Perth’s new apartment market recorded its strongest quarter of sales since Q4 2021, with 412 apartments sold in Q1 2026 and a record quarterly sold value of $537 million, according to Urbis’ latest Apartment Essentials results.

Urbis said the March quarter result reflects strong, highly product‑specific demand across both ends of the market, from more attainable projects delivering at scale, through to premium stock being absorbed by equity‑rich downsizers.&nbsp;

David Cresp, Partner at Urbis, said the key story in Perth is not demand, it is the market’s ability to convert demand into delivered housing.&nbsp;

“This is the strongest sales quarter since Q4 2021, and it reinforces that demand in Perth is real and it’s local,” David Cresp said. “But the task now is delivery, turning that demand into projects that can actually be built and completed.”&nbsp;

[smartcode_project:default project_id=110291 project_image_fid=302785]

<h2>Affordable product leads, premium demand remains resilient</h2>

Sales in Q1 were led by more affordable projects, with The Boulevard (SKS Group) recording 115 sales in the quarter, the presentation noting this is only the second time a single project has surpassed 100 quarterly sales. The project was able to offer more affordable housing product right next to a train station.&nbsp;

Palmyra West (Finbar) also delivered strong results with 28 sales in Q1, following 84 sales in Q4, with an average price of under $800,000, underscoring depth of demand for well‑located, attainable new stock.&nbsp;

At the premium end, Urbis said downsizer demand is continuing, with the results highlighting Romeo (Applecross, Finbar) recording 75 sales and reaching almost 50% sold in one quarter.

Jual (Shenton Park, Celsius Property) also posted a strong quarter with 28 sales, reaching 39% sold in one quarter.

Urbis noted that Perth apartment demand is not speculative, not investor‑led, and not uniform, describing it as localised, often equity‑driven and highly product‑specific, a pattern reflected in the polarisation between strong “attainable” performers and premium downsizer product.&nbsp;

[smartcode_project:default project_id=148957 project_image_fid=364102]

<h2>Prices underpinned by costs, and the delivery risk is growing</h2>

Urbis said pricing pressure is cost not demand‑driven: construction costs and delivery risk are now a central constraint, with the results noting build costs remain elevated and volatile, and that energy, fuel and labour uncertainty weigh on feasibility.

David Cresp said a growing challenge for private Build‑to‑Sell developers is simply securing a builder in the current environment.

“Developers are really feeling the pressure from a building market that was operating at capacity and securing a builder is challenging,” David Cresp said, adding that even where a builder can be secured, “trying to get to the price that makes the development financially viable is incredibly challenging in the current market.”&nbsp;

Urbis’ broader WA commentary also notes that industry remains at or above capacity with lot and housing creation, and that many builders are limiting new sales to manage stretched workforces and fixed‑price contract pressures, conditions that flow directly into apartment feasibility and delivery timing.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=108869 project_image_fid=317905]

<h2>Supply: improving later, but still constrained, and Perth lags eastern benchmarks</h2>

While near‑term supply remains constrained, Urbis’ forecast shows completions lifting “Supply is forecast to be back above 1,500 apartments per annum for the first time since 2019”, with 1,775 completions forecast for 2026, and volumes remaining above that level over the following years.&nbsp;

Looking further ahead, completions are forecast to reach 2,500 in 2028, with the report noting 32% of that total is social/affordable, reflecting the role of government‑supported delivery in rebuilding the pipeline.&nbsp;

However, Urbis said Perth remains behind comparable markets on pipeline scale. In a national comparison of projects under construction, the report shows under construction Perth Build‑to‑Sell (BTS) at 3,446 apartments versus the Gold Coast at 7,922. Mr Cresp said “The challenge for Perth is how to we grow the delivery pipeline”.

Urbis’ conclusion is that Perth’s market is increasingly defined by product discipline and delivery certainty, with the research identifying “delivery certainty is key” and calling out builder risk and procurement models as core success factors, alongside “timing and staging”.&nbsp;

Joel Robinson

Perth apartment sales hit strongest pace since late 2021 as builder capacity tightens

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/sammut-developments">Sammut Group</a> has secured development approval for its latest Brisbane apartment project, marking the Sydney developer’s next step in expanding its Queensland pipeline following the success of its debut Gold Coast development, Coast.

The approved project at <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/44-glen-road-toowong-qld-4066">44 Glen Road, </a><a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developments/toowong-qld-4066">Toowong</a> will deliver a 15-storey riverfront apartment building with 42 residences, significantly increasing the scale of the site’s previous approval for a smaller luxury scheme. Designed by Bureau^proberts, the development will comprise a mix of predominantly four-bedroom and two-bedroom apartments positioned to maximise Brisbane River and city views.

Sammut Director Julian Sammut said the group had been actively searching Brisbane for several years before identifying Toowong as the right fit.

“Brisbane was the right step for Sammut,” Sammut said.

“With the success of Coast we thought we should definitely look to do more in Queensland alone. We then pushed up to look at Brisbane. We've been looking for I'd say two to three years actually and it was hard to find the right location.”

<img alt="Sammut makes Brisbane apartment play" data-entity-type="" data-entity-uuid="" src="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/f_auto,c_limit,w_1440,q_75/https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/field/image/Screenshot%202025-12-23%20at%203.27.14%E2%80%AFPM.png?VersionId=dYAVIL7qdcGA8ojvkslSrLjczXFejSSx" />

Sammut said suburbs including New Farm and Teneriffe were considered before the group ultimately focused on Toowong due to its strong downsizer demographic and limited supply of developable riverfront land.

The site was acquired off-market after what Sammut described as a lengthy negotiation and planning process, with the developer pursuing an uplift to the original approval.

“We are DA approved now which is very exciting,” Sammut said.

