<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
Election season means transport season: just as the recent <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-the-nsw-election-promises-on-transport-add-up-112531" target="_blank">New South Wales</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-much-will-voters-pay-for-an-early-christmas-eight-charts-that-explain-victorias-transport-election-106782" target="_blank">Victorian</a> elections gave us massive new transport promises, so too is the federal government relying on the enduring popularity of new roads and rail. But look beyond the rhetoric and the past three years have been largely business as usual. That leaves plenty of room for the next government, of whatever colour, to take a fresh look at how transport promises are made – and plenty of room to improve.
Last week’s federal budget committed to transport expenditure of <a href="https://www.budget.gov.au/2019-20/content/bp1/download/bp1_final.pdf" target="_blank">A$7.4 billion in 2019-20</a>, and A$33 billion over the four-year forward estimates period.
The government claims it’s spending a <a href="https://www.budget.gov.au/2019-20/content/community.htm#transport" target="_blank">record A$100 billion</a> over a decade. Yet the <a href="https://www.billshorten.com.au/2018_budget_reply_canberra_thursday_10_may_2018" target="_blank">opposition claims</a>: “Across the four years of this budget, Commonwealth investment in infrastructure actually falls, from A$8 billion to A$4.5 billion.” And <a href="https://www.afr.com/business/infrastructure/coalition-needs-to-fill-infrastructure-shortfall-20190329-p518u0" target="_blank">Infrastructure Partnerships Australia says</a> recent budgets are down on the long-term average by about A$11 billion over the forward estimates.
How much is the government actually spending?
With such polarised views, who are we to believe?
In reality, the <a href="https://theconversation.com/budget-transport-spending-is-about-par-for-the-course-but-the-pattern-is-unusual-114597" target="_blank">expenditure for 2019-20</a> is absolutely normal. At 0.37% of GDP, it’s close to the midpoint of spending on transport under treasurers Scott Morrison, Joe Hockey and Wayne Swan. In each of the past ten budgets, annual transport spending in the year following the budget has been <a href="https://theconversation.com/budget-transport-spending-is-about-par-for-the-course-but-the-pattern-is-unusual-114597" target="_blank">0.26-0.53% of GDP</a>.
What is different is the extent of promises that lie beyond the forward estimates period. The move to a <a href="https://buildingourfuture.gov.au/assets/documents/10_Year_Infrastructure_Pipeline.pdf" target="_blank">ten-year pipeline of promises</a> might be fine in theory, but an interested elector can rely only on what’s in the budget papers. And from that they would conclude there’s nothing unusual to see here.
A new enthusiasm for equity investments
All these figures concern grants to state governments, which are responsible for transport networks. But, in addition to these grants, the federal government has developed an enthusiasm for funding projects “off-budget”. In the past two years, the Commonwealth made <a href="https://www.budget.gov.au/2018-19/ministerial-statements/2018-19-regional-ministerial-budget-statement.pdf" target="_blank">equity investments</a> of A$9.3 billion in <a href="https://inlandrail.artc.com.au/" target="_blank">Inland Rail</a> and A$5.3 billion in <a href="https://westernsydneyairport.gov.au/" target="_blank">Western Sydney Airport</a>.
The <a href="https://treasury.gov.au/publication/charter-of-budget-honesty-policy-costing-guidelines__trashed/appendix-a-costing-of-measures-and-updating-estimates__trashed" target="_blank">Charter of Budget Honesty</a> states that an investment can be treated as an off-budget equity injection only if the government has a “reasonable expectation” of recovering the investment. In other words, the entity must be expected to make a positive return over time.
But this gives governments a lot of latitude. A positive rate of return is not the same as a commercial one. And there seems little likelihood of commercial returns in either case.
For Inland Rail, it’s no secret that the Australian Rail Track Corporation will <a href="https://www.afr.com/news/economy/barnaby-joyces-inland-rail-revenues-wont-cover-capital-cost-artc-ceo-says-20180219-h0wbvw" target="_blank">never be asked to repay the A$9.3 billion</a>, even when project revenues start to flow in 2025. Let’s hope the finance minister is right to insist there’s no prospect the project will need even more taxpayer support, despite the risks identified in the <a href="https://www.budget.gov.au/2018-19/bp1/bp1.pdf" target="_blank">budget papers themselves</a> and by the Commonwealth <a href="https://www.anao.gov.au/sites/default/files/ANAO_Report_2017-2018_9.pdf" target="_blank">Auditor-General</a>. With no expectation of repayment, there is no practical difference between this “equity investment” and a grant.
For Western Sydney Airport, the government decided to build the airport itself after Sydney Airport Corporation declined its right to build it. The airport operator said the offer as it stood was “<a href="https://www.afr.com/business/infrastructure/airports/badgerys-creek-deeply-uneconomic-sydney-airport-ceo-kerrie-mather-20170216-gueiq6" target="_blank">deeply uneconomic</a>”. It cited operational, traffic, financial and political risks.
So it’s hard to share the confidence of the then treasurer (and now prime minister), Scott Morrison, when <a href="https://www.afr.com/news/politics/govt-set-to-build-airport-rail-link-with-good-debt-20170427-gvtcmy">he said</a> the new airport will “generate an income stream that’s going to pay for itself”.
In both cases, if a future government ends up writing down the fair value of these assets, this will appear on the balance sheet as a change to “other economic flows”. It won’t be separately identified. Nor will the write-down show up in the underlying cash balance figure that the media spotlight highlights on budget night.
The unavoidable conclusion is that pushing transport spending off-budget seriously diminishes not only the discipline that comes from competing for funds through the budget process, but also transparency in how public money is being spent.
A foray into road pricing is stillborn
In November 2016 the government took an unusually bold step: <a href="https://transportinfrastructurecouncil.gov.au/publications/files/Australian_Government_Response_to_Australian_Infrastructure_Plan_November_2016.pdf" target="_blank">it committed</a> to holding an inquiry into road-user charging. The then minister for urban infrastructure, Paul Fletcher, was in good company. His commitment to commission a review led by an eminent Australian was in response to a <a href="https://infrastructureaustralia.gov.au/policy-publications/publications/files/Australian_Infrastructure_Plan.pdf" target="_blank">2016 recommendation</a> from Infrastructure Australia, which invoked a similar <a href="http://competitionpolicyreview.gov.au/files/2015/03/Competition-policy-review-report_online.pdf" target="_blank">recommendation in the 2015 Harper Review</a> of competition policy, which in turn referred to a <a href="/news">2014 Productivity Commission recommendation</a>. And the backdrop to all these reports was a <a href="http://taxreview.treasury.gov.au/content/downloads/final_report_part_1/00_afts_final_report_consolidated.pdf" target="_blank">recommendation of the 2010 Henry Tax Review</a>.
But time passed and no eminent person was appointed. More time passed, ministers moved portfolio, and no eminent person was appointed. Finally, in October 2018, current minister Michael McCormack <a href="https://www.afr.com/news/politics/deputy-pm-michael-mccormack-shelves-inquiry-into-road-pricing-20181004-h1688d" target="_blank">declined to commit</a> to the inquiry.
An inquiry is no more than an inquiry, but a non-inquiry is a commitment to the status quo. Roads funding and roads investment are serious topics, and many <a href="https://www.pc.gov.au/news-media/speeches/infrastructure-pricing-reform/infrastructure-pricing-reform.pdf" target="_blank">commentators have argued</a> that they are the laggards of regulatory reform.
A change to how road use is funded could significantly alter which roads are funded, what maintenance is done, and how networks are managed. It appears to have been all too much for this government. This task awaits a future government.
The alternative government’s most important promises aren’t the sexy ones about electric vehicles. They are <a href="https://www.alp.org.au/media/1539/2018_alp_national_platform_constitution.pdf" target="_blank">Labor’s promises</a> that Infrastructure Australia should assess projects before the decision to invest, and to release assessed business cases. These promises may sound worthy and a little dull, but in reality they are big and welcome commitments.
Less obvious is how to square them with federal Labor’s promise to advance high-speed rail, or the promise to <a href="https://www.billshorten.com.au/getting_melbourne_s_suburban_rail_loop_on_a_faster_track_sunday_14_october_2018" target="_blank">work with the Victorian premier “to deliver the visionary Melbourne Suburban Rail Loop”</a>. Both of these are massively expensive projects with nothing approaching an assessed and publicly available business case.
It would be a significant improvement if whichever party wins government next month were to commit to, and follow through on, careful assessment of transport gaps and problems, consideration of the various feasible solutions, and rigorous evaluation of the preferred approach. And it’s not enough just to do this; it should be done in public.
Let’s hope.
Marion Terrill, Transport and Cities Program Director, Grattan Institute
This article is republished from <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/business-as-usual-record-on-transport-leaves-next-government-plenty-of-room-to-improve-113571" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

