<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/sunland-group">Sunland Group</a> has officially lodged plans for its first Gold Coast apartment project since the departure of the Abedian family from the company three years ago, unveiling a new high-rise proposal for a prominent Broadbeach corner site on Old Burleigh Road.

The application was submitted by an entity directed by Tom Jamieson, stepson of longtime Sunland leader Soheil Abedian, and Riaz Rezvanipour, brother-in-law of Sahba Abedian, Soheil’s son.

Sunland acquired the 1,283 sqm site on the corner of Old Burleigh Road and Armrick Avenue for $9.5 million late last year and is now seeking approval for a <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/99-101-old-burleigh-road-broadbeach-qld-4218">42-storey tower with 81 apartments</a>.

<img alt="First look: Sunland Group returns to Broadbeach with new Old Burleigh Road tower plans" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="fea2946d-90ee-4cfc-babe-2a8ad5db2cb6" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/pers.png?VersionId=BV0fihJw31nDIQ8ozY_h3GbS8mxDyhnm" />

Designed by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/contreras-earl-architecture">Contreras Earl Architecture</a>, the proposed tower at 99-101 Old Burleigh Road would deliver a predominantly larger-format apartment mix aimed at the owner-occupier market. Plans include 17 two-bedroom apartments, 55 three-bedroom apartments, and nine four-bedroom residences across 35 residential levels.

The development also incorporates three basement levels, four podium parking levels, two levels of communal recreation facilities, and rooftop plant and equipment. A total of 189 car spaces are proposed, significantly exceeding the 90 spaces required under the planning scheme.

The architecture adopts a sculpted, curvilinear form, with deep wraparound balconies and integrated landscaping intended to soften the tower’s vertical expression. The planning report states the building’s “slender footprint/form provides a complimentary yet varied built form within the local streetscape” and contributes to “a varied, yet ordered skyline.”

Contreras Earl noted in its Architectural Statement that from the early stages, the project addressed a fundamental challenge: how to accommodate the required residential yield while avoiding the conventional model of a tower sitting on a rigid, fully resolved parking podium.

“The most direct response would have been to consolidate parking into a singular, flat podium and extrude a repetitive tower above,” the statement said. “While efficient, this approach would result in a consolidated built form with limited engagement with the surrounding landscape and public realm.”

Instead, the conventional podium model was “deliberately rejected”. The architects described the base of the building as “a landscaped architectural condition where structure, planting and circulation are integrated”.

“Rather than presenting a continuous built mass, the base of the building is articulated through a series of concrete planter elements that organise the podium into a fragmented system,” the statement said. “This approach reduces the perceived bulk of the lower levels while establishing a more permeable interface with the streetscape and adjacent open space.”

<img alt="Sunland" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="923fad8d-c960-4527-8fbe-975cf1ddf88d" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-05-25%20at%2010.32.03%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=pngwb0hYOIUpq9vDw6F2EsOiVuHF3DiX" />

&nbsp;

The site sits within the High Density Residential Zone and inside the City of Gold Coast’s unrestricted “HX” building height area, where the planning framework anticipates intensified residential development tied to the expanding light rail corridor. The planning report notes the area is undergoing “transition toward more intense development forms” given its proximity to Broadbeach, Surfers Paradise, and high-frequency public transport infrastructure.

Positioned directly opposite Broadbeach Park and within walking distance of Florida Gardens light rail station, the development would sit among a rapidly evolving stretch of Old Burleigh Road that has become one of the Gold Coast’s most active apartment development corridors.

The application joins a growing pipeline of luxury residential projects reshaping Broadbeach, including nearby developments by 5Point Projects, Polycell, and Graya.

The planning report argues the project contributes toward the Gold Coast’s long-term housing targets under the South East Queensland Regional Plan, which forecasts the need for more than 100,000 additional high-rise dwellings across the city by 2046.

<section data-scroll-anchor="false" data-testid="conversation-turn-4" data-turn="assistant" data-turn-id="request-WEB:84a2af5e-d7cf-4ddf-922a-f4d44d6c6caa-1" data-turn-id-container="request-WEB:84a2af5e-d7cf-4ddf-922a-f4d44d6c6caa-1" dir="auto">
The Abedian family departed Sunland Group in late 2023, ending a four-decade association with the company, and subsequently established the private development firm Abedian &amp; Co. The group is currently delivering <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/greenmount-residences-cnr-hill-street-and-marine-parade-coolangatta-qld-4225">Greenmount Residences</a> at Rainbow Bay and recently launched <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/18-mary-avenue-14-18-mary-avenue-broadbeach-qld-4218">18 Mary Avenue</a> in Broadbeach.
</section>

Joel Robinson

First look: Sunland Group returns to Broadbeach new apartment market with new Old Burleigh Road tower plans

The Minns Labor Government has established the new Bays West Delivery Authority to lead the development&nbsp;of the Bays West Precinct and Blackwattle Bay Precinct.&nbsp;

The Authority is charged with creating Sydney’s newest precinct, a thriving, connected, sustainable hub with White Bay Power Station as its cultural heart. Its vision is to build on the area’s natural, cultural and industrial history to shape a vibrant new neighbourhood.

The precinct will deliver up to 8,500 well-located homes, including a minimum of 10 per cent affordable and essential worker homes. Combine new housing with public open space, opening public access to the waterfront for the first time in more than 100 years, while retaining important deep-water facilities to support Sydney’s working harbour.

Located just minutes from the Sydney CBD and connected to a world-class metro, ferry, walking and cycling links, the Bays West precinct will rebalance housing growth towards well-serviced inner-city locations and help tackle the state’s housing crisis.

The Bays West Delivery Authority,&nbsp;an agency of the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure, will report to the NSW Minister for Lands and Property who already has oversight of major precinct renewal projects including at Blackwattle Bay and Barangaroo.

As part of the broader Bays West transformation, the Minns Government recently announced that a proposal from Lendlease to redevelop part of the Bays West Precinct has progressed to Stage 2 of the NSW Government’s unsolicited proposals process.

<img alt="Sydney" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="2ed71eb9-d8e8-4fa7-b9d1-de4531dcf2f3" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-05-25%20at%209.42.31%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=IDryFIbped9SNDg72LEN_EecvhUsOPvp" />

The Minns Labor Government has also confirmed the Bays West precinct will have a new suburb name. This will be the first major suburb built in close proximity to Sydney’s CBD in decades and will encompass the area currently being referred to as Bays West, including Glebe Island and the White Bay Power Station. Served by a new Metro station just five minutes from the CBD, it will become one of the most populous suburbs in the Inner West and one of Sydney’s premier cultural destinations.

An early works program is taking shape, which&nbsp;includes the first stages of an international design competition.&nbsp;

The aim of the Bays West&nbsp;International&nbsp;Design Competition is to&nbsp;ensure design excellence is embedded in the project from the start. The competition will deliver an&nbsp;urban framework that defines the character, ambition and long-term identity of&nbsp;this&nbsp;former industrial precinct as it transitions to a vibrant, inclusive and sustainable residential&nbsp;neighbourhood.

The competition will be led by the Bays West Delivery Authority in partnership with Government Architect NSW.&nbsp;

It will launch with an invitation for a global Expressions of Interest, before moving to an invitation-only stage that will be assessed by a panel that&nbsp;will provide advice to Cabinet who will select a winner.

Premier of NSW, Chris Minns said the establishment of the new Authority is the first step in transforming the Bays West precinct into a vibrant, livable suburb minutes from the Sydney CBD and two stops from Hunter St Station on the Metro West line.

“The Authority will deliver well-located homes close to the heart of the city and integrate the new precinct with Blackwattle Bay and the new Sydney Fish Market.