“We've had our change approval come through and we've obviously doubled the height, 15 storeys plus rooftop. We've got 42 amazing apartments that are going to be coming to market soon.”

<img alt="Sammut makes Brisbane apartment play" data-entity-type="" data-entity-uuid="" src="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/c_scale,w_580,dpr_2.0,q_auto:good/https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202025-12-23%20at%203.27.26%E2%80%AFPM.png?VersionId=ohkRkY0dIZlqdfME2EZePsCQavRiBadE" />

Bureau^proberts said the design responds to Toowong’s evolving urban character, balancing contemporary apartment living with the area’s established residential identity.

“A place where traditional Queensland living has taken place for centuries; Toowong is seeing a shift of contemporary influence, commercial and retail hubs mixed with well-considered residential offerings – all the while maintaining its character and charm,” the architect noted in planning documents submitted to Brisbane City Council.

The architecture practice said the project’s form was shaped by its riverfront setting, flood considerations, neighbouring building scales, and view corridors.

“They said the mix of four and two-bedroom apartments capture the ‘fundamental qualities of Queenslander living,’ translated into the context of a contemporary subtropical building.”

The development sits just off Coronation Drive within walking distance of Toowong’s retail precinct and the upgraded Regatta ferry terminal, while also benefiting from proximity to the incoming green bridge connection to West End. Sammut said the accessibility and amenity offering were central to the site’s appeal.

The approval adds to growing residential activity along the Toowong riverfront, joining nearby projects including Consolidated Properties’ Monarch Residences and Spyre Group’s ARC Residences.

Sammut secures approval for debut Brisbane apartment development in Toowong

Developer Lanevick is heading back into Sydney’s apartment market after focusing more heavily on the luxury townhouse and terrace sector in recent years.

Lanevick, founded and directed by Steve Maroun, is expecting to receive approval in the coming months for a new apartment development in Gladesville, with the aim to launch it to the market later this year.

The 51-apartment project, designed by Studio Johnston, will comprise a mix of one-, two-, and three-bedroom apartments positioned toward the Hunters Hill downsizer market.

“Traditionally it’s been difficult for people in that market to downsize because there just hasn’t been the right product available,” Maroun said.

“We’re targeting buyers who might have 30 to 40 per cent of their house value sitting in the bank after downsizing.

“They still want good spacious entertaining areas, they still want quality design, but they also want flexibility and the ability to enjoy life a bit more after working hard for a long time.”

The project sits near Boronia Park and within close proximity to the Parramatta River foreshore, an area Maroun says offers more of a Hunters Hill lifestyle than a traditional apartment precinct.

“From a lifestyle perspective, it’s really more Hunters Hill than Gladesville,” Maroun said. “You’re close to the foreshore, close to parklands, and still connected back into the village precinct.”

From level four and above, apartments will capture water views&nbsp;toward Sydney Harbour. Communal amenity will include rooftop entertaining areas, wellness spaces, and a gym tailored toward owner-occupier buyers.

“We’ve really designed these apartments around that buyer coming from the Hunters Hill LGA and what they’re actually looking for in their next chapter.”

The proposed development has also been designed to respond to the changing character of the broader Gladesville town centre, where a growing number of mixed-use and residential proposals are expected to emerge over the coming years.

“Gladesville presented a rare opportunity to deliver a genuinely design-led residential project within an evolving lifestyle precinct, just moments from the growing Gladesville town centre, and we’ve approached the project with a strong focus on architecture, liveability and long-term community value,” Maroun said.

Maroun said Lanevick saw a first-mover advantage within the precinct as planning controls continue to evolve to accommodate greater housing density.

“We think there’s a real opportunity there that hasn’t really been serviced properly yet,” he said.

“There’s going to be a broader evolution of the whole Gladesville village precinct over time, particularly with more activation and mixed-use outcomes.”

The Venus Street proposal will include a commercial and retail component at ground level designed to contribute to that evolving streetscape activation.

“A big part of the thinking was how do you activate that area properly and create more vibrancy and amenity, which is what Hunters Hill has been looking for,” Maroun said.

Lanevick’s focus since 2020 has largely been on smaller-scale luxury townhouse and terrace developments. The developer recently completed Royale Randwick, also designed by Studio Johnston, where prices reached $3.65 million. The project was featured in the UDIA NSW 2026 Professional Development Prospectus and was also named a finalist for Development of the Year.

&nbsp;

Lanevick to cater for Hunters Hill downsizers with new Gladesville apartment development

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.