j.ballantyne1990-6AQqhLzZaK

Business-as-usual record on transport leaves next government plenty of room to improve

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
Regulation of the Australian building industry is broken, according to the <a href="https://www.industry.gov.au/data-and-publications/building-confidence-building-ministers-forum-expert-assessment" target="_blank">Shergold-Weir report</a> to the <a href="https://www.industry.gov.au/regulation-and-standards/building-and-construction/building-ministers-forum" target="_blank">Building Ministers’ Forum</a> (BMF).
"[…] we have concluded that [the] nature and extent [of problems] are significant and concerning. The problems have led to diminishing public confidence that the building and construction industry can deliver compliant, safe buildings which will perform to the expected standards over the long term."
You can say that again.
Just one of the issues identified in the report, combustible cladding, <a href="https://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/hit-list-identifies-10000-potential-grenfellstyle-buildings/news-story/65aaf99088ead16bd3e0947a6e242770" target="_blank">could affect over 1,000 buildings across Australia</a>. An unknown proportion of these are tall (four storey and above) residential strata buildings. Fears of rectification costs are starting to have <a href="https://www.afr.com/real-estate/melbourne-apartment-buildings-face-extra-scrutiny-over-combustible-cladding-20190205-h1avoi" target="_blank">severe impacts on the apartment market</a>.
The cost of replacing combustible panels at the Lacrosse Apartments in Melbourne, which caught fire in 2014, will be <a href="https://theconversation.com/lacrosse-fire-ruling-sends-shudders-through-building-industry-consultants-and-governments-112777" target="_blank">at least A$5.7 million, plus A$6 million or so in consequential damages</a>. The total cost of replacing combustible panels across Australia is unknown at this point, but is likely to run to billions of dollars.
The <a href="https://www.industry.gov.au/data-and-publications/building-confidence-building-ministers-forum-expert-assessment" target="_blank">Shergold-Weir report</a> identifies a catalogue of other problems, including water leaks, structurally unsound roof construction and poorly constructed fire-resisting elements. Faults appear to be widespread.
A <a href="https://cityfutures.be.unsw.edu.au/documents/44/Governing_the_Compact_City_EXECUTIVE_SUMMARY.pdf" target="_blank">2012 study by UNSW City Futures</a> surveyed 1,020 strata owners across New South Wales and found 72% of respondents (85% in buildings built since 2000) knew of at least one significant defect in their complex. Fixing these problems will cost billions more.
Regulatory failures are not only “diminishing public confidence”, they have a direct impact on the hip pockets of many Australians who own a residential apartment. In short, building defects resulting from lax regulation are a multi-billion dollar disaster.
How could authorities let this happen?
A web of regulations and standards enacted by governments cover construction in Australia, but this regulation is centred on the <a href="https://ncc.abcb.gov.au/ncc-online/About" target="_blank">National Construction Code</a> (NCC). The <a href="https://www.abcb.gov.au/ABCB/The-Board" target="_blank">Australian Building Codes Board</a> (ABCB), a body controlled by the Building Ministers’ Forum, manages the NCC. The ABCB board comprises appointed representatives from the Commonwealth plus all the states and territories and a few industry groups.
It is such a complicated system that it is hard to identify any government, organisation or person that is directly responsible for its performance.
The NCC is supposed to create “benefits to society that outweigh costs” but it appears the ABCB may have been more focused on the need to “consider the competitive effects of regulation” and “not be unnecessarily restrictive” (Introduction to NCC Volume 1).
The BMF’s <a href="https://www.industry.gov.au/sites/default/files/bmf-communique-8-february-2019.pdf" target="_blank">February 8 communique</a>, issued after the <a href="https://www.industry.gov.au/sites/default/files/bmf-communique-8-february-2019.pdf" target="_blank">fire in the Neo200 building</a> in Melbourne, is straight out of the Yes Minister playbook:
"Ministers agreed in principle to a national ban on the unsafe use of combustible ACPs (aluminium composite panels) in new construction, subject to a cost/benefit analysis being undertaken on the proposed ban, including impacts on the supply chain, potential impacts on the building industry, any unintended consequences, and a proposed timeline for implementation. Ministers will further consider this at their next meeting [in May this year]."
This suggests the ministers are more concerned about possible impacts on the panel suppliers and the building industry than the consumer. The earliest a ban can take effect is in May. In the meantime, anecdotal evidence suggests buildings are still being clad in combustible ACP.
Thanks to the journalist Michael Bleby, we know <a href="https://www.afr.com/real-estate/governments-failed-to-act-on-warnings-of-combustible-cladding-dangers-20190226-h1br6n" target="_blank">governments and the ABCB failed to act in 2010</a> when presented with evidence that combustible ACP was not only a danger, but was also being widely used on tall residential buildings.
Bleby quoted ABCB general manager Neil Savery as saying neither his organisation, nor any of the states, was aware that builders were using the product incorrectly.
We also know that panel manufacturers, including the Australian supplier of Alucobond, actively lobbied building ministers. At the July 2011 BMF meeting, the ACT representative effectively vetoed an ABCB proposal to issue an advisory note on the use of combustible ACP.
We are entitled to ask why the ABCB and its staff, or the downstream regulators and their staff, did not know about serious fire problems with ACP that the technical press <a href="http://www.cookeonfire.com/pdfs/eurisolgreenreport.pdf" target="_blank">identified as long ago as 2000</a>. The answer will be of particular interest to residents of tall apartment buildings clad in these panels, all of whom are now living with an active threat to their safety.
Consumers are owed better protection
While both Labor and Coalition governments have worked to improve consumer protection for people buying consumer goods, their record on housing, particularly apartments, is awful. While a consumer can be reasonably sure of getting restitution if they buy a faulty fridge, <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/business/consumer-affairs/victims-suffer-as-combustible-cladding-crisis-rages-on-20190402-p519yy" target="_blank">no such certainty exists if they buy a faulty house or apartment</a>.
At the moment, the NCC does not have any focus on providing protection for buyers of houses or apartments. There are few requirements for the durability of components and astonishingly weak requirements for waterproofing. Under the NCC and its attached Australian Standards, particularly AS 4654.1 and 2-2012, a waterproof membrane could last, in practice, five minutes or 50 years.
Given the magnitude of the economic loss, it would be appropriate for the BMF and ABCB board to publicly admit they have failed. Since their appointments in November 2017 and January 2013 respectively, neither ABCB chair John Fahey nor Savery as general manager has remedied the situation. The Shergold-Weir report has not been implemented and the combustible cladding issues remain unresolved. It would be reasonable for Fahey to step down and for Savery to consider his future.
The next federal government should consider what further action should be taken, particularly in relation to individuals on the BMF and within the ABCB involved in the 2010-2011 decision not to issue the proposed advisory note on the use of ACP. Since the ABCB does not publish minutes and none of its deliberations are in the public domain no one knows what actually happened or who did what.
The new board should consider moving residential apartment buildings (Class 2 buildings in the NCC classification) from Volume 1 of the NCC to Volume 2, which controls detached and semi-detached housing. Volume 2 should then have as its overriding objective the protection of consumers.
The downstream regulators should focus on requiring builders to deliver residential buildings with no serious faults and providing simple mechanisms for redress if they don’t.
Surely this is not too much to ask.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/113115/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;">
Geoff Hanmer, Adjunct Lecturer in Architecture, UNSW
This article is republished from <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/housing-with-buyer-protection-and-no-serious-faults-is-that-too-much-to-ask-of-builders-and-regulators-113115" target="_blank">original article</a>.
This article has been updated to correct a reference to NCC volumes 1 and 2 – the latter controls detached and semi-detached housing.
</body></html>

Housing with no serious faults and buyer protection – is that too much to ask of builders and regulators?

<html><body>
NSW’s population, currently sitting at 8,048,000 is tipped to rise to 8.63 million by 2022.
At the same time the Australian population will rise, according to the budget estimates, from 25.1 million to 26.9 million.
But NSW’s lead over Victoria will narrow from being some 1.5 million more residents to around 1.44 million more.
NSW is set to continue receiving high overseas migration settlement, but see a continued decline every year with residents moving interstate.
The interstate exodus from NSW is tipped to see a 16,000 annual decline for the next four years.
Queensland is the biggest beneficiary with 18,400 new arrivals from other states, with Victoria expected to gain 16,800 annually.
WA and SA are also set to lose resident, by 12,000 and 6,500 annually respectively.
The estimates of migration, interstate and overseas, are based on a weighted average of the past three years, the federal budget papers noted.
The total fertility rate is assumed to be 1.781 babies per woman in 2018, and is assumed to rise to 1.900 babies by 2021.
The budget confirmed the Government will reduce the level of overseas migration from 190,000 to 160,000 places for four years from 2019-20.
For the 2019-20 migration program, there will be 108,682 places in the skill stream, 47,732 places in the family stream, with a combined 3,586 places for child and special eligibility streams.
Net overseas migration is tipped to peak this year at 271,700.
</body></html>

