Developers and apartment buyers have a narrowing window of opportunity before Brisbane's Olympic infrastructure pipeline begins competing directly with residential construction, pushing up costs, tightening labour supply and making new projects increasingly difficult to deliver.

While Brisbane's apartment market continues to benefit from strong population growth and limited housing supply, industry research suggests the years leading up to 2027 could prove to be the most important period for developers looking to secure builders and buyers hoping to purchase before the next wave of price increases.

A new Colliers report, Brisbane 2032 Olympic and Paralympic Games: Creating Solutions, highlights the scale of the challenge. While thousands of new homes are planned across South East Queensland, the Brisbane Olympic Athletes Village alone will deliver more than 10,500 beds during the Games before being converted into around 1,750 to 2,000 apartments. Equivalent to almost two years of typical inner-city apartment supply, the project will also absorb a significant share of the construction workforce and building materials.

The broader construction pipeline paints an even clearer picture.

Construction Skills Queensland's Horizon 2032 report forecasts Queensland's annual construction pipeline will average $69 billion over the coming years before peaking at $75 billion in 2027-28. Demand for construction workers is expected to increase by 17 per cent to almost 150,000 people, with the industry facing an annual shortfall of around 19,000 workers that could blow out to as many as 35,000 during the peak construction period.

The Olympic venues, athletes village and supporting infrastructure will account for billions of dollars worth of work across South East Queensland through to 2032, creating intense competition for labour at a time when Australia's residential construction sector is already under pressure.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=150489 project_image_fid=373834]

Colliers Queensland Residential Director Andrew Scriven said the convergence of these projects is creating a clear window of opportunity for both developers and buyers.

"From 2027 onwards, the market will shift dramatically," Scriven said.

"Labour will increasingly be locked into government-led infrastructure and Olympic projects, which means private residential developments will face higher costs and tighter margins. The developers who move now are the ones most likely to get projects off the ground."

Scriven said the same dynamic would also affect buyers, with fewer apartment projects expected to launch once construction capacity tightens.

"If you're looking to change your lifestyle over the next five years, now is your window of opportunity to buy."

[smartcode_project:default project_id=150713 project_image_fid=373827]

Developers are already positioning themselves ahead of that window.

Following the success of Monarch at Toowong, Consolidated Properties is preparing to launch two new Brisbane apartment projects in the second half of 2026. They include <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/gloriette-30-bedivere-street-yeerongpilly-qld-4105">Gloriette</a> at Yeerongpilly Green, a 25-storey tower within one of Brisbane's key Olympic precincts, and <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/castile-47-skyring-terrace-newstead-qld-4006">Castile</a>, a recently approved 25-storey riverfront development at 47 Skyring Terrace in Newstead.

Hutchinson Builders will deliver both projects, with early works already underway at Yeerongpilly and Newstead expected to commence later this year.

The timing comes as Brisbane's fundamentals continue to strengthen, with strong interstate migration, population growth and vacancy rates remaining below 1.5 per cent.

Colliers Queensland researcher Pragya Sharma said Greater Brisbane is forecast to require around 40,000 new apartments between 2021 and 2031.

"There's a real mismatch emerging between when housing is needed and when it will be feasible to build," Sharma said.

"As a result, the period leading up to 2027 presents a key window of opportunity for developers to secure approvals, funding and construction capacity, while buyers will have greater choice before supply constraints intensify."

Colliers research outlines a critical pre-2027 window to start residential projects before labour squeeze: now is the time to buy

Joel Robinson

Developers, buyers on watch in South East Queensland ahead of construction crunch: Colliers

It's taken less than nine months for developer Sherpa Property Group to sell out all 51 apartments in its <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/flourish-oasis-palm-beach-7-9-sixth-avenue-palm-beach-qld-4221">Flourish Oasis</a> development in <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developments/palm-beach-qld-4221">Palm Beach</a>, over a year before its anticipated completion.