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

Housing Affordability

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
As politicians across Australia grapple with a fix for housing affordability, you might be forgiven for thinking this was the first time the nation has confronted a crisis in housing. But analysis of documents from the reconstruction period following the second world war finds that, as the war was drawing to a close, concern was building about housing availability and affordability. <img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/74615/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
Some of the issues, arguments and solutions being presented today are extremely similar to those consuming Australian politicians and policymakers three-quarters of a century ago.
<h2>Housing and fertility</h2>
Treasurer Scott Morrison <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/people-are-delaying-having-children-so-they-can-buy-a-house-scott-morrison-20170312-guwnm1" target="_blank">recently asserted</a> that the housing affordability crisis was so severe that:
"People are putting off when they buy their house. They are even putting off when they have kids so they can save more."
The links between housing affordability and the fertility of the national population are difficult to make at the best of times. But Morrison is not the first to make this connection.
In 1944, housing reformer Oswald “Oz” Barnett connected the declining national birth rate with a lack of quality and affordable housing.
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://catalogue.nla.gov.au/Record/1599057?lookfor=author:(Oswald%20Barnett)&amp;offset=17&amp;max=19">He argued</a> that the "tragic lack of decent dwellings is rapidly leading us along the road to national race suicide […] One cannot blame a woman for refusing to bring a baby into the world […] nor blame the expectant mother, when her baby does come, for refusing to have another baby until she is able to obtain a house."
Similarly, in its second interim report in 1944, the <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://catalogue.nla.gov.au/Record/2843335?lookfor=commonwealth%20housing%20commission&amp;offset=5&amp;max=343" target="_blank">Commonwealth Housing Commission</a> reasoned that the lack of affordable housing stock available was “one of the major factors in the limitation of families” and the “alarming decline in the Australian birth rate”.
<h2>Rural spaces as the solution</h2>
While rural Australia had its own housing problems – and <a href="https://theconversation.com/a-housing-affordability-crisis-in-regional-australia-yes-and-heres-why-71808" target="_blank">still does today</a> – it also offered a solution to the problem of a low national birth rate. Sidney Luker, a civil engineer and town planner in New South Wales, <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://catalogue.nla.gov.au/Record/2319960?lookfor=author:(walter%20bunning)&amp;offset=11&amp;max=13" target="_blank">observed that</a> the decline in the national fertility was “naturally more apparent in the capital cities than in the country”.
His solution? Get people to move to the country via decentralisation policies.
Not only were those living in rural Australia more likely to have children, but life in the country was argued to be naturally superior. Journalist and historian <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://catalogue.nla.gov.au/Record/749306?lookfor=title:(War%20Aims%20of%20a%20Plain%20Australia)&amp;offset=1&amp;max=394913">Charles Bean</a> argued that “decentralisation” was necessary for the “health, conveniences and improvement of the big cities”.
Architect, town planner and key contributor to the Commonwealth Housing Commission <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://catalogue.nla.gov.au/Record/2235723?lookfor=author:(walter%20bunning)&amp;offset=6&amp;max=13" target="_blank">Walter Bunning</a> also believed that decentralisation would improve “housing conditions” and reduce the time workers spent travelling to their places of employment. This would prevent people from becoming a “race of ‘straphangers’” – people spending a long time on transport to and from work.
Such arguments are eerily similar to those we hear today about the costs of congestion that come with affordable housing being on the outskirts of our major cities.
Earlier this year, Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-01-24/barnarby-joyce-urges-aspiring-home-owners-to-look-beyond-sydney/8209496">argued that</a> home buyers who couldn’t afford property in the major cities should consider moving to regional Australia. He said “there are other parts of Australia” to buy housing.
<h2>Housing affordability and political risk</h2>
Political and policy minds were also focused on fixing housing problems during the 1940s due to the risk of political discontent.
The <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://catalogue.nla.gov.au/Record/2316916?lookfor=(author:Council%20OR%20author:of%20OR%20author:Social%20OR%20author:Services%20OR%20author:NSW)%20AND%20(title:Report%20OR%20title:on%20OR%20title:Housing)%20AND%20(date:%5B1940%20TO%201950%5D)&amp;offset=1&amp;max=520">Council of Social Services NSW</a> explained: "Bad housing fosters the growth of anti-democratic opinion – the frame of mind of the ‘have not’."
Similarly, <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://catalogue.nla.gov.au/Record/713131?lookfor=author:(Oswald%20Barnett)&amp;offset=1&amp;max=19" target="_blank">Barnett</a> and fellow social housing campaigners Walter Burt and Frank Heath noted “an increasingly bitter contest between […] capitalism [and …] labour”.
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://catalogue.nla.gov.au/Record/1599057?lookfor=author:(Oswald%20Barnett)&amp;offset=17&amp;max=19" target="_blank">Barnett</a> argued that this contest was being waged over housing: "The fight is centring on the struggles for houses for the people, […] houses that they can rent, or buy, at prices within their capacity to pay."
Politicians and policymakers today have not made a direct connection between problems of housing affordability and the political instability that comes with it. But they are no doubt highly attuned to it. They need only look to the <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/greatspeculations/2010/11/12/5-long-term-consequences-of-the-recession/#5875d93144ec">US</a> and <a href="https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/eurocrisispress/2014/06/10/mind-the-gaps-the-political-consequences-of-the-great-recession-in-europe/">Europe</a> and the part housing has played in contributing to political uncertainty in those places to understand the importance of tackling the problem in Australia.
Important differences exist between the the housing problems of 1940s Australia and those we confront in 2017. However, a historical perspective augments our understanding of contemporary housing debates and policies. It can provide more context and detail on potential ways forward.
Rae Dufty-Jones is senior lecturer in human geography at <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/western-sydney-university-1092" target="_blank">Western Sydney University</a>.
This article was originally published on <a href="https://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/when-it-comes-to-housing-affordability-debates-everything-old-is-new-again-74615" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