Population gap to narrow between NSW and Victoria

<html><body>
Josh Frydenberg has accused Labor of “lying” about figures behind their negative gearing reforms. 
It comes as the Australian ­Bureau of Statistics has denied claims it had produced data showing that only 7 per cent of property invest­ors bought new homes, a figure opposition treasury spokesman Chris Bowen has been using repeatedly to back his housing policy.
Mr Bowen’s use of ABS data has been challenged by the Grattan Institute, a ­public policy think tank, which has argued that 14 per cent of ­investors buy new properties rather than existing ones. 
Mr Bowen has repeatedly referred to ABS figures purportedly showing that negative gearing has failed to promote construction in new housing and create jobs. 
But ABS financial statistics analyst Tony Mitchell told The Australian newspaper the ABS did not collate the figures Mr Bowen had been referring to since 2016. 
“If you wanted to have those numbers you wouldn’t be able to get them from our statistics ­because we don’t collect them,” Mr Mitchell told The Australian. 
“We’ve got a little bit about construction, but it is to do with lending to businesses for construction of investment dwellings. It is not to do with lending to households for construction of ­investment dwellings.
“There is nothing about lending­ for newly constructed dwellings. That is included in other statistics, but you can’t break it out.” 
The Treasurer said Bowen had been “caught out” and had to “come clean” about Labor’s sums in his budget reply speech later today.
“Bill Shorten and Chris Bowen have been tripping over their shoe laces and the election hasn’t even begun,” the Treasurer told Sydney’s Alan Jones on 2GB radio this morning.
“The Labor Party in reality may see a big black hole in them because they have underestimated the number of negative gearers who use new homes.
“Chris Bowen needs to come clean about the data.”
“The most recent Australian Bureau of Statistics data shows that 93 per cent of new investment loans go to people purchasing ­existing housing stock,” Mr Bowen said in January. 
“This means that the vast bulk of investment does not increase supply or boost jobs. 
“All it does is increase demand and the price of the existing homes, allowing investors to use tax subsidies to outbid owner-occupiers and first-home buyers.”
Grattan Institute director Danielle Wood said the independent think tank had estimated that more investors bought new properties than Labor was claiming. 
“It is right that you can’t ­directly calculate it from the ABS data because some of the finance is going into homes that are newly constructed and you can’t see the split between­ investors and owner-occupiers for that ­category,” Ms Wood said. 
<div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
The Property Investors Council of Australia (PICA) said the use of ‘dodgy data’ shows Labor must urgently authorise the Parliamentary Budget Office to release modelling and assumptions used in their negative gearing and capital gains tax policies.
“If Labor has nothing to hide, then this is a straight forward exercise in full disclosure so all property owners can understand their reasoning for such significant reform,” said PICA chairman, Ben Kingsley.
Mr Kingsley said Labor’s keystone policy failed to include off-the-plan and house-and- land packages in its estimation that more than 90 per cent of new investment loans are to people purchasing existing housing stock.
He said industry experts have shown this figure to be woefully inaccurate.
“Just today Australia biggest aggregator – AFG with over 2900 mortgage brokers – confirmed its mortgage application data for new investment purchases vs. existing property was 43% new and 57% existing,” he said.
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body></html>

Labor's Chris Bowen accused on major negative gearing data miscalculation

<html><body>
Wynn Resorts says it has scrapped preliminary talks to acquire the James Packer-controlled Crown Resorts for $10 billion ($US7 billion) after the Australian Financial Review broke news of the negotiations.
Crown shares jumped as much as 22 per cent <a href="/news/las-vegass-wynn-resorts-seeking-crown-resorts">on the news yesterday</a> to $14.37, close to the $14.75 per share level that Crown said Wynn’s latest cash-and-stock offer valued the company.
When the markets opened they shot down 10.6% to $12.55.
After the AFR revealed Wynn’s takeover approach, Crown not only confirmed the confidential talks on Tuesday, but also disclosed the price that Wynn was offering.
It added that Crown’s board had not yet considered Wynn’s latest offer.
Wynn, the world’s No.2 casino operator, then issued two statements, first confirming the talks, and, a few hours later, stating that they had ended.
“Following the premature disclosure of preliminary discussions, Wynn Resorts has terminated all discussions with Crown Resorts concerning any transaction,” the company said in its second statement.
Wynn was founded in 2002 by Steve Wynn, who started his casino business in Las Vegas in the 1960s.
Beset by sexual misconduct allegations, Wynn left the company and sold his entire 11.8 per cent stake in Wynn Resorts for $US2.1 billion last month.
Wynn operates large resort-and-casino complexes in Las Vegas and Chinese gambling hub Macau, with another under construction in Massachusetts.
The Australian reported the departure of Wynn Resorts billionaire founder Steve Wynn last year enabled the US-based casino operator to come forward with its $10 billion takeover approach for Crown Resorts.
It wrote the offer landed with the company about one month ago, after which Crown called in Goldman Sachs and UBS as its defence advisers.
Ashurst is working as a legal adviser to Crown, which counts James Packer as a 47 per cent shareholder.
Then there was the period when both tycoons were competing for the casino licence in Sydney decades ago, <a href="/news/when-donald-trump-toyed-with-opening-darling-harbour-sydney-casino">and even Donald Trump</a>.
Wynn was unsuccessful in securing the Sydney casino, which was won by Harrah.
Moelis is understood to be working on the transaction with Wynn because of the connections of founder Ken Moelis with casino operators in the US. 
Deutsche Bank is also involved.
</body></html>

