The first partnership between national developer <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/fortis">Fortis</a> and Adelaide-based developer <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/otello">Otello</a> has made a strong start, with the pair securing $21 million in unconditional sales at <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/one-four-four-hutt-adelaide-144-hutt-street-adelaide-sa-5000">One Four Four Hutt</a>&nbsp;on the edge of the Adelaide CBD.

Over a third of apartments have been snapped up in the boutique 44-apartment project on the corner of Hutt Stret and Wakefield Road. Local downsizers and owner-occupiers wanting to remain in Adelaide's tightly-held southeast quarter have been the most prominent purchasers.

The DKO-designed, mixed-use development is one of the few new apartment projects in the precinct, an area where new housing supply has remained limited despite continued demand from buyers wanting to stay close to the CBD, Victoria Park and Adelaide's established east-end amenities.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=151233 project_image_fid=375378]

Fortis Head of Development SA Arthur Dendrinos said the early sales reflected both the strength of the local owner-occupier market and confidence in the Hutt Street location.

"The level of early commitment reflects the confidence local buyers have in the Hutt Street precinct," Dendrinos said.

"Many purchasers are long-term east-end residents who love the area and want to stay connected to the neighbourhood. They recognise the value of a well-designed, well-located development.

"Our partnership with Otello has been central to this success, and the number of unconditional sales at this stage only strengthens our confidence in the South Australian market."

&nbsp;

[smartcode_project:default project_id=151233 project_image_fid=375379]

Otello Director Daniel Harris said the sales result also highlighted the lack of new apartment opportunities within the Hutt Street precinct.

"One Four Four Hutt has clearly resonated with buyers, with strong early sales reflecting both the appeal of the Hutt Street corridor and the lifestyle on offer," Harris said.

"The activated ground-floor retail has also been a key drawcard, with purchasers responding to the vision of a more vibrant and connected streetscape, not just the residences themselves."

One Four Four Hutt will deliver 44 one, two and three-bedroom apartments, alongside a collection of penthouses, above a ground-floor retail offering designed to further activate the Hutt Street precinct.

Construction is scheduled to commence in the third quarter of this year, with completion anticipated in 2028.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=151233]

Fortis Head of Development SA Arthur Dendrinos said the early sales reflected both the strength of the local owner-occupier market and confidence in the Hutt Street location.

Joel Robinson

Fortis makes Adelaide debut with Otello as One Four Four Hutt records strong early sales

For all its prestige, Roseville hasn't seen many new apartment developments that genuinely cater to the suburb's owner-occupier market.

Most new projects on Sydney's North Shore have focused on increasing supply, but Aqualand Prestige's <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/boronia-by-aqualand-roseville-2-4-larkin-street-roseville-nsw-2069">Boronia</a> is taking a different approach.

The 111-apartment project on Larkin Street has been designed around a buyer who already knows the area, whether they're downsizing from a nearby family home, upgrading from an older apartment, or moving into the suburb to be closer to schools and transport.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=152095 project_image_fid=372391]

Boronia is the first project from Aqualand Prestige, the boutique residential division of Aqualand, the developer behind projects including AURA in North Sydney and Blue at Lavender Bay. The project is being delivered in partnership with Phoenix Property Investors.

Rather than trying to maximise density, the focus has been on creating apartments that feel much closer to a house. There's a strong weighting towards larger three-bedroom residences, alongside a limited collection of four-bedroom duplex-style sky homes, a product that's rarely delivered in apartment projects on the Upper North Shore.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=152095 project_image_fid=373694]

Architecture firm Woods Bagot has designed the building to sit within Roseville's established tree canopy rather than dominate it. The building steps down the site with deep balconies, generous setbacks and a material palette of masonry and natural stone that reflects the suburb's established character.

"The forms float among the canopies along the Larkin Street ridge to maximise the outlook across the green sea of the treetops," Woods Bagot Principal Jason Fraser said.

"The architecture is deliberately simple and understated, so that the detail, the craftsmanship and, above all, the landscape can be the hero."

[smartcode_project:default project_id=152095 project_image_fid=373685]

The same approach continues inside.

Interiors by COX take inspiration from the surrounding bushland of Lane Cove National Park, using natural stone, timber and handcrafted finishes throughout the residences. Kitchens feature Gaggenau and Bosch appliances, while the penthouse collection includes upgraded stone finishes and bespoke detailing.

"We wanted the homes to feel like an urban retreat, where the boundary between inside and out simply dissolves," COX Director Brooke Lloyd said.

Landscape architecture by Ground iNK extends that connection outdoors, with mature tree planting, deep soil landscaping and retained established street trees helping the development blend into one of Sydney's leafiest suburbs.

Residents will also have access to landscaped communal gardens, a wellness centre and outdoor spaces designed more as an extension of their own homes than traditional apartment amenities.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=152095 project_image_fid=373687]

The location is another reason Aqualand Prestige believes Boronia will resonate with buyers.

