<html><body><div class="content">
<div id="bodyContainer" class="col-12">
<div id="contentPage" class="article">
<div class="header clearfix">
<h1> </h1>
GUEST OBSERVER
In April, Chinese house prices data showed a further broadening of momentum across the 70 major cities that report.
For new housing, 65 cities reported price gains in April relative to March; that compares to 62, 47, and 38 respectively in March, February and January.
In contrast, momentum in the existing market failed to improve: at 51, the number of cities reporting gains was marginally down on March’s 54, but up from around 35 in January and February.
Relative to a year ago, new and existing housing price growth improved in April, albeit only at the margin. For tier-1 cities, prices for new and existing houses are up 31.5 percent yr (from 29.4 percent yr in March) and 36.1 percent yr (from 35.6 percentyr). Within tier-1, Shenzhen remains the clear leader, with new house prices there up 62.5 percentyr versus the next-best (Shanghai) at 28.6 percent yr. Shenzhen also has the strongest performing existing market, although the divergence is less obvious: 56.2 percent yr against 37.3 percent yr in Beijing and 30.1 percent yr for Shanghai.
Price growth in tier-2 and tier-3 cities remains a striking contrast against tier-1. For tier-2, new and existing house prices have risen 5.0 percent yr and 5.5 percent yr respectively (up from 3.6 percent yr and 4.4 percent yr). And in tier-3, prices are up just 1.6 percent yr and 1.3 percent yr (0.5 percent yr and 0.8 percent yr).
It is certainly a positive that prices are growing in tier-2 and tier-3 cities, but the uptrend is hardly robust. The divergence across the three tiers continues to suggest that, while established wealth is being put to use in the most-developed cities, conditions remain quite subdued elsewhere, with easier policy only having an impact at the margin.
So as to give longevity to the burgeoning upturn in residential activity, there is a need to limit speculative excess at the top while maintaining accommodation to other regional markets.
Clearly there is more work to do in this area.
 
‎Elliot Clarke is director and Senior Economist, Westpac, and can be contacted <a href="https://www.westpac.com.au" target="_blank">here</a>.
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div></body></html>

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

Chinese 70-city property prices: Westpac's Elliot Clarke 

<html><body>
The Bowral Hotel has been sold to an undisclosed Sydney-based hotel operator for $6.35 million by the listed Lantern Group.
It sold through CBRE's Daniel Dragicevich​ and Ben McDonald.
Lantern Hotel's chief executive Jon Osborne said the sale was part of the ongoing divestment of non-core assets.
The group has sold five hotels in the past nine months, with two further sales under contract.
"The program is continuing with a sale of the Lawson Park Hotel, Mudgee.  
CBRE Hotels advised the sales campaign for the Bowral Hotel attracted more than 50 genuine inquiries and 13 initial offers.
</body></html>

Bowral Hotel sold for $6.35 million

<html><body><div class="content">
<div id="bodyContainer" class="col-12">
<div id="contentPage" class="article">
<div class="webArticle">
<div id="pnlSectionWrapper" class="section">
<div class="page tpl-a">
<div class="row-1">
<div class="col-12 col-first col-last box-1x1">
GURST OBSERVER
Wage inflation in Qld has moderated down to the pace in WA even though the mining invesment hit is greater in the latter state.
Total hourly wage rates ex bonuses (WPI) lifted 0.4 percent in Q1, less than market’s expectation for a 0.5 percent rise. Westpac forecast was for a 0.4 percentqtr rise in the WPI. This follows on from a rise of 0.5 percent in Q4 and 0.6 percentqtr rise in each of the two quarters before.
The annual pace is a new record low for the Index at 2.1 percentyr. This is a moderation from 2.2 percentyr in Q4 and the recent peak of 2.5 percentyr in 2015Q4. The WPI started in the September quarter of 1997.
More dramatic has been the deceleration in private sector wage inflation. Lifting just 0.4 percentqtr this followed a 0.5 percentqtr rise in each of the previous four quarters. Before that it had a run of three quarters printing 0.6 percentqtr each quarter.  As such, the annual pace has hit a new record low of 1.9 percentyr. Private sector wage inflation recent peak was 4.0 percentyr in 2011Q1 and has been moderating ever since.
There was, however, some more positive news. The annual pace of growth in wages rates when you also include bonuses lifted to 2.5 percentyr in Q1. But before you get too excited this was more to do with base effects than an improvement in the underlying pace. In the quarter, total wages included bonuses lifted 0.4 percent compared to 0.5 percent in Q4 and 1.0 percent in Q3 but as it is up on the surprising 0.2 percent in 2015Q1 it boosted the annual pace.
The moderation in wages may also be due to the shifting composition of employment gains, from mining and construction to hospitality and other household services. These sectors seem to be able to draw in a greater supply of labour (noticeable in the rising female participation) and tend to have weaker collective bargaining power.
Public sector wage inflation printed 0.5 percent in the March quarter from 0.5 percent in the December quarter and an average of 0.7 percentqtr in the previous four quarters. The annual pace was flat at 2.5 percentyr which is a moderation from the recent peak of 2.7 percentyr in 2015Q3. Post the GFC, public sector wage inflation peaked at 3.9 percentyr in 2010Q4.
Wage inflation lifted a touch in WA to 2.0 percentyr as Qld held a 1.9 percentyr pace to now have the lowest rate of total wage inflation for any mainland state. ACT overall holds the award for the lowest rate of wages growth at 1.8 percentyr. However, at 1.6 percent WA has the lowest rate of private sector wage inflation. NSW wages growth was flat at 2.1 percentyr while Vic wages growth was also flat but at a higher pace of 2.4 percentyr. SA spit the difference of the two recording a 2.2 percentyr pace.
Wage inflation is underperforming what the broader labour market indicators are suggesting it should be. Wage pressures are well contained as the temperature cools in the former hot sectors and industries. This presents a very benign outlook for inflation and one that is set to remain so given modest job gains, increasing market competition in the retail space in particular, declining inflation expectations and rising supply of workers in the sectors that are expanding (as exemplified by rising female participation).
Depending on which deflator you use, real wage inflation is benign at 0.8 percent/yr (headline CPI) or 0.5 percentyr (using average of the RBA core measures). 
Justin Smirk is ‎senior economist, Westpac Group and can be contacted <a href="https://www.westpac.com.au/about-westpac/westpac-group/" target="_blank">here</a>.
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div></body></html>