Crown shares drop 10% after AFR leak on Wynn/Packer talks scuttle negotiations 

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
Chinese investment in Australia fell 36% in 2018, to A$8.2 billion (US$6.2 billion) from A$13 billion (US$10 billion) in 2017, according to research by KPMG and the University of Sydney Business School.
This is despite Chinese investors still generally regarding Australia as safer and more attractive than most other countries. So 2018 need not be a turning point. But it is cause for reflection.
Discussion about Chinese investment in recent years has been dominated by political and security concerns. These concerns need to be balanced by the national interest in economic prosperity. Chinese investment creates jobs, increases export opportunities and deepens relations with our most significant trade partner.
Arguably the pendulum has to swing back to thinking about the economic benefits. We need a more balanced national conversation.
Many losers, one winner
Our data covers direct investments through mergers and acquisitions, joint ventures and new projects. We do not include portfolio investments, such as buying stocks and bonds, which do not result in foreign management, ownership or legal control. Nor do we include residential property sales.
In the mining, agribusiness and services sectors investment fell by more than 90%. In renewable energy it fell by 48%, and in commercial real estate by 31%.
The only sector where investment did not fall was health care, where investment more than doubled to A$3.4 billion. This made health care the biggest investment sector, attracting 41.7% of all Chinese money, relegating commercial real estate (36.7%) to second place.
The declines were driven by state-owned enterprises pulling back on foreign investment. In 2018 13% of Chinese money came from state-owned enterprises, with 87% from private companies.
This reflects the Chinese government’s greater control of capital outflows and pressure to reduce debt levels, as well as the Australian government’s security concerns about Chinese influence.
It also reflects global dynamics. Chinese investment in Australia is no longer isolated from scrutiny of Chinese investment in North America and Europe. Excluding Chinese technology from telecommunications infrastructure is a notable example.
In the United States, Chinese investment fell 83% to US$4.8 billion from US$29 billion in 2017. In Canada, it fell 47% to US$3.4 billion from US$6.2 billion in 2017.
Balancing competing concerns
Australian governments, corporations and professional advisers need to consider what types of Chinese investments and investors are desired and actively welcome in Australia.
Our report points to areas where Chinese investment is in Australia’s national interest and benefits the global integration and competitiveness of Australian industries.
Health care is a key example.
Chinese investment in health care companies has both provided capital for innovation and facilitated entry into the Chinese market.
Take the Chinese private equity firm <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/business/markets/sirtex-medical-goodbyes-varian-backs-1-9b-chinese-offer-from-cdh-20180614-p4zlk1" target="_blank">CDH buying Sirtex Medical Ltd</a> for A$1.9 billion. Sirtex is an Australian medical device company with a treatment for liver cancer. Its acquisition enables expansion into China, which accounts for more half of the global incidence of liver cancer.
In mining, lithium provides an example of Chinese investment adding value. <a href="https://www.tianqilithium.com.au/site/About-Us/company-overview" target="_blank">Tianqi Lithium</a> has invested A$700 million in a <a href="https://www.tianqilithium.com.au/site/About-Us/tianqi-lithium-global" target="_blank">processing plant</a> in Perth. The plant will provide about 200 jobs and produce 48,000 tonnes of battery-grade lithium hydroxide for export.
Even in food and agriculture, which has generated much controversy over land acquisitions, we see room for advantageous investment processing and value-adding facilities, such as regional abattoirs.
Signalling Australia’s economic interests in Chinese and foreign investment is crucial to Australia’s prosperity.
At a time of global uncertainty, Australian politicians, bureaucrats, business leaders, educational organisations and others must work quietly and respectfully with their Chinese counterparts to allay community concerns and consolidate Australia’s reputation as a welcoming and proactive partner.
Hans Hendrischke, Professor of Chinese Business and Management, University of Sydney
The authors contributed to the Demystifying Chinese Investment in Australia Report.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/114984/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
This article is republished from <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/chinese-investment-in-australia-is-down-36-its-time-for-a-more-balanced-debate-about-the-national-interest-114984" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

Chinese investment in down 36% - it’s time for a more balanced debate about the national interest

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
Half a billion dollars sounds like a lot of money, but that really depends on what you’re spending it on. In Tuesday’s federal budget, the Coalition government announced its <a href="https://theconversation.com/tax-giveaways-in-frydenbergs-back-in-the-black-budget-114177" target="_blank">Commuter Car Park Fund</a>, a A$500 million, 10-year package intended to make it easier for people in the suburbs and regions to drive to their local railway station.
While this is a drop in the ocean compared with the wider transport infrastructure budget, we’re going to use it here as a starting point to run some thought experiments to see if this is the best way to spend our taxes to help people get around.
How much car parking could we buy for $500 million?
The construction cost for a single parking spot can range from <a href="https://www.ptua.org.au/myths/parkride/" target="_blank">A$10,000 for a surface car park to A$68,000 per space in multi-level structures</a>. So, if all the money is spent on surface car parks, the new fund could build 50,000 spaces at railway stations around Australia.
Of course, not all of these spots are going to be in surface parking lots – some will need to be in multi-level parking garages. So, if we built one multi-level space for every five at ground level, the A$500 million earmarked in the budget would buy us 30,000 parking spaces.
Does increased parking increase transit usage?
If these 30,000 park-and-ride spaces at train stations are built, this is unlikely to lead to an increase in transit patronage. It could even <a href="https://humantransit.org/2014/10/basics-the-math-of-park-and-ride" target="_blank">run counter to providing good public transport</a>.
