<html><body>
Hi Margaret,   
This is a question about the tax deductibility of break costs on an investment loan for an investment property. My husband and I had a fixed rate investment loan which we broke last financial year. I am wondering whether the break cost associated with this loan is tax deductible in the year it is incurred, or whether it has to be classed as a borrowing cost for tax purposes and deducted over a five-year period. Also, does it make a difference if the break cost was capitalised into the new refinanced loan?   
Thanks in Advance,   
Kirsten
 
Kirsten, one of the main reasons why someone breaks a fixed rate loan is because they can get a better <a target="_blank" href="?option=com_googlesearch_cse&amp;q=ask%20margaret">rate</a> elsewhere and so reduce their expenses, and this may be the reason why the tax office allows you to claim these costs completely in the year they are incurred.
In addition to this, the interest on the money you borrow to finance the $20,000 will also be deductible, but only while the property is used to produce income.  
Make sure that you have a complete record of the exact costs which you incurred and give it to your accountant in plenty of time to make the allowable claims.
 
Margaret Lomas is a best-selling author and writes and hosts the popularProperty Success With Margaret Lomas and heads up the panel onYour Money, Your Call, both on Sky News. She is the founder of <a href="https://destiny.com.au/dotnetnuke/en-au/home.aspx" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Destiny</a>.
Have a property question? <a href="mailto:askmargaret@propertyobserver.com.au" target="_blank">Ask Margaret!</a>
</body></html>

mlomas-KC9MUPZ6Ca

Ask Margaret: When are my loan break costs tax deductible?

<html><body>
Hello Margaret,
I have an investment duplex in which I pay body corporate fees, but they do not cover flood damage. Do I need the body corporate or do I get insurance that will cover the lot? And if I have to have a body corporate do I seek an insurance company that will cover for flood only?
Cheers,
Erik Smith.
Erik, I’ve checked this one with Michael Teys, who is my resident expert on Property Success. He tells me that you cannot take out the flood insurance yourself. This is because you have no insurable interest in the common property - this is vested in the owners corporation. The owners corporation is obliged only to insure for fire, lightning and explosion.
Some bodies corporate may insure for flood - remember this is not always available as some insurance companies will not provide flood insurance in some areas -  but they can't be forced to do so.
If you believe that your property is at risk, and you live in an area where flood insurance is available, you should  propose that the body corporate consider adding this insurance cover.  This will then be put to a motion and voted upon by all committee members.
Failing that, I'm afraid there is little you can do. Make sure your contents are well insured though, as anything within your four walls is your responsibility.
I've added the following clarification following queries from readers:
To clarify, any common property, which can include garages, car ports, structures on common land and anything essentially outside of the inner surface of your own four walls is not an insurable  interest for individual lot holders.  Anything inside your walls is, and you should hold all possible insurances to protect your interest in them.
</body></html>

Ask Margaret: Do I need flood insurance if I pay body corporate fees?

<html><body>
Dear Margaret,
If I buy a property to rent out, what insurances do I need to cover me for the tenants etc?
Phillip, ACT 
Phillip, as you know the basic insurances are going to be really important for you, as with all property, so you need to start with a good house and contents policy. 
This means insuring the building, and any contents too.  Where it is rented you might not have a lot of contents but remember there are some things which still need covering, like window treatments and anything not part of the building. 
A lot of people think they don’t need to cover the building if it’s a strata-titled property, since the body corporate has building cover, but that’s not entirely true.  You will still need that gap insurance to cover parts of your property not considered common property - so anything inside your four walls.
In addition to that you will need landlords insurance.  This will cover:
<ul>
<li>Damage caused by a tenant</li>
<li>An amount for public liability</li>
<li>Loss of rent if the damage renders your property uninhabitable</li>
<li>The costs of pursuing a tenant through a tribunal for unpaid rent</li>
</ul>
It won’t cover loss of rent through periods of normal vacancy but that’s something you should be planning for before you buy anyway. 
It’s important to be aware that not all policies are the same – the important things you are looking for will be a low excess, and a high cap on claims for each event – many companies cap the claim you can make at too low an amount leaving you very out-of-pocket in the event of damage.
Shop around and don’t just take the cheapest option – a few dollars more might save you thousands in the long term and remember, the cost of this insurance is tax deductible.
Margaret Lomas is a best-selling author and writes and hosts the popular Property Success With Margaret Lomas and heads up the panel onYour Money, Your Call, both on Sky News. She is the founder of <a href="https://destiny.com.au/dotnetnuke/en-au/home.aspx" target="_blank">Destiny</a>.
Have a property question? <a href="mailto:askmargaret@propertyobserver.com.au" target="_blank">Ask Margaret!</a>
</body></html>

Ask Margaret: What insurance policies do I need to cover my tenants?

<html><body>
Dear Margaret
There is a very confusing and ongoing debate about houses and apartments which is quite confusing at times.
I need to ask you: in your opinion, which is a better investment and why?
Thanks in advance.
Regards
Opinder
 
This is an oft-asked question and, in my opinion, it shouldn’t be confusing at all!
Many investors start out with the notion that they will consider buying an apartment (also known as flats or units) as there is a perception that they are cheaper and represent a more ‘entry level’ price.
Alternatively, it’s believed that because a freestanding house has land around it, and land appreciates while buildings depreciate, a house ultimately becomes worth more.
Both of these notions are actually based more on myth than fact, for a number of reasons.
Firstly, an apartment can often have hefty body corporate levies which can add considerably to the holding costs.  If we considered that ‘profit’ in a property is the difference between the purchase price (plus costs) plus holding costs, and the eventual sale price (less costs), then these levies can add considerably to the holding costs and eat into profits.  One could argue that a body corporate’s sinking fund is like a savings plan for eventual repairs and maintenance, the costs of which you would otherwise bear alone, however a portion of these fees are for the type of ongoing maintenance which you’d probably carry out yourself if it were your home alone.
Secondly, it’s not proving true that a house and land necessarily grows in value more quickly than an apartment, and if the myth that buildings depreciate were true where it relates to value growth, then we’d be seeing all apartments go backward in value while all houses grow. Buildings do depreciate for tax purposes, and they do get older, requiring repair and maintenance (this applies to both units and apartments), however for value purposes this depreciation is not necessarily evident.  It’s a fact that in some areas the houses grow better than the apartments and in others the apartments are the better performer.
And that brings me to my final point – it’s demand which ultimately drives growth, not the property type. Therefore, the only way to establish whether to buy an apartment or a house is to discover what kind of people live in the area, and their preferred choice of property type. In some areas, such as those where young, childless couples live, apartments are the bigger sellers, and in others, such as areas where family units are settling, it will be houses. It makes sense to realise that the property type most in demand will also be the property type which grows better in value!
This is why property type choice should never be the first thing you do.  You should never decide to buy, say an apartment, and then go looking for the best area. You should always work out the best area to buy, discover the largest demographic in that area, and buy a property which suits that demographic. Buying a property which is not the preferred choice in any area is one of the biggest reasons investors do not get the outcomes they would like in terms of growth.
Margaret Lomas is a best-selling author and writes and hosts the popular Property Success With Margaret Lomas and heads up the panel onYour Money, Your Call, both on Sky News. She is the founder of <a href="https://destiny.com.au/dotnetnuke/en-au/home.aspx" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Destiny</a>.
Have a property question? <a href="mailto:askmargaret@propertyobserver.com.au" target="_blank">Ask Margaret!</a>
</body></html>