Roseville Station is around a five-minute walk away, placing Chatswood just one stop down the line, while the Sydney CBD remains within easy commuting distance. The suburb also sits within the NSW Government's Transport Oriented Development precinct, where planning changes are encouraging more housing around existing rail infrastructure.

Despite those planning reforms, opportunities to secure a new apartment in Roseville remain relatively limited, particularly developments aimed at owner-occupiers rather than investors.

Aqualand Prestige Executive Director Wayne Xiong said Boronia was designed for buyers intending to stay for the long term.

"These are homes built for decades of living rather than for the moment," Xiong said.

"Whether buyers are downsizing, raising a family or simply seeking more space, they're choosing the scale and craftsmanship of a fine house in a suburb they love, with the ease and connectivity modern life calls for."

Boronia's two-bedroom apartments are priced from $1.79 million, three-bedrooms from $2.49 million, penthouses from $2.85 million, and four-bedroom duplex-style Sky Homes from $4.5 million.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=152095]

Aqualand Prestige launches Boronia to undersupplied Roseville apartment market

For most new apartment buildings, the Owners Corporation starts life with little more than a bank account and the first quarterly strata levies.

At <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/buildings/9-gay-street-castle-hill-9-gay-street-castle-hill-nsw-2154">9 Gay Street</a> in <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developments/castle-hill-nsw-2154">Castle Hill</a>, it starts with around $7 million in reserve.

It's an unusual legacy of what was once one of Sydney's highest-profile apartment remediation projects. When the development, originally known as Skyview and built by disgraced developer Top Place, came under scrutiny by then NSW Building Commissioner David Chandler, an $11 million remediation bond was negotiated to ensure any building defects could be fully rectified.

The building underwent an 18-month remediation program, during which around $4 million of that bond was spent bringing the building up to the standard it should have been in from the outset.

After extensive inspections, all active rectification orders have been lifted. What's more, around $7.2 million remains secured for the Owners Corporation for the next 15 years.

In a twist few would have predicted, what began as a significant concern for purchasers has left the building with something almost unheard of in the apartment market: a multi-million-dollar financial reserve from day one.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=147685 project_image_fid=359136]

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/project-marketer/equitifund-group">Equitifund</a> Executive Chairman Greg Huxley said the structure offers buyers a level of certainty that is difficult to replicate.

"The $11 million bond established for the Skyview Castle Hill development represents exceptional value, providing genuine financial security for purchasers," Huxley said.

"Unlike a standard insurance policy, this bond consists of real funds held in trust for the Owners Corporation, offering a tangible layer of protection and added peace of mind."

The apartments themselves have been designed with a focus on practical, contemporary living. Interiors feature Smeg appliances, stone benchtops, tiled living areas, carpeted bedrooms, 2.7-metre ceilings, floor-to-ceiling glazing, and ducted heating and cooling throughout.

Residents also have access to a range of shared amenities, including two rooftop barbecue areas, a swimming pool, children's playgrounds, secure building access, storage cages, and visitor parking.

The location continues to be one of the project's strongest drawcards. Castle Hill Metro Station sits virtually on the doorstep, providing direct connections across Sydney's expanding Metro network, while Castle Towers offers extensive retail, dining, entertainment, and service amenities within walking distance.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=147685 project_image_fid=359127]

The building, now named after its location at 9 Gay Street, comprises a diverse mix of one-, two-, and three-bedroom apartments starting from just under $600,000.

Equitifund National Sales Director Ben Hamblett said demand in the Hills District continues to be driven by buyers seeking convenience and connectivity.

"Interest from both owner-occupiers and investors in Castle Hill remains exceptionally strong, with buyers consistently prioritising developments in close proximity to the Metro station and Castle Towers Shopping Centre," Hamblett said.

"There is a clear trend in the market, with purchasers seeking convenient access to transport and lifestyle amenities that support a seamless, low-maintenance way of living."

On top of the long-term protection afforded by the remaining $7.2 million bond, Equitifund is offering a limited-time stamp duty rebate on selected apartments.

Eligible purchasers can also secure finance options, including a 3.99 per cent two-year variable rate, loan-to-value ratios of up to 90 per cent, and interest-only lending options through EquitiCredit.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=147685]

Why this Castle Hill apartment building starts with a $7 million advantage

For much of the past few years, conversations about Australia's property market have centred on the rapid growth seen in Sydney, Brisbane, Gold Coast, and Perth. <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developments/melbourne-vic-3004">Melbourne</a> has followed a different trajectory.

That relative underperformance is now encouraging some buyers to reassess the city, particularly those willing to look beyond short-term market movements and focus on quality property in established locations, along with the long-term growth prospects of a city expected to overtake Sydney as Australia’s most populous.

John Bekiaris, Research &amp; Market Insights at <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/project-marketer/equitifund-group">Projects by Equitifund</a>, said Melbourne's current position is attracting increasingly sophisticated purchasers.

"Melbourne continues to present one of Australia's strongest long-term investment stories," Bekiaris says.

