mixed-use city centre.

Since the completion of Victoria Cross Metro Station, developers have increasingly shifted their attention towards residential projects capable of leveraging the area's unparalleled transport connectivity.

&nbsp;

FiveX recently lodged plans for a 61-storey, 490-apartment tower that would become one of the tallest residential buildings in North Sydney if approved.

Aqualand continues to expand its Lower North Shore presence following the completion of AURA on Walker Street and its recent St Leonards and Roseville proposals.

Developers are also progressing projects throughout Walker Street, Miller Street and the Victoria Cross precinct as demand for well-located owner-occupier apartments continues to strengthen.

First look: Zurich targets North Sydney office conversion with 148-unit proposal above Metro station

Busy developer Aqualand Prestige has formally taken the next step in its expansion across Sydney's Lower North Shore, lodging a State Significant Development Application (SSDA) for its long-held Archer Street site in Chatswood.

The application covers <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/51-55-archer-street-chatswood-nsw-2067">51-55 Archer Street</a>, a 1,767 sqm amalgamated site on the eastern edge of the Chatswood CBD, where the developer is seeking approval for a 45-level mixed-use tower delivering 114 apartments, including a significant affordable housing component, alongside retail, commercial space and six basement levels of parking.

The SSDA marks the latest milestone for a project Aqualand has been quietly progressing over the past two years. The developer first secured the site for its Aqualand Prestige platform before undertaking an alternative design excellence process with PTW Architects, ultimately avoiding a formal design competition through the Housing Delivery Authority pathway.

The proposal has evolved considerably from Aqualand's original concept. The revised scheme has been designed around larger owner-occupier product, with an unusually high proportion of three and four-bedroom apartments, targeting the more affluent buyer profile, and downsizer, emerging across the North Shore.

<img alt="Archer St" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="0171204c-5811-41b5-9b09-2335d1b7c3d0" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-07-22%20at%208.52.48%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=6YTuxfq.puZo7k2wbfgemcO5K3QfXYGQ" />

The 114-apartment mix comprises six studios, 27 one-bedroom apartments, 18 two-bedroom apartments, 50 three-bedroom residences and 13 four-bedroom homes. A quarter of the building will be dedicated to affordable housing, well above the mandated 15 per cent&nbsp;

PTW has structured the building vertically, with affordable housing across levels one to six, premium apartments through levels seven to 31, duplex skyhomes on klevels 32 to 43, a penthouse on level 44, and a rooftop plant level above. Six basement levels will provide resident parking and servicing.

The tower is proposed to reach approximately 154 metres, placing it among a growing collection of residential high-rises transforming Chatswood's skyline.

Rather than competing purely on height, PTW says the design has been driven by creating a slimmer tower capable of delivering significantly larger apartments.

"The primary objective of this project was to create a distinctive building that stands out from the recently approved or built structures in the Chatswood area," the design report states, noting the structural efficiency allows greater investment into apartment quality and resident amenity.

Residents would have access to more than 450 sqm of communal open space including landscaped gardens, swimming pool, rooftop entertaining areas, fitness spaces, community gardens, children's play areas and barbecue facilities.

A major focus of the design has been the public domain.

The ground plane has been opened up through landscaped terraces inspired by Willoughby's sandstone ridges, with native planting, public seating, artwork, retail activation and a series of gathering spaces intended to soften what has traditionally been a hard commercial streetscape.

The landscape strategy references Blue Gum forests once common throughout the area, while incorporating Indigenous storytelling, public art and lighting installations to strengthen the connection to Country.

Chatswood has been one of Sydney's busiest apartment markets over the past 12 months, with a steady pipeline of both new project launches and fresh development applications.

Hyecorp recently launched Celine, a 122-apartment development just along Archer Street, while Changfa and Huirong Group are progressing The Anderson, an 84-apartment project on Anderson Street.

Develotek recently secured approval for a 101-apartment tower on Pacific Highway, while Tian An LFD received the green light for Hammond Greens, its apartment development on the edge of the Chatswood Bowling Club.

Commercial property developer FiveX is also making its move into the residential market. Last month it lodged plans for a 61-storey tower with 490 apartments, which, if approved, would become one of the tallest residential buildings in Chatswood.

Read more:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/news/nsw/first-look-fivex-targets-chatswood-skyline-with-61-storey-tower-after-north-sydney-plans">First look: FiveX targets Chatswood skyline with 61-storey tower after North Sydney plans</a>

Aqualand is also expanding its development pipeline following the launch of its luxury residential brand, Aqualand Prestige. The developer has delivered a string of high-end apartment projects across Sydney's affluent suburbs over the past decade, most recently AURA by Aqualand on Walker Street in North Sydney.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=30959 project_image_fid=292863]

It has since quietly assembled its next wave of projects.