Ask Margaret: Are houses or units the better investment?

<html><body>
Hi Margaret
We have an investment property that needs some tidying up to maximise the rent – things such as replacing the carpets, renovating the kitchen and bathroom, painting and a carport.
Should we get a depreciation schedule before and after the renovations?
Your help is appreciated.
Regards
Debbe
 
 
Hi Debbe
I am so glad that you clarified this before you went ahead.  There is a significant benefit to be gained from what is known as ‘scrapping’, but all too often investors think of this after they have already thrown everything out, and this is too late.
First of all, your property has to be technically in the middle of being rented.  So, if it’s never been rented and you carry out these minor renovations before you make it available to rent, then you will not be able to make claims.  The property must be ‘income-producing’ in order to make claims.  So the best time is either while the tenant is in there, or in between tenancies.
If you do not know the value of the items which you will be removing from the property, start out by having a depreciation schedule prepared.  You are allowed to estimate the value of plant and equipment yourself (but not construction values), but in my experience it’s easier to have the schedule prepared, as this provides your construction values too.   Once you have had this done, go ahead and carry out the makeover.  Then, have the quantity surveyor come back to prepare an updated schedule.  It’s probably helpful if you can keep a list of anything you threw out to assist them.
You can then go ahead and ‘scrap’ any items which had a value before you disposed of them.  This means that their full, remaining value as at the time you threw them out carries an immediate deduction of 100% of the value for you, in that year!  For example, if you dispose of $5,000 worth of old items, you can claim an immediate tax deduction for the entire amount! For those on the 40% tax bracket, this is a tax break of $2,000, which isn’t to be sneezed at!
Good luck with your renovation!
Update
Last week a reader asked me to clarify whether I meant that you could avoid capital gains tax if you move out of your Principal Place of Residence for up to 6 years (as written), or if I meant 6 months!
You can move out of your PPOR for up to 6 years and still claim the PPOR exemption on that property, as long as you are not claiming the exemption on any other property.  You can rent it out during this time.  You must move back in (or sell it) not a day later than the 6 years are over.
The ‘6 month overlap rule’ is a different rule – it states that you can apply the PPOR exemption to two properties at the same time for an overlap period of not more than 6 months.  This allows you to move from your former home and into a new one and have 6 months to sell the old one without incurring CGT.  Again, the timing is strict; one day more than 6 months and the CGT applies form the date you moved out.
 
Margaret Lomas is a best-selling author and writes and hosts the popular Property Success With Margaret Lomas and heads up the panel onYour Money, Your Call, both on Sky News. She is the founder of <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="https://destiny.com.au/dotnetnuke/en-au/home.aspx">Destiny</a>.
Have a property question? <a target="_blank" href="mailto:askmargaret@propertyobserver.com.au">Ask Margaret!</a>
</body></html>

Ask Margaret: When should I get a depreciation schedule?

<html><body>
Investors of anything should only ever buy investments that stand alone as strong and viable propositions not because of tax benefits.
It’s no secret that I am not a fan of NRAS property.  I’ve written extensively about it since it was first introduced and watched how an essentially great scheme has been prostituted for gain for greedy developers and their marketers.
In its purest form, NRAS was a scheme designed for large institutional investors, such as public superannuation funds and insurance companies.  They would undertake these developments, which were built in lots of 100, and gain the tax credits for the lot.  It was a good deal and a good idea, providing discounted rent to para professionals who would, it was claimed, make suitable tenants. The scheme was not designed for individual investors.  In fact the NRAS Policy Guidelines stated:
The scheme encourages large-scale investment in affordable housing so it is not directly available to small-scale, private, individual investors in the rental property market. 
Somehow, probably due to one of those tax office loopholes, some of the developments were sold to individuals as single lots.  The powers that be clearly didn’t sew up the scheme tightly enough, and someone drove a Mack truck through the space.  I still remember the day the tax office woke up and realised that it had no method in place to deal with the tax returns of individuals who bought them, and it scurried about with transitional arrangements to cope with the issue.  Lo and behold a precedence was created, and before we knew it whole companies were set up to move this latest tax advantaged product.   NRAS Policy Guidelines were amended to include:
Individual investors may wish to participate in the scheme as part of a non-entity joint venture or another joint venture arrangement or by purchasing NRAS dwellings from an approved participant. 
It’s pretty easy to counter the flippant claims of NRAS marketers when they use simplistic three line statements espousing the benefits of buying one – just buy it, discount the rent and get tax benefits–with a plethora of dangers;
<ol>
<li>The middlemen do make big commissions – I’ve not seen one less than $20,000, and you’d have to be very dull to be convinced that this isn’t built somewhere into the price.</li>
<li>They are released in lots of 100 – that’s a very large influx of competition all at the one time – affecting both the capital value and the potential rent return. Your 20% discount may end up being a 20% discount to a rent that has already dropped by 30% because of oversupply!</li>
<li>They are rarely built in hotspots, and when they are, well, refer to point 2!</li>
</ol>
 