“This is a generational opportunity to build a new suburb on the city’s edge and open the harbour foreshore to the public for the first time in a century.”&nbsp;

Minister for Lands and Property Steve Kamper said the new Bays West Delivery Authority established by the Minns Government will turbocharge the development of Sydney’s newest suburb.

“The Authority is working at a record pace to deliver an international design competition, planning pathways and a financial model so that this development benefits Sydney with well-designed homes in a central location, close to public transport, jobs, entertainment and essential services.

“If we want Sydney to stay liveable and affordable, we need to be bold about using underutilised government-owned land to deliver homes for the future while making sure essential working harbour functions can be accommodated.”

Bays West Delivery Authority established to "turbocharge" Sydney’s newest suburb

Around 400 additional homes could be built at Southwark Grounds on Port Road, lifting total site capacity from 1300 to around 1700 dwellings.

A recently approved code amendment would allow apartment towers of up to 14 storeys in some areas of Renewal SA’s redevelopment of the former West End Brewery.

Renewal SA Acting Chief Executive Shane Wingard said he welcomed the code amendment, with the increase in heights and homes making a positive impact on the supply of high-quality, well-connected housing close to the city.

“By going higher across some parts of Southwark Grounds, we are adding a substantial number of very well-located homes with little impact on project delivery time or planned open space,” Mr Wingard said.

Since the project officially launched in 2025, Mr Wingard said more than 12,000 enquiries had been received about living at Southwark Grounds.

“The very strong early interest we’ve seen since homes were first released in the precinct reinforces our plans to create more housing opportunities,” he said.

The Southwark Grounds code amendment was launched in December last year, with community engagement undertaken over five weeks from January.

It proposed increasing maximum building heights from eight to 14 storeys on the eastern section of Southwark Grounds, and to 12 storeys across the remainder of the site, with minimum building heights ranging from two to four storeys.

The code amendment was implemented through an Early Commencement policy in late January, allowing developers to quickly explore the viability of increased height and housing yield while other planning processes continue.

One of the first developers delivering apartment sites have already finalised redesigns to increase the number of apartments following the code amendment.

Samaras’ development adjacent to the future Colonel Light Park is now planning to deliver 125 apartments across 11 storeys, significantly greater than original plans of around 50 apartments across four storeys.

The developer is also exploring the potential for additional affordable housing outcomes.

Most of the apartments at Southwark Grounds will be delivered within a master-planned precinct on a large parcel of land on the eastern portion of the site, covering around two-thirds of its 8.4 hectares.

Wingard said detailed precinct planning over the coming months may identify further opportunities to increase yield further that could see total apartment numbers at Southwark Grounds, exceed this number.

Affordable homes at Southwark Grounds will also see a net increase, with Renewal SA maintaining its commitment to a minimum of 20 per cent affordable housing across the development.

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

Civil works have begun across the site, with construction under way on the first new roads surrounding a townhouse precinct in the south‑west corner of Southwark Grounds. This includes Renewal SA’s 17 Founder’s Row homes, which are on track for completion by Christmas.

“We expect to have people living at Southwark Grounds by the end of the year, so delivering roads and public spaces for those residents is among our highest priorities.”

Construction of 40 townhouses off Anderson Street, known as West Village and being delivered by Contour, is forecast to begin in mid‑2026. Kolabb’s Anderson Lane development will follow shortly after, delivering a further 26 townhouses.

Southwark Grounds is a state government‑led urban renewal project now set to deliver around 1,700 homes over the next decade.

Homes will be supported by a supermarket, a range of retail and hospitality offerings anchored by a revitalised Walkerville Brew Tower, a childcare centre, car parking and well‑connected public spaces.

400 new homes planned for Adelaide's former West End Brewery site

Brisbane developer&nbsp;<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/cavcorp">Cavcorp</a> has lodged plans for a new mixed-use residential development at <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/55-wyandra-street-teneriffe-qld-4005">55 Wyandra Street</a>, Teneriffe, anchored by an 85-metre public laneway designed to reconnect the suburb’s riverfront with the Gasworks precinct.

The buildings, known as Teneriffe House and Teneriffe Lane, would replace the existing Queensland Cotton head office site with a 15-storey residential tower transitioning to eight storeys toward Helen Street. The project has been designed by Plazibat Architects and lodged as a code assessable development application for 93 apartments across a 3,401 sqm mixed-use site within the Newstead and Teneriffe Waterfront neighbourhood plan.

Central to the scheme is the transformation of an existing service easement into a publicly accessible cross-block connection linking Wyandra and Helen Streets. Cavcorp says the new laneway will act as both a pedestrian shortcut and a landscaped civic space between the Teneriffe Riverwalk, ferry terminal, and Gasworks precinct.

<img alt="First Look: Cavcorp unveils Teneriffe House and Teneriffe Lane plans for landmark wellness tower in Teneriffe" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="26e7f058-b065-4de8-b13d-a2b8cb64dfcc" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/bldg.png?VersionId=sELS0ZKYi361oYipUa1BIKfe_.DLZoFV" />

“The revised proposal delivers a legacy public-realm cross-block link, permanently secured for community use, transforming an existing private easement into a safe, high-quality pedestrian connection between the Teneriffe heritage riverwalk and the Gasworks–Long Island precinct,” the planning report states.

The laneway will sit beneath a large subtropical loggia integrated into the podium levels of the development. The design incorporates deep landscaping, water gardens, lobby spaces, business lounges, and ground-floor apartments to create what Cavcorp describes as a climate-responsive “urban verandah.”

The tower itself has been designed as a slender form with recessed floorplates and curved translucent corners inspired by contemporary Japanese architecture. The building height aligns with the Commercial Road precinct controls, which permit towers up to 15 storeys within proximity to Longland Street.

<img alt="First Look: Cavcorp unveils Teneriffe House and Teneriffe Lane plans for landmark wellness tower in Teneriffe" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="a8a17d40-43b6-4718-b3fd-67676fcbb485" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/pers%202_1.png?VersionId=i3VwDtp5AmL_8InW7w4qRbDFEpb744Jt" />

The project will comprise a mix of larger-format apartments aimed at owner-occupiers, downsizers, and families. The proposed apartment mix includes 11 loggia apartments across the lower levels, 50 four-bedroom Sky-Terrace apartments from levels three to seven, and 32 Sky-Pool Homes occupying the upper tower levels. The Sky-Pool Homes will feature private thermal plunge pools integrated into oversized balconies.

According to the application, the apartments are intended to reinterpret the scale and character of Teneriffe’s woolstore conversions and Queensland homes within a vertical residential format.

“The sky-pool homes build on Cavcorp’s previous projects and introduce a distinct apartment typology to Teneriffe, informed by both local and international precedent and responding to an identified market demand for enhanced safety, space and amenity,” the planning submission notes.

A major focus of the proposal is its five-level wellness and lifestyle offering, extending from the basement through to the rooftop.

Amenities proposed include a rooftop Swim &amp; Racquet Club with a 25-metre Olympic lap pool and tennis court, coworking spaces and libraries, golf simulators, wine storage, concierge facilities, business lounges, pet wash areas, and rooftop longevity-focused wellness spaces with spas, outdoor fitness zones, and landscaped terraces.

<img alt="First Look: Cavcorp unveils Teneriffe House and Teneriffe Lane plans for landmark wellness tower in Teneriffe" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="944b352c-49b9-4247-a4c6-5967b4b69fda" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/amenity.png?VersionId=Ed_qKjAtMwFT.5gfl3jiA9QwdWxSMsaX" />

All parking will be concealed within basement levels accessed from Wyandra and Helen Streets. Cavcorp says the deep-basement engineering approach allows the entire ground plane to prioritise landscaping, pedestrian movement, and active frontage rather than vehicle infrastructure.