j.ballantyne1990-6AQqhLzZaK

The housing debate goes full circle: Rae Dufty-Jones

<html><body>
Fifty five percent of first home buyers worry they’ll never own a home and for many the prospect is taking an emotional toll.
The findings come from a new study of 1,000 wannabe home owners by industry super fund-owned bank ME, in conjunction with clinical psychologist, Elizabeth Neal.
According to the study, as a result of not owning a home:
<ul>
<li>46 percent feel inadequate</li>
<li>43 percent self-blame, feeling they’ve made bad decisions financially or with money management</li>
<li>43 percent can’t imagine feeling fulfilled without owning a home</li>
<li>39% feel they have nothing to look forward to</li>
<li>38 percent feel envious or jealous when others reach the property ladder before them, rising to 50 percent of Gen Ys</li>
</ul>
Study co-author, Elizabeth Neal said negative emotions stemming from non-home ownership are understandable.
“Property is such a hot topic in Australia with constant reminders everywhere you turn, so it's unsurprising many feel somewhat cynical and experience low self-worth as a result.
“Worries about non-home ownership can easily turn into feelings of inadequacy or humiliation when we’re reminded every day – whether it’s through the media, friends and family, or via social media.
"I’m not surprised half of Gen Y’s who don’t own a home feel the most envious or jealous when others get on the property ladder before them – Instagram and Facebook feeds are likely to be dotted with photos of acquaintances smiling proudly outside their first home.
“But before you question your own life-decisions, remember every person’s situation is different,” said Ms Neal.
ME Head of Home Loans, Patrick Nolan, said “despite affordability pressures the ‘Great Australian Dream’ remains embedded in many Australians’ mindsets.
“The unfortunate reality is house prices have more than doubled in the past 15 years through several supply and demand factors.
“For those still striving to get their foot on the ladder, it’s important to stay positive and to consider alternative strategies, like buying an investment property, a unit instead of a house, joining forces with friends or family, or looking to neighbouring suburbs where properties may be cheaper.
ME’s research found Gen X was the hardest hit when it comes to the emotional toll of not owning a home.
Sixty eight per cent of Gen X respondents felt worried they won’t be able to get into the property market; 58% said they feel inadequate; 53% blame themselves and feel they’ve made bad decisions financially or with money management; and 35% said they felt humiliated; all significantly higher proportions than other generations.
Neal said the reason Gen X is hardest hit is related to their life stage.
“The need for security is fundamental to the human condition and our sense of belonging.
It goes back to Maslow's hierarchy of needs – physical safety is the base need, followed by our social and emotional needs.
“Gen Xers are at the ‘settling down’ stage of their lives and security has become a higher priority.
This generation grew up with the assumption that buying property is integral to becoming an adult.”
Some respondents saw positives in non-home ownership.
According to the study, as a result of not owning a home:
<ul>
<li>42 percent said they feel like they have the freedom to explore other opportunities and grow in other areas</li>
<li>34 percent feel liberated; like they have greater freedom</li>
<li>33 percent said it enables them to lead a better lifestyle</li>
</ul>
Nolan said not owning a home certainly doesn’t mean you’ve run out of options to build wealth.
“Housing is unaffordable in many parts of the world but people continue to find other ways to invest their savings to build wealth for the future, like contributing more to superannuation or using the monthly savings they might have paid to a mortgage for another type of investment.
“Australians have become fixated by property as a means of building wealth and it’s worth talking to a financial expert to understand and explore your options.
For many people not owning a home just opens another door.”
Reported negative impacts of not owning a home
<table border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"><tbody>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="286">
 
</td>
<td valign="top" width="36">
Total
</td>
<td valign="top" width="52">
Gen Y
</td>
<td valign="top" width="52">
Gen X
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="286">
I have felt worried that I won’t be able to get into the property market
</td>
<td valign="top" width="36">
55%
</td>
<td valign="top" width="52">
63%
</td>
<td valign="top" width="52">
68%
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="286">
Has made me feel inadequate
</td>
<td valign="top" width="36">
46%
</td>
<td valign="top" width="52">
53%
</td>
<td valign="top" width="52">
58%
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="286">
Means I’ve felt I’ve made bad decisions financially or with money management
</td>
<td valign="top" width="36">
43%
</td>
<td valign="top" width="52">
44%
</td>
<td valign="top" width="52">
53%
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="286">
I can’t imagine feeling fulfilled in the future without owning a home
</td>
<td valign="top" width="36">
43%
</td>
<td valign="top" width="52">
58%
</td>
<td valign="top" width="52">
48%
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="286">
Has made me feel like I have nothing to look forward to
</td>
<td valign="top" width="36">
39%
</td>
<td valign="top" width="52">
42%
</td>
<td valign="top" width="52">
49%
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="286">
I’ve felt envy or jealousy when others get on to the property ladder before me
</td>
<td valign="top" width="36">
38%
</td>
<td valign="top" width="52">
50%
</td>
<td valign="top" width="52">
46%
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="286">
Has negatively affected my ability to build wealth
</td>
<td valign="top" width="36">
32%
</td>
<td valign="top" width="52">
29%
</td>
<td valign="top" width="52">
41%
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="286">
Has felt humiliating
</td>
<td valign="top" width="36">
29%
</td>
<td valign="top" width="52">
33%
</td>
<td valign="top" width="52">
35%
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="286">
Has negatively affected my retirement plans
</td>
<td valign="top" width="36">
27%
</td>
<td valign="top" width="52">
23%
</td>
<td valign="top" width="52">
30%
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="286">
I’ve experienced conflict with others on the topic of housing unaffordability
</td>
<td valign="top" width="36">
25%
</td>
<td valign="top" width="52">
31%
</td>
<td valign="top" width="52">
30%
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="286">
Has negatively affected my personal relationships
</td>
<td valign="top" width="36">
16%
</td>
<td valign="top" width="52">
17%
</td>
<td valign="top" width="52">
18%
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="286">
Has negatively affected my family planning (i.e. having children)
</td>
<td valign="top" width="36">
14%
</td>
<td valign="top" width="52">
24%
</td>
<td valign="top" width="52">
14%
</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
Reported positive impacts of not owning a home
<table border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"><tbody>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="277">
 
</td>
<td valign="top" width="46">
Total
</td>
<td valign="top" width="52">
Gen Y
</td>
<td valign="top" width="52">
Gen X
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="277">
Makes me feel like I have the freedom to explore other opportunities and grow in other areas
</td>
<td valign="top" width="46">
42%
</td>
<td valign="top" width="52">
45%
</td>
<td valign="top" width="52">
45%
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="277">
Has made me feel liberated, like I have greater freedom
</td>
<td valign="top" width="46">
34%
</td>
<td valign="top" width="52">
28%
</td>
<td valign="top" width="52">
36%
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="277">
Enables me to lead a better lifestyle
</td>
<td valign="top" width="46">
33%
</td>
<td valign="top" width="52">
27%
</td>
<td valign="top" width="52">
39%
</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
</body></html>