 Wages inflation continues to probe new record lows: Westpac's Justin Smirk

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
<div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="section">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
The Index has now been in negative territory for the last 12 months and continues to point to below trend growth in the economy throughout 2016. 
With trend growth generally assessed as 2.75percent for Australia the Index is sending a more negative signal than both Westpac and official forecasts.
The Reserve Bank recently released its revised growth forecasts for 2016 and 2017 and retained the forecasts from its February Statement on Monetary Policy at 3percent for through the year growth in both 2016 and 2017. On the other hand, the Government was a little more circumspect , broadly consistent with the signals from the Leading Index and forecasting year average growth in both 2015/16 and 2016/17 at 2.5 percent. 
Arguably, the recent sharp deterioration in the growth rate of the Leading Index (five consecutive months where the growth rate is more than 1 percentage point below trend) is likely to be pointing to a more serious below trend growth performance in 2016/17 than indicated even by the government.
<a href="/images/2016/05/18/Screen%20Shot%202016-05-18%20at%202.40.03%20PM.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2016/05/18/Screen%20Shot%202016-05-18%20at%202.40.03%20PM.png" alt="">
Westpac is more optimistic than the Government with forecasts of 2.9percent (2015/16) and 2.7percent (2016/17) although slightly less optimistic than the Reserve Bank with forecast growth rates of 2.8percent (through the year) in both 2016 and 2017.
To test what is driving the Leading Index to produce a more downbeat outlook than the official forecasters and Westpac it is helpful to consider the contributions to the growth rate from the various components of the Leading Index. International factors dominate with US industrial production (–0.46 percentage points) and Commodity Prices (RBA Index) (–0.31 percentage points) contributing 0.77 percentage points of the 1.08 percentage point deviation below trend.
Perhaps the official forecasters and Westpac are underestimating the importance of these international influences on Australia’s growth prospects.
Another “test” of the signals from the Index is to track the contribution to the growth rate of the Index from its components over the course of the last six months. Over that period the growth rate of the Index fell from 0.5 percentage points below trend to 1.08 percentage points below trend.
The main contributors to the fall in the growth rate were: aggregate monthly hours worked (–0.37 percentage points) Westpac MI Unemployment Expectations Index (–0.10 percentage points); Westpac MI Consumer Sentiment Expectations Index
(–0.12 percentage points); US Industrial Production (–0.19 percentage points); yield spread (–0.7 percentage points); RBA commodity prices Index (–0.06 percentage points); and dwelling approvals (–0.04 percentage points). Partially offsetting this fall was a less negative contribution of 0.36 percentage points from the ASX 200.
An overall conclusion from this analysis is that international factors have generally been the source of the underperformance of the Index but in recent months a deterioration in components associated with the labour market have contributed to further weakness.
The Reserve Bank Board next meets on June 7. We were surprised that the Board decided to cut the cash rate by 0.25percent at its meeting in May. We underestimated the degree to which the staff lowered its inflation forecasts in the wake of the March quarter Inflation Report. On the basis of that Report the Bank lowered its underlying inflation forecasts for 2016 and 2017 from 2.5percent and 2.5percent respectively to 1.5percent and 2.0percent even after allowing for the rate cut. Presented with those forecast changes the Board would have had little choice but to take some action.
We expect that further action will be required at the August meeting once more information about the inflation outlook is available following the release of the June quarter Inflation Report. Indeed the Bank’s current forecasts for inflation take into account the May rate cut and market pricing which, at the time, assumed a further cut. With the 2017 forecast for underlying inflation barely reaching the bottom of the target zone (2–3percent) it is likely that a follow up move will be required.
However we do not expect that move as early as June. It will be prudent to test the current forecasts with the benefit of the June Inflation Report which will not be available until late July.
BILL EVANS is chief economist of <a href="https://www.westpac.com.au/" target="_blank">Westpac</a>.
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body></html>

Leading Index still weak: Westpac's Bill Evans

<html><body>
<div class="domain-article-share-panel">
<div class="domain-article-share-link domain-article-share-tw">
Home auction markets weakened over April with most capitals reporting falling clearance rates compared to the previous month.
Melbourne was the exception with clearance rates increasing marginally from 71.8 percent to 72.5 percent to remain the best performing capital city market.
Clearance rates in all capitals with the exception of Adelaide remain below the levels reported over April last year.
</div>
</div>
<div class="domain-article-content-body">
CAPITAL CITY      APRIL 2016     MARCH 2016         APRIL 2015
SYDNEY             68.1 percent    69.2 percent         83.1 percent
MELBOURNE      72.5 percent     71.8 percent        76.9 percent
BRISBANE          41.6 percent     44.9 percent        52.8 percent
ADELAIDE          63.5 percent     64.0 percent        57.1 percent
CANBERRA         62.2 percent    65.6 percent        69.2 percent
Domain noted median auction prices were down over the month in Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane reflecting to some extent the impact of holidays with fewer higher-priced homes in the market.
The number of auctions listed this year so far however is higher than the result over the same period last year in all capitals except Sydney where auction volumes have fallen sharply by 6.5 percent.
 