<hr class="system-pagebreak">
 
But in a recent email to me from an investor who recently felt similar concern to mine over the legitimacy, or otherwise, of these investments, far greater issues were brought to my attention.  Proponents may claim that in return for a financial loss each year of between $3,500 and $5,000 you get "tax-free" money of $9,980, but the writer of this email found that to be potentially misleading in the extreme.
This investor had such a great concern that he sought a private ruling, and to his alarm he found the following:
<ul>
<li>A portion of the rebates for this scheme ($2495) are provided by the state in which the property is built. As state governments cannot raise income tax, the portion of the rebates received from the state cannot be considered a tax offset. This portion of the rebates received is known as NANE income.</li>
<li>As entering the scheme is for the purpose of receiving a rental income and the NANE, claims related to the investment property must be apportioned.</li>
<li>On low rental properties, this can reduce claimable rental expenses by as much as 17%.</li>
</ul>
The investor who wrote to me wanted to be sure that he had it right, and so he telephoned the person who provided the ruling. This person advised that a further ruling was not necessary as the position is clear:  those costs relating to the scheme – being the initial NRAS set-up cost, the annual audit cost for scheme payment eligibility and the periodic rental market rates audit – are not considered expenses related to the derivation of assessable income.  Neither the NANE nor the Commonwealth tax offset, are considered assessable income.
He went on to apply this information to one set of figures provided by one of the many companies promoting NRAS, and found that the swing was $141 per week!  That pretty much wiped out the positive cashflow, and if the property could not actually be leased for the rent amount forecast by the seller (which is what I am finding with many of these once they are constructed and settled) it could leave unsuspecting investor in quite a financial pickle!
This was one smart investor who, rather than believe everything presented to him by a property seller, chose to do the due diligence himself.  Getting a private ruling was a good move, one all investors should take before taking the plunge on any scheme that sounds so good.
While I agree that NRAS isn’t olive trees or an emu farm, it’s still a tax scheme, and its opponents draw their comparison from this notional similarity, rather than from any physical likeness between the two.  It’s not the physical product itself which is being attacked – it’s the marketing of the tax scheme over the property itself.  Luring investors into a property based on getting tax benefits can be compared to stock market- based investments, as the results can be the same – the investor buys the asset for the overlying scheme, giving little consideration to whether the scheme is appropriate for them, or whether the underlying asset stacks up. Investors of anything should only ever buy investments which stand alone as strong and viable propositions – tax benefits, income guarantees or free holidays should only ever be icing on an already tasty cake.
Margaret Lomas is a best-selling author and writes and hosts the popular Property Success With Margaret Lomas and heads up the panel on Your Money, Your Call, both on Sky News.
</body></html>

NRAS is a tax scheme; a property investment must stack up on its own: Margaret Lomas

<html><body>
You’ve probably met someone who bought property in a mining town and made a bucket load. 
Years ago when everyone else was turning up their noses at those giant red holes in the ground that were mining towns, some crazy risk-takers bit the bullet and took the gamble.  It wasn’t much of a gamble, really – you could buy property that probably fit within your credit card limit, but at that time everyone figured nothing much could come of it.
Stories abounded of untold success.  It was the first we’d ever heard of a "donga", but apparently these tin sheds skyrocketed and fetched astronomical prices and rental yields.    Everyone wanted a piece of that action, and you had to jump out of the way to avoid the stampede of investors racing to these one-horse towns for their piece of investing gold.
There’s no question that a great return can potentially be made buying property in a mining town, but people make money investing in pork bellies and trading foreign currency, too.  Why don’t we all jump on that bandwagon?  Quite simply, because we know they are high risk, and we are mostly pretty acquainted with our own personal appetite for risk.
So what madness is this that causes property investors, many of them without money to lose and gambling the equity in their own family homes, to completely ignore the risk factor attached to buying in mining towns?
I have a few theories around this.  Firstly, property investors rarely educate themselves before taking the plunge.  Somehow they feel that just because they own a home of their own they are suddenly experts at picking the right property.  It’s a bit like believing that just because you bought Telstra shares you vicariously received a crash course in share investing and are now an expert at it.
 
<hr class="system-pagebreak">
 
Secondly, it seems that when you use someone else’s money (the bank’s) it’s OK to be less careful.  There’s a misplaced confidence that comes when a bank gets a valuation and then agrees to advance you the money – as if it somehow provides its tick of approval for your decision and, well, banks know what they’re doing, right?
Lastly, it’s public enemy number one – the undying belief that property, as long as it’s held long enough, will always go up.  It provides a false sense of security around property buying and removes any common sense many investors might otherwise use when choosing an appropriate investment that sits nicely within their risk profile.
Investing in a town based solely on only one industry carries a risk that  is greater than buying property in an area where the industry is diversified. An event that may initially have little to do with that one industry, such as another GFC, a slowdown in China’s demand for our resources, to name a couple, could eventually develop to create an impact great enough to negatively affect the fortunes of the true risks involved.
Where an entire area extracts its income and employment from that one industry and its related industries (such as retail and hospitality), a closure of that industry can have swift and devastating effects upon those who own property. An investor may go quickly from having a property with a high value and exceptional rental returns to one with no tenant and no buyers.
I’ll never argue that significant gains cannot be made by those who invest in towns such as these, typically mining towns. However, all investing must be undertaken with a sound grasp of the true risks involved. If you are prepared to accept those risks, and you have considered what your position would be if you owned a property that suffered a significant loss, then a mining town may be an excellent investment for you.
Contrarily, if you need a little more surety in your investing, stick with areas of more diversity, which can manage industry closures because there are many other employers to take up the slack.
Margaret Lomas is a best-selling author and writes and hosts the popular Property Success With Margaret Lomas and heads up the panel on Your Money, Your Call, both on Sky News.
</body></html>