On the day of the 2016 Census, <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://quickstats.censusdata.abs.gov.au/census_services/getproduct/census/2016/quickstat/036" target="_blank">1,225,668 people used public transport to get to work</a>. <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://quickstats.censusdata.abs.gov.au/census_services/getproduct/census/2016/quickstat/036" target="_blank">Generously assuming</a> that <a href="https://chartingtransport.com/tag/car-occupancy/" target="_blank">a single car has an average of 1.5 passengers</a>, the Commuter Car Park Fund might enable only 45,000 extra people to access the public transport network. That’s a tiny 4% of the current number of people who travel to work by public transport.
But <a href="https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2013/03/how-park-and-ride-encourages-car-use/5034/" target="_blank">studies</a> show that only a small proportion of park-and-riders had previously commuted by car all the way to their destination. Many are existing passengers who used to walk, cycle, bus or drive to a different station but are now opting to drive to the station with new parking places. Non-commuters working or shopping in nearby activity centres also often use park-and-ride spaces.
There are at least 705 train stations in metropolitan Australia, and it is not clear from the budget papers where these extra parking spaces are going to be placed. Sydney has <a href="https://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/sites/default/files/media/documents/2017/Train%20Statistics%202014.pdf" target="_blank">176 train stations</a>, Melbourne has 218, Southeast Queensland has 152, Adelaide has 89, and Perth has 70. Even assuming only 300 stations will need extra parking, that provides an average of only 100 new spaces per station.
More bang for your buck
There are cheaper ways to move an extra 45,000 people a day to and from railway stations and around our cities.
Linking a major university campus with a Skytrain station, Vancouver’s 99 B-Line bus service moves <a href="https://public.tableau.com/profile/translink#!/vizhome/2017TSPR-BusSummary/TheWorkbook" target="_blank">56,000 passengers a day</a> at a cost of less than C$14 million (A$14.7 million) a year.
Similarly, in Toronto, the Finch West bus service carries <a href="https://www.ttc.ca/Customer_Service/Corporate_Plan/Appendices/Key_facts_and_figures/index.jsp" target="_blank">44,000 passengers a day</a> to and from the subway. The Toronto urban transit network moves <a href="https://www.toronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/8bd3-TTC-2018-Op-Budget-Notes-V1.pdf" target="_blank">more than a million people a day with an annual operating subsidy of C$713 million</a>.
<img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/267740/original/file-20190405-123431-1f0fvg4.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt="">
Passengers transferring from the Metro to a feeder bus in suburban Montreal. Iain Lawrie/University of Melbourne, Author provided
Each of these cities has comparable urban landscapes to suburban Australia, but is able to offer buses to nearby stations every five minutes.
We understand that these costs are not necessarily directly comparable. We provide them though as a point to think about, and so you might begin to ask how our cities could be better configured.
Better land use around train stations?
Alternatives like direct and frequent buses <a href="https://theconversation.com/freeing-up-the-huge-areas-set-aside-for-parking-can-transform-our-cities-85331" target="_blank">could liberate space around our suburban train stations</a>. Around the world, stations are community hubs, and even simple stations can be wonderful, vibrant places for people. The best ones are a pleasure to move through and spend time in, unencumbered by the conflict and noise of space dominated by car traffic.
Building car parks wastes that place potential. Instead, it bakes in the mobility habits and planning prejudices that condemn our public places to being grey deserts, difficult to move through, and keeping out parks, shops, gardens, street life, walkability and human interaction.
<img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/267750/original/file-20190405-114908-1qfn7cz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt="">
Unsealed car parking at Tarneit station in Melbourne’s western suburbs. Paul Fleckney/University of Melbourne, Author provided
Underpinning the futility of the Commuter Car Park Fund is the fact that “demand” for free parking is fundamentally insatiable. Just like urban road space, building more of the wrong infrastructure simply <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.3141/2543-19" target="_blank">induces more use and perpetuates congestion</a>.
Parking policy scholars and practitioners have known for decades now that parking demand can be successfully managed, <a href="https://www.foreground.com.au/planning/car-parking-choking-cities/" target="_blank">including via pricing existing parking supply and improving transport alternatives</a>. Pricing and related policies serve as an effective disincentive to people who don’t need to be driving (and parking), freeing up road space for those who do.
Urban congestion is a problem of the quality and connectivity of our public transport network, not just a parking and road space issue. We have long known the policies and mechanisms to shift higher proportions of people to alternatives (and improve conditions for those who need to drive). We still need the funding and the planning capacity to achieve it.
Australia deserves better transport policy and a clearer, better-informed discussion about how its transport funds are being spent.
Nathan Pittman, PhD Candidate in Transportation Planning, University of Melbourne
Crystal Legacy, Senior Lecturer in Urban Planning, University of Melbourne
John Stone, Senior Lecturer in Transport Planning, University of Melbourne
Rebecca Clements, PhD Candidate, Faculty of Architecture, Building and Planning, University of Melbourne
This article is republished from <a href="http://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/500m-for-station-car-parks-other-transport-solutions-could-do-much-more-for-the-money-114908">original article</a>.
Main photo: With more than a million Australians using public transport to get to work each day, demand for car parking at the station is virtually insatiable. <a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/philipmallis/46402974731/in/photolist-23RbPF2-Gjsh88-2ekmTqK-bEfVA-EDLrAJ-TgfpQc-M5wkF7-HQRQVf-2aX7ext-23zY5e1-PZ8Qfk-RCDnAd-24Lw2wt-RqYRZD-2dUEmhR-Ng589h-2bQ5kHc-RVZuuK-PWm1gP-SA6aE7-2eWmyh4-P6mmSo-D5GjN-dgxvHq-aF3Lb6-bpCRM-KH53p-259W8Ku-aF7wpU-aF7Ah5-4a9Rot-dpDGsV-cwBpZw-9hKnjZ-5sb8ah-91JveF-GLEnUQ-v74pZ4-uadf16-HaSga7-r8ztRk-6Yj2WA-28mpmu2-HTJjNL-23nR3sx-2dGtnJt-BSC48H-RyFCw3-TdcKuw-23NSTS4">Philip Mallis/flickr</a>, <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a>
</body></html>