"While other capital cities have experienced stronger recent growth, that relative underperformance is exactly what's attracting sophisticated counter-cyclical investors."

[smartcode_project:default project_id=1979 project_image_fid=363268]

Equitifund isn't just commenting on Melbourne's property market, it's investing in it.

The Sydney-headquartered capital partner has taken over the remaining apartments at <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/buildings/victoriana-melbourne-20-queens-road-melbourne-vic-3004">Victoriana</a>, the recently completed glass-encased development opposite Albert Park Lake in Melbourne's tightly held St Kilda Road precinct.

Designed by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/rothelowman">Rothelowman</a> and built by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/builders/hickory">Hickory</a>, Victoriana places residents between one of Melbourne's most recognised parklands and the CBD, offering oversized two and three-bedroom apartments aimed at owner-occupiers seeking a genuine alternative to a traditional family home.

The development comprises 232 completed residences alongside a suite of resident amenities, including a 25-metre indoor swimming pool, gymnasium, landscaped entertaining areas, resident lounges, EV charging, secure basement parking and a concierge-style arrival experience.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=1979 project_image_fid=363229]

The apartments have been designed with owner-occupiers firmly in mind.&nbsp;Open-plan living and dining areas flow onto generous balconies framing views across Albert Park Lake, Fawkner Park, the Royal Botanic Gardens and the Melbourne skyline.

Kitchens feature Gaggenau appliances, stone benchtops and generous preparation space. Bedrooms include built-in robes, while bathrooms feature full-height textured tiling. Hardwood flooring and ducted air conditioning complete residences designed for long-term living.

Rothelowman's architecture takes its cues from the landscape opposite the site. Sweeping horizontal glazing references the movement of Albert Park Lake, while generous balconies and expansive glazing strengthen the connection between the apartments and the surrounding parklands. The result is a building designed to deliver the scale and amenity expected of luxury apartment living, while offering the larger floorplans increasingly sought by owner-occupiers.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=1979 project_image_fid=363284]

The location is one of Victoriana's defining characteristics. Positioned on Queens Road, residents are directly opposite Albert Park Lake and within easy reach of Fawkner Park, the Royal Botanic Gardens, South Melbourne, St Kilda Road and the CBD. With few comparable development opportunities remaining in the precinct, buyers are increasingly placing value on outlooks that are unlikely to be interrupted by future construction.

Greg Huxley, Founder of Equitifund, believes those qualities become even more valuable over time.

"Premium real estate has always rewarded buyers who take a long-term view," Huxley said.

"Victoriana represents the kind of asset that's increasingly difficult to recreate today, particularly in an established location like Queens Road."

He said rising construction costs are also changing the way buyers assess completed developments.

"When you combine an irreplaceable location with thoughtful architecture and premium finishes, you create something that becomes increasingly difficult to reproduce as construction costs continue to rise."

[smartcode_project:default project_id=1979 project_image_fid=363228]

According to National Sales Director Ben Hamblett, enquiry has been driven largely by Melbourne downsizers and buyers upgrading from smaller apartments.

"Interest in Victoriana continues to build, with strong buyer focus on the larger owner-occupier residences within the development," Hamblett says.

"Enquiry is increasingly driven by local buyers who recognise the rarity of what's on offer: park-facing apartments in an established neighbourhood where new development opportunities are becoming increasingly scarce. At Victoriana, the view is not just a feature; it's an appreciating asset in its own right."

He said interstate enquiry has also strengthened as buyers reassess Melbourne's position within the national property cycle.

"Melbourne currently stands as the most compelling entry point of any major Australian capital, and discerning buyers are beginning to recognise what those who move early always understand: the best opportunities are taken before the price rise confirms them."

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=1979]