Are mining towns really property investment goldmines?: Margaret Lomas

<html><body>
I love it when debates around whether there is a property bubble begin, and so I particularly enjoyed reading about the latest debate, right here on<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/residential/room-for-debate-is-there-an-australian-housing-bubble/2012110157585" target="_blank"> Property Observer</a>. 
This one pitted Terry Ryder, whose job is to examine property markets and their movements at their most fundamental, determining the potential impact of future, planned activity on micro property markets, against Phillip Soos, a master’s research student and employed researcher at Deakin University.
People always take sides, and it comes down to which side of the fence you sit on.  In this particular debate, the two sides have completely different backgrounds, experience and perspectives and use entirely different methods to assess and forecast the property market.
Terry uses factual data to establish whether or not there is likely to be property price growth in the future, along with issues of housing affordability, supply and demand and general price movements.  From what I can see he looks at areas in their individuality, considers the micro-economic situation in its present form and then overlays the information he has about what’s happening next in that area.  When this is all measured against the supply factor, I think he is saying that strong, local area economic growth, where there is an undersupply of property, has to mean that property in that area will go up.
Phillip uses some pretty impressive data, some great-looking graphs and some economic theory to predict a bubble.  From what I can see, he overlays this theory and graph drawing upon the Australian property landscape and from that he draws the conclusion we are in a bubble.  In addition, he quotes Minsky’s financial instability hypothesis, one that says that where income flows cover neither principal nor interest repayments the result is an asset bubble, to assert that there is, in fact, a bubble.
I like economic theory as much as the next guy, and I definitely use economic factors on which to base my own prognosis of where I think a property market is headed.  It’s not an exact science, but there is a good degree of empirical evidence to show that strong underlying economic factors, such as decreasing unemployment, increasing median household income and an improvement in gross regional product can often lead to property price growth.
However, I can’t help but get an uncomfortable squirming feeling when I see someone who devotes their life’s work to studying property markets at the most micro of level debating against someone who uses economic theory to pronounce to the property investing world that there is a bubble.
If my two cents worth means anything, here it is:  If we live in a country where there is such a vast difference in property prices, where we have areas that are ramping up and those that are plateauing or falling in value, where we have two-speed economies (Queensland) and varying degrees of local government activity, infrastructure development and employment opportunities, how can we possibly rely on a single, economic projection of a single property market to establish if there is a bubble or not?
 
<hr class="system-pagebreak">
 
The other factor that has me twitching at my desk, wanting to shake someone, is that those basing forecasts on economic theory like to ignore the bottom line impact of taxation.  Yes, I get it that at any time the government can take away tax benefits. 
I also know that investing for a tax benefit is no way to approach your retirement  income needs.  However, we do live in a country where the tax treatment of investors is quite unique and decidedly different than most others in the developed world, and from what I can see it makes it difficult to rationalise the theory that ‘where income flows cover neither principal nor interest repayments the result is an asset bubble’. 
To the average punter, what matters most is cashflow, and since investing in property in this country is tax advantaged, (and includes on-paper deductions for depreciation in many cases), the cashflow for many properties purchased today in economically strong areas with great yields and potential for further values growth is positive, or at least even.  Whether gross rent covers principal and interest repayments is a moot point when you consider that you can get a tax break equal to, or greater than, the difference.   And while ever that possibility exists, investors will continue to support those markets, creating further, albeit moderate, values growth and continuing strong yields.
I’ll never understand why economists cannot see the forest for the trees and why they insist on having a single-minded, broad view of the Australian property market. I am not suggesting that the market in Australia is fantastic or risk- free, and I don’t think Terry Ryder is, either.  But I do believe that talk of a unilateral property bubble decidedly ignores the true underlying situation – that opportunities for great property investing do exist, and that now is as good a time as ever to find them.
Margaret Lomas is a best-selling author and writes and hosts the popular Property Success With Margaret Lomas and heads up the panel on Your Money, Your Call, both on Sky News.
</body></html>

Australian housing market too complex to make sweeping bubble statements: Margaret Lomas

<html><body>
For the past four years we’ve been waiting for the property bubble to burst. To be honest, it’s been a little like waiting for the end of the world.
When I was a kid, there was a slated date for the end of the world to occur. We knew what it would look like – black thunder clouds, strong winds and then judgement day would be upon us. Depending upon your religious persuasion, a couple of things would happen on that day – you’d either be saved while non-believers everywhere perished, or the entire world would disappear in a fireball. There was also the threat of the nuclear bomb giving us incurable cancer, turning the earth to fallow pasture and causing slow and painful deaths always foreshadowing our everyday existence.
More recently, another end of the world date came and went, but the real one, sometime this December, is still before us, scaring our children and creating lively debate.
For property investors, though, we haven’t given the imminent destruction of the world a second thought, given the more dire situation surrounding the property bubble and its impending bursting. It’s consumed us and dictated our every investing move, and it seems like we are finally sick of it. Property investors have decided that enough is enough, and that if something was ever going to happen, it should have happened by now.
I’m somewhat cheered that there seems to be a renewed confidence in the market, but extremely worried, too. You see, the dodgy spruiker is back, in fine form, and investors, many with memories too short to recall the bad old days of rip-offs and questionable deals, are just begging for their money to be taken.
A recent Sun-Herald investigation established that “aggressive marketing by Heritage Financial Solutions of often overpriced and second-rate Queensland properties has left a trail of burned investors, bankruptcies and broken hearts”. This is by no means a one-off situation, and I am seeing more and more people being taken advantage of, and a return to a situation we saw in the early 90s.
The problem is this – there is no regulation to protect property investors, and therefore literally anyone can call themselves a property investment adviser and get away with it. In doing so they create around them an illusion of expertise and qualification, and usually their websites are so professionally created that this illusion appears real and legitimate.
So what is happening here? Well, it’s quite simple – the spruikers are once again convincing a whole new generation of property investors that they have only their best interests at heart and selling them deals with exceptionally poor underlying assets. And the investors, often time poor and looking for the solution to their retirement income woes, are lapping it up, neglecting due diligence and choosing to place their trust in those who have a big financial incentives to tell them what they want to hear.
 