</div>
</body></html>

April auctions weakened slightly: Domain

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/57114/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVERS
A structural change is underway in global dairy markets. A perfect storm has emerged through a coincidence of events, technology, and policy changes across the major dairy producing nations, including Australia, which will result in a long term significant reset of dairy economics across the globe.
Cooperatives Murray Goulburn and Fonterra have both dramatically reduced the prices they offer dairy farmers for milk, sparking a backlash from farmers, who say they will be pushed into the red and out of dairy.
It is only due to the strength of the two cooperatives in absorbing the costs of high milk prices in a changing market that these reductions did not occur earlier. The cooperatives have shown an inadequate understanding of global dairy economics by over-paying farmers and by seeking to claw back over-paid advances.
The low prices have been blamed on a short-term oversupply coinciding with a reduction in demand from China and Russia. Some of this demand is now being met by Chinese investment in both Australia and New Zealand which also contributes to the changes underway. But the debate thus far has focused on problems with demand while ignoring the bigger issue of increasing global over-supply.
The preoccupation with the belief that global demand will solve emerging on-farm production cost difficulties and that a “substantial improvement in prices was still expected by mid-2016” was naïve and failed to recognise how quickly, and irreversibly global dairy supply can change.
Since the mid-2000s a strong increase in demand for milk products across Asia, largely on the back of rising middle-income wealth led to the complete depletion of surplus dairy stocks in the European Union and the US. This change to the supply-demand equilibrium resulted in a temporary sea-change in dairy markets because growth in demand simply outpaced growth in supply by between 50% and 100% in some markets on an annual basis.
To a large extent this imbalance had been driven by regulation of the global supply market in which only a few export nations competed – Australia and New Zealand included. It resulted in higher than historical average dairy prices in global markets, but considerably more short-term volatility due to global GDP shocks and short-term supply-demand imbalances.
Regrettably a critical assumption that appears to have emerged among producers during this period, as evidenced by continued investment and expansion, was that the real price for global dairy commodities was increasing, a trend they expected to continue in the long term.
The current dairy price scenario, which would historically have been short-lived, is in fact masking underlying structural changes to supply-side dynamics that are now underway. Only approximately 7 percent of globally produced milk is traded (65 billion milk-equivalent litres). Therefore, a small change in supply globally has a profound effect on the global dairy market equilibrium.
The EU is the world’s largest milk producer, with approximately 160 billion litres produced annually. The <a href="https://www.fao.org/docrep/012/i1522e/i1522e02.pdf">r</a>emoval of milk production quotas in March 2015 presented an opportunity for dairy expansion and, even more importantly, one that is no longer confined to the traditional dairy exporters of Ireland, France, Belgium, and the Netherlands.
Under quota, EU exports doubled between 2000 and 2013 to 9.5 billion litres and are anticipated to increase again this coming season. Quota removal has freed dairy farmers in central and Eastern Europe to increase in scale considerably, availing themselves of technologies denied during the Cold War years. Coupled with the removal of regulations concerning the transportation of liquid milk across borders, producers and processors now find themselves with opportunities for growth not experienced since the second world war.
Political policies in the world’s third largest dairy producer, the USA, are also likely to influence global dairy supply in the future. Current dairy production is being stimulated by low feed prices, which were driven by record yield seasons in 2013 and 2014, similar levels in 2015 and new projected highs this year.
Eighty percent of US dairy farm costs are feed. The reduction in feed costs from US$29.26 per 100kg milk in August 2012 to US$18.04 per 100 kg milk in June 2015 has greatly increased the value of marginal production.
The advent of large-scale fracking, which has resulted in a significant reduction in the price of oil, will likely maintain lower corn prices, at least in the short-term. This comes as the reduced value of biofuels re-focus the use of corn back to a feedstuffs for farmed livestock. The net result is that 75% of every new tonne of production across the USA is expected to be sold on the global surplus market.
Farmers have fought for free trade and open access for decades on both sides of the Tasman. Now that it is emerging, profitable returns will be caught first by the lowest cost global producer.
We are fools to think that that will be either Australia or New Zealand. Therefore, possibly with the exception of the US market, a downward reset is in store for global dairy prices.
James Lockhart is senior Lecturer, School of Management, Massey University and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/james-lockhart-265538" target="_blank">here</a>.
Danny Donaghy is professor of Dairy Production Systems, Massey University and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/danny-donaghy-265818" target="_blank">here</a>.
Hamish Gow is professor of Agribusiness, Massey University and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/hamish-gow-265539" target="_blank">here</a>.
All are authors for The Conversation.
</body></html>

Milk price cuts reflect the reality of sweeping changes in global dairy market

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/57114/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
Globally, interest in national urban policy peaked in the late 1970s and declined sharply thereafter. The trend held true for Australia, peaking under the Whitlam government.
The decades after the Whitlam government produced a variety of federal housing and other urban policies. None had the scope of a national urban policy.
Not until 2011, with Labor’s Our Cities, Our Future, was a national urban policy launched. This did not mirror a similar resurgent interest in Western countries. These countries promote intergovernmental decentralisation, while Australia has increased centralisation.
Australian exceptionalism – both its “unique model of metropolitan governance” and its extreme <a href="https://theconversation.com/renewing-federalism-what-are-the-solutions-to-vertical-fiscal-imbalance-31422">vertical fiscal imbalance</a> (VFI) – provides the setting for federal policy that assumes the prerogatives of state and metropolitan urban policy.
<h2>Commonwealth role rarely challenged</h2>
Urban academics and professional organisations such as the Planning Institute of Australia celebrated Our Cities, Our Future – perhaps due to the increased prominence accorded urban affairs.
Few questioned the rationale for federal engagement in matters such as metropolitan strategic planning, infrastructure investment and housing. No significant urban outcomes can be attributed to Our Cities, Our Future.
Yet the policy environment at the time did have a legacy, following the creation in 2008 of Infrastructure Australia. In a context of VFI, then-prime minister Kevin Rudd sought to rationalise federal infrastructure funding based on the “business case” for projects. He tasked the COAG Reform Council with preparing guidelines for capital city strategic planning systems that would provide an “evidence base” for federal decision-making.
In 2014, the remit of Infrastructure Australia was expanded. It was to undertake an Australian Infrastructure Audit and prepare an Australian Infrastructure Plan. The plan, finalised in 2016, holds that:
The Australian government should drive change in the planning and operation of Australia’s cities through the use of Infrastructure Reform Incentives.
This approach would:
 …tie the provision of additional funding for infrastructure to the delivery of a range of city-based reforms, focused on improving the quality of planning, development and infrastructure across Australia’s cities.
This is an extraordinary assertion of power over planning for, and infrastructure investment in, cities. It has no constitutional foundation. VFI, however, frees the pens of the drafters of urban policy and the presumptions of their political masters.
Lest we forget, at the time the plan was being finalised, for 99 days there was a minister for cities and the built environment. Again, responding to the attention given to urban affairs, urban academics and professionals feted the creation of this position. No significant urban outcomes can be attributed to the ministry.
Following Jamie Briggs’ misadventure and the appointment of Angus Taylor as assistant minister for cities and digital transformation, the Smart Cities Plan was launched. Its potential significance is huge. Its ambition is to “rethink the way our cities are planned, built and managed”, with the Commonwealth to lead the rethinking.
<h2>So what’s in the latest plan?</h2>
The plan contains much that is interesting, but little that is substantial. It has the appearance more of a think-piece than a substantive policy document. Some prominent ideas are plugged in, then ignored.
An example is the “30-minute city”. It gets headlines, but it is difficult to identify what this adds to the urban agenda once the actual commitment to public transport is considered.
What the 30-minute city concept does do is reveal the extent of federal presumption about city planning. Can one really argue that this is the job of federal government?
Together, the Australian Infrastructure Plan and the Smart Cities Plan amount to a new national urban policy based on metropolitan strategic planning, infrastructure funding and City Deals.
While acknowledging the states' constitutional prerogatives to undertake metropolitan strategic and infrastructure planning and to implement projects, VFI makes federal presumptions possible. The views of a metropolitan community of interests are not a consideration.
The federal commitment is to:
<ul>
<li>
A$50 million for infrastructure planning;
</li>
<li>
establish an infrastructure financing unit; and
</li>
<li>
invite state and territory governments to partner the Commonwealth on City Deals.
</li>
</ul>
Any federal discussion about financing infrastructure in Australia’s cities is interesting and the Smart Cities Plan does appear to presage innovative public and private financing opportunities.
As for City Deals, these are to be based on federal and state/territory partnerships to “drive national priorities tailored to local needs”. So, at the local level, national priorities prevail. The federal government knows best.
In the UK, City Deals are premised on “devolution” and the creation of metropolitan governments. Deals are negotiated with local and metropolitan governments and business leaders, with reference to civil society as well. Metropolitan governments are seen as desirable because it is believed the economic growth of cities is best promoted by city leadership.
However, neither Labor nor Coalition conceptions of national urban policy envisage city leadership serving a metropolitan constituency. Representative, revenue-generating metropolitan government, which can enter the infrastructure finance market, would threaten federal and state power and influence.
<h2>How can federal policy make a difference?</h2>
There are two preconditions for effective federal engagement in urban policy.
The first is a policy that survives the next election. Because the Labor and Coalition approaches incorporate urban issues from local to federal, they are essentially political treatises. Long-lived policies are unlikely.
The second precondition is to recognise that most policies are urban in a country that is 90% urban. The unintended urban consequences of federal policies have outweighed those of policies having urban intent. Examples include negative gearing, immigration and climate-change policies. The criterion of urban consequences should be integral to federal policy formation.
A federal concern with urban policy requires locating responsibility and funding for policies to the level of government where they are most effectively addressed. Often this will be at a metro scale. It is then best undertaken by metropolitan government.
Rather than tied infrastructure and social grants, untied fiscal decentralisation is desirable. Australia should welcome policy and expenditure differences, experimentation and mutual learning among metros.
The way forward is to consider what level of government is best placed to resolve contested urban issues, in partnership with the private sector and civil society.
A federal urban policy should be limited to issues that explicitly require federal intervention. The determination of these issues will be subject to debate. But the operating assumption should be federal policy modesty in relation to states and cities, devolution of responsibilities, and fiscal decentralisation.
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>