Gen X holds the highest emotional toll of not owning a home

<html><body>
The LJ Hooker-Seniors Housing Online survey found 38.3 percent of respondents were living in properties with two spare bedrooms.
Furthermore, almost one in five (18.6 percent) had three or more unused bedrooms in their family home. 
Incentivising seniors to downsize to more appropriate accommodation would benefit wider housing affordability, according to LJ Hooker and Seniors Housing Online.
Ahead of the release of a joint company white paper this month which canvasses the housing concerns of over-50s across Australia, the leading real estate network and retirement property portal encouraged the Federal Government to make downsizing more attractive in the May Budget, saying its benefits would extend far beyond seniors.
Mathew Tiller, LJ Hooker’s head of research said policy which gave seniors the confidence to move on from the family home to more appropriate lodgings would benefits the real estate market’s ‘ecosystem’.
“Supply is the centrepiece of affordability, and in 2016 there was a 9.2 percent reduction, year-on-year, in the number of properties which changed hands in Australia,” said Mr Tiller.
“New development helps supply but encouraging the sale of properties in the secondary market – where the market’s focus is - would make prices more sustainable.
It would help the real estate ecosystem, allowing second, third or fourth family home buyers to upgrade.
“Across Australia, there’s dust gathering in unused bedrooms of seniors who would rather be living in something that better suits their mobility and is more affordable, and would happily do so if their interests were considered.”
Preliminary findings of the LJ Hooker-Seniors Housing Online survey found three-quarters of respondents wanted to downsize.
Amanda Graham, Co-CEO of Seniors Housing Online welcomed the Treasurer’s speech, saying it was good to see recognition of how the housing market situation is impacting on retirees, including more older people renting, bigger mortgages taking longer to pay off, and the use of super to pay down mortgages.
“Downsizers play an important role in unlocking property supply with flow on benefits to those on every other step on the ladder, including first home buyers.”
</body></html>

Downsizer incentives would aid affordability: LJH

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

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

Affordable housing, finger-pointing politics and possible policy solutions

<html><body>
Treasurer Scott Morrison has said the housing affordability problem, mainly in Sydney and Melbourne which houses 40 percent  of Australia’s population, has to be dealt with a ‘scalpel’ approach, "not a chainsaw as advocated by the Labor Party."
He said the “principal cause of declining housing affordability is the failure of housing supply to adjust to increased demand, driven by higher economic growth”.
Batting for a careful and calibrated response, Morrison said drastic steps could “spark a negative housing shock that would undermine our economic confidence, negatively impact household consumption and retard economic growth”.
He noted that the proportion of Australian households that own their own home has fallen marginally from 71 per cent to 67 per cent over the last two decades.
“Between 2002 and 2014, home ownership among 25 to 34 year olds declined more significantly by almost ten percentage points to less than 30 per cent. That is more than 160,000 young people that would otherwise be home owners. For 35 to 44 year olds it fell by more than ten percentage points to 52.4 per cent.”
Higher house prices are making it tougher for potential homebuyers to transition into ownership.
He cited research by CHOICE, the National Association of Tenants' Organisations and National Shelter, that said just over half of renters say they rent because they can't afford to buy their own property.
Because of this, they are staying in the rental market for longer — a dynamic that puts upward pressure on rental prices and availability and even more pressure on lower-income households, increasing the need for affordable housing.
“Our response must first strive to remove obstacles that restrict supply responding to genuine demand. These impediments are well known, planning delays and regulations, supporting infrastructure and services, the cost of new development, taxes and charges and access to sites, including Government land, just to name a few,” he said.
As an example of the scalpel-like approach, he said a good example was the recent action taken by the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority to limit the share of housing lending that is interest-only. This follows their earlier intervention in December 2014, placing a speed limit on investor credit growth that halved previous levels.
He noted the decline in home ownership and increase in mortgage costs has been most pronounced in family-forming households and that Australians are increasingly carrying into their retirement larger mortgage debts, or are renting.
“The proportion of home owners aged over 45 with a mortgage has increased and, according to the Productivity Commission in 2015, the most frequent use of superannuation lump sums was to fund housing, including paying down mortgages.”
He cited Saul Eslake's recent report to Superannuation trustees saying, "it is likely that an increasing proportion of new retirees will use some or all of their accumulated superannuation savings to discharge their outstanding mortgage debt' and that 'an increasing proportion of retirees will be living in privately rented housing, spending a higher proportion of their income on rent."
These are the facts and they represent a problem that needs to be addressed in the broader national interest, said Morrison.
“As a Government, we acknowledge that for certain Australian households, housing affordability is an issue regardless of where they live due to economic reasons such as not having a job or social reasons such as having a disability.”
The government is working on a taskforce to look at harnessing large-scale private investment through a bond aggregator concept.
The bond aggregator would issue bonds to the market, and on-lend these funds to community housing providers — allowing them to access cheaper and longer term finance.
The Housing Finance Corporation (THFC) in the United Kingdom, has operated a similar model successfully for over 30 years, he said. THFC has provided more than £5 billion worth of loans which is assisting the provision of affordable housing throughout the UK.
"Of course, if found to be viable, a housing bond aggregator is only a part of the solution. A variety of complementary reforms are required to increase the supply," said Morrison.
For the full text of speech, <a href="https://sjm.ministers.treasury.gov.au/speech/005-2017/" target="_blank">click here</a>.
</body></html>

jonathanchancellor-7SQnKwU6yx

Treasurer Morrison says tackling housing affordability needs a scalpel-like approach