&nbsp;

Located at 7-9 Sixth Avenue, the $67 million development has resonated strongly with both local owner-occupiers and downsizers seeking high-quality apartments within walking distance of the beach, dining precincts and everyday amenities.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=151449 project_image_fid=357458]

Christie Leet, Founder of <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/sherpa-property-group">Sherpa Group</a>, said the sell-out reflected both the strength of the Palm Beach market and the success of Sherpa's community-first approach to development.

"The sell-out of Oasis is a fantastic outcome and reinforces the strong demand we're seeing for thoughtfully designed apartments in lifestyle locations," Leet said.

"From the outset, our vision was to create a development that genuinely enhanced the Palm Beach community while providing residents with exceptional homes and wellness-focused amenities.

"We've been incredibly encouraged by the level of local support throughout the campaign, 72.5 per cent of buyers are locals, with a significant proportion of purchasers choosing Oasis as their future home rather than an investment."

[smartcode_project:default project_id=151449 project_image_fid=357463]

Construction is now progressing following development approval, with trusted builder LPS Group delivering the project and completion anticipated in Q3 2027.

Oasis forms part of Sherpa Group's successful Flourish collection, which has become recognised for its focus on wellness, community and elevated coastal living.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=151449 project_image_fid=357469]

Residents will have private access to a rooftop amenity space featuring a pool, gym, sauna, steam room, hot and cold plunge pools, spa and barbecue facilities.

"The success of Oasis demonstrates that buyers continue to prioritise quality, location and lifestyle," Leet said.

"We are proud to have delivered a project that has resonated so strongly with the market and look forward to bringing Oasis to life for our future residents."

Sherpa recently launched <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/flourish-soleira-palm-beach-1150-1160-gold-coast-highway-palm-beach-qld-4221">Flourish Soleira</a>, its third instalment of the Flourish brand in Palm Beach following Flourish Oasis and <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/amargo-6-12-sixth-avenue-palm-beach-qld-4221">Flourish Amargo</a>.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=151449]

Sherpa sells out Flourish Oasis in booming Palm Beach

Urban Property Group's <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/la-vera-macquarie-park-94-talavera-road-macquarie-park-nsw-2113">La Vera</a> is leading the next phase of Macquarie Park's residential evolution, with the new apartment development set to become the first of several new apartment projects in the precinct to complete.

The 169-apartment building has now topped out ahead of its scheduled completion in the third quarter of 2026, as new residential investment continues to reshape one of Sydney's largest employment hubs into a true mixed-use precinct.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=134951 project_image_fid=368645]

Cox Architecture has designed La Vera to capture the best of its unique positioning on Talavera Road, orienting the building towards Lane Cove National Park.&nbsp;The building features a sculpted northern façade with flowing curves inspired by the surrounding landscape, while its city-facing elevation adopts a more structured architectural expression to maximise skyline views.

"The vision for the project was to conceive a building that adopted an organic and curvilinear form to the northern portion that faces the Lane Cove National Park," <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/cox-architecture">Cox Architecture</a> Director Felipe Miranda said.

"The residents that reside in the northern portion of the building benefit by having beautifully crafted curved balconies that speak to the natural context and heighten the relationship of their internal living spaces to the external balconies."

[smartcode_project:default project_id=134951 project_image_fid=358802]

La Vera offers a diverse mix of one, two, three, and four-bedroom configurations, with prices currently starting from $740,000. Buyers so far have been a mix of Sydney-based investors,&nbsp;metro commuters, owner-occupiers and downsizers from surrounding North Shore suburbs.

Both investors and owner-occupiers have been drawn to La Vera's proximity to Macquarie University, Macquarie University Hospital, Macquarie Centre and the Sydney Metro, infrastructure that supports both strong rental demand and a convenient lifestyle for residents.

The apartments feature full-height glazing, timber flooring throughout living areas, stone kitchen benchtops, SMEG appliances, floor-to-ceiling bathroom tiling and ducted air conditioning.