$500 million for station car parks? Other transport solutions could do much more for the money

<html><body>
There’s relief coming for workers who have been driven mad by the bumper to bumper.
The budget seeks to encourage the workforce to instead park and ride on the train.
The first funds will be spent at Hurstville, Panania, Gosford and Woy Woy.
The $500 million national program has been dubbed the Commuter Car Park Fund.
It is aimed at providing carparking for the workers wishing to commute to work rather than drive into the increasingly congested CBD.
The bulk will be spent at Gosford which will get a $30 million car park. Panania and Hurtsville gets a $7.5 million allocation with $5 in Woy Woy.
“The Commuter Car Park Fund will allow more people to park and ride, taking tens of thousands of cars off our major roads per day,” the budget papers noted.
“This fund will focus on immediate, practical measures to cut travel times within our cities.
"Removing bottlenecks and improving travel corridors,” the Treasurer said.
It will include a $500 million Commuter Car Park Fund that will improve access to public transport hubs and take tens of thousands of cars off our roads.
NSW is budgeted to get a $50 million car park building allocation which comes under the $4 billion Urban Congestion Fund, which has been boosted by $3 billion.
It comes as Sydney residents have been increasingly frustrated by the unavailability of carparking at railway stations, and also annoyed at the increased road congestion.
</body></html>