<html><body>
PowerHousing Australia, the peak body representing 28 of Australia’s largest Community Housing Providers (CHPs), has welcomed Treasurer Scott Morrison’s commitment to deliver a raft of measures that address housing right across the lifecycle spectrum.
"From aiding new supply, to creating more social and affordable housing, supporting first home buyers and seniors looking to downsize, this package has been a while coming but signals a step in the right direction for fixing Australia’s housing affordability challenges," PowerHousing CEO Nicholas Proud said.
Adopting the UK bond aggregator model will open streams of institutional funds to increase the supply of social and affordable housing.
He said community housing providers, were the industry’s quiet achievers, well-placed to leverage these funding flows to maximise new housing stock.
“PowerHousing Members have, over the past 10 years, grown into credible scale managers, operators and developers of new and existing social housing dwellings and we do this by quietly achieving the highest level of social outcomes.
“While public housing has decreased by 24,000 since 2007, community housing in Australia has over the same period grown from 33,526 to 72, 410 dwellings as per the recent Productivity Commission Report on Government Services.
The community housing sector has largely built scale on the basis of property transfers and the Federal National Rental Affordability Scheme.
“Providing funds through to the community housing sector will deliver more affordable homes more cost-effectively and assist those on low incomes through to first home ownership with more options, new housing and the potential for a suite of wrap around services to aid training, education, health and livable outcomes.
“We will have to wait until the Budget to know whether the Treasurer will secure the deep funding measures that are required to meet the gap between what those in affordable housing can provide and what it is vital to deliver in terms of dwellings into the long-term future.
This is an integral part of the CHP model and we are hopeful this gap will be addressed in the upcoming federal budget.
“There has been some solid work undertaken in the states with reviews of New South Wales, South Australia and Tasmania showing good progress in meeting National Agreement Targets such as facilitating 35 percent of public housing being operated by the Community Housing Sector.
“Ultimately access to new finance streams, as suggested here, allows for the best return on government investment with more affordable housing delivered at the lowest cost to taxpayers – a win-win situation.
“Today’s announcements are a strong Federal Government acknowledgement of our CHP Members’ commitment to being commercially astute and achieve economies of scale by working with government, tier one/innovative financial lenders and scale developers to design and construct affordable housing options.”
</body></html>

PowerHousing Australia says Treasurer Morrison signals right first step towards affordability fix

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/75834/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
It is ironic that at a time when so many young Australians are finding it so hard to break into the property market, commentators are finding it so hard to break out of discussing it.
This week we saw three notable pieces of information. First, the CoreLogic home value index showed further rises in property prices across the country in the month to March 31. Year-on-year, Sydney, Melbourne, Canberra and Hobart had double-digit percentage gains. Melbourne was up 15.9 percent and Sydney a staggering 18.9 percent.
And although prices have come down a little in the volatile Perth and Darwin markets, the numbers triggered further concern from regulators.
In keeping the cash rate steady at 1.5 percent, RBA governor Philip Lowe made the following observation is the formal announcement:
“Growth in household borrowing, largely to purchase housing, continues to outpace growth in household income. By reinforcing strong lending standards, the recently announced supervisory measures should help address the risks associated with high and rising levels of indebtedness. Lenders need to ensure that the serviceability metrics that they use are appropriate for current conditions. A reduced reliance on interest-only housing loans in the Australian market would also be a positive development.”
But it was comments made outside the official script that were the most revealing. The governor specifically tied prices to “taxation arrangements” and <a href="https://www.rba.gov.au/speeches/2017/sp-gov-2017-04-04">noted</a>: “For many people, the high debt levels and low wage growth are a sobering combination.”
Yup: negative gearing plus inadequate supply plus low wage growth equals financial distress.
<h2>Prudential regulation</h2>
The Australian Prudential Regulatory Authority (APRA) announced it wanted to see the proportion of interest-only loans fall from the current strikingly-high level of 40 percent of new loans, down to 30 percent.
That’s fine, but three concerning things come quickly to mind: it treats the symptom not the cause of risky lending; it may be too late; and targets like this tend to lead to “gaming”. 
On the latter point, how much principal repayment qualifies? What about a loan with a 200-year maturity – is that interest only or not? You can bet the smart folks at the big banks are on the case figuring out how they can comply with the letter of the regulation but not necessarily the spirit.
Meanwhile, building approvals rose strongly in February, up 8.3 percent. This came mostly from NSW and Queensland, which were up 19.6% and 33.7%, respectively. These numbers reveal how volatile approvals are, and hence how little of a long-term supply trend they represent. 
The numbers were also driven largely by apartment approvals, which are particularly lumpy. Moreover, if these don’t sell well off-the-plan – perhaps because of interest-only loans drying up – then developers can quickly find themselves in trouble. 
Much as I would like to read these figures as a positive supply response, it’s hard not to be worried.
<h2>Governments aren’t helping</h2>
So while the RBA keeps cautioning market participants, governments are doing very little, or things that are explicitly unhelpful. It <a href="https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/bringing-down-the-house-radical-plans-considered-to-ease-homebuyer-crisis/news-story/1c9eae05b7f7569d785dea29a5adb159">was reported</a>this week that NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian favours extending the first home owner grant from new properties to existing properties in the June state budget. The premier has said previously that increasing supply is important (she is correct on that), but now seems to be undoing that by goosing demand.
That is the worst idea ever. Period. It just drives up prices and throws away precious government funds. As economist Saul Eslake has put it:
“All [FHOGs] do is increase the price of housing by that amount. There’s almost 50 years of evidence to show that when you give cash to would-be home buyers … the price of the housing they buy goes up by at least that amount. The people who get it think that it’s helping them - the government says ‘here’s a slab of cash’, and that’s popular, but it does nothing.” 
Meanwhile, we wait with anticipation the housing affordability package in the Commonwealth budget on May 9. No shortage of dumb ideas have already been floated – including letting people dip into their superannuation to buy a property.
Let’s hope that economics trumps politics just this once. Negative gearing needs to be reformed, and supply needs to be boosted. Housing affordability, financial stability and economic inequality are all riding on it.
Richard Holden is professor of Economics and PLuS Alliance Fellow, UNSW and author for The Conversation. He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/richard-holden-118107" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Regulators fiddle while house prices sizzle