The development continues Cavcorp’s concentration in Newstead and Teneriffe, where the Brisbane developer has delivered a number of apartment projects including Lucent, Le Bain, and Luminare, as well as the Long Island Wellness Precinct nearby. Several of those projects have received national design and architecture awards, including recognition under Brisbane’s “Buildings that Breathe” program.

Cavcorp unveils wellness-focused Teneriffe House and Teneriffe Lane apartment buildings

Focus Group Investments has lodged plans for a new apartment development at <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/64-70-hanover-street-fitzroy-vic-3065">64–70 Hanover Street</a> in Fitzroy, seeking to utilise the Victorian Government’s recently introduced Great Design Fast Track pathway to accelerate approvals for the project.

The proposal is among the latest developments to emerge through the state-led initiative, which was established to fast-track well-designed residential projects in activity centres and transport-connected inner-city locations. The pathway allows qualifying developments that meet elevated design and housing benchmarks to bypass traditional council planning timeframes and instead be assessed directly by the Department of Transport and Planning.

Designed by SJB, the development will comprise a mix of apartments above activated lower levels, with a strong focus on architectural articulation, landscaping, and communal amenity. The design response seeks to balance the industrial character of Richmond’s former warehouse precincts with a more contemporary residential form.

<img alt="First look: Focus Group Investments taps Victoria’s Great Design Fast Track for Richmond apartments" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="abea51cc-d85b-479e-9aef-a589f3b37ca7" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/ground.png?VersionId=e1Kf8EyPWwyiVumtqQ4rM5S4GpOR3CCz" />

Proposed are 63 new dwellings, a wide ranging mix of studio, one-, two-, and three-bedroom apartments, and townhouses and duplexes. They will be spread across a part-three, part-eight storey building.

The Planning and Urban Context Report by Tract says the development is of an "exemplary architectural standard" and has been carefully crafted by SJB Architects.

"Dwellings&nbsp;will benefit from excellent access to natural light, cross-ventilation opportunities and extensive communal space," the report noted.

The architectural material highlights the project’s integration of landscaped elements and communal spaces throughout the building. The proposal also incorporates sustainability initiatives aligned with the Victorian Government’s push for higher-performing apartment developments under the fast-track program.

The Great Design Fast Track was unveiled by the Victorian Government in 2024 as part of a broader housing supply strategy aimed at accelerating the delivery of new homes. Projects assessed through the pathway must demonstrate high-quality architecture, sustainability outcomes, and housing diversity while being located close to public transport and existing infrastructure.

<img alt="First look: Focus Group Investments taps Victoria’s Great Design Fast Track for Richmond apartments" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="afdbe834-8dc4-4a77-a943-ba07bc927348" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/site_11.png?VersionId=0J657j.TaChAZfp93wqJYBTqSsnREJx2" />

Focus Group, founder and led by Paul De Lutiis, is increasingly active across Melbourne’s inner suburbs, targeting well-connected urban renewal locations suited to medium and higher-density residential development. The Fitzroy proposal continues that strategy, leveraging the area’s strong transport links, established retail amenity, and proximity to the CBD.

Fitzroy has been one of the most popular spots for developers and buyers in recent years. The likes of PACE Development Group, SMA Projects, Crema Group and Chapter Group, currently selling projects in the suburb.

First look: Focus Group Investments taps Victoria’s Great Design Fast Track for Fitzroy apartments

Politics

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
Victorian Labor in its <a href="https://www.danielandrews.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Victorian-Labors-Project-10000.pdf">November 2014 election transport manifesto Project 10,000</a> boldly announced it would “remove our 50 worst level crossings” at a cost of $5-6 billion.  They are now the government.
Grade separation of rail – elevating the track or, preferably, putting it underground in cut and cover trenches – removes congestion for both rail and road.  Higher transit speeds shrink the city. The savings available are quite substantial.
I am sure Melburnians quite like all this – provided someone else pays for it, and their personal amenity improves.
Tantalisingly, Labor alluded to ‘value capture’ as a funding mechanism:
"This engineering work requires a considerable amount of track on either side of the crossing to be submerged underground, freeing up land at ground level.
"At some locations there is likely to be an opportunity to develop this available land and ‘capture the value’ created by the removal of the level crossing.  While development opportunities will vary with each site depending on physical restraints, Victorian Labor will actively pursue appropriate development opportunities and reinvest the proceeds generated back into further improvements to the public transport system."
Those ‘appropriate development opportunities’ are the subject of a fascinating research paper, <a href="https://msd.unimelb.edu.au/sites/default/files/docs/Intensifying%20Melbourne%202014_180dpi.pdf">Intensifying Melbourne by the Melbourne School of Design</a> at the University of Melbourne, looking at practical urban design opportunities – like turning waste land around rail stations into high density residential – to transform the way this city lives.
The paper is broader than rail station redevelopment, but I want to focus here because of the principles involved.
Intensifying Melbourne looks at redevelopment scenarios for Reservoir, Sunshine, Surrey Hills and Batman rail stations, all surrounded by large areas of currently unused land with the potential for high density residential. The newly-created high-value land funds undergrounding the rail, overall density increases and congestion falls – a win-win-win.
Intensifying Melbourne is astonishingly honest about the difficulties around change of this magnitude. The sobering realities are nasty and include:
<ul>
<li>Councils are often elected to enforce the anti-development views of residents. Those in well educated, wealthy suburbs often see anything higher than two stories as gross over-development and are formidable opponents.  Governments take them on at their peril.</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>The cost of trenching is triple that of raising rail lines, and many scenarios result in negative land values – the engineering cost exceeds the land value uplift.</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Reservoir and Sunshine are considered highly unattractive residential locations by planners and developers. Developers face above-average risks in realising their investment, relative to other competing opportunities. There is a genuine possibility of failure after government has spent hundreds of millions liberating land over time-frames longer than the four year electoral cycle.</li>
</ul>
I say, the problems and solutions are structural and go deeper that revealed by this analysis.  These calculations are incomplete and overlook key free-carried interests.
Labor identified major, widely dispersed congestion reduction benefits.  Large scale level crossing removal will uplift land values everywhere, as faster travel times shrink distance and cut both time and cost.
The current cultural narrative that all such benefits must accrue to land owners is the barrier.  Intensifying Melbourne sees this: “The way in which urban infrastructure investment creates capital gains and increased economic flows need to be better understood to ensure the capital gains due to public investment can be captured to fund that investment.”
This, of course, goes back to the structure of taxation.  We rely heavily on wage taxes and under-tax land.  Rebalancing this anomaly – an economically damaging imbalance imposed by major land owners on other citizens – would dramatically realign the economy toward productive activity if the beneficiary pays.
Shrinking the distance between say Narre Warren and the CBD brings important efficiencies and would permanently raise land prices along the entire corridor between.  The Victorian government has the tool to ‘value capture’ enough of the uplift to square the equation.  It is called state land tax.  Use it.
David Collyer is policy director of <a href="https://www.prosper.org.au/" target="_blank">Prosper Australia</a>.
David ran as a Senate candidate for the Australian Democrats in the 2013 federal election.
</body></html>

dcollyer-7rQRVBSdz6

Could value capture be the key to Melbourne's infrastructure development?