Residents will have access to a rooftop recreation level featuring a swimming pool, sauna, barbecue facilities and landscaped relaxation areas, complemented by additional communal space at ground level. Many apartments enjoy uninterrupted views across Lane Cove National Park, reinforcing the project's connection to its natural setting.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=134951 project_image_fid=364551]

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/urban-property-group">Urban Property Group</a>, a family-owned developer and builder with nearly four decades of experience, holds a 4.5-star iCIRT rating and was Australia's first developer to introduce 10-Year Latent Defects Insurance (LDI). La Vera is the first apartment development in <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developments/macquarie-park-nsw-2113">Macquarie Park</a> approved to offer the additional insurance protection, alongside a five-year warranty on SMEG appliances.

Urban Property Group CEO Patrick Elias said the additional protection reflects changing buyer expectations in the off the plan market.

"Consumers are a lot more weary and a lot more concerned in buying off the plan than they ever have been. Having LDI is a tool to portray the confidence that we have in our product, and a confidence we want buyers to share," Elias said.

Following completion of the building later this year, buyers will move into their apartments well before Christmas.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=134951]

La Vera closes in on completion as Macquarie Park continues residential transformation

Brisbane developer Red &amp; Co's decision to include dual key apartments in its debut Gold Coast apartment development, <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/como-varsity-lakes-22-lake-street-varsity-lakes-qld-4227">COMO Varsity Lakes</a>, is proving to be one of the project's biggest drawcards, with buyers quickly snapping up the flexible residences.

More than half of the project's 36 dual key apartments have already sold, helping drive COMO beyond the 50 per cent sold mark within the first month of launch.

The strong response highlights growing demand for apartment designs that can adapt to changing lifestyles, with buyers increasingly looking for homes that accommodate multi-generational living, provide rental income opportunities or simply offer greater flexibility over time.

Located on the shores of Lake Orr, COMO will deliver 156 apartments across 16 levels, with the dual-key residences forming a limited release within the broader development.

Each combines a primary two-bedroom apartment with a fully self-contained studio on a single title, connected by a shared foyer and lockable internal door. The design allows owners to house ageing parents, adult children or guests while maintaining privacy, or lease the secondary residence to generate additional income.

Just 17 of the original 36 dual key apartments remain available.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=135546 project_image_fid=367096]

The innovative configuration combines two fully self-contained residences on a single title, typically comprising a primary two-bedroom apartment alongside a separate studio residence, connected via a shared foyer and lockable internal door.&nbsp;

The model is proving particularly attractive to owner occupiers navigating changing family dynamics and the realities of the current housing crisis.&nbsp;

[smartcode_project:default project_id=135546 project_image_fid=363511]

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/project-marketer/npa">NPA</a>&nbsp;CEO Andrew Erwin said dual key living was resonating strongly with modern buyers because it delivered both financial flexibility and practical lifestyle benefits.&nbsp;

“The housing crisis and rising cost of living are fundamentally changing how Australians think about home ownership,” Erwin said.&nbsp;

“Dual key apartments provide a genuine solution for families who want to stay connected while maintaining independence. Parents can help adult children save for a future home, ageing parents can remain nearby without moving into aged care, and owners still retain privacy and flexibility.

“Importantly, buyers are also recognising the financial advantages. It creates the opportunity to generate additional income from part of the home without the holding costs associated with owning a separate investment property.”&nbsp;

[smartcode_project:default project_id=135546 project_image_fid=363509]

Unlike traditional dual occupancy arrangements, the residences operate under a single title, meaning owners only incur one set of body corporate fees, council rates and holding costs.&nbsp;

The secondary residence can also evolve over time - functioning as guest accommodation, a home office, creative studio or private retreat before later becoming an income-producing asset.