<hr class="system-pagebreak">
How can you tell if a deal is dodgy? You can’t, but here are some clues:
 
<ul>
<li>If there is a middleman between you and the supplier (excluding standard real estate sales), then there is going to be big commissions built in. While the property may be OK, the commissions usually run from around $15,000 up to $40,000. You won’t know about it, as it’s often provided as an after-sales “kick-back” and it doesn’t have to be disclosed – there is no law around property investment advice, and so no disclosure requirement. Such a big commission will, in this subdued environment, take years to recoup and put a dampener on leveraging ability. </li>
<li>If the property exists in a state other than where it is being marketed, there has to be a reason why the locals haven’t snapped up the deal.</li>
<li>If the person advising you to buy the property is also representing the seller then it is not possible for their advice to be independent – it is biased, and the deal is likely better for the marketer than it is for you.</li>
<li>If the company selling the property waxes lyrically about how you are their first concern, it’s likely to be dodgy. It’s fine to sell property as a middleman but not fine to claim that your interests are with the buyer. </li>
<li>If there is any kind of incentive scheme, such as a rent guarantee or bonus, something is likely to be up. Property that makes a viable investment can sell itself.</li>
</ul>
Now is the time to take extra care. If you’d like to invest in property, you can do so safely, but you have to have your eyes open and take responsibility for your own successes and failures. Protect yourself with the following guidelines:
<ul>
<li>Beware of property being marketed by a seminar or telemarketer – such campaigns are expensive, and these people are paid big commissions that are hard to recoup through capital appreciation. Don’t believe claims that commissions aren’t built into the price – this is simply not possible.</li>
<li>Never sign a deal on the day you see it. If an extra incentive is offered to do so, be doubly wary!</li>
<li>Always confirm the value of a property through recent sales. Only recent sales can determine the actual value.</li>
<li>Be aware that forecasts on income are based on historical figures and do not consider future supply.</li>
<li>Be extra careful of off-the-plan – especially tax advantaged ones. They are often part of a huge development which will affect future supply and impact on your yields. </li>
</ul>
Most importantly, become educated before you become an investor. Too many people decide to invest and then go looking for a property, and this is why they are so vulnerable. Get that education under your belt first and then you will know how to spot a dodgy deal at 10 paces.
Margaret Lomas is a best-selling author and writes and hosts the popular Property Success With Margaret Lomas and heads up the panel onYour Money, Your Call, both on Sky News. She is the founder of<a target="_blank" href="https://destiny.com.au/dotnetnuke/en-au/home.aspx"> Destiny</a>.
</body></html>

No sign of a property bubble, but dodgy spruikers are taking advantage of investors: Margaret Lomas

<html><body>
Jordan Wirsz is at it again. This time, thankfully, not many here in Australia are listening to him.
In this latest diatribe, Wirsz claims that he has been studying human behaviour for 22 years. In the past he has tried to have us believe some fairly hard to swallow claims, but that one has to take the cake!
You see, Wirsz was born in 1983, making him barely 29 year of age.
I have five children. I think back to when each of them was seven.  My eldest was a bit of a larrikin – I still recall the day when he set the sprinklers to the “on” position right in the middle of his dad’s work barbecue. Of course, all of the staff were picnicking on the lawn at the time, but it was true seven-year-old behaviour, and most of us were able to laugh about it. My three girls were most likely playing with Barbies at that age and my youngest boy, the studious one, would have been reading a young person’s book.
Studying human behaviour? It conjures up the picture of one of them sitting at the dinner table, thoughtfully stroking their chin and saying to me, ‘you know mum, Mrs Wilson next door has an interesting response to the post man, and I’ve been pondering this peculiar behaviour’!
It’s rubbish, as is much of what Wirsz claims to know about the Australian property market, one which, by his own admission, he researches using Google.
Further, he states that he has learned to “virtually ignore all media/news, because most of the time, they are wrong”. He then goes on to say that ‘this is because they are listening to so called “experts” who have agendas’. Has anyone asked Wirsz how he makes his money? It looks to me like it’s from running seminars and real estate classes, ones that give you the strategies to employ after he has wound you up with his press releases and lathered you into frenzy about the latest gloom and doom.  If that’s not an “agenda”, then I’d like to know what to call it.
He seems to have lately jumped ship a little – from talking about the woes of US real estate to now saying that “the normalcy bias is keeping many people too fearful of buying real estate, which is going to create an exaggerated bottom, just like we saw an exaggerated top”. He now wants to buy into a market that he said, not that long ago, was doomed.
And, in the latest blog (littered with grammatical errors, which I will ignore because, let’s face it, he’s a product of that younger set), he couldn’t resist another swipe at Australia. He says that he has done a lot of research on the Australia real estate market, and can see some “very significant signs that they are almost exactly where the U.S. market was in 2008”. Who knew it could fall so much?’
He thinks Australia is in for it in a “big way” and invites you to “stay tuned for more later”. I gather this means another webinar – more money-making for Wirsz.
 
<hr class="system-pagebreak">
 
I gather he is doing his research on Google again, because I am finding much more encouraging news from some fairly reliable sources.  Housing affordability is improving monthly, and the average Australian now spends below 30% of his or her income on the average home loan payment, with even better results expected in the coming months. Australians are repaying debt too, with more than 50% of all mortgage holders now in advance on their loans, many of them over one year in advance. We are great ones for hunkering down and shoring up for that rainy day, even if the signs show we may not need it. Lenders are being careful, and under the new credit reforms our lending policies, already tight with an abundance of integrity, just got stronger, providing further protection.
And look at all of those areas in the country today with low buy in prices, growing population and housing shortages.  With technology allowing us to live and work in areas other than capital cities, the choices for housing have become more and more diverse and available, and the Australian people’s confidence in property values remains as strong as ever.
The figures don’t lie. The September quarter showed some slow, albeit low, growth in many markets, as we carefully creep along, prudently buying, bargaining hard but keeping property values just about where they should be given the world economic outlook.
Let’s listen to true experts – you know the Australian ones. Like Tim Lawless from RP Data, who forecasts rising housing prices for the major urban areas of Australia. He says “based on index data over the month up to September 28th, dwelling values across the combined five largest capital cities of Australia are likely to increase by around 1.4% over the month of September, and the quarterly rate of growth will be around 2% over the quarter – that's the strongest quarterly change since May 2010”.
And what of those other real experts – those guys over at BIS Shrapnel? They say that house prices in Sydney, Brisbane and Perth will recover over the next three years, which sounds pretty good to me.
My money’s with the guys who know.  The ones who live here and make the details of our markets their life’s work.
Jordan who?
Margaret Lomas is a best-selling author and writes and hosts the popular Property Success With Margaret Lomas and heads up the panel onYour Money, Your Call, both on Sky News. She is the founder of<a target="_blank" href="https://destiny.com.au/dotnetnuke/en-au/home.aspx"> Destiny</a>.
</body></html>

US doomsayer Jordan Wirsz's Australian housing bubble predictions rubbish

Property developer One Living, backed by former Macquarie banker turned investment manager Chris Green’s investment firm, has unveiled plans to bring more institutional capital into housing to help address the national supply crisis.