<html><body>
If the Real Estate Institute of New South Wales (REINSW) can't achieve their goals by lobbying political parties, they have an alternative strategy in place: become one.
According to REINSW president Malcolm Gunning, the group is considering the formation of a political party to change legislation regarding the real estate industry.
It is now too late for the industry group to form a political party to run in the March 2015 New South Wales election. However, Gunning tells Property Observer the REINSW has already made connections with the head of one party, which he declines to name.
"We've been approached now by another industry based single party to support them, which we'll consider," Gunning says.
"If we get co-operation by state government, we'll review it. But if we don't, if again we're pushed off, there's the framework in place."
He likens the potential real estate focused party to the Shooters and Fishers party, which holds two seats in the New South Wales Upper House. As a result of their government deals, hunters are now allowed onto public land in New South Wales.
"It's really about putting pressure on both sides of government to make sure property practice and agency practice is in line with public expectations."
The REINSW's potential political ambitions come after their sister organisation, the Real Estate Institute of Victoria, was <a href="/expert-insights/investing/tweet-of-the-day-reivs-anti-liberal-campaign-reckless">criticised by some</a> for running an <a href="/news/vic/reiv-locked-in-dispute-with-small-business-body-over-victorian-election-advertising">anti-Liberals campaign</a> ahead of last week's Victorian state election. 
Gunning claims any REINSW affiliated political party won't be campaigning on behalf of any major party.
"We're apolitical, we're policy driven," Gunning says.
"From an REINSW point of view, we prefer to argue policies in both sides of government, and not necessarily back any particular party."
Their main concern, he explains, is the <a href="/news/real-estate-agent-education-in-a-dire-state-reinsw">standard of real estate professionals</a> in the state.
"We've been lobbying state government and various ministers, and the Office of Fair Trading, for some time about improving the educational standards for entry into our industry," he says.
"And it's been really falling on deaf ears."
Gunning says despite the existence many qualified and long-practicing real estate agents in New South Wales, lax educational standards have allowed unqualified or unprofessional agents to practice, particularly in migrant populations.
"Through our international chapter, they're saying there's a sub-market taking place within Melbourne and Sydney's immigrant groups, and it's slipping under the radar of Fair Trading.
"A lot of the immigrants won't report real estate agents, and don't understand the legislation," claims Gunning.
He says the state's poor agent standards extend beyond selling agents, to property managers.
"A profile of a current property manager is a 26 year old female, maybe with a week of training," he explains.
"If that's the case, that young woman, or that person, has got to be mindful of swimming pool legislation in New South Wales, fire place safety, or people hanging themselves with blind cords.
"So you've got people who are assumed to be taking on responsibilities which they aren't equipped for."
He claims the increasing educational requirements for new agents will not negatively impact competition in the industry, with agents previously required to train for 12 months and then have two years of probation.
"So when it came to opening their own business, they were pretty well prepared," says Gunning.
Land tax and stamp duties would be another area a REINSW party would hope to reform after addressing their industry standard concerns.
"There are about 70% of Australians who have some interest in property.
"If you own a bit of real estate, you hope to have a voice in government," says Gunning.
</body></html>

jrichardson-uRX5hFdKfN

Will the REINSW make the leap from lobby group to political party?

<html><body>
A month out from a state election, the Victorian Napthine government has seriously stung the state's real estate agents.
Last week, the government announced that agents handling the sale or lease of commercial real estate valued over $15 million or at with floor space of least 10,000 square metres will no longer need a licence.
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://twitter.com/geoffwhite/status/527206198949314560" target="_blank"><img src="/images/2014/10/29/tweet-oct-29-one.jpg" alt=""></a>
Some licensed real estate agents, including Geoff White of Lucas Real Estate, aren't happy.
The Real Estate Institute of Victoria has already pledged $1 million to campaign against the government's changes, which it claims will damage small business and increase risks for consumers as agents may not be required to use trust accounts or have insurance.
The Coalition government claims the measures will "reduce red tape".
</body></html>

Real estate agents push back against Napthine's reforms: Tweet of the day

<html><body>
As Melbourne grows — having doubled in size since the 1970s and being on track to double again to eight million people by 2050 — transport is increasingly becoming a key issue. No longer is this just a debate among politicians, bureaucrats, and engineers, but one for all Melburnians, evident by attention various news media outlets have given to the issue.

Transport can simply be understood as how we get from A to B, but it is more than that. It has complex interrelations with where we live and work, the shape of our cities, and the nature of our neighbourhoods and streets. Unsurprisingly, it is shaping up to be a vote shifter at the upcoming Victorian election in November, having previously been instrumental in Labor’s defeat in the 2010 election.

Since campaigning on a platform of public transport improvements, the Coalition government has made the East West Link their key infrastructure project. Labor has opposed the project, while indicating that it would nevertheless proceed with it if contracts were signed before the election.

Labor has also said that it will build the Melbourne Metro rail tunnel, including a station near Melbourne University, and remove 50 level crossings across the city. The Coalition has instead pledged to build a rail link via the Fishermans Bend urban renewal area.

It’s great that we’re talking about transport, how it affects our daily lives, and what we can do to move towards transport systems for the city we want to live in. However, the danger is that politicians and lobby groups will seek to use it for political gain, rather than delivering what is actually in the best interests of the greatest number of people. Danae Bosler, spokesperson for the Public Transport Not Traffic campaign, describes the transport issue as a “political football”. “It’s concerning that decisions are being made based on a quick victory in November, rather than what is best for Victoria’s future,” she says.

The Coalition’s flagship project, the East West Link, is a historically unprecedented expenditure with no publicly released business case and a questionable approvals process, heavily criticised even by those with no opposition to the project per se.

Meanwhile, Labor’s policy is similarly focused on large-scale projects that will generate ribboncutting opportunities and, importantly, employment.

Level crossings and new rail lines sound like a good thing. But there is little indication from either party that their proposed projects have been decided through a strategic process of having a vision for the city and its transport systems and then finding the most cost-effective strategies for meeting those objectives.

Instead, decisions are heavily influenced by political factors, such as the need to win votes in marginal seats, or keep key lobby groups and donors happy, and then justified in terms of supposed benefits.

When I recently asked a senior Labor politician why such a strategic approach was not being used to demonstrate that good policy, not politics, was driving the party’s decisions, I was simply met with a blank stare.

One key problem is that there is no overarching transportation plan for the State, meaning there is greater potential for decisions to be made for political reasons — such as “pork barrelling”, or spending in key or marginal electoral seats — rather than on a solid policy basis.

For example, both major parties are keen to make promises in the marginal “sandbelt” seats in Melbourne’s south, while public transport-poor outer growth areas cry out for investment. A report by consultancy Essential Economics estimates that $6 billion additional public transport investment is required in these growth areas by 2026 to close the gap between them and established parts of Melbourne.

Public Transport Victoria has released a 20-year development plan for the rail network. However, according to Public Transport Users’ Association spokesperson Cait Jones, “the manner in which [the Government is] picking and choosing from that indicates that they are not committed to an objective network approach”. In addition, there is little integration with other modes of transport or land use planning.

The government’s metropolitan planning strategy for Melbourne, Plan Melbourne, reads like an advertisement for its big-ticket infrastructure projects, with scant detail on implementing more integrated public transport services or better conditions for cycling. It also largely ignores the important role of transport in the city’s ability to achieve environmental sustainability and social equity outcomes.

Transport is a huge election issue. But it’s also an important policy issue with ramifications for Melbourne’s future. Without an independent transport planning body that can make integrated and long-term plans that can survive changes of government, important decisions will continue to be made on the basis of winning votes, rather than the best possible outcome for the State.

Transport will undoubtedly be a huge issue at November’s election, but whether promises made this year will be kept and delivered remains to be seen.

This article originally appeared in <a href="https://www.facebook.com/farragomag">Farrago</a>.