Car park construction spree for select railway stations 

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
After a three-year cycle of industry comment, review and revision, May 1 marks the adoption of a new <a href="https://ncc.abcb.gov.au/ncc-online/About" target="_blank">National Construction Code</a> (NCC). Overseen by the <a href="https://www.abcb.gov.au/ABCB/The-Board" target="_blank">Australian Building Codes Board</a> (ABCB), the code is the nation’s defining operational document of building regulatory provisions, standards and performance levels. Its <a href="https://ncc.abcb.gov.au/ncc-online/About" target="_blank">mission statement</a> is to provide the minimum necessary requirements for safety and health, amenity, accessibility and sustainability in the design, construction, performance and liveability of new buildings.
Some say the building industry is in <a href="https://www.thefifthestate.com.au/columns/spinifex/construction-crisis-no-minister-its-broken-try-an-iron-clad-mandated-warranty-instead/" target="_blank">deep crisis and broken</a>, that even our entire building regulatory system is not fit for purpose. Consider what has happened, <a href="https://www.afr.com/real-estate/what-are-australias-other-defective-towers-aside-from-sydneys-opal-tower-20190102-h19n02" target="_blank">particularly in residential construction</a>. We have had buildings <a href="https://theconversation.com/cladding-fire-risks-have-been-known-for-years-lives-depend-on-acting-now-with-no-more-delays-111186" target="_blank">burning</a>, <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/biggest-shake-up-in-building-laws-in-our-state-s-history-follows-opal-tower-debacle-20190210-p50wtd" target="_blank">cracking</a>, windows exploding, <a href="/news/vue-on-king-william-adelaide-cbd-apartment-owners-hot-under-the-collar">rooms with intolerable heat stress</a>, <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-02-23/opal-tower-residents-face-long-wait-for-repair-work/10842504" target="_blank">rendered unfit for occupation</a> without <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/feb/12/it-could-take-two-years-to-replace-flammable-cladding-in-melbourne-says-building-authority" target="_blank">costly remedial action</a>, class <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-08/residents-furious-builder-sued-combustible-cladding/10214570" target="_blank">actions against developers</a>, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/lacrosse-fire-ruling-sends-shudders-through-building-industry-consultants-and-governments-112777" target="_blank">multi-million-dollar court judgments</a> against consultants and builders.
Well, how do you measure performance? We should think in terms of lives saved, <a href="https://theconversation.com/health-check-how-can-extreme-heat-lead-to-death-91480" target="_blank">heat stroke</a> minimised, costly remedial works avoided, <a href="https://theconversation.com/too-hot-to-sleep-heres-why-11492" target="_blank">less sleep deprivation</a> and climate-induced respiratory issues, <a href="https://theconversation.com/we-cant-just-leave-it-to-the-ndis-to-create-cities-that-work-to-include-people-with-disability-93419" target="_blank">disability access</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/sustainable-housings-expensive-right-not-when-you-look-at-the-whole-equation-60056" target="_blank">less bill shock for the vulnerable</a>, and housing that is built to allow <a href="https://theconversation.com/for-australians-to-have-the-choice-of-growing-old-at-home-here-is-what-needs-to-change-91488" target="_blank">ageing in place</a>.
Safety and amenity
Widespread use of non-compliant building materials, and specifically combustible cladding, has been foremost in the minds of regulators. Three years ago, after the <a href="https://www.melbourne.vic.gov.au/sitecollectiondocuments/mbs-report-lacrosse-fire.pdf" target="_blank">Lacrosse fire in Melbourne Docklands</a>, the ABCB amended the existing code. This crucial revision has been <a href="https://www.abcb.gov.au/Resources/Publications/Education-Training/Fire-performance-of-external-walls-and-cladding" target="_blank">carried forward into the new code</a>.
Individually, states have acted on the findings of a <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Economics/Non-conforming45th/Report" target="_blank">Senate inquiry</a> into this area. Last October, for example, Queensland enacted the <a href="http://www.hpw.qld.gov.au/construction/BuildingPlumbing/Building/Pages/NonConformingBuildingProducts.aspx" target="_blank">Building and other Legislation (Cladding) Amendment Regulation 2018</a>.
Investigations into the highly publicised, structurally unsound Opal tower in Sydney found the design – namely the connections between the beams and the columns on level 10 and level 4, the two floors with significant damage — indicated “<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-01-16/opal-tower-investigation-what-the-report-actually-says/10717830" target="_blank">factors of safety lower than required by standards</a>”.
<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/jj9MWsDrqg8?wmode=transparent&amp;start=0" frameborder="0" width="440" height="260"></iframe>
Opal Tower report finds “construction issues”.
Just two months ago when the new code was released in preview form, we learnt that a significant number of approved CodeMarks used to certify compliance for a range of building materials are under recall. The Australian Institute of Building Surveyors <a href="https://aibs.com.au/Public/News/2019/20190220_CodeMark_Certificates_Withdrawn.aspx" target="_blank">posted urgent advice</a>: “We are in the process of making enquiries with the ABCB and Building Ministers to find out when they were made aware that these certificates were withdrawn and what the implications for members will be […] and owners of properties that have been constructed using these products.”
Fire safety concerns are driving changes in the code. The new NCC has extended the provision of fire sprinklers to lower-rise residential buildings, generally 4-8 storeys. However, non-sprinkler protection is still permitted where other fire safety measures meet the deemed minimum acceptable standard.
Comfort and health
The code includes new heating and cooling load limits. However, requirements for overall residential energy efficiency have not been increased. The 6-star minimum introduced in the 2010 NCC remains.
The code has just begun to respond to the problem of dwellings that are being constructed to comply but which <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27432732" target="_blank">perform very poorly in the peaks of summer</a> and winter and <a href="http://www.thrive-research.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Living-Well-Report-Final-for-issue-080317.pdf" target="_blank">against international minimum standards</a>. The change in the code deals with only the very worst houses – no more than 5% of designs with the highest heating loads and 5% with the highest cooling loads.
It’s a concern that the climate files used to assess housing thermal performance use 40-year-old BOM data. Off the back of record hot and dry summers, readers in such places as Adelaide and Perth might be surprised to learn the ABCB designates their climate as “<a href="https://www.abcb.gov.au/Resources/Publications/Education-Training/Energy-Efficiency-NCC-Volume-Two" target="_blank">the mildest region</a>”.
For well over a decade my colleagues and I have researched thermal performance, comfort and health and improvements by regulation. Our <a href="http://anzasca.net/paper/investigating-equivalence-in-compliance-pathways-to-australian-housing-energy-efficiency/" target="_blank">recent paper</a>, based on a small <a href="http://www.nathers.gov.au/newsletters/issue-2-june-2016/nathers-news" target="_blank">sample of South Australian houses built between 2013 and 2016</a>, demonstrated what has been discussed anecdotally in hushed voices across the industry, that a building can <a href="http://anzasca.net/paper/investigating-equivalence-in-compliance-pathways-to-australian-housing-energy-efficiency/" target="_blank">fail minimum standards using one particular compliance option yet pass as compliant using a different pathway</a>.
A building that is not six stars can be built under the new code. In fact, it may have no stars!
Lamentably, there has been no national evidenced-based evaluation (let alone international comparison) of the measured effectiveness of the 6-star standard. CSIRO did carry out a <a href="https://publications.csiro.au/rpr/pub?pid=csiro:EP1312595" target="_blank">limited evaluation</a> of the older 5-star standard (dating back to 2005). An <a href="https://www.abcb.gov.au/Resources/Publications/Consultation/Energy-Action-Modelling-and-Sensitivity-Analysis" target="_blank">evaluation for commercial buildings</a> is available from the ABCB website.
Accessibility and liveability
Volume 2 of the NCC covers housing and here it is business as usual, although the ABCB has released an <a href="https://www.abcb.gov.au/Resources/Publications/Consultation/Accessible-Housing-Options-Paper" target="_blank">options paper</a> on proposals that might be part of future codes. Accessible housing <a href="https://www.abcb.gov.au/Initiatives/All/Accessible-Housing" target="_blank">is treated as a discrete project</a>. Advocates for code changes in this area, such as the <a href="https://anuhd.org/" target="_blank">Australian Network for Universal Housing Design</a> (ANUHD), have written to the ABCB expressing disappointment.
A Regulation Impact Assessment on the costs and benefits of applying a minimum accessibility standard to all new housing has yet to see the light of day.
These proposals or “options” talk of silver and gold levels of design (there is no third-prize bronze option for liveable housing). Codes of good practice in accessible design have for decades recommended such measures.
It’s all about performance
Some argue that deep-seated problems have developed from a code that favours innovation and cost reduction over consumer protection. There is a cloud over the industry and over some provisions – or should we say safeguards and compliance?
Safety should not be a matter of good luck or depend on an accidental selection of a particular building material or system. New buildings born of this new code are hardly likely to differ measurably from their troublesome older siblings. The anxiety for insurers, regulators and building owners continues.
The National Construction Code adopts a performance-based approach to building regulation, but don’t expect the sales consultant to know the <a href="http://www.yourhome.gov.au/passive-design/glazing" target="_blank">U-value</a> of the windows, whether the doors are hung to allow for disabled access, or if the cleat on your tie beam is to Australian standards.
Anyone can propose changes to the NCC. The form is on the website. Consultants will be hired to model costs and benefits.
Regulatory reforms introduced through the ABCB over the past 20 years have produced an <a href="http://www.thecie.com.au/?page_id=379" target="_blank">estimated annual national economic benefit of A$1.1 billion</a>. That’s a lot of money! The owners of failing residential buildings could do with some of that cash to cover losses and legal fees.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/113729/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;">
Timothy O'Leary, Lecturer in Construction and Property, University of Melbourne
This article is republished from <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/australia-has-a-new-national-construction-code-but-its-still-not-good-enough-113729" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