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/red-co">Red &amp; Co</a>&nbsp;Director and Co-Founder David Laverty said the strong early sales reflected growing buyer urgency and changing priorities within the market.&nbsp;

“Securing more than half of COMO’s residences within such a short timeframe is an outstanding result and a clear endorsement of both the design and location,” Laverty said.&nbsp;

“Buyers are responding to the combination of location, connectivity and amenity, but ultimately it’s value relative to other East Coast markets that is driving enquiry.”&nbsp;

“We’re also seeing strong interest from owner occupiers looking for homes that can adapt with them over time. Flexibility has become one of the most important considerations for buyers in today’s market.”&nbsp;

[smartcode_project:default project_id=135546 project_image_fid=363515]

Designed by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/bda-architecture">BDA Architecture</a>, COMO features a mix of one-, two- and three-bedroom residences with 2.7-metre ceilings and larger-format floorplans aimed at owner occupiers, downsizers and lifestyle-focused buyers.&nbsp;

The development will feature an extensive rooftop recreation and wellness offering including a 25-metre lap pool, sundeck, barbecue and dining areas, gym, sauna, plunge baths, landscaped gardens, wellness spaces and rooftop pickleball and paddleball courts.

The remaining dual key apartments range from 137 sqm to 167 sqm and include generous three-bedroom layouts with separate self-contained studio accommodation and dual parking.&nbsp;

Erwin said the dual key concept represented a broader shift in how Australians would live in the future.

“People want homes that can evolve with their lives,” he said.&nbsp;

“A dual key apartment can suit a family today, support an ageing parent tomorrow, and potentially generate income later on. That adaptability is becoming incredibly valuable in the current environment.”

Prices currently range from $2,115,750 to $2,583,000.&nbsp;

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=135546]

Inter-generational living drives demand for COMO’s dual key apartments as housing pressures reshape buyer priorities 

Builder-developer&nbsp;<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/ceerose">Ceerose</a> has doubled down on its Leichhardt ambitions, lodging its second State Significant Development Application (SSDA) in the suburb in the last six months.

Their newest proposal seeks to transform a former industrial precinct into a new residential community centred around the adaptive reuse of one of the site's heritage warehouse buildings.

The new project, on a 6,930 sqm block at&nbsp;<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/40-76-william-street-leichhardt-nsw-2040">40–76 William Street</a>, will bring more than 200 apartments to a suburb that has seen little to no new supply in recent years. It follows Ceerose's late 2025 SSDA for a mixed-use apartment project on nearby Parramatta Road, signalling the developer's growing investment in Sydney's Inner West.

Ceerose Founder Edward Doueihi told Apartments.com.au the developer’s long-standing presence in Leichhardt and the Inner West had given it a strong understanding of how the area has evolved and where its future opportunities lie.

“Ceerose has had a long-standing presence in Leichhardt and the Inner West, giving us a unique understanding of the area’s evolution and future potential,” Doueihi said.

“Having delivered projects throughout the region, we have witnessed the suburb’s transformation first-hand and understand the opportunities for its continued growth.”

Doueihi said that understanding also informed the planning process, with a comprehensive Stakeholder Engagement Outcomes Report prepared before the application was lodged.

The report identified the key issues and concerns raised by neighbouring residents and other stakeholders, allowing those matters to be considered and incorporated into the design where appropriate.

He said the delivery of additional housing would also play an important role in supporting the revitalisation of Norton Street and the Italian Forum.

“By increasing the local residential population, the development is expected to strengthen demand for local businesses, encourage further investment, and help restore the vibrancy that made the precinct a thriving destination in the early 2000s.”

<img alt="First look: Ceerose returns to Leichhardt with 203-apartment adaptive reuse proposal at former warehouse site" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="7258c54c-8167-479e-8361-2d5fca9915b4" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Appendix%2010B%20-%20CGI%20-%20View%202.jpg?VersionId=S9DQfxu_jpcB5LrAEYFUbyMzg5odW6i5" />

Designed by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/woods-bagot">Woods Bagot</a>, the redevelopment would involve the demolition of four existing industrial buildings while retaining and adaptively reusing the site's most significant warehouse. The retained structure would anchor a new residential precinct comprising five interconnected buildings arranged around a large central landscaped courtyard, with heights stepping from five storeys along the surrounding residential streets to 11 storeys at the William Street corner.