Why now is the time to buy in Melbourne's premium apartment market

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

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

Home Ownership

<html><body>
Figures released from the 2016 Census of Population and Housing by the ABS shows the proportion of those owning their own homes outright has declined, falling to 31 percent in 2016 compared to 41.1 percent in 1991.
Census data released today shows residents with mortgages now account for 34.5 percent of the total, up from 27.5 per cent in 1991.
The census also found renters account for 30.9 percent, up from 26.9 percent in 1991.
"Australia's highest mortgages are paid by Sydneysiders, whose median repayments are around $2200 per month," the census found.
Home ownership dropped faster in Sydney than the national average, the latest census figures show.
Total dwelling ownership in the NSW capital dropped to 62.3 per cent in 2016 from 65.2 per cent five years earlier as both outright and mortgage-ownership fell. 
The nationwide home ownership rate dropped 1.5 per cent to 65.5 per cent between 2011 and 2016, but there were notable differences from city to city.
Nationally, home ownership fell to 65.5 per cent since the last census from 67 per cent. 
Darwin mortgages also sit around $2200 per month.
Canberra is next with $2100 per month, followed by Perth ($1950) and Brisbane ($1800). Melburnians pay $1750 per cent, while those in Adelaide pay $1500, just head of Hobart with $1450.
Similarly rents are highest in Sydney -- $440 per week - followed by Darwin ($420) and Melbourne ($350).
Sydney remains the most most expensive city with 14.2 percent of residents devoting more than 30 percent of their incomes on rents.
The proportion of tenants in Sydney increased from 31.6 per cent in 2011 to 34.1 per cent in 2016, making them the most dominant group in the city. Home owners with a mortgage declined from 34.8 per cent to 33.2 per cent. Fewer Sydneysiders owned their home outright – down to 29.1 per cent from 30.4 per cent in 2011.
The ABS Census noted we’re still a nation of home owners, or aspirational home owners, with 31 percent of Australian homes owned outright and 34 percent owned with a mortgage – leaving 31 percent being rented.
While separate houses still account for most homes in Australia (72 percent), there’s been a large increase in other forms of dwelling, such as flats, apartments, semi-detached, row housing or town housing, which now make up more than a quarter (26 percent) of Australian housing – all higher density residential development. 
"Of the 8.3 million occupied private dwellings, seven in 10 housed families (69 percent by one family and 1.9 percent by multiple families), one in four were one-person households, and one in 25 were group households," the Census papers noted.
The nation's diversity is also reaching what the bureau described as "a tipping point" - with 49.3 per cent of the population either born overseas, or born to parents who were born overseas.
Around 50.7 per cent described themselves as "third-generation" or more.
While the biggest number of overseas-born Australians still started life in either England or New Zealand, the last decade has seen the largest number of migrants coming from India (accounting for 13.7 per cent); China (13.3 per cent), followed by England (7.9 per cent), NZ (7.7) and The Phillipines (6 per cent).
Around 2 million migrants live in NSW - accounting for 28 per cent of that state's resident population.
Another 1.7 million live in Victoria (28 per cent of the total), followed by 1.02 million in Queensland (22 per cent), 797,000 in Western Australia (32 per cent), 384,097 in South Australia (26 per cent) and 61,240 in Tasmania (12 per cent).
</body></html>

j.ballantyne1990-6AQqhLzZaK

Australia's highest mortgages paid by Sydneysiders as ownership slips: ABS Census 2016

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

prateek24-ezbwHMbNAk

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

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/74926/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">GUEST OBSERVER
 They’ve saved a deposit of A$70,000 each and want to buy the same type of apartment in the same block.
Lee is able to buy off the plan with a mortgage and receive a First Home Owner Grant. Sarah is not.
What’s the difference? Sarah could be any one of 660,000-plus Australians with an intellectual disability.
<h2 class="caption">Barriers at every turn</h2>
People with intellectual disability face so many barriers to finding a home of their own that it’s hard to pick one.
Rates of unemployment and underemployment are high. Only 23% are wage or salary earners, and around one-third of these work for less than 15 hours per week.
And pay rates, according to the Australian Human Rights Commission, are “extraordinarily low”. In other words, a mortgage is largely off-limits.
For most, family support then becomes a precondition for acquiring a home. But, if family earnings have been negatively affected by their supporting responsibilities, financial assistance may not be possible.
If funds are available, one option is to create a family trust. For Sarah, a family member could acquire the apartment and act as a guarantor on a mortgage. However, unlike Lee, Sarah couldn’t get the first home owner and stamp duty concessions, which are not available under a family trust arrangement.
On the other hand, she could get Commonwealth Rent Assistance, as she would count as a renter not an owner.
Another option is for Sarah’s family to set up a “special disability trust”. This would enable her to have access to first home owner concessions, although that would require confirmation from the revenue office of the relevant state or territory.
Even then, opening a special disability trust is onerous. It requires specialist legal and accounting advice. Annual fees and reporting requirements would quickly outweigh any first home owner concessions. Further, the beneficiary can’t pay rent to the trust, which would otherwise serve as a proxy for servicing a mortgage.
A third option is to help Sarah buy a home in her own name. However, many people with intellectual disability are unlikely to reach the threshold of mental competency required under current law. The person may then need to be placed under guardianship or trusteeship.
This raises a host of human rights concerns and has the potential to further disempower the person. First home owner concessions may be available to guardians on the person’s behalf, depending on the state or territory. But, again, discovering this information tends to require specialised legal advice.
Victoria has the unusual option of appointing “supportive attorneys”. The supporter doesn’t take over decision-making, but instead helps the person by gathering information. This can be a way to avoid removing legal capacity. Yet, it appears, supportive attorneys cannot assist with the acquisition of property.
In short, all options come at a significant cost to the person or their family.
The one measure that is possibly useful for Sarah – claiming rent assistance for a property owned by a family trust – appears to exist by accident rather than design.
<h2 class="caption">Unequal and a waste of taxpayer dollars</h2>
The lack of support for acquiring a home drives people with intellectual disability into group homes, either state-run or for-profit.
While these facilities may be acceptable for some, for many they perpetuate what Gerard Goggin and Christopher Newell describe as “social apartheid”. They also make people vulnerable to abuse and marginalisation.. Nowhere is this more evident than on the ABC’s Four Corners report this week.
Group homes are also expensive. In New South Wales, the average total cost to house a group-home resident, according to the Social Policy Research Centre, is $137,000 per year. That is $2,634 per week.
Ask most people with intellectual disability and their families to suggest better ways to spend $137,000 per year, and I’m sure they’ll have suggestions for wiser public spending.
Current mindsets are fixated on congregate-care models, such as group homes, as well as highly professionalised models that cost enormous amounts.
Social housing is another option, but Sarah would have to join the nearly 200,000 Australians on a waiting list. Even if she did manage to get a home this way, it is questionable whether being congregated with other disadvantaged groups will improve her chances of social inclusion.
No wonder people are seeking alternatives.
<h2 class="caption">Low-cost and no-cost solutions</h2>
As a starting point, state and federal governments could easily provide clear information about the various options available to people with intellectual disabilities who wish to acquire a home. People shouldn’t need law degrees to know their options.
Procedural equality could be improved by giving access to first home owner concessions to people with a disability who acquire a home through a family trust. For those needing funds for a mortgage, government-subsidised co-ownership schemes could be a great help.
These solutions should not replace efforts to improve employment rates, access to mortgages and all the typical pathways to home ownership. To help open up these pathways, people with intellectual disability would need to be able to buy a home with support and safeguards.
Funds should be re-invested from congregate care to the ongoing costs of supporting people with an intellectual disability to live in their own home.
Housing policy has tended to overlook home ownership for people with intellectual disability, which suggests the “soft bigotry of low expectations” is at play.
Barriers to housing for people with intellectual disability don’t seem to have been driven by malice. Instead, these barriers emerged from countless decisions not to afford them equal opportunities. Each barrier on its own seems unfortunate; together they appear tantamount to neglect and discrimination.
Piers Gooding a Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the Melbourne Social Equity Institute, University of Melbourne and author for The Conversation. He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/piers-gooding-207492" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