New name, new look for latest national urban policy, but same old problem

<html><body>
Fixed, split or variable? Home buyers are always faced with the dilemma as to which is the best mortgage for their needs.
Interest rates being fickle, bank loan approvals usually take into account rate rises to make sure the repayment is still affordable, though in the end it still boils down to an individual's capacity to repay. 
The current low interest rate environment has translated to a growth in fixed loans. 
Let's look at each type of mortgage:
Fixed
The biggest advantage of fixed-rate loans is the predictability that comes with it, giving you some peace of mind as you are largely insulated from interest rate fluctuations. 
ASX-listed Mortgage Choice reported earlier this year that the demand for fixed rate home loans hit its highest level in more than 12 months, citing national home loan approval data, with fixed rate home loans accounting for 23.62 percent of all loans written in January, up from 19.44 percent in the previous month. 
But while considering fixed-rate loans, you must carefully consider the time period over which you would be comfortable with paying fixed payments.  
If interest rates drop during this period, you might end up paying more. Obviously, how much lower is the question. Because at present, RBA's cash rate of 1.75 percent is already at record lows.
The best aspect of fixed rate, however, is that it allows you to plan ahead as you already know how much to set aside for the mortgage payment each month.
The popular fixed rate products are usually around three to five years. 
Property Observer went looking for the cheapest fixed home loans on <a href="https://mozo.com.au/home-loans/fixed-rate" target="_blank">mozo.com.au</a> and found that Illawarra Credit Union with an interest rate of 3.5 percent for the first year of mortgage was the one with the lowest rate. It was followed by Greater Bank at 3.79 percent, Illawarra Credit Union with 3.85 percent (for two years), loans.com.au at 3.99 percent and last Hunter United Credit Union at 3.98 percent. 
Fixed-rate loans come with a caveat. If you try to pay off your fixed-rate loan, fixed rate break costs and discharge fees apply.
If your home loan is fixed or if it was setup before July 2011, the exit fees can be significant.
So it may be worth considering a variable rate if your plan is to sell the property after some quickly realised gains. 
Some fixed rate loans include redraw facilities, and some have more flexible terms around repayments allowing you to pay extra up to a certain amount.
Variable
When it comes to variable rate loans, flexibility is the buzz word.
Variable interest rates tend to be lower than fixed rate products, and will have more features as well. However, they do come with an added risk, that of rising interest rates increasing your mortgage payments. So you need to be covered when interest rates rise.
If you’re borrowing less than you can handle, then you may decide that a variable rate is a good option in the immediate term – you can always fix later if necessary.
As of May 17, 2016, the top variable rates offered by lenders varied from 3.63 percent to 4.20 percent, according to mozo.com.au.
Independent lender <a href="https://offers.mortgagehouse.com.au/autumn-special/?campaignid=22150&amp;sourceid=45&amp;gclid=CIXG1-q-4swCFVcnvQodjnoJow" target="_blank">www.mortgagehouse.com.au</a> is offering a variable rate of 3.52% for the first six months, which then reverts to 4.02%. The lender also claims that it doesn't have expensive overheads unlike banks, which allows it to better customise its products and offer lower rates to customers.
Another advantage of variable interest rate home loans is that paying lump sums is easier with fewer associated costs than fixed rate loans.
If you know you cannot increase your repayments significantly, and there's a sudden vacancy in an investment property, then a rate rise can impact you. On the other hand, a rate cut will mean you could find yourself with a bit of extra cash on hand or paying off your mortgage sooner. 
Split
A 'split loan' is a comfortable compromise between the pros and cons of fixed and variable interest rate loans, according to a blog on the website of Suncorp Bank. A split mortgage allows you to reap the benefits of both the security of fixed rate loan and the flexibility of a variable interest rate loan. 
How it works is that you can allocate a portion of your loan amount to attract a variable interest rate, and another portion to a fixed rate, thus you have the security and the flexibility. The split may not necessarily be 50/50, it can be what you are comfortable with.
This provides you partial protection from future interest rate changes.
This may be a good option if you plan to pay off your loan earlier. The extra repayments you make can be solely done on the variable component of the loan.
However, you may have to pay the costs should you wish to break the fixed portion as that part is considered a fixed mortgage. 
As always, these are just rough guidelines and one should always consult a loan specialist to figure out which product is best suited to your needs.
</body></html>