The New York-based investor has focused his firm, GreenPoint Partners, on addressing the supply shortage hitting middle market housing in Australia.

It is backing the new One Living business to develop more than 1000 units along the eastern seaboard. The new firm is starting with a development on Mona Vale Road, on the border of Mona Vale and Pymble, in Sydney’s Northern Beaches, with around 140 apartments planned. They are eyeing off more sites across the city.

With cost pressures rising in the industry, One Living’s model is to be a vertically integrated developer-builder, so it can respond directly to the housing gap by removing the cost inefficiencies embedded in traditional residential delivery.

“We are building a platform designed to operate at scale and starting in a market where there’s a clear need for quality, attainable housing,” One Living joint managing director Joseph Scuderi said.

“It’s that missing middle – it’s that attainable end of housing… that’s what most Australians invest into and what Australians can actually afford.”

<img alt="Mona Vale" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="798dfa93-4941-4db6-a696-31e9dc18e81c" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-05-28%20at%202.31.50%E2%80%AFPM.png?VersionId=mKBqi5C_DmeiXS.AtJkcR8LQIxqCqmFi" />

GreenPoint Partners brings years of experience assembling and scaling real estate operating businesses across major markets. And Green sees a big opportunity in Australia.

“For its size, sophistication and importance to the community, Australia’s living sector has remained largely under-institutionalised, which represents significant opportunity,” Green said. “GreenPoint identified that gap, assembled the right team, and is backing One Living to build a platform that is aligned to market needs.”

Green said being a builder-developer would give the company the capacity and flexibility it required to deliver reasonably-priced homes.

“We want it to be at that attainable level; not super high end luxury but at that attainable level,” he said.

<img alt="Mona Vale" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="74a5344a-4b26-4d4a-ada3-056b1220be77" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-05-28%20at%202.32.15%E2%80%AFPM.png?VersionId=vY8hXHO4reBMdO8ZXMWCNtGZJofUPQ3j" />

&nbsp;

One Living will undertake a component of affordable housing in its schemes, which it will own and operate, and it could also run build-to-rent on some sites.

Green praised local policy settings.

“The NSW government is being very supportive, strategic and pragmatic in terms of how do we generate more supply of housing,” he said. “We think it’s actually positive for development and the bit that’s been lacking at that attainable level is that it’s lots of relatively small private developers, whereas we want to create an institutional platform.”

One Living is also&nbsp;looking at high-density projects and could take on more institutional funding in the future.

“The way we will be able to achieve economies of scale is through size,” Green added.

Joel Robinson

One Living enters Sydney's new apartment market with Northern Beaches site acquisition

It's been several years since there's been an opportunity to buy a brand new townhome in Melbourne's coastal suburb of Mordialloc. Even apartment developments in recent times have been few and far between in the area.

Local developer LDS Property identified the gap in new housing, securing a site on White Street, directly opposite&nbsp;Woodlands Golf Club Mordialloc. They've recently launched&nbsp;<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-townhouses/wm-residences-mordialloc-102-white-street-mordialloc-vic-3195">WM Residences</a>, just 13 townhouses which they have already started building.

Projects by Buxton Director Heath Thompson, who is selling WM Residences, says the townhouses x that perfect middle ground be

"Mordialloc residents have had limited options to downsize within the suburb, often forcing them to look elsewhere despite long-standing ties to the area," Thompson says.

"With very little comparable new supply coming to market, projects like WM Residences are well placed, particularly as buyers look to capitalise on current conditions amid constrained supply."

[smartcode_project:default project_id=134646 project_image_fid=6109]

The development, designed by regarded architecture firm&nbsp;<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/ewert-leaf">Ewert Leaf</a>,&nbsp;adopts a deliberately restrained architectural approach, focusing on simplicity, durability and liveability rather than overt design gestures.

The boutique scale is central to the offering. With only 13 three-bedroom residences, each home is configured to prioritise functional layouts and everyday use, supported by private terraces and secure two-car garages.

Ewert Leaf’s design response leans into a calm, neutral material palette. Interiors are defined by oak flooring, white walls and soft finishes, creating a consistent and understated backdrop. The approach avoids trend-driven detailing in favour of longevity, with an emphasis on natural light and spatial clarity.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=134646 project_image_fid=6110]

Beyond aesthetics, the homes are designed to meet contemporary performance expectations. Each residence targets a minimum 6-star energy rating, incorporating double glazing, comprehensive insulation and all-electric Bosch appliances.

The project’s location supports a walkable coastal lifestyle, sitting within close proximity to Mordialloc’s foreshore, Main Street retail strip and the train station. Local cafés and dining venues, including Suburbia Deli and Hendriks Café, are within a short walk, reinforcing the area’s established neighbourhood character.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=134646 project_image_fid=6116]

While <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developments/mordialloc-vic-3195">Mordialloc</a> is often defined by its beach and pier, the project taps into other areas of day to day living, offering easy access to local food, casual dining and transport, rather than positioning itself purely as a lifestyle retreat.

WM Residences reflects a continued trend across Melbourne’s coastal suburbs towards smaller-scale, design-led townhouse developments, particularly on infill sites where proximity to amenity is already established.

With construction commenced prior to its market entry, the project aligns with a growing preference among buyers for developments with visible progress and defined delivery timeframes.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=134646]

WM Residences fills gap in Mordialloc townhouse market

&nbsp;

Developer GURNER™ Group has revealed $1.65 billion in residential sales nationally across the 12 months to December 2025, driven largely by the continued momentum of its Docklands wellness-focused precinct, Elysium Fields.

The sales result was generated across seven projects in Victoria and New South Wales, headlined by Elysium Fields, GURNER™’s $2.75 billion mixed-use precinct planned for Harbour Esplanade in Docklands.

The project has recorded more than $500 million in sales across the first three towers, equating to around 580 apartments sold.