Australia new National Construction Code still isn't good enough

<html><body>
The South Yarra office market is set to double in size in the next four years in the most significant expansion this increasingly sought after commercial precinct has seen in recent history. 
According to Colliers International research, there is 80,000 square metres of upcoming space in the South Yarra commercial market over three projects, with a pipeline until 2023. 
The largest injection of new office space will be an additional 50,000 square metres over four buildings at the new-look Jam Factory, being developed by Newmark Capital.
An estimated 4,000 square metres will be added at Chapel Plaza (402 Chapel Street) and another 25,000 square metres at Goldfields Group’s 627 Chapel Street which will comprise 25,000 square metres of office space.  
“No substantial office building over 4,000 square metres had been delivered in South Yarra in the last six years – all development in the last five years has been in the Forrest Hill precinct, so as new office space comes online, it joins a thriving, mostly residential, development market in this area,” Rob Joyes, Colliers International National Director of Office Leasing, said. 
“In recent years, large occupiers of 4,000 square metres-plus have had to focus on other city fringe areas such as Richmond and Cremorne due to a lack of options in South Yarra.  
“Led by the rejuvenation of the Jam Factory, these new projects will open the door for large occupiers to position themselves in this tightly held precinct.” 
According to Colliers International, South Yarra’s net lettable area was 97,000 square metres at March 2019. 
“An 80,000 square metres investment in new office space will result in the doubling of this boutique commercial precinct and turn it into one of the next city fringe office hot spots,” Colliers International Research Manager Sarah Walker said. 
“An analysis of historic office demand in the CBD shows that for every new head of population, 0.9 square metres of office space is demanded. Up until about 2015, office supply in the Melbourne CBD broadly kept pace with population growth.
“Since that time, however, the increase in population has outpaced CBD supply growth. This has contributed to the exceptionally low vacancy we are recording in both the CBD and City Fringe markets. 
“Based on ABS forecasts, as well as Colliers’ own analysis of future office supply, this supply/demand imbalance is forecast to become even greater and the undersupply in the CBD will need to be met by alternative markets. 
“Tenant location preferences are continually moving towards greater emphasis on accessibility to public transport and amenity for staff. City fringe markets, particularly those serviced by a train station, are best positioned to capture this demand.  
“Vacancy in the city fringe is currently at just under 4.5%, and has been sub-4.5% for two years now. Coupled with the very low vacancy in the CBD, and a forecast for continued low vacancy, upcoming supply in the City Fringe is expected to be met favourably by Melbourne occupiers.” 
Joyes said office leasing teams were seeing a strong desire from businesses to cater to the lifestyle of their staff.
“People want to work, live and play in close proximity, and South Yarra offers not only easy access to the CBD for meetings but an abundance of after hours entertainment and amenity for employees to enjoy,” he said.
“The Jam Factory in particular is set to capture this demand and be snapped up by savvy businesses looking to attract and retain the best staff. This once in a generation development will truly unlock the full potential of this commanding 1.8 hectare site in one of Melbourne’s fastest growing and most affluent suburbs.  
“Occupiers of the Jam Factory will also be able to take advantage of a new dedicated pedestrian connection linking the development to South Yarra railway station, one of the busiest train stations outside the Melbourne CBD.” 
Jonathan Bradhurst , Newmark Capital Project Director, said The Jam Factory was at the focal point of South Yarra’s vibrant lifestyle precinct fueled by innovation, creative industry and its young and affluent demographic.  
“South Yarra continues to evolve, on trend, with an exciting lineup of new apartments, food halls, restaurants and gyms in the pipeline,” Bradhurst said.
“Businesses across the spectrum of culinary, physical fitness and wellness and entertainment see the value of bringing their services to South Yarra to reach the millennial, educated demographic that makes up nearly 50% of the neighbourhood’s residents.
Jonathan Isaacs, of the Clemenger Group, said South Yarra was an ideal fit for businesses looking to provide work-life balance in close proximity to the CBD and an abundance of amenity. 
“We’re proud to base some of the Clemenger Group’s businesses in South Yarra because our employees love to work here,” he said.
“Our agencies get to form a part of the creative precinct along Chapel Street, and the competitive overheads mean we can invest in contemporary, exciting office fit-outs that reflect the businesses they house.”
</body></html>

South Yarra office market set to double with record injection of capital

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

Joel Robinson

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

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

Sherpa acquires new site for second Brisbane apartment tower

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

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

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

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

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

Staff reporter

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News