How to decide: Fixed, split and variable home loan interest rates

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
The management of growth across Sydney should be helped by the NSW government announcement of 17 new councils through amalgamations.
The NSW government has needed to take on a reform agenda for local government for decades and is now delivering.
The announcement that the government is proceeding with the formation of 17 new councils including 7 in metropolitan Sydney should finalise debate and lead to more effective councils. 
The government is also supporting in principle 9 more new councils including 6 in metropolitan Sydney subject to court decisions and this is likely to also lead to more effective councils.
The most important thing is to finalise the transition quickly so strategic planning and development assessments are not disrupted.
The Urban Taskforce has seen delays to planning decisions for large projects that have been caught up in the proposed amalgamations and a clear decision on the final structure of council boundaries should give clarity to responsibilities for planning decisions. We urge the government to ensure that planning determinations have clear processes for decision making during the transition phase to the new councils.
There would appear to be a role for the Greater Sydney Commission to take over some planning decisions in Sydney during the transition to the new councils through their two planning panels. Now that the 6 District Commissioners are appointed the new panels should be able to get underway soon.
The amalgamation of rural councils should lead to more effective servicing of communities but towns that are a long distance apart will need local service centres for their communities.
The Urban Taskforce is keen to work with the state government on ensuring planning services, particularly for approvals, are not disrupted during the transition to the new council structures.
 
Chris Johnson is chief executive officer of property development industry group Urban Taskforce and can be contacted <a href="https://www.urbantaskforce.com.au/index.php?option=com_content&amp;view=article&amp;id=97&amp;Itemid=126#.Vdaart55dFI" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Stronger councils good for a growing city and state: Chris Johnson