Lead image credit: <a href="http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Victoria_Parliament_Melbourne_(Colonnades_%26_Stairs).jpg">wikipedia</a>.
</body></html>

apsheko

Transport promises: delays expected

<html><body>
The headline for this article references a comment by a planning aficionado last week along the lines of many people are entitled to, and do have their say, but at the end of the day "there still needs to be a bus driver." This was in reference to the malaise of municipal councils north of the Murray and the friction generated from those councils not necessarily heading in a common direction, or advancing their agendas without an overarching plan and/or vision that a body such as a State Government would provide.

Different context yes, but the rumblings of late surrounding Fishermans Bend leads me to draw some parallels with what is occurring north of the border.

As many readers are aware Fishermans Bend reached a critical juncture last week when it was announced that a handful of the dozens of towers slated for the precinct gained approval. Notable in that these towers are the first large-scale developments given a green light for the Urban Renewal Area, whereas previous approvals were of a low-rise nature.

Encircling the raft of approvals was an almost pall of commentary, bemoaning all things Fishermans Bend. Examples include:

<ul>
<li><a href="http://www.heraldsun.com.au/leader/central/port-phillip-mayor-slams-state-governments-tall-towers-plan-for-fishermans-bend/story-fngnvlpt-1227049190768">Port Phillip Major slams State Goverenments's tall towers plan for Fishermans Bend</a></li>
	<li><a href="http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=16609&amp;page=0">IBAC, the development industry and Australia's newest planning disaster</a></li>
	<li><a href="http://www.heraldsun.com.au/leader/central/back-to-the-drawing-board-on-fishermans-bend-says-labor-mp-foley/story-fngnvlpt-1227045238416">Back to the drawing board on Fishermans Bend says Labor MP Foley</a></li>
</ul>
Add to this the questionable assertions as outlined in this article entitled "<a href="http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/a-tall-order-as-melbourne-city-council-seeks-to-reclaim-skyscraper-approval-powers-20140901-10b3j7">A tall order as Melbourne City Council seeks to reclaim skyscraper approval powers</a>." Current Planning Minister Matthew Guy is derided for approving too many planning applications as if he in some way is responsible for instigating the mass of current applications; last time I checked developers lodge planning applications where and when they see fit.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/tip_ny_0414_03.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="The metaphorical Fishermans Bend bus - everyone's lining up to take a shot. Image courtesy Time"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="384" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/tip_ny_0414_03.jpg?itok=WWLOAikw" title="The metaphorical Fishermans Bend bus - everyone's lining up to take a shot. Image courtesy Time" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>The metaphorical Fishermans Bend bus in the eyes of some. Image courtesy Time</figcaption></figure>So it seems all and sundry are lining up to slag Fishermans Bend prior to the commencement of works, with a multitude of opinions thrown into the public sphere. There's nothing wrong with that of course but one of the critical questions has already been answered by Labor leader Daniel Andrews should Labor triumph in the upcoming State election.

Whilst displeased with certain aspects of the Fishermans Bend planning process to date, Labor "<a href="http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria-state-election-2014/opposition-leader-daniel-andrews-backs-fishermans-bend-redevelopment-with-some-concerns/story-fnocxssc-1227040443256?nk=9805beb53b5578634c400a400d5ce3e6">will not ditch the master plan if it wins office</a>." Having been ardent critics to date, Daniel Andrews' comment suggests that Labor also at a State level understands the vital nature of Fishermans Bend, particularly as an economic driver into the future.

It also gives the impression that someone will be 'driving the Fishermans Bend bus' post election, regardless of who wins.

So big picture thinking seemingly assured, what is the pertinent criticism of Fishermans Bend that puts other mediocre arguments surrounding the precinct to shame? The Urban Renewal Area absolutely needs a coherent and cohesive structure plan beyond what has already been put forward.

I consider tower height near on obsolete in the current Fishermans Bend argument; whether a tower is 20 or 40 levels is to my way of thinking near inconsequential compared to what occurs at street level which is absolutely paramount. Consider Southbank and Docklands whose common failings revolve around what occurs (or more accurately what doesn't occur) at street level. Tall or short buildings aside, if the public realm doesn't work it's almost inconceivable that anything else will.

Post election the party of the day needs to place Fishermans Bend's transport and public realm considerations at the fore. Provide clarity as to the location of light and heavy rail options, implement an area-wide ground level landscape plan, nominate specific sites for what will become necessary community infrastructure and ensure the street level activation of all buildings for the area. Granted much of this has been done to a degree, but half-arsed attempts lead to poor outcomes.

It's about getting the fundamentals right, and getting them right sooner rather than later (hello Docklands!)

Regardless of who wins the upcoming election, Fishermans Bend's structure plan, transport blueprint and urban principles need to be enshrined prior to works commencing. Is this a case of easier said than done? Once the Urban Renewal Area stops being used as a political football, I think not.
</body></html>

silvermb

Who's driving the Fishermans Bend bus beyond the upcoming election?

<html><body>
Ah, the Greens. Like your well meaning Nanna who still gives you a Freddo Frog every time you see her, they mean well but... they just don't get it.

While their commitment to better public transport can't be faltered, it seems they have the economic sense of Greece. It's this complete lack of financial responsibility that led them to come up with this gem last week: <a href="http://greens.org.au/sites/greens.org.au/files/140710%20trams%20connections%20backgrounder_FINAL.pdf">Connecting Melbourne's Trams</a>.

To be fair, much of this plan isn't the most crazy idea bandied about in Melbourne's transport planning sphere. That prize is reserved for the Public Transport Users Association's 1991 plan to build a heavy rail spur line to Princes Park, to cater for those millions of fans that used to turn up to watch Fitzroy play the Brisbane Bears and thus couldn't fit on the tram that stopped right outside the ground.

Now there's no denying our tram network needs some love, it is something <a href="/news/car-wars-time-for-trams-to-strike-back">I have spoken about before</a>. However with money for transport projects becoming thinner on the ground, we need to be very selective on where we spend that money. While the Metro Tunnel should be our first priority without a shadow of a doubt, its $9 billion price tag means we must think long and hard as to where the rest of the transport budget is spent. This means setting out a pipeline of projects, ensuring the cost is spread out over time, as well as providing a steady stream of jobs to build them.

In typical Greens fashion, they have thrown common sense out the window and decided it is a better idea to try and fix all our transport woes in one foul swoop; at least the ones involving trams. And so their tram plan was born; containing a collection of 15 different extensions at a cost of $840 million, a price tag that would make that much maligned spendthrift, the drunken sailor, weep tears of pain.

And unfortunately for this bag of mixed sweets, it contains more boiled lollies than it does chocolates.

$840 million may not sound humongous in light of today's infrastructure costs, however it does when it is being spent on lots of little projects that have an overall questionable benefit. Let's analyse some the best and worst suggestions. Inspired by my first viewing of the spaghetti western classic just last week, I have divided them into the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly.

<h2>The Good</h2>

<a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/route_48_large.jpg" rel="gallery-all"><img alt="" class="image-article-half-width-290px" height="290" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_half_width_290px/public/pictures/article-images/route_48_large.jpg?itok=2eFLd6G4" width="290"></a>

<h3>1 - North Balwyn to Doncaster Hill</h3>

This actually makes sense which is why I can't understand why the Greens are backing it. For decades now they have been bleating about how a Doncaster heavy rail connection is the most important project in Melbourne, and now they are actually advocating a reasonable alternative. Or more likely, they are very unreasonably advocating we build both. Either way, this could be a winner. As building a Doncaster heavy rail link <a href="/expert-insights/buying/is-doncaster-rail-is-good">has many issues</a>.

This could solve the problem of having a rail link to Doncaster, without the multi billion dollar price tag heavy rail would come with. One down side is the current 39 minute journey time from North Balwyn to the CBD. However with a project 96 style upgrade to light rail, the journey time could be significantly reduced.