<html><body>
Home ownership among Australian millennials is among the lowest, with less than a third (28 percent) owning one, with a majority citing high property prices as a major barrier, says a new survey by HSBC.
The findings are contained in HSBC’s report, ‘Beyond the Bricks’, and comes just a month ahead of the May budget when the government is expected to reveal a housing affordability package.  
Other findings of the survey, which was conducted in nine countries, reveal that 83 percent of Australian millennials intend to buy a home in the next five years. It found that while Australian millennials’ desire to own a home was no different from their global counterparts, the barriers to home ownership in Australia were higher.
Three quarters (75 percent) of Australian millennials say the challenge of saving for the deposit for a home loan is their biggest barrier, but only 17 percent of Australian millennials intending to buy a home have a precise budget. 
Additionally, 45 percent of Australian millennials who do own their own home say they have overspent on their original budget, showing that many are not prepared for the realities of owning real estate in Australia.  
“The deposit for a home loan is the biggest initial cost of owning a home, but buyers also need to factor in the costs of stamp duty, legal fees, mortgage insurance, building inspection fees and in some cases renovation costs,” said Alice Del Vecchio, head of Mortgages, HSBC Australia. 
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/04/6/MillennialHomeOwnership.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
 <img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2017/04/6/MillennialHomeOwnership.png" alt="">
Establishing a budget to buy a home is a vital step before buying a home, said Del Vecchio, and should factor in for some changes in property prices, allowing for price increases from the time one starts to search for properties. 
“It is not uncommon to look for more than six months to find the right home, and often prices to enter the market have moved.” 
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/04/6/MillennialBarriers.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2017/04/6/MillennialBarriers.png" alt="">
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/04/6/MillennialsBudget.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2017/04/6/MillennialsBudget.png" alt="">
The survey was conducted among 9,000 people in nine countries. 
Home ownership in Australia among millennials (between ages 19 and 36) fares only marginally higher than millennials in the United Arab Emirates (26%), and well below those in Mexico, who have one of the highest rates of home ownership (46 percent). China was at the top with a huge 70 percent millennials owning a home.
The average figure was 40 percent.
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/04/6/MillennialSacrifices.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
 <img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2017/04/6/MillennialSacrifices.png" alt="">
Australian millennials said their second-biggest barrier to owning a home was having an insufficient salary to save, with 61 percent saying they needed a higher salary before they could buy a home compared to just 54 percent of millennials in the UK. 
<div title="Page 8">
<div>
<div>
Average property prices in Australia increased by 5.4 percent in 2016, while in 2017 real wages are expected to increase by only 1.6 percent. 
Even RBA Governor Philip Lowe has described the combination of high household and low wages growth a sobering combination.
</div>
</div>
</div>
“Despite the rising costs, millennials overwhelming still want to own a home in Australia. The dream certainly isn’t dead. This research demonstrates that a lack of preparation and understanding of the realities of owning real estate however can stall or even deflate those dreams,” says Del Vecchio. 
 
</body></html>

prateek24-ezbwHMbNAk

Australian millennials' home ownership rate among the lowest: HSBC report 

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/73186/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
Urban planners have been blamed for a lot of things, including higher housing costs. But the solution is to refine the process, not sideline the good planning that makes cities safe and liveable.
Modern urban planning first came about to improve industrial cities that had become unsafe, unhealthy and essentially unliveable. However, new policies in Australia and New Zealand view planning as a cause of urban problems, not a solution. Both treat urban planning as a hindrance, which supposedly slows down economic growth and is the main reason for unaffordable housing.
Why did urban planning fall out of favour?
Several underlying factors explain this aversion to planning.
First, many urban areas developed under the current planning system haven’t produced a very liveable environment. It is difficult to make a case for the value of planning with few good examples. In some cases this isn’t bad planning; rather, traffic engineering has taken precedence.
But what might this approach mean for future development of Antipodean cities? While urban planning may have fallen short of its goals over recent decades, policy that marginalises urban planning exposes us to long-term social and environmental risks.
Cities in Australia and New Zealand do face particular challenges: both countries are highly urbanised, 89% and 86% respectively. A closer look at land use patterns and infrastructures show they are mostly suburban – closer to Houston than Hong Kong. Therefore, urban policy faces the challenge of governing suburbia.
Many areas of Auckland, for instance, are designed in such a way that residents have little choice but to drive everywhere. They are unsafe for children or seniors to navigate. And vast amounts of space are allocated to parking for private vehicles.
This is the cumulative result of decades of infrastructure decision-making that prioritises private vehicle movement over safer and more efficient public transport. Residents are living with the consequences of this, and current policy risks more of the same for future residents.
New shared spaces, cycle lanes and frequent transit services are a dramatic improvement. However, greater change is needed to make an impact on everyday life for those who live and work outside the city centre.
Second, delays in planning approvals are notorious for adding significant cost and uncertainty to property development. But inefficient delivery of planning services should not be confused with overly stringent planning rules.
Planning rules are intended to mitigate environmental damage and improve the quality of development. Rather than getting rid of planning, delays can be reduced through better resourcing, training and management of planning departments.
Also, approvals are only one step in delivering new housing. Fast-tracked consenting in Auckland’s special housing areas resulted in 30,000 consented dwellings, but only 1,300 new homes were built over almost three years.
This shows that other factors slow down the pace of development. These include capacity in the construction sector, local construction labour and delays due to land banking.
Putting affordability claims to the test
Poor urban planning is claimed to be the primary cause of unaffordable housing. It is said to be linked to higher house prices and lower economic performance.
Evidence to support these claims shows a correlation – but not a causal link – between the restrictiveness of planning regulations and housing affordability.
The simple correlation ignores other factors driving house prices: speculative investment behaviour, incentives for land banking, record-low mortgage rates and strong cultural biases toward home ownership.
Looking to land supply as the primary policy lever to fix this may do little to moderate house prices. It also overlooks more important causes.
Urban expansion also has implications for transport: it is expensive and inefficient to leave transport authorities playing catch-up to serve new growth areas.
The politics of growth further complicate expansion of land supply and tend to distribute new growth haphazardly. Most residents agree that cities need to allow for future growth, but deciding where this should go is contentious. Recent growth in New Zealand and Australian cities has been accommodated mostly in the city centre and at the urban fringe.
Only a small share of growth is in existing suburbs. Suburban residents (or at least a vocal contingent) often oppose new growth. This is unsurprising since intensification counters the very reason for living in the suburbs – more space and fewer people.
Regardless, urban policy needs to acknowledge the political tensions in accommodating growth.
Good planning involves citizens
National urban policy is important to manage land use and infrastructure differently in cities. Policies don’t have to be prescriptive. They can also enable local authorities to govern better with greater devolution of power and fundraising capabilities.
Scaling back urban planning is an understandable but disappointingly short-term response. In many cases planning hasn’t delivered what it promised. Measures to reduce delays and improve the quality of the built environment are needed. However, policy that simply reduces the role of planning may result in significant long-term costs.
Such an approach risks environmental damage, as well as uncoordinated land and transport development. The next generation living in our cities will pay for it.
Informed citizens are essential to support good planning and infrastructure decisions. For the general public, however, local regulations on urban planning, infrastructure and environmental quality are painfully dull. But they are also fundamental in shaping your everyday life: where you can afford to live, your daily commute, and the chance of air pollution shortening your lifespan.
For those without time to go through lengthy consultation documents and plans, local advocacy groups are leading the way to translate these concisely to the public. Auckland’s Generation Zero is a good example. This organisation is advocating for inter-generational equity and environmental sustainability in local planning and transport, with targeted campaigns on important projects and planning decisions.
Negotiating the trade-offs and politics of urban growth is always a challenge for policy, but quality public engagement is crucial to build cities that are liveable, affordable and environmentally sustainable over the long term.
Jenny McArthur is the Research Associate at University College London (UCL) and author for The Conversation. She can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/jenny-mcarthur-206031" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Sidelining planners makes for poorer urban policy, and future generations will pay the price: Jenny McArthur