Earlier this year Aqualand launched Boronia in Roseville, a boutique 111-apartment development on Larkin Street. The project is one of the first significant apartment developments to launch in the suburb ahead of what is expected to become one of Sydney's most active new housing precincts under the NSW Government's Low and Mid-Rise Housing reforms, which allow greater density around train stations.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=152095 project_image_fid=373685]

The developer has also lodged plans for a two-tower, 413-apartment development on Herbert Street in nearby St Leonards, further strengthening its presence across the Lower North Shore.

Beyond that, Aqualand remains behind the final stage of Barangaroo, where plans will deliver a five-hectare mixed-use precinct comprising new homes, retail, hospitality and community facilities, alongside a new Metro entrance and more than two hectares of public open space, completing the Barangaroo precinct.

Read more:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/news/nsw/central-barangaroo-development-takes-big-step-with-concept-proposal-approval">Central Barangaroo development takes big step with concept proposal approval</a>

Read more:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/news/nsw/first-look-aqualand-joins-st-leonards-apartment-party">First look: Aqualand joins St Leonards apartment party</a> 
&nbsp;

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

First look: Aqualand pushes ahead with Chatswood apartment tower as SSDA lodged for Archer Street

Mass timber is becoming an increasingly popular construction material in apartment developments, but Adelaide developer <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/otello">Otello</a> is taking the approach a step further.

At its new <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/flowe-bowden-18-gibson-street-bowden-sa-5007">Flowe Bowden</a> development, the exposed cross-laminated timber (CLT) structure isn't just about reducing the building's environmental footprint. It also forms the foundation of a broader wellness strategy, influencing everything from indoor air quality and natural materials to the way residents move through and experience the building.

The 115-apartment mixed-use development, designed by Melbourne-based architecture practice Fieldwork, will occupy a prominent island site opposite Bowden Village Reserve, combining one, two and three-bedroom apartments with retail and a dedicated wellness destination.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=152022 project_image_fid=375528]

Wellness isn't confined to a gym or shared resident facility at Flowe. Instead, Fieldwork embedded the concept into the building itself.

The development has been split into two residential wings connected by a naturally ventilated central breezeway, replacing traditional enclosed corridors with open-air walkways that improve natural light, encourage cross ventilation and create more opportunities for neighbourly interaction.

"Rather than treating wellness as something that only happens on the ground floor, our response integrates it throughout the building, which led us to ask what it really means to design a healthy building," Fieldwork Director Quino Holland said.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=152022 project_image_fid=375531]

The building's architecture also reflects Bowden's industrial heritage. The lower podium references the area's historic brick and sandstone buildings, while the upper levels transition to exposed CLT, allowing the timber structure to become a defining feature throughout the apartments and shared spaces.

The use of mass timber sits alongside a range of sustainability initiatives, including a fully electric, gas-free design, rooftop solar and a targeted 5 Star Green Star rating.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=152022 project_image_fid=375524]

Inside the residences, the focus remains on natural, durable materials. Blackbutt engineered timber flooring, exposed CLT ceilings, porcelain surfaces and warm timber joinery create a calming interior palette, while low-VOC finishes and responsibly sourced materials have been selected to improve indoor air quality.

Kitchens have been designed as the centrepiece of each apartment, featuring porcelain island benchtops, timber-look cabinetry and brushed steel tapware, with layouts that maximise natural light and ventilation.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=152022 project_image_fid=375530]

The more traditional interpretation of wellness comes in the form of Level Eleven, a two-storey wellness club spanning the ground floor, mezzanine and first floor.

The facility will include a gym, yoga and reformer Pilates studios, Finnish and infrared saunas, magnesium hot and cold plunge pools, and dedicated recovery spaces. Unlike many residential wellness facilities, Level Eleven will also operate commercially, allowing the broader Bowden community to access the venue while giving residents exclusive membership benefits.

The ground floor has also been designed around everyday living. A café overlooking Bowden Village Reserve will activate the street frontage, while a bike workshop with tool storage, co-working space and dog wash has been incorporated to support daily routines and encourage interaction between residents.

"Flowe brings together my two biggest passions, creating places and creating healthier lives," Otello founder Daniel Harris said.

"We wanted to create something Adelaide hasn't seen before, a genuinely healthy building, where the way you live is lifted without even trying."

Flowe is positioned directly opposite Bowden Village Reserve and within walking distance of Bowden Railway Station and the Adelaide Entertainment Centre, placing future residents just minutes from the Adelaide CBD while remaining connected to one of the city's most established urban renewal precincts.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=152022]

Jonathan Chancellor

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News