<a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/route_57.jpg" rel="gallery-all"><img alt="" class="image-article-half-width-290px" height="290" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_half_width_290px/public/pictures/article-images/route_57.jpg?itok=cEUiPmTj" width="290"></a>

<h3>2 - Highpoint to East Keilor</h3>

Given that Avondale Heights/East Keilor are currently not served by heavy or light rail, this would add some value. With no room for a heavy rail line, a grade separated light rail route down Milleara Road would service quite a large residential area much quicker than buses would in the peak. Another tick.

<h2>The Bad</h2>

<a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/route_82.jpg" rel="gallery-all"><img alt="" class="image-article-half-width-290px" height="290" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_half_width_290px/public/pictures/article-images/route_82.jpg?itok=W2cGUFiH" width="290"></a>

<h3>1 - Footscray to Docklands and City</h3>

Right thoughts, right words, wrong action. I don't understand why you would run a tram down Footscray Road, not only is there no residents to service, it would also wreak havoc with the trucks going to the Port of Melbourne creating a recipe for disaster.

Beyond Footscray Rd, the tram would then need to turn right at the major truck intersection at the Docklands Highway, run down busy Whitehall Street, before having to turn at another major intersection at Dynon Road. Given the Port of Melbourne own land on both sides of Footscray Road, it would more than likely be vetoed as part of any long term lease deal anyway.

Surely it would make more sense to go from its current terminus in Docklands, run north through the soon to be new residential precinct E Gate, then along Dynon Road where it could eventually service the Dynon urban renewal precinct, sandwiched between the rail line and Dynon Road itself. No trucks impeded, while servicing two high density residential areas, how could the Greens have got something so basic so wrong?

<a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/route_3.jpg" rel="gallery-all"><img alt="" class="image-article-half-width-290px" height="290" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_half_width_290px/public/pictures/article-images/route_3.jpg?itok=QN7a7h6o" width="290"></a>

<h3>2 - East Malvern to Chadstone</h3>

There's no doubt that a lack of a rail connection to Chadstone Shopping Centre is one of the great Melbourne planning oversights, however I don't know whether a tram link is the best answer. A tram line down heavily congested Warrigul Road would be a disaster, and there are already options for a heavy rail link from either Alamein or East Malvern that would be better equipped to deal with the numbers that frequent the shopping centre. The <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/chadstone-station-and-tunnel-on-2b-shopping-list-20121110-29556">East Malvern option</a> would even partially pay for itself by selling off land above the Glen Waverly Line.

<h2>The Ugly</h2>

<a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/route_86.jpg" rel="gallery-all"><img alt="" class="image-article-half-width-290px" height="290" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_half_width_290px/public/pictures/article-images/route_86.jpg?itok=OiHGo-9A" width="290"></a>

<h3>1 - Bundoora RMIT to South Morang</h3>

Dear oh dear. The justification for this is that it will ease pressure on the much overcrowded South Morang Line. However with a journey time of over an hour already from Bundoora to the CBD, how much mode shift would we actually see if people could catch the tram instead of the train?

Childless couples could get on at South Morang and have three children ready to start school by the time the tram arrived at Bourke Street! This works out to be nothing but an extension to join the dots.

<a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/route_8.jpg" rel="gallery-all"><img alt="" class="image-article-half-width-290px" height="288" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_half_width_290px/public/pictures/article-images/route_8.jpg?itok=I20ZMO3Q" width="288"></a> <a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/route_new_n_melb-rmond.jpg" rel="gallery-all"><img alt="" class="image-article-half-width-290px" height="288" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_half_width_290px/public/pictures/article-images/route_new_n_melb-rmond.jpg?itok=YM3YN5jW" width="288"></a>

<h3>2 - Toorak to Camberwell Rd &amp; North Melbourne to Richmond</h3>

I don't quite understand what the point of these are. This is the transport version of architect Jahn Gehl's 'Bird Sh*t Architecture' theory.

It is like someone went up in a chopper over Melbourne and said to themselves 'Wouldn't it be nice if those trams lines linked up and completed a pretty pattern?" Routes 8 &amp; 75 already run to the CBD, while the 3.96 km gap is already serviced by route 72. The 1.2km gap in North Melbourne would save about 5 mins by not having to go via Peel and La Trobe Streets.

<a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/route_19.jpg" rel="gallery-all"><img alt="" class="image-article-half-width-290px" height="290" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_half_width_290px/public/pictures/article-images/route_19.jpg?itok=uydCUI6d" width="290"></a>

<h3>3 - Coburg to Gowrie Station</h3>

This extension merely hugs an existing low patronage heavy rail line. What is the point of this? It is fast becoming a case of quantity of ideas over quality...

<h2>Summary</h2>

Overall, the Greens proposal does contain a few good ideas. However they seem to have fallen into the trap of trying to flesh it out with too many bad or pointless ideas just to make it look comprehensive. Worse still the cost is just a random number.

With no business case, or even an estimated BCR to back it up, it is hard to justify any of the 15 proposals. There's also no explanation of how they arrived at an average cost of $15 million per km (<a href="http://blogs.crikey.com.au/theurbanist/2014/07/17/can-the-greens-tram-plan-be-taken-seriously/" target="_blank">see Alan Davies blog post on Crikey for a good summary on this point</a>).

Trams are great for short to medium urban journeys as their hop on/hop off nature makes them ideal for trips in high density areas, and/or as connector/feeder services to heavy rail. Conversely, due to the increased number of stops, using them as a high patronage, long distance commuter service to the CBD fast becomes a case of diminishing returns. A concept that seems to have been completely ignored with the idea to extend to places like South Morang and Knox.

The Greens would be much better served to concentrate on getting up a few of the really good ideas, rather than a large series of average ones. But of course, they won't. Welcome to the planet that is the Greens, where populism outranks economic reality - every time!
</body></html>

TheHeadOnTheDoor

Wham Tram Thank You Ma'am - Have the Greens jumped the shark again?

<html><body>
Paradigm was the buzz word when Australia was handcuffed to a hung parliament, so to be different let’s take a look at Australia’s property paradigm and what we can expect to be reading about the direction Australian property is headed in coming months.
Many vastly differing opinions are front and centre at the moment, for some strange reason commentaries keep reverting back to Australia’s property boom in 2003/04 – which I am struggling to accept.
In 2003/04 Australia was basking in an unprecedented period of economic growth together with a booming resources sector, which for want of a better expression, this may be better described as the old economy given our resources sector is now in decline.
The latest capex figures were released by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) this week which revealed that total capex fell by 4.2% in the March quarter. Most notable was the mining industry which declined by 8.7% in the March quarter with total new capex now 5% lower than this time last year. As Australia moves from mining to non – mining industries the building sector was suggested as the biggest benefactor from mining and also declined by 7.4% in the March quarter. Capex has now fallen by 8.5% over the last two quarters – which puts the Australian capex on par with the largest six month decline since the recession back in 1993.
There are many questions that today remain unanswered given there is growing opinions that Australia’s long-term planning may need an immediate visit back to the drawing board as these unknown economic irregularities have Australia steering into unknown waters. Certainly the latest capex figures indicate that our productivity is headed completely in the wrong direction.
With interest I have been closely watching the ANZ – Roy Morgan weekly consumer confidence rating which has revealed that confidence is now down 15% since the Abbott government first started spruiking its budget policies. This has brought about a most unusual trifecta given we see confidence, terms of trade and property prices (apparently) in decline. What we are seeing today is a complete opposite to what happened back in 2003/04 although the cash rate back then was approximately double what it is today and from 2003/04 the cash rate steadily increased to 7.25% in 2008 only to be halted by the global financial crisis.
<a href="https://www.rwm.com.au/files/2014/05/27-05-2014-12-25-40-PM.jpg"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-8564" src="https://www.rwm.com.au/files/2014/05/27-05-2014-12-25-40-PM.jpg" alt="27-05-2014 12-25-40 PM" width="595" height="357"></a>
Source: Macro Business
Although what is conflicting is the property dynamic over the same period for residential term loans to households which may very well explain why we are starting to see the early signs of the property markets easing. Although it must be noted that the traditional real estate markets have only recorded modest capital growth when compared to the outer Sydney areas that have posted unprecedented capital growth.
It is anyone’s guess when the RBA will start increasing the cash rate again although most agree that they will remain where they are for some considerable time to come.
<img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-8565" src="https://www.rwm.com.au/files/2014/05/27-05-2014-1-10-16-PM.jpg" alt="27-05-2014 1-10-16 PM" width="696" height="347">
 