<html><body>
Challenger banks may be impacted by "ultra-competitive mortgage pricing" as lenders struggle to cope with rising demand for loans amid rising funding and regulatory costs and pressure on profits.
A warning came through from Bendigo and Adelaide Bank managing director  Mike Hirst, who said rates needed to return to levels that "reflect the current market funding and capital costs”, according to a report in the Australian Financial Review.
With the big four banks — Commonwealth, Westpac, ANZ and NAB — raising home loan rates for both investors and owner occupiers, smaller lenders are seeing a surge in borrower applications and struggling to meet demand.
Adelaide Bank announced an increase in its deposits for residential investors from 10 per cent to 20 per cent on top of the 25 basis point increase in costs for investor loans.
"As has been well telegraphed to all Australian authorised deposit-taking institutions, there is an expectation that as lenders, we must manage within the regulator's 10 per cent growth speed limit for investor loans,” Hirst was cited as saying by Fairfax Media.
Another lender to announce a change in its lending rates was AMP Bank, the Australian Broker reported.
The bank is raising variable interest rates for interest-only loans for existing customers by 15 basis points for owner-occupied loans and 28 basis points for investment loans from April 3.
In addition, effective March 31, 2017 for new customers and April 3, 2017 for existing customers, owner occupied principal and interest variable rate loans will increase by 7 basis points. As a result, the AMP Bank Professional Pack owner occupied variable rate loan will increase to 3.92% p.a. for new customers for loans of $750,000 and above.
The lender is also encouraging customers with interest-only loans to switch to principal and interest repayments. It will waive the switch fee until June 30. 
Sally Bruce, group executive of AMP Bank, almost echoed Hirst, saying the bank’s rate decision reflects “wholesale funding costs, the need to maintain a balanced portfolio and the market environment”.
“We also want to encourage customers to move to principal and interest repayments where it’s appropriate, as there is a great opportunity to access lower interest rates and repay your loan faster,” she was quoted as saying.
Teachers Mutual Bank, Unibank and Firefighters Mutual Bank are also increasing owner-occupier fixed rates from one to five years by 7 basis points. It applies to interest only and principal and interest.
For example, the interest rate on a one-year principal and interest loan for an owner occupier will rise from 3.77 per cent to 3.84 per cent. For five years the rate will rise from 4.54 per cent to 4.61 per cent.
Investor rates for the same borrower will respectively increase to 4.14 per cent and 4.91 per cent over the same terms.
Last May, Teachers Mutual Bank and Unibank were among the first lenders to slow growth on investor loans to meet the financial regulator, the Australian Prudential Regulatory Authority’s 10 per cent annual cap on investor loan growth. 
The banks, which have more than $6 billion in assets and 180,000 members, also recently withdrew from new investment lending to reduce annual growth from about 15 per cent. It was not available for comment.
"The changes to our fixed rate home loans represent the first changes to these rates in 2017. They reflect the changing market conditions for interest rates, both domestically and internationally,” said a bank spokesman. 
MyState, the listed financial services group, is also set to raise the rate for existing residential investors by 28 basis points.
Last Friday, property investors with interest-only loans from Commonwealth Bank of Australia were hit with the second interest rate rise in six weeks.
It follows earlier increases from ANZ Banking Group, Westpac Bank Corp and National Australia Bank and comes despite the Reserve Bank of Australia holding the official cash rate steady last week.
</body></html>

Housing Affordability

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Housing Affordability

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News