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
Australia votes on 2 July 2016 and never before has so much superannuation policy turned on one election. A Liberal victory could mean very different things than a Labor victory.
In this article, I explore some of the ins and outs of each party’s announced policies.
Labor
The policy
Labor has been consistent with their policies for superannuation (including SMSF) pensions. Its position is <a href="https://www.alp.org.au/fairer_super_plan" target="_blank">available here</a>.
… reduce the tax-free concession available to people with annual superannuation incomes from earnings of more than $75,000. From 1 July 2017, future earnings on assets supporting income streams will be tax‑free up to $75,000 a year for each individual. Earnings above the $75,000 threshold will attract the same concessional rate of 15 per cent that applies to earnings in the accumulation phase
… capital gains will be grandfathered …
The drawbacks
The key drawback I feel is that the above could be very difficult to implement for those with pensions from multiple funds. For example, consider an individual who receives pensions from two superannuation funds. The earnings from the assets supporting the first pension in the first fund might total $60,000. The earnings from the assets supporting the second pension in the second fund might also total $60,000. Accordingly, total earnings (ie, $60,000 + $60,000 = $120,000) exceed the $75,000 threshold by $45,000. This raises a tricky question: in which fund is the $45,000 excess subject to tax?
I suspect that the most practical way of dealing with this problem is as follows. I stress that this is only what I suspect what would happen. Again, I have no special inside information.
At the end of each financial year, each fund tells their pensioners what the associated pension assets earnings of the fund are by way of a document that is similar to a PAYG payment summary.
Each pensioner has to lodge an income tax return with the total of all associated pension assets earnings from all funds. These figures would not constitute assessable income of the pensioner.
If total associated pension assets earnings is greater than $75,000, the ATO sends the pensioner a tax bill calculated as the excess (eg, $45,000 in the above example) multiplied by 15 percent.
The pensioner must give this bill to one or more for their superannuation funds to pay. The superannuation funds can adjust the tax bill by any deductions/losses they have in the relevant year.
The pensioner can only pay the tax bill him or herself if there is insufficient money in any of their superannuation accounts in any superannuation funds to pay the bill.
Naturally, the above would be very paperwork heavy. Further, it would be mean that pensioners who might not otherwise have to lodge income tax returns would need to start lodging tax returns. However, I suspect the above — or some version of it — is what would be needed to make the Labor policy work.
Another drawback is the question of what happens in respect of the sale of ‘lumpy’ assets such as real estate. Real estate can be quite low yielding in rent meaning that in most years the $75,000 threshold might not be used up. However, when sold, there could be a large capital gain. If this capital gain is greater than $112,500 (ie, $75,000 grossed up for the one-third CGT discount that superannuation funds currently get if the asset is held for more than 12 months), then the SMSF would pay tax at usual superannuation fund rates on the excess of the net capital gain over $75,000. However, some of the harshness of this would be mitigated by the fact that ‘capital gains will be grandfathered’. Also, there is no suggestion that the $75,000 threshold will be indexed.
The pros
Firstly, ‘capital gains will be grandfathered’. On one construction, this could mean that pension assets already owned in superannuation funds will remain CGT free upon sale. Alternatively, on a more charitable/optimistic reading of the sentence, this could even mean that the second drawback doesn’t even occur (ie, that there’s no limit on the pension exemption that applies to capital gains). Alternatively, it also mean even other things.
Liberals
The liberals made three noteworthy policy announcements in the Budget.
The first policy
The first policy is to:
… [f]rom 1 July 2017 … introduce a $1.6 million transfer balance cap on the total amount of accumulated superannuation an individual can transfer into the retirement phase. Subsequent earnings on these balances will not be restricted.
This $1.6 million cap will be indexed in increments of $100,000 in line with the consumer price index. A fact sheet released on Budget night explains:
A proportionate method which measures the percentage of the cap previously utilised will determine how much cap space an individual has available at any single point in time. ― For example, if an individual has previously used up 75 per cent of their cap they will have access to 25 per cent of the current (indexed) cap
The drawbacks of the first policy
On its face, the Liberals’ policy is similar to Labor’s policy. Afterall, assuming that assets yield income of 4–5% pa, $1.6 million of assets will generate approximately $75,000 of income. However, I suspect the reality could be quite different. My reasoning is as follows. Firstly, remember that under Liberals’ policy ‘[s]ubsequent earnings on these balances will not be restricted.’ Accordingly, a taxpayer with greater than $1.6 million of assets will have a tremendous incentive to try to do a bit of ‘crystal ball gazing’ in order to determine which assets will experience significant capital appreciation and use those assets to fund their pension. This can work out in two ways:
If the crystal ball gazing is right and assets that will experience significant capital grow are allocated to the pension, then — contrary to the Liberals’ motivation — high wealth individuals could still experience significant tax free income, including net capital gains.
However, the opposite could occur (ie, the crystal ball gazing is wrong), and indeed I suspect the opposite will occur more regularly. That is, assets are allocated to commence pensions and those assets end up collapsing in value, for example, where the next GFC comes along. Because it very much sounds like the Liberals want to implement a lifetime cap of $1.6 million, if you pick the wrong assets (eg, if you started your pension with $1.6 million of shares in the next Enron), then it appears to be a case of too bad: even though the original assets might collapse in value down to effectively nothing, you can never use your pension exemption again.
This means that the income tax system would not be taxing income. Rather, it would be giving a tremendous free kick to those who are good at picking investments and it would be giving a tremendous kick in the guts to those who mis-predict future investment performance.
Other draw backs of this policy include:
It sounds like there will be a harsh penalty for exceeding one’s cap. This could occur if a fund miscalculates market values and starts a pension not with $1.6 million of assets but with what ends up being valued at, for example, $1.7 million of assets. The penalty would a tax on not just the earnings of the excess but also on the capital of the excess. Hopefully lessons from the poorly drafted excess contributions tax regime would be learnt and a sensible discretion will be given to the ATO (or even to taxpayers themselves) in order to avoid unfair and harsh outcomes.
It would require tracking of how much of each individual’s lifetime cap — as proportionally indexed — has been used.
The pros of the first policy
This policy would be conceptually easier to administer I think than the Labor equivalent.
The second policy
The Liberals have said that they will remove ‘the tax exemption on earnings of assets supporting Transition to Retirement Income Streams from 1 July 2017’.
The key point here is that to date, for those wishing to take no greater than 10% of their assets per annum, it has not made a huge difference whether they receive transition to retirement income streams or full account-based pensions. However, under this policy it would make a big difference. Accordingly, if this policy ultimately becomes law, those wishing to commence transition to retirement income streams will have an incentive to see if they can first ‘trigger’ a retirement event so that they can take a full account-based pension rather than a transition to retirement income stream and thus pension assets can access the pension exemption. It has been noted by many that — particular once someone reaches age 60 — ‘retirement’ as defined in superannuation law can occur in ways that are very unintuitive. For example, according to paragraph 22 of APRA’s Prudential Practice Guide SPG 280 Payment Standard, if a 60 year old works two jobs and quits one job (eg, to work even more in the other job) this constitutes retirement under the superannuation law.
The third policy
The Liberals propose to remove the ability to make a reg 995‑1.03 election that ‘allows individuals to treat certain superannuation income stream payments as lump sums for tax purposes.’
Succession planning
Both the Liberals and Labor’s proposals could have a massive impact on succession planning.
Currently, the legislature has been quite explicit that if a fund member dies in pension mode, so long as their benefits are cashed as soon as practical after death, the pension exemption at the fund level will continue and there will be no ‘back door’ death tax by way of CGT at the fund level.
This could change a lot regardless of who wins. I won’t give this full consideration in this article, however, I will note the following consideration in respect of the Liberals’ policy. Namely, unlike Labor where an infinite amount can support a pension, it appears that under the Liberals’ policy, someone can never receive pensions with assets that were worth more than $1.6 million upon their commencement.
This might mean in a mum and dad fund with real estate worth say $3.2 million, if dad dies and mum already has a pension, all of dad’s benefits (ie, a 50% interest in the real estate) might need to be cashed out of the fund by way of a lump sum with no scope of a death benefit pension to mum.
Therefore substantially more CGT may be collected in superannuation funds in respect of death benefits especially given the Liberals’ proposed removal of the anti-detriment deduction.
Disclaimer: The following is based on my view of materials publicly available as at the date of writing (16 May 2016). I suspect that when more details become known about both parties’ policies, some comments could become redundant.
This article is for general information only and should not be relied upon without first seeking advice from an appropriately qualified professional. 
Bryce Figot is director, DBA Lawyers and <a href="https://www.dbalawyers.com.au/">can be contacted here</a>.
</body></html>

Liberal v Labor: what different election outcomes could mean for smsf pensions

The Victorian Government has secured the passage of the Building Legislation and Treasury Legislation (Tax Relief) Amendment Bill 2026, introducing a suite of reforms aimed at improving consumer protection and confidence in the apartment market.

Resilience Insurance, Australia’s leading Latent Defects Insurance (LDI) provider, has welcomed the move.

The LDI elements of the Bill passed with bipartisan support and now moves to the Legislative Council where debate and passage are expected later this month. It represents a significant milestone in the national shift toward stronger, longer-term protection for apartment buyers.&nbsp;

The reform would deliver practical benefits across the housing system. Apartment owners will have stronger protection if major defects emerge, developers and builders will have a clearer quality framework to work within, and the State will reduce the risk of serious building failures becoming a long-term financial and social burden for households, communities and government.&nbsp;

LDI helps support apartment delivery while providing stronger protection for buyers and encouraging better construction outcomes.&nbsp;

Resilience LDI provides apartment owners with 10 years of insurance-backed cover for major structural defects from completion, with direct claim access to the insurer. This means owners are not required to first pursue developers or builders through costly legal action before accessing protection.&nbsp;

Resilience Insurance has been operating in Australia since 2022 and has already insured hundreds of development projects covering many thousands of apartments across Australia.&nbsp;

At approximately 1.8 per cent of build cost, it is a cost-competitive alternative to the traditional two per cent Strata Bond, bond while delivering significantly broader and longer protection.&nbsp;

“The Victorian Lower House vote shows that reforms like this succeed when they are practical, evidence-based and supported by industry," says Corey Nugent, CEO of Resilience Insurance.

"Victoria is moving quickly on a reform that will make a real difference for apartment buyers, while supporting better building outcomes and greater confidence in apartment delivery.