The forgotten 660,000 Australians locked out of home ownership: Piers Gooding

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
The appointment of Gladys Berejiklian as NSW Premier and her suggestion to review all options to address housing affordability should provide some optimism for a generation of young Australians who have a very real fear that owning their own home is fast (if not already) slipping beyond their reach.
As it stands, in Sydney the average home costs 12 times the average household income (20 years ago this was only four times), stamp duty tax has increased by a jaw-dropping 750 per cent over that same period in NSW and while building approvals in metropolitan areas is on the rise, lower interest and strong population growth have combined to increase demand for property faster than we can supply them. Throw this all into a melting pot and what we are left with is; a housing affordability crisis.
So in search of answers, LJ Hooker conducted a survey of more than 2,600 property owners which found that stamp duty was a major factor in the decision making process for those looking to sell and buy property.
The survey found that 51 percent of home owners that received an appraisal by a real estate agent but did not subsequently list their property for sale, would, in fact, do so if stamp duty was lower. This figure rose to 61 per cent if stamp duty was abolished altogether.
These numbers highlight the chokehold the current stamp duty tax has on the secondary market; Australians families would like to sell, move and relocate but cannot afford the cost of transacting. According to our data the reduction or removal of stamp duty will see more properties come onto the market, which in turn will help balance the current supply and demand issue.
But solving housing affordability is not a one-step process, nor is there one bandaid answer. Instead, state and federal governments should work together to look at a number of solutions which could elevate housing stress, so our children’s children will be able to afford property in all the major cities across Australia.
Here at LJ Hooker, we think these changes to the below three policy areas will help the likes of Premier Berejiklian, and her kin across Australia solve housing affordability issues:
1. Affordable housing
Recent strong price growth across our capital cities has seen low-income and essential service workers such as teachers, nurses and emergency service workers priced out of most inner city markets. However, these areas still require the services that these workers provide.
The provision of affordable housing for these low and middle-income families is required to ensure a diverse range of households have access to housing across all areas of our capital cities. 
However, at present, it has not been feasible for developers to provide affordable solutions. The government, therefore, needs to step in with incentives to ensure the delivery of affordable housing can occur. After all having nurses live near hospitals, and teachers live near schools just makes sense.
2. Removal of stamp duty
The high cost of selling, buying and moving home has reached a point where people are reconsidering and/or delaying their next property move. Recent strong price growth, and the fact that stamp duty is calculated on the value of the property, means that it has reached a point where it is having a big impact on the budgets of property buyers.
The scrapping of stamp duty would directly assist housing affordability by helping increase the mobility of the population and encourage owner-occupiers to upsize and downgrade into a property that suits their changing needs without being slogged with an exorbitant tax. This will insure more properties become available for sale, helping balance supply with demand and insuring more families get to grow up in their home of choice.
3. Regionalisation and decentralisation of government services and businesses
The growing population across all capital cities and the increasing cost of providing infrastructure to the masses mean that decentralisation of businesses, households and government departments is becoming essential.
With more than 90 per cent of the Australian population living in capital cities, there is a need to incentivise businesses to relocate, or start-up, some or all, of their business in our major and minor regional centres.
This regionalisation will boost the economies of these smaller regions and provide employees access to more affordable housing in these areas. It will also elevate some stress and demand on infrastructure, services and housing in capital cities.
We look to our politicians and decision makers to take these policies under consideration. Inaction will only perpetuate the issues faced by Australian families. Their needs to be decisive structural change to make the long-held Australian dream of home ownership a reality for all Australian families and individuals. 
Grant Harrod is chief executive officer of JL Hooker and can be contacted <a href="https://about.ljhooker.com.au/leadership-team" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Three solutions to the housing affordability crisis: LJ Hooker's Grant Harrod