Source: Digital Finance Analytics
With interest this week I read Ian Macfarlane on central bank policies, inflation and China on <a href="https://cuffelinks.com.au/ian-macfarlane-central-bank-policies-inflation-china/" target="_blank" title="Cuffelinks">Cuffelinks</a>. What I find most interesting about China is that aside from them being a number one client for buying our iron ore, which is now in decline, they are fast becoming the number one foreign purchaser of our real estate.
What that in itself may suggest that given their insatiable interest in Australian real estate prices will flat line for some considerable time to come as they are definitely a noteworthy driver of real estate today – this reinforces the mislead perceptions/predictions that real estate values will fall.
The biggest question marks over Australian real estate are quite simple and twofold – what will happen to the markets when the cash rate goes back to some form of normality say at 7.50% which represents a 200% increase? Lastly, they keep mentioning negative gearing and given the Australian government’s debt position there will come a time when this great tax deduction is re-examined.
Although maybe we are looking at the wrong paradigm given nobody can explain why the ASX surged to a six year high this week?
Obviously I must have missed something?
</body></html>

robertsimeon-hRNTwJyXkQ

Australia's contentious property paradigm: What we can expect to hear about in the future

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
A damaging admission by the Commonwealth Bank will boost concern about the government’s plan to weaken protections for consumers seeking financial advice and throw into doubt its timetable for announcing changes.
The bank’s earlier failure to provide a parliamentary inquiry with full information about its handling of the aftermath of financial advisers' misconduct has forced a last-minute delay to a Senate report into the affair.
The bank now admits not all the relevant clients were contacted and offered the promised $5,000 to help them get fresh advice. More than 4000 cases are now to be dealt with.
Full information was apparently withheld by the bank for some time from the inquiry and from the Australian Securities and Investments Commission.
The government’s proposed changes to Labor’s Future of Financial Advice (FoFA) law would advantage the banks. They would apply the ban that exists on “conflicted renumeration” only to the provision of personal advice - exempting general advice provided by employees of banks and product manufacturing institutions.
The controversial package was put on hold for further inquiry and consultations. Seniors groups have been particularly critical.
Finance Minister Mathias Cormann is anxious to finalise the measures quickly and does not want to revise them substantially.
But what the Senate economics references committee on Wednesday described as “surprise developments” – the production of new information from ASIC and the bank - will increase suspicion.
The committee, investigating the performance of ASIC, had been due on Friday to present a report expected to be very critical of the bank.
One of the committee’s main concerns has been the misconduct of some financial advisers in Commonwealth Financial Planning Ltd (CFP), part of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia Group, and ASIC’s response to allegations of wrongdoing.
The committee said in an interim report on Wednesday that it was particularly interested in the adequacy and integrity of the ASIC-approved compensation arrangements for affected clients.
It had been well advanced in preparing its report when on May 16 ASIC and the CBA advised there were inconsistencies in the way in which the compensation arrangements had been applied.
“This revelation suggested that, for some time, the CBA had not kept either the committee or ASIC full informed about the compensation process for clients affected by serious misconduct within CBA’s businesses,” the interim report said.
Although ASIC and the CBA had attempted to correct the record, the committee said the evidence provided was “sketchy” and many questions were left unanswered.
Committee chairman, Labor’s Mark Bishop, said these included how many affected clients were “kept in the dark by the CFP, for how long, and the number who missed out on the offer of $5000 to help them pay for an expert assessor to assist their claim”.
Concerned it might still not have a full understanding of what had happened, the committee has asked for more information from ASIC and the bank.
Bishop tweeted that he was alarmed that “ASIC says over 4000 clients affected by inconsistent approach CBA applied to compensation measures. Maybe ten of thousands”. The latter number is a reference to possible unidentified clients.
The committee’s final reporting date has been delayed to no later than June 26.
The Senate economics legislation committee, with substantially overlapping membership with the ASIC inquiry, is examining the proposed FoFA changes.
It will report on June 16 and Cormann has planned to announce the government’s position immediately after that.
But the government could expose itself to more criticism if it did not wait until the report dealing with the Commonwealth Bank.
Chairman of the Financial Planning Association Matthew Rowe told The Conversation one would expect the latest development would push out the timetable for the government’s announcement.
His organisation, a professional body representing financial planners, has written to Cormann with its concerns about the reintroduction of commissions. It says the selling of products should be clearly separated from providing professional advice.
“Consumers are becoming increasingly suspicious of the behaviour of some of our major institutions,” Rowe said.
“The government needs to take great care with the arguments of those with significant vested interests where there is a real and significant public interest at stake.”
On FoFA the government is trapped in the triangle of what it wants to do, what politically it should do, and what the Senate will allow it to do.
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/27285/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">Michelle Grattan is one of Australia's most respected and awarded political journalists. Michelle currently has a dual role with an academic position at the University of Canberra and as associate editor (politics) and chief political correspondent at The Conversation.
This article was originally published on <a href="https://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>. 
</body></html>

jake-cSmGT7VXVf

Commonwealth Bank behaviour sends more warning signals about Liberals' financial advice changes

<html><body>
In his first budget Treasurer Joe Hockey has taken the axe to a range of measures designed to assist SMEs while sticking to the government’s promise to lower the company tax rate.
The government will abolish key business programs including Commercialisation Australia, Enterprise Solutions and the Innovation Investment Fund and will redirect the savings into other budget areas and the establishment of an Entrepreneurs Investment Program. 
“We know that for some in the community this budget will not be easy,” Hockey said in his budget speech.   
“I say to the business community we need you to help out.  Rather than corporate welfare, the government’s focus will be on strengthening the overall business environment, so that enterprise, large and small, can create more jobs in Australia.”
Hockey claims despite the cuts the government will improve business opportunities by sticking to its promise to lower the company tax rate to 28.5%.   
He says the 1.5% cut will help 800,000 businesses although the budget does not contain any provision for the company tax cut.  
The key budget measures that will impact SMEs are:
<ul>
<li>Cutting the company tax rate to 28.5%;</li>
<li>Scrapping schemes to support apprentices and instead providing a loan program;</li>
<li>Scrapping Commercialisation Australia, Enterprise Solutions and other assistance schemes and replacing them with the Entrepreneurs Investment Program; </li>
<li>Extending unfair contract provisions to small business;</li>
<li>Abolishing the Small Business Commissioner to be replaced by a Small Business Ombudsman with more far ranging powers;</li>
<li>Wage subsidy program of up to $10,000 for businesses which employ older workers;</li>
</ul>
The budget also:
<ul>
<li>Links increases in pensions to inflation;</li>
<li>Reduces the income threshold for Family Tax Benefit Part B to $100,000;</li>
<li>Freezes pay for one year for politicians, judges and senior public servants;</li>
<li>Allows direct financial assistance for students studying diploma and sub bachelor degree courses;</li>
<li>Switches unemployed people under the age of 25 from Newstart to Youth Allowance; </li>
<li>Provides for a $20 billion Medical Research Future Fund;</li>
</ul>
The budget confirmed measures previously reported including:
<ul>
<li>A debt levy for high income earners;</li>
<li>A Paid Parental Leave scheme with a cap of $100,000;</li>
<li>A higher level of fuel excise tax;</li>
<li>Increase in the pension age to 70 by 2035;</li>
<li>The abolition of 70 government agencies;</li>
</ul>
“Doing nothing is not an option. The days of borrow and spend have come to an end,” Hockey said in his speech.
But the Opposition branded the budget a “broken promises budget” before it was even released.
"This is a budget of broken promises and twisted priorities," Opposition Leader Bill Shorten said.
This article first appeared on <a href="https://www.smartcompany.com.au/" target="_blank">SmartCompany</a>.
</body></html>

cwaters-YrtBR88nBe

Hockey warns it’s not easy as he slashes business assistance but cuts company tax: Budget 2014