The first tower, Helios, has now sold out of its 240 private residences, with GURNER™ preparing to release a premium penthouse collection comprising 15 three-bedroom penthouses in coming weeks.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=144441 project_image_fid=370975]

Elysium Fields is being developed on the long-held 20,000 sqm Docklands site at 208-226 Harbour Esplanade, which had remained undeveloped for more than two decades prior to GURNER™ taking over the project around four years ago.

Construction has now commenced across four towers ranging between 18 and 30 storeys, with Hamilton Marino and Maxcon appointed as builders.

Once complete, the precinct is expected to comprise around 1,100 residences, alongside retail, hospitality and public realm uses integrated throughout the site.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=144441 project_image_fid=370981]

Designed by Fraser &amp; Partners in collaboration with GURNER™ Design House, the project has been positioned around the developer’s broader focus on wellness-led residential living.

“We don’t sell apartments. We create a true luxury lifestyle that simply doesn’t exist elsewhere in the market today,” Founder and Executive Chairman Tim Gurner said.

“To deliver that requires an extraordinary level of detail, coordination and discipline across multiple verticals, from design and hospitality through to wellness and service.”

“We’ve always believed that living extends far beyond the physical residence. It’s about how you feel the moment you arrive, how you live day-to-day, and the ecosystem that supports that.” 
[smartcode_project:default project_id=144441 project_image_fid=370977]

The project’s design places a heavy focus on landscaping, wellness amenities and biophilic design principles.

Plans include around 3,700 sqm of landscaped gardens and open space throughout the precinct, alongside a retail and dining offering spanning approximately 5,000 sqm.

The broader public realm strategy centres around what GURNER™ describes as the “Path of Life”, an urban forest and landscaped pedestrian environment intended to connect the various buildings and wellness spaces across the precinct.

The apartments themselves will incorporate a range of wellness-focused inclusions, including purified air and water systems, circadian lighting, antimicrobial surfaces, and optional in-home wellness upgrades.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=144441 project_image_fid=370980]

Gurner said the company’s experience through its Saint Haven wellness clubs had directly informed the residential offering now being incorporated into Elysium Fields.

“We’re seeing a clear global shift toward longevity, performance and proactive health,” Gurner said.

“Our role is to deliver that in a way that feels seamless, highly private and beautifully resolved within the environments we create.”

A large component of the wellness offering is planned through the resident amenity and health facilities proposed within the precinct.

That includes plans for bathing and recovery facilities spread throughout the towers, incorporating mineral pools, saunas, steam rooms, flotation therapy, red light therapy and wellness lounges.

The developer is also seeking approvals for what it describes as a “reverse ageing medical clinic” within the precinct.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=144441 project_image_fid=370978]

According to project information released by the group, the proposed facility would include cryotherapy, IV infusion therapy, infrared and dry saunas, PEMF beds, MRIs, DEXA scans, brain scans and blood analysis services.

Within the first tower, Helios, residents will also have access to a dedicated amenity offering known as the Sky Private Club.

The upper 15 levels of the building will include private lounges, dining spaces, rooftop amenities and optional private wellness studios integrated within residences.

The Helios tower itself comprises 260 apartments ranging between 60 sqm and 300 sqm, including a collection of penthouses.

That includes a planned two-storey penthouse spanning around 600 sqm with uninterrupted bay views.

The Elysium Fields precinct is being delivered in partnership with Digital Harbour Holdings, a consortium that includes the Liberman family, which controls the development rights across the Docklands site.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=144441 project_image_fid=370979]

The sales result comes as GURNER™ continues expanding its national development pipeline beyond Victoria.

“We have a strong pipeline across Australia and are now focused on scaling into key markets including New South Wales and Queensland, while continuing to build on our Melbourne base,” Gurner said.

“We currently have more than $3 billion in the market, growing to over $5 billion by October, and expect to materially outperform last year in the 2026 calendar year.”

The result also reflects the continued strength of the upper-end apartment market in Melbourne, particularly for owner-occupier-focused product with large-scale amenity and lifestyle offerings.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=144441]

Record result anchored by the Group’s “utopian” Elysium Fields precinct – defying market headwinds in Docklands.

Elysium Fields drive Gurner to $1.65 billion in apartment sales over 2025

National Australia Bank (NAB) will fund <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/palmera-residences-gold-coast-18-garfield-terrace-surfers-paradise-qld-4217">Palmera</a>, a $1 billion, 52-level luxury residential tower being developed by Central Equity in one of the Gold Coast’s most tightly held coastal locations at Northcliffe.

The project, launched recently by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/central-equity">Central Equity</a>, one of Victoria’s largest private residential developers, comes at a time when construction funding for large residential developments has become increasingly competitive as lenders tighten exposure to the sector.

Multiplex has been appointed the builder, and construction is now underway.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=108274 project_image_fid=365784]

Since its first project, Central Equity has delivered more than 85 residential developments with a combined end value exceeding $8 billion.

Palmera reflects Central Equity’s growing focus on the Gold Coast luxury apartment market and continues a relationship between Central Equity and NAB that dates back to the late 1980s, when the bank funded one of Melbourne’s earliest inner-city residential towers at a time when high-rise apartment living in the CBD was largely unproven.

“NAB’s funding of Central Equity’s $36 million CBD development in the late 1980’s to the financing of the billion-dollar tower today highlights the long-term relationship between the two organisations in delivering major residential projects” said Central Equity Founder and Chairman Eddie Kutner.

He said NAB’s early support was instrumental in helping establish the company’s development model.

“When we commenced our first residential tower in the late 1980s the concept of funding off-the-plan apartments was still largely untested in Australia,” Kutner said.

“NAB recognised the opportunity early and supported the project when others were uncertain. That relationship has now continued for more than 37 years across many developments.”

[smartcode_project:default project_id=108274 project_image_fid=365771]

Central Equity was established in 1987 when Melbourne’s CBD and Southbank precinct were still dominated by warehouses and commercial buildings. Fewer than 100 residents lived in Southbank at the time, and large-scale residential development in the inner city was not widely considered.

Recognising changing demographics and lifestyle preferences, the company began developing high-rise residential projects designed to bring permanent residents into the city centre.

Central Equity has provided accommodation for approximately 40,000 residents across Melbourne’s CBD and Southbank, while also incorporating supporting infrastructure including essential lifestyle facilities like retail spaces, childcare facilities and neighbourhood activity centres.