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/65465/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
Australia’s long run of “home ownership for all” appears to have ended. 
Smashed avocado aside, young people are now much less likely than their parents to ever own their own home. Almost one-third of the nation rents, mainly from private landlords. 
Governments have gradually shifted the focus of welfare away from public housing and towards subsidising housing in the private rental market. At last count, around 1.3 million households were receiving government rental assistance – that’s around one in five Australian households receiving on average A$128 per fortnight. 
As the private rental sector expands and the cost of housing rises, it is important to acknowledge that the effects of unaffordable housing cascade into other areas of life, in particular, mental health. 
Our research has found unaffordable housing has a negative effect on mental health. And it’s worse for private renters than those with a mortgage. When lower-income private renters’ housing becomes unaffordable, their mental health worsens. This doesn’t seem to happen for people on similar incomes paying a mortgage. 
It’s different in the UK. Our cross-national comparison conducted before austerity measures were taken in the UK suggested more generous benefits and conditions may have protected their lower-income private renters from the mental health effects experienced by their counterparts in Australia. 
While this work highlights the potential protective effect of affordable housing, recent changes in the UK as a result of austerity measures may have taken the Brits backwards. 
<h2>A ‘natural experiment’</h2>
A recently published analysis tracked the effect of a national reduction to government-provided rent assistance in the UK. 
In April 2011, austerity measures in the UK resulted in a reduction of the rental housing assistance payment. This meant that incomes for rent assistance recipients fell, on average, by approximately £1,220 (A$2,000) per year. Some people experienced much smaller declines, but many witnessed much larger reductions in their housing benefit. 
Although not without methodological challenges, the research found reduced government support to meet housing costs has a negative impact on people’s mental health. The policy caused a measureable population-wide increase in depressive symptoms, with around 26,000 people experiencing symptoms for the first time.
<h2>Lessons for Australia</h2>
Affordable housing is an effective health intervention. Australia has some of the world’s least affordable housing, and while we debate the solutions to this (such as removing negative gearing), government assistance to meet housing costs protects many people from poor mental health, and possibly, depression. 
As World Medical Association president Professor Michael Marmot argues, housing is a form of preventative health care. The one in five Australian households relying on government assistance to pay their rent are currently receiving this form of preventative health care. 
Households that receive private rent assistance gain more than just shelter. Rent assistance may allow people to live nearer to good schools, buy healthier food for their kids, and provide some residential stability. It also protects their mental health. 
Cuts to private rent assistance may do the opposite: pushing people away from good schools, leaving them without adequate food, and exposing them to housing insecurity. As the UK work shows, even slight changes to policy can have major (and often unintended) effects, particularly for mental health. The most economically vulnerable are likely to be disproportionately affected. 
As we enter an era of substantial reassessment of the structure of welfare in Australia, this UK research highlights the importance of harnessing natural experiments to systematically test the outcomes of broad policy change, and develop evidence on which to build better health into the future. 
While Australia’s cohort of private renters grows and housing affordability stress escalates, we need to ensure that health, well-being and productivity are supported. We need to address the structural factors that contribute to our housing affordability crisis. We also need to support people who are disadvantaged by it. We shouldn’t underestimate the importance of getting housing right.
Rebecca Bentley is associate professor, Centre for Health Equity, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/rebecca-bentley-173502" target="_blank">here</a>.
Aaron Reeves is associate professorial research fellow in Poverty and Inequality, London School of Economics and Political Science and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/aaron-reeves-298453" target="_blank">here</a>.
Emma Baker is associate professor, School of Architecture and Built Environment, University of Adelaide and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/emma-baker-172081" target="_blank">here</a>.
All are authors for The Conversation.
</body></html>