“This is step one. We look forward to the Bill completing its passage through the Legislative Council and to working with government and industry to implement the framework effectively.”&nbsp;

Fast Facts: What is Resilience LDI?&nbsp;

<ul>
	<li>Resilience Latent Defects Insurance (LDI): Covers major structural defects for 10 years from completion.&nbsp;</li>
	<li>Consumer-first: Direct claim access, no need for lengthy legal action.&nbsp;</li>
	<li>Cost advantage: At approximately 1.8% of build cost, LDI is typically priced below the traditional 2% Strata Bond while offering broader protection.&nbsp;</li>
	<li>Market leader: Resilience Insurance is the first approved LDI provider in NSW.</li>
</ul>

The Building Legislation and Treasury Legislation (Tax Relief) Amendment Bill 2026 has passed the Victorian Lower House, putting Victoria on track to become the first state to legislate an industry workable LDI framework as a formal alternative to the Strata Building bond. 

Joel Robinson

10-year Latent Defects Insurance for new apartment buyers set to land in Victoria

Just a few months after acquiring a prime Broadbeach site on the corner of First Avenue and Surf Parade, family-run developer <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/raptis">Raptis</a> has filed fresh plans for a new apartment development.

Raptis is seeking to deliver a <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/17-19-first-avenue-broadbeach-qld-4217">29-storey tower with 73 apartments</a> on the 818 sqm site. It will be the developer's seventh project in the suburb, as they are approaching completion of The Sterling on George Avenue.

There will be a pool, barbecue and outdoor dining area, residents lounge and dining, sauna and steam room, gym, and a Yoga and Pilates studio.

<img alt="Raptis" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="b554da3f-7344-49aa-b1c9-44cf459af0d7" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-06-05%20at%2010.41.45%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=zzjWu1iO1wnuYv4EV4fyOyf5nSXjGYut" />

Raptis Joint Managing Director, Evan Raptis, says they remain&nbsp;committed to developing quality infill sites across the Gold Coast in the lead-up to the 2032 Brisbane Olympics.

"This project continues our long track record of delivery in Broadbeach, and we look forward to bringing another premium development to this thriving precinct."

The announcement follows strong delivery momentum for Raptis, with The Sterling Broadbeach nearing completion and construction well underway on the final stage of the Waterpoint community adjacent to Harbour Town. The developer's continued investment in the Gold Coast reflects confidence in the region's apartment market fundamentals, underpinned by sustained Southeast Queensland population growth.&nbsp;

The outlook for the region is further bolstered by infrastructure investment tied to the Brisbane 2032 Olympic Games, which is expected to drive continued economic and population growth across the SEQ corridor.&nbsp;

Subject to a favourable response from Gold Coast City Council, construction on the new First Avenue tower is targeted to commence before the end of 2026.&nbsp;

Read more:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/news/qld/it-s-all-in-the-family-four-decades-later-raptis-continues-to-shape-the-gold-coast-skyline">It’s all in the family: Four decades later, Raptis continues to shape the Gold Coast skyline</a>

Read more: <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/news/qld/raptis-secures-prime-surf-parade-site-for-next-broadbeach-apartment-development">Raptis secures prime Surf Parade site for next Broadbeach apartment development</a> 
&nbsp;

Gold Coast developer brings seventh Broadbeach project to market, targeting construction commencement before year end

First look: Raptis lodges plans for new 29-storey Broadbeach tower 

Brisbane development veteran Kevin Seymour's Seymour Group is set to deepen its presence on one of Brisbane's most tightly held riverfront addresses, lodging revised plans for a luxury apartment development on Oxlade, just a few doors down from The Oxlade, which it completed in 2024.

The <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/70-72-oxlade-drive-new-farm-qld-4005">new project at 70-72 Oxlade Drive</a>, directly north of The Oxlade, will have 27 apartments across a seven-storey building&nbsp;overlooking the Brisbane River and Merthyr Park. It's a revision from a 2021-approved design.

Designed by bureau^proberts, the project has evolved from the previously approved 26-apartment scheme, introducing an additional penthouse level while maintaining a low-density, boutique character. The development will comprise 26 three-bedroom apartments and a single four-bedroom penthouse, supported by two basement levels with 86 car spaces and 34 bicycle spaces.

The architectural response is centred around two distinct building forms separated by a landscaped open-air atrium.&nbsp;"This dual composition captures and embraces Brisbane’s subtropical environment whilst breaking down built form and scale," the submission to the Brisbane City Council noted.

<img alt="First look: Seymour Group returns to Oxlade Drive with revised riverfront apartment plans in New Farm" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="c12d84d0-bc11-4067-b46f-5bd2d786a34d" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/new%20farm%20landscape.png?VersionId=YEPc2k5CAdh6aAPlu4uVpgZadh4MEfRd" />

A defining feature of the design is a deep landscaped void running through the centre of the building, creating what bureau^proberts describes as a "natural ravine" that enhances airflow, daylight penetration and resident amenity. The design report notes that the separation of the two building volumes is intended to maximise natural light, cross-ventilation and outlook while strengthening connections to the surrounding riverfront setting.

Curved balcony edges, integrated planting and extensive landscaping throughout the façade reinforce the subtropical design approach. The building's façade is softened by elevated gardens and planter beds, creating a green edge that complements the established landscape character of Oxlade Drive and neighbouring Merthyr Park.

New Farm has become one of Brisbane's most sought-after suburbs for developers delivering premium downsizer-focused apartments.

GRAYA has been particularly active in the precinct, completing both Chalk and York in recent years, while construction of Moray House, being delivered for Spyre, is now nearing completion. Architect-turned-developer Joe Adsett recently launched <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/arcilla-new-farm-by-joe-adsett-28-maxwell-street-new-farm-qld-4005">Arcilla on Maxwell Street</a>, an exclusive collection of just nine apartments.

First look: Seymour Group returns to New Farm's Oxlade Drive with riverfront apartment plans

A new residential tower will be the first piece of a broader mixed-use precinct set to reshape a prominent Newcastle West site, with local developer <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/gwh">GWH</a> bringing its <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/cambridge-quarter-newcastle-west-12-denison-street-newcastle-west-nsw-2302">Cambridge Quarter</a> vision to market.

The first release, Tempo, will introduce 87 apartments across a 24-storey tower, marking Stage 1 of the residential component of a larger urban regeneration project planned for the western end of Newcastle's city centre, encompassing the former Cambridge Hotel site.