According to the Architecture Design Report by Woods Bagot, the proposal "seeks to create a residential village centred around a generous green heart while celebrating the site's industrial heritage through the adaptive reuse of the existing warehouse building."

The development would comprise 203 apartments, with 188 proposed as build-to-sell residences, alongside 15 affordable housing apartments.

Rather than treating the retained warehouse as a standalone heritage object, Woods Bagot has sought to weave the site's industrial history throughout the masterplan. The proposal retains the north and west facades of the landmark corner warehouse, while new buildings reinterpret the site's brick-and-steel industrial language through their material palette and architectural expression.

<img alt="First look: Ceerose returns to Leichhardt with 203-apartment adaptive reuse proposal at former warehouse site" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="9e8c64c2-881b-49e1-8c90-6b6acaaa45b6" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Appendix%2010C%20-%20CGI%20-%20View%203.jpg?VersionId=Qm8_8H_Xrg_sc4Mdjc59vlAcKF_5wRTb" />

The design is organised around what Woods Bagot describes as a "green heart", a landscaped communal open space that reinstates the leafy character removed when the site became an industrial storage facility. A new pedestrian laneway running through the site would improve permeability between William, North and Francis streets, linking residents through landscaped public spaces while activating the ground plane.

Residents would have access to communal gardens and shared recreation areas distributed throughout the development. Sustainability has also been prioritised, with the project targeting an average 7.9-star NatHERS rating. Proposed initiatives include rooftop solar generation, rainwater harvesting, passive solar design, naturally ventilated lobbies, extensive cross-ventilation and the reuse of existing building fabric to reduce embodied carbon.

The adaptive reuse strategy became a defining feature of the application after heritage investigations found only one of the site's industrial buildings could feasibly be retained. The Heritage Impact Statement concludes that preserving the key warehouse façades while referencing the site's industrial character throughout the new development provides an appropriate balance between renewal and conservation.

<img alt="First look: Ceerose returns to Leichhardt with 203-apartment adaptive reuse proposal at former warehouse site" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="efffafdb-594f-4e2b-a067-921fd51c05e1" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Appendix%2010D%20-%20CGI%20-%20View%204.jpg?VersionId=DPmE4.k16YRt0i27hEZVtJAffarpvUfx" />

"Retention and adaptation of the site buildings has been explored but found not to be feasible except for the tallest building, whose street facades will be retained," the heritage report states.

"The proposed building will interpret the brick and steel character of the subject site, including reuse of some components and construction of a large 'sawtooth' structure in the proposed open space."

<img alt="First look: Ceerose returns to Leichhardt with 203-apartment adaptive reuse proposal at former warehouse site" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="3bfef2b5-83f5-40cd-9cab-767092f34266" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Appendix%2010E%20-%20CGI%20-%20View%205.jpg?VersionId=7asb3i_ql4ybbuJOUb5UHBEIy0Q9t.DF" />

The William Street site is located around 300 metres from Leichhardt North Light Rail station and a short walk to Norton Street's retail, dining and hospitality precinct. The surrounding area has increasingly become a focus for urban renewal given its proximity to public transport and the Parramatta Road corridor.

Doueihi founded Ceerose in 1998 and has grown the business to become one of Sydney's more active apartment developers in recent years, with completed projects including The Alex Collective in Alexandria, Abbie's Lane in Annandale, and the award-winning Munro House in Elizabeth Bay. They are currently delivering Belgravia, 17 luxury apartments in Potts Point.

First look: Ceerose doubles down in Leichhardt with adaptive reuse of former warehouse site

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