Housing: the hidden health intervention

<html><body>
NAB-owned digital bank UBank has launched an ad campaign featuring terminally ill Australians who talk about rethinking priorities on assets and not take on too much debt.
The ad says it is a ‘unique perspective on the Australian dream’.
UBank chief executive Lee Hatton says the advertisement, produced with support from Palliative Care Australia by the ad agency, The Monkeys has been designed to encourage viewers to question their choices when it comes to taking on too much debt, according to an article in The Australian Financial Review.
"We think it's important that Australians start thinking about borrowing less and living more. It's not morbid, there's actually a really positive message in there," Hatton said.
The ad begins with a dark line by Julie, one of the terminally ill group. “When you are given a death sentence, you really evaluate what it's all about,” she says. 
Five more terminally ill Australians speak about the pitfalls of taking on too much debt and working away all your life to repay that. 
‘It’s not about bricks and mortar, it’s about what you put into those bricks and mortar,’ says one of them in the ad, which closes with the punchline ‘Borrow less, live more.”
In the film the group speak of coming to terms with their illnesses and then reflecting on how their priorities had changed, with a focus on big ticket items such as cars and houses.
UBank will be pushing the campaign through traditional channels and social media. The video can be found at ubank.com.au/home-truths.
Mike Hill, the film’s director, has worked on a number of projects that focused on people nearing the end of their lives. 
"It's an exploration of the Australian dream and it's really refreshing to hear people calling that out and saying 'Hey maybe that really big mortgage, that big house with all the bells and whistles isn't that important to your quality of life'," Hill said.
UBank previously ran a campaign that tried to reframe the concept of home ownership to include apartments after conducting research that showed large numbers of young people had given up on "the great Australian dream".
The digital-only bank does not lend on loan-to-valuation ratios of more than 80 percent.
It has 350,000 customers.
To view the campaign, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCmRY0GyFo0t8xBgd8-v7J6Q" target="_blank">click here</a>.
</body></html>