Positioned on Denison Street, Tempo has been designed as the inaugural building within Cambridge Quarter, a precinct that will ultimately combine apartments, retail activation and revitalised public spaces including the revamping of the Cambridge Hotel.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=135876 project_image_fid=368853]

The tower will comprise a mix of one, two and three-bedroom apartments, including layouts with multipurpose rooms, catering to a broad cross-section of owner-occupiers. Apartment sizes range from around 60 sqm to 192 sqm, with a number of residences oriented to capture views across Newcastle Harbour, the city skyline and coastline.

GWH has emphasised liveability in the design, with open-plan layouts extending to generous balconies and terraces. Residents will have a choice of two interior palettes, while specifications include engineered stone benchtops, SMEG appliances, full-height bathroom tiling and secure building access. Premium upgrade packages will also be available.

Multiple rooftop resident retreats will provide communal outdoor space overlooking the harbour and city, offering an elevated amenity layer above the activity of the precinct below.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=135876 project_image_fid=368851]

The broader Cambridge Quarter vision extends beyond the residential tower itself. Ground-level retail activation and landscaped public areas are planned throughout the precinct, creating a walkable neighbourhood environment connected to the surrounding renewal of Newcastle West. The Cambridge Hotel is also earmarked for future redevelopment into a family-friendly hospitality venue integrated with the new precinct.

The project is strategically positioned within walking distance of Newcastle Interchange, providing access to light rail, regional rail services and direct connections to Sydney. Residents will also be close to Honeysuckle, Newcastle Harbour and the city's beaches and coastal walkways.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=135876 project_image_fid=368852]

For GWH, Cambridge Quarter represents one of its most significant Newcastle developments to date. The locally based developer, which has operated in the Hunter region since 1995, describes the project as a new chapter in the ongoing transformation of Newcastle West.

GWH Executive Director Jonathan Craig said the project had been shaped by a focus on creating lasting community connections.

"We take pride in creating places that last. Spaces where people feel connected, comfortable and a genuine sense of belonging," Craig said.

"Cambridge Quarter is something we are truly proud of, a place shaped by local knowledge, built with care and designed to be part of Newcastle's next chapter."

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=135876]

GWH unveils first release at landmark Cambridge Quarter precinct in Newcastle West

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/ss-projects">S&amp;S Projects</a>,&nbsp;Rainbow Bay's busiest developer,&nbsp;has officially lodged plans for the largest development in its booming local portfolio, seeking approval for a further 88 apartments on Boundary Street.

The proposal&nbsp;at <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/209-213-boundary-street-coolangatta-qld-4225">209–213 Boundary Street, Coolangatta</a>,&nbsp;marks the next chapter in the developer's transformation of the southern Gold Coast beachside precinct. It will be its fifth in the area, having already delivered Flow, Awaken and Esprit, while construction continues on the 38-apartment Radia. The new project would rise 57 metres above a consolidated 1,518 sqm site, on the same street as Radia and Esprit.

&nbsp;

Designed by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/cottee-parker-architects">Cottee Parker</a>, the proposed development comprises 88 two and three-bedroom apartments across a contemporary podium-and-tower form that integrates extensive landscaping from street level through to the rooftop.

The tower would be delivered above a basement and multi-level podium accommodating resident and visitor parking, with the residential component commencing from level three. The design incorporates cascading planting throughout the façade, landscaped podium edges, and deep planting zones along the Boundary Street frontage.

<img alt="First look: S&amp;S Projects lodges plans for 88-apartment wellness tower at Coolangatta's Boundary Street" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="677e6615-b5c0-4b6c-b4f9-efb14fcde1a6" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/ss%20da%20pers.png?VersionId=YOnPKQm7IFXv0M5H326djEpxk80500Hi" />

A key feature of the development is its expansive rooftop wellness and recreation precinct. Plans reveal a resort-style pool deck, gymnasium, sauna, steam room, hot and cold plunge pools, rooftop terraces, barbecue areas and landscaped relaxation spaces positioned to capture views across the southern Gold Coast coastline.

The rooftop wellness focus builds on the vision S&amp;S Projects first outlined when it acquired the site for $20.25 million last year.

"We are taking every advantage to create a truly unique rooftop wellness experience with a natural feel for residents, offering stone features throughout and an underlying theme that emulates a botanical garden," S&amp;S Projects founder and director Paul Gedoun said at the time.

The proposal seeks a 57-metre building height, representing a 50 per cent uplift on the site's mapped 38-metre height limit. Planning documents argue the additional height is consistent with recently approved and emerging towers in the immediate Boundary Street and Rainbow Bay precinct.

Urbis, acting as planning consultant, said the development would provide "88 dwellings, comprising a mix of two and three-bedroom apartments, contributing to housing choice and supply within an established medium to high-rise coastal urban neighbourhood."

The scheme has undergone extensive pre-lodgement consultation with the City of Gold Coast, with the design refined following feedback relating to architectural expression, landscaping, traffic access and podium treatment.

<img alt="S&amp;S" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="0a2d70fd-62ac-4b83-97c6-b798fc1243dd" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-06-05%20at%209.16.31%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=yHmghUwKM3IVGpBktQU1mE.0Lpf3WimG" />

The architectural team is led by Brisbane-based Cottee Parker, one of Australia's most active residential design studios, with landscape architecture by Dunn + Moran. The consultant team also includes ADG Engineers, Windtech and Acoustic Works.

S&amp;S Projects has become one of the most influential private developers operating on the southern Gold Coast. Since entering Rainbow Bay in 2022, the company has assembled a portfolio exceeding $1 billion in end value, establishing itself as a key player in the area's evolution into a premium apartment destination. Pezet Matheson will again handle the sales for S&amp;S.

Coolangatta is entering another wave of apartment development, following the delivery of several prominent residential projects in recent years.

John Kearney's Immerse Projects will launch&nbsp;<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/kaiya-kirra-beach-5-haig-street-coolangatta-qld-4225">Kaiya on Haig Street</a>&nbsp;soon, meanwhile, Palm Beach-based Sherpa Property Group is preparing to bring its debut Coolangatta development, <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/flourish-viver-87-griffith-street-coolangatta-qld-4225">Flourish Viveré</a>, to market later this year, subject to approvals.

Jonathan Chancellor

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News