<html><body>
The current NSW ICAC hearings which appears to link clandestine property developer payments to the NSW Liberal Party ought trigger the strategic delay, though not the death knell, of key NSW state government's planning reform initiatives.
Can the freshly installed Baird government ministry now be seen to handsomely reward the property development industry with long-desired legislation against the backdrop of alleged corrupt influence over their parliamentary colleagues and hangers on? Ditto the NSW opposition.
The controversial planning and strata legislation were already looking like courageous endeavours with an apprehensive public, but with the ICAC hearings to resume again in August and the March 28, 2015 election looming, both the NSW planning and strata reforms may possibly not deserve to be high on the agenda before the state Parliament rises in late November this year.
It's not to deny that the majority are cleanskins in the government, opposition and property development industry, but the pall over them all just doesn't sit well.
The new Planning Minister Pru Goward certainly doesn't shy away from doing the tough policy implementation - as her public housing housing tenant reforms showed - but already she has acknowledged her planning bill quandary. She understands the community concern over the derailed planning legislation going too far, even without the troubling backdrop that it now sits within.
''She understands there is community concern about getting the planning reforms right and she'll be very keen to listen to the views of everyone involved and work towards getting the balance right,'' her spokesman said on her appointment last month.
Then a few days later after assuming the ministry Pru Goward acknowledged the public perception.
"Development is a very expensive and highly-invested sector, and there will be plenty of people who want me to do what they want to make money for them, and every community in NSW will want me to listen to them," she told News Ltd papers.
Touted as the biggest shake-up in urban planning for three decades, the overhaul has effectively been in limbo since late 2013 when the Labor opposition and the minor upper house parties forced major changes, with 51 amendments. The government's plan to fast track the approval process for code-complying developments in high growth areas within a 25 day period was struck out in the upper house along with the intention to have the economic significance of mining projects deemed a principal consideration in the approval process.
The other key reform, and gift to urban renewal property developers, is the so-called "collective sales and renewals" initiative which will allow developers to evict strata home owners from their apartments. The renewals policy will actually force elderly owner occupiers out of their homes by developers. 
Currently 100% of strata lot owners have to agree to any replacement and redevelopment.
The property development industry has successfully lobbied the state government to reduce that to a 75% threshold with conciliation and mediation to encourage consensus.
The 75% threshold is a very generous threshold especially as each lot will have one vote, the decision will not be based on the more worthy unit entitlement. It is extraordinary that on such an important issue the lawmakers would seek to have the penthouse owner's voting entitlement the same as the viewless studio down near the laundry in the basement.
Yes it will start slowly with select blocks mostly with water views, but I think there will be an outcry once the electorate understands the disruptive compulsory eviction outcome, let alone The Castle movie-like denial of rights to ownership.
Of course the government has done the talk to the stakeholders routine, but once it filters down to the property ownership constituency there will be no tolerance of the 'Making NSW No.1 Again: Shaping Future Communities' spin. 
Hardly an initiative I'd suggest that reflects the moniker of the NSW Fair Trading department, but rather a scheme that developers have won from lobbying Macquarie Street.
One legislative clause apparently gives all lot owners and mortgagees just 60 days to consider the proposal and to seek independent advice. Hardly fair if you've been resident for many decades, and betcha the wishful stay-put strata owners get their letters early December, just before the lengthy Christmas summer holidays.
Compulsory acquisition by local council and state and national governments has been around in some form for ever for development purposes when they consider this to be in the best interest of the community - and leaves a sour aftermath, but this legislation is handing private nest eggs over to a ambitious private developer. It will involve resumptions eventually on a scale perhaps not seen since farmers lost land for the 1940s postwar soldiers settlements. Milder metropolitan dispossessions subsequently took place on the Macquarie University construction at North Ryde, the Eastern Suburbs railway line, and the Gore Hill freeway, all for the community benefit by government.
This time the supposed net public benefit is going to be harder to cop, especially in the face of big profits for developers. The proposed legislation is really just making life easier, and cheaper, for the developer who view the task of getting 100% as taking too much time and profit.
I don't see why the legislation can't have a graded threshold of say 95% where the building is less than 15 years old and 85% if the building is more than 15 years old. As we already occasionally see amalgamations can happen, and did so recently along the Cronulla beachfront when the Sunland Group consolidated a 2,398 square metre Prince Street site - from nine separate sellers - and then got approval for 12 luxury apartments.
There have now been three Fair Trading ministers with carriage of the task over the past seven months.
Anthony Roberts, the then Fair Trading Minister, told the Strata Community Australia (NSW) last November that the government’s commitment to change has been responding to the community’s calls to modernise the state’s strata laws.
NSW was the first jurisdiction in the world to introduce strata title laws, back in 1961, so there is no doubting they need modernisation, and the economic boost that will come from infill housing, rather than greenfields development. Some 30% of residential strata schemes in the Sydney metropolitan area were registered more than 30 years ago.
Only 826 strata schemes have been terminated since 1961, out of over 72,000 schemes in New South Wales.
Almost all of these terminations have been made following an application to the Registrar General unanimously signed by the lot owners, with only five schemes being terminated by Supreme Court orders.
It is estimated that more than 30% of the State’s population live or work in strata and within two decades around half of NSW’s population will be living or working in strata.
Roberts said the government was undertaking a landmark reconsideration of the strata and community schemes legislation, which will lead to important reforms in the sector in 2014. Termination of a strata scheme without the unanimous support of all apartment owners occurs in countries including Singapore, New Zealand and the United States.
It was Robert's aim of the bill being introduced to Parliament early this year and to commence the new laws by the middle of this year.
Then Fair Trading Minister Stuart Ayres drafted legislation for cabinet approval this month, with hopes to table it in Parliament this month too.
Yesterday MLC Matthew Mason-Cox was appointed the latest Fair Trading minister.
He might reconsider the specifics of the drafts.
It's not just the Liberals who've found the going tough.
Previous Labor governments have averted the emotional legislative debate about property rights with developers expressing their frustrations since the days of the NSW premier Bob Carr.
Then in 2007 the Planning Minister, Frank Sartor, had plans for the Morris Iemma cabinet to drop the threshold to less than 100%, but a decision was made at the last minute to retain the status quo.
The Keneally government envisaged similar legislation in 2010. 
Stand by to watch the potential evictees heading off to the High Court with the Magna Carta of 1215 and the more recent Mabo judgment.
The drama of dozens of Daryl Kerrigans, mimicking the lines from the film The Castle, will be a news feast since compulsory acquisition is almost un-Australian.
</body></html>

Politics

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Politics

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News