Central Equity has spent many years assembling the Palmera development site on the corner of Garfield Terrace and Frederick Street in Northcliffe, creating a supersite of around 3,300 sqm.

The developer said the Palmera apartment tower reflects its long-term view of the Gold Coast as a growing and increasingly diversified economy.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=108274 project_image_fid=365768]

Supported by infrastructure including the light rail network, major road upgrades expanded education, hospital and medical facilities and continued expansion at the Gold Coast Airport with more international and domestic flights.

Positioned in the tightly held Northcliffe precinct, the 52-level tower will deliver 347 apartments, targeting buyers seeking a high-end coastal lifestyle, from downsizers to interstate investors.

Designed by Marchese Partners with interiors by DBI, Palmera has been conceived as a next-generation residential offering, featuring a collection of oversized apartments, with premium three-bedroom residences offering sweeping northern views stretching from Surfers Paradise through to Burleigh Heads.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=108274]

NAB funds $1 billion Surfers Paradise apartment development, Palmera

Two years after completing one of the newest developments in North Sydney, developer <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/aqualand-australia">Aqualand</a> is turning its attention to the rapidly evolving St Leonards apartment market.

The developer, which completed AURA by Aqualand on North Sydney's Walker Street, has lodged plans for a 5,918 sqm site at <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/33-37-herbert-street-st-leonards-nsw-2065">33-37 Herbert Street, St Leonards,</a> seeking approval for a pair of residential towers rising above a shared podium opposite Royal North Shore Hospital.

The proposal forms part of the broader transformation underway across the St Leonards-Crows Nest precinct, where former industrial and commercial sites are increasingly being redeveloped into high-density mixed-use projects tied to major transport infrastructure.

<img alt="Aqualand" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="2cc428cf-fe70-4cac-9cd5-264ad53af62c" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-05-28%20at%209.51.56%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=otKSnHtbjAvAddOnovyXQMgcAwE6DMe1" />

According to the planning documents, the site sits “within the St Leonards–Crows Nest Strategic Centre, identified by the NSW Government as a key area for accommodating future jobs and housing across Sydney.”

The proposal has been designed by fjcstudio, formerly FJMT Studio, and is being progressed through the State Significant Development pathway due to its scale and affordable housing provision.

The scheme would comprise 413 apartments, including 46 affordable housing units, alongside retail and commercial uses fronting Herbert Street. The project would also include communal open space, landscaping, a swimming pool, gymnasium, children’s play areas and podium-level resident amenities.

Planning documents show the development would consist of a part-13, part-39 storey tower form positioned above a four-storey podium.

“The development comprises a unified podium that activates the street interface, and two setback towers to accommodate new housing supply while maintaining an appropriate human scale at ground level,” fjcstudio noted in its Design Report.

The northern and southern towers have been shaped to respond to the surrounding skyline while also limiting overshadowing impacts to nearby public open space, particularly Talus Reserve.

The design report said the differing tower heights were intended to “contribute to a varied skyline while responding to the surrounding built form context and solar access considerations.”

<img alt="Aqualand" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="36da62dc-ff9e-41f2-a7e3-7be38373751c" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-05-28%20at%209.51.45%E2%80%AFAM_0.png?VersionId=Mo6Rp2r.XRLTzIfg_PEEpw8NepDH8UBs" />

The site sits directly opposite Royal North Shore Hospital and within walking distance of both St Leonards Station and the new Crows Nest Metro station.

While the site itself sits just outside the formal Crows Nest Transport Oriented Development boundary, the planning documents repeatedly reference its alignment with the broader TOD objectives reshaping the Lower North Shore.

“The site is located adjacent to St Leonards Station and in close proximity to Crows Nest Metro which is within the Crows Nest Transit Orientated Development Accelerated Precinct which has been identified by the NSW Government to support housing delivery,” the Design Verification Statement noted.

According to fjcstudio, the project has been designed to respond to the broader transition occurring across St Leonards, where increasing residential density is being concentrated around transport infrastructure and employment hubs.

“The broader precinct is undergoing significant change, with a mix of existing mid-rise buildings and newer high-density developments,” the report stated.

“Recent and approved projects indicate a consistent shift toward taller built form, typically organised as tower-and-podium typologies with more active ground levels.”

The proposal includes close to 6,000 sqm of retail and commercial space across the ground floor and podium levels, designed to create a more activated street edge along Herbert Street.

Aqualand’s plans would also introduce a landscaped podium shared between the two towers, with communal open space in the form of a podium rooftop designed to support resident interaction and improve urban greening outcomes. The scheme would also introduce pocket parks at the northern and southern ends of the site, including a landscaped area at the corner of Herbert and Ella streets designed to improve pedestrian amenity and soften the streetscape.

&nbsp;

The proposal is being progressed through the NSW Government’s Housing Delivery Authority pathway, which was introduced to accelerate housing supply across the state. The application was declared State Significant Development in April 2025 following an expression of interest process.

<img alt="Aqualand" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="faf6d97d-2671-454f-b85a-fe1c6a7be608" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-05-28%20at%209.51.49%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=diVd28OBVr5.YV.7prrOz.uAanwwwm7a" />

St Leonards has been particularly active with new developments in recent weeks. Developer SP Setia’s <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/news/nsw/first-look-sp-setia-targets-st-leonards-skyline-with-40-storey-tod-tower">plans for a new 42-storey tower</a> recently went on exhibition through the same pathway, while <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/news/nsw/first-look-stockland-plans-52-storey-538-apartment-st-leonards-tower">Stockland’s 52-storey tower proposal</a> was also recently unveiled.

Aside from the St Leonards project, which is expected to take around nine months to move through the approvals process ahead of a potential 2027 launch, Aqualand is also preparing to launch Boronia, a new apartment project in Roseville comprising around 111 apartments on Larkin Street.

The developer also has approvals in place for the next stage of the Barangaroo precinct, which will feature new residential, retail, hospitality and community uses, alongside a new metro entry across the five-hectare site.

More than 50 new retail destinations are planned for Central Barangaroo, alongside a 270-metre-long boulevard connecting Hickson Park to Nawi Cove. Together with Harbour Park, more than 50 per cent of the precinct will comprise public open space and parkland.

Margaret Lomas

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News