Terminally ill feature in UBank ad to spread message on borrowing less

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/67536/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
Treasurer Scott Morrison has outlined his vision for increasing home ownership at a speech to the Urban Development Institute of Australia.
The Treasurer acknowledged it’s hard for first home buyers to get into the Australian housing market and suggested a number of barriers to increasing housing supply. We asked an expert panel to analyse these and suggest what other ideas they might have for easing the problem.
What the states need to do
Nicole Gurran, Professor of Urban and Regional Planning, University of Sydney
The Treasurer’s comments about the planning system are out of date. A decade of state reforms to alleviate supply constraints have enabled the inner city apartment boom, and generated a steady supply of outer suburban land to build on. 
With housing construction at record numbers, state planning systems are clearly able to respond to rising market demand. Putting aside questions about the location and quality of new housing, increased construction hasn’t delivered cheaper homes, nor does the Treasurer seem to want that. In fact, he spends much of his speech cautioning about risks to the housing market from the removal of negative gearing or from an over-supply of apartments.
With our housing system so dependent on the private sector, the real question is how to keep construction running when the market cools. If Treasurer Morrison is truly concerned about affordability he should also be asking how to secure affordable homes as part of new development, without lowering values across the established market.
Providing incentives for developers to provide affordable homes is an obvious solution and one that the property industry itself has been lobbying for. This entails government support to drive investment towards affordable rental housing and to enable a new range of housing products such as shared equity and low cost home ownership.
At present, only around 2 percent of new homes are delivered by affordable and non profit housing providers. A larger affordable housing sector, assisted by government to draw on innovative sources of institutional finance, would be able to sustain new housing construction, irrespective of the market cycle.
The commonwealth should negotiate with states so that infrastructure investment and land release is closely linked to mandatory targets for including affordable housing. This way opportunities for affordable homes can be secured before land values rise. This will help stabilise housing production while boosting the supply of well-located and affordable homes. 
Cutting the cost of infrastructure to go with housing
Robin Goodman, Deputy Dean of Sustainability at the School of Global, Urban and Social Studies and Joe Hurley, Senior Lecturer, Sustainability and Urban Planning, RMIT
The planning, cost and provision of adequate infrastructure may add to the cost of housing. But the real cost of housing must include the ongoing costs of living. These will be greatly increased if there is little or no public transport, schools, services and jobs in anywhere near close proximity. 
The growing difference between expensive and unaffordable locations and prices on the urban fringe, shows people buying houses value infrastructure and services and the access to opportunities these provide. Morrison’s view of the costs of infrastructure as impeding housing supply, suggests we should spend less on infrastructure. Were we to do this we would be significantly adding to this growing inequality which will have implications for both liveability and prosperity. 
The way infrastructure is funded at the moment is partially through contributions from property developers and some of this will be passed on to the home buyer, increasing purchase costs. Governments fund some infrastructure directly however the current federal government has been more prepared to do this with freeways and roads, but less so with public transport and facilities. Housing affordability is a broader problem which involves the costs of both buying and renting and the ongoing costs of living within a house and a city. 
Rather than reducing the funding of infrastructure, or absolving developers of making some contribution towards it, the real issue is accurately targeting investment to where it most needed. The most urgent need for new outer urban areas is for adequate public transport to begin to give all residents more equal access to jobs and opportunities. 
Releasing more land and relaxing regulations
Steven Rowley, Associate Professor of Economics and Property, Curtin University Business School
The core driver of new housing supply is profit and that profit is a result of demand (the revenue from sales) and cost (the physical construction, land, finance, taxes). There are many barriers to this profit and hence new housing supply. A solution often put forward, and we heard again from the treasurer, is removing land use planning regulations that unnecessarily impede housing supply. 
Sounds sensible, but it’s no good just randomly releasing land and expecting development to occur. Policy makers must understand that more land does not necessarily lead to more development. For example, why would developers flood a local market with new product of a similar type; it will just reduce prices and hence profitability.
Infill development, where development occurs within existing built up areas, was barely mentioned in the speech. States are grappling with the challenges of increasing proportions of new dwellings on infill sites in an attempt to tackle urban sprawl. Large scale, coordinated infill projects can deliver open space and amenity, adding quality to our existing urban areas. This scale will be difficult to achieve without public sector intervention.
Challenges abound in the infill space and include community opposition, upgrades to existing infrastructure and allowing for housing diversity (attached houses and low rise apartments, not just high density towers). If the government wants to make a difference to the supply of dwellings, in places where many people want to live, they need to facilitate development at scale and deliver significant affordable housing contributions on government-owned land. This will not be popular with local communities and local council members, but is essential in delivering the diverse housing essential in our cities. 
Planning where to put more houses
John Daley, CEO of The Grattan Institute
Treasurer Morrison is right, planning is the biggest lever to make housing more affordable. Current rules make it reasonably easy to build apartments in the CBD – so that is what we’re getting. But it also makes it very difficult to subdivide and create extra residences in the middle rings of our capital cities, up to 20km out of the CBD.
It’s important that new supply is focused on the inner and middle rings (2-20km out of the CBD) of our large capital cities. New developments on the edge tend to be a long way from where additional jobs are being created. Over half of the net growth in jobs in Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane in the last five years was within 10km of the CBD. 
<a href="/images/2016/10/25/image-20161024-26504-uo2gpc.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2016/10/25/image-20161024-26504-uo2gpc.png" alt="">
<h4>Grattan Institute, Author provided</h4>
Apartments in the CBD are never going to be enough to fill the demand for accessible housing – supply is limited by a very small area of land. There isn’t much governments can do about where employers decide to create jobs. But governments can set planning rules so that housing is built appropriately.
But unfortunately while Treasurer Morrison was spruiking the benefits of making it easier to subdivide and release land, he glossed over the impact on the prices of existing homes. And simultaneously he went out of his way to argue that reforms to negative gearing would both do nothing for housing affordability and lead to a crash in house prices.
Not all of these things can be true. By definition, if housing is more affordable, then prices are lower than otherwise. It would be more honest to recognise that changes to negative gearing will have less impact on home prices – and affordability – than to planning. On the other hand, changes to negative gearing will also reduce distortion in investment decisions, discourage excessive private sector leverage, and contribute to budget repair – outcomes which should all warm the cockles of a treasurer’s heart.
<div class="hover tooltip bottom">John Daley is chief executive officer, Grattan Institute and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/john-daley-1870" target="_blank">here</a>. Joe Hurley is senior lecturer, Sustainability and Urban Planning, RMIT University and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/joe-hurley-157161" target="_blank">here</a>.; Nicole Gurran is professor - Urban and Regional Planning, University of Sydney and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/nicole-gurran-759" target="_blank">here</a>. Robin Goodman is professor of Urban Planning, Deputy Dean, Sustainability and Urban Planning, RMIT University and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/robin-goodman-213975" target="_blank">here</a>. Steven Rowley, is director, Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute, Curtin Research Centre, Curtin University and can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/steven-rowley-201914" target="_blank">here</a>.</div>
<div class="hover tooltip bottom"> </div>
<div class="hover tooltip bottom">All are authors for The Conversation.</div>
 
</body></html>

Solutions beyond supply to the housing affordability problem

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
ABS data showed a further moderation in home price growth over the year to the June quarter to 4.1 percent, but June quarter growth was 2 percent plus (or 8 percent plus on annualised basis) in Sydney and Melbourne which indicates these cities remain too hot. 
A surge in auction clearance rates suggests they may have become even hotter lately. 
There is not much the RBA can do, but it is an issue for APRA to keep an eye on.
<a href="/images/2016/09/27/auctions_normal.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
 <img src="/images/2016/09/27/auctions_normal.png" alt="">
Meanwhile, Australia’s population popped 24 million in the March quarter. While population growth has slowed to 1.4 percent year-on-year from a peak of 2.1 percent in 2008, it appears to have stabilised, remains strong compared to most other advanced countries, will help drive reasonable potential economic growth and continues to underpin long term housing demand. 
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://plus.google.com/110172465327488162875?rel=author" target="_blank">SHANE OLIVER</a> is head of investment strategy and economics and chief economist at <a href="https://www.ampcapital.com.au/home" target="_blank">AMP Capital</a> and is responsible for AMP Capital's diversified investment funds.
</body></html>

Further moderation in home price growth: Shane Oliver

<html><body>
The latest Housing, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia survey found just half of Australian adults own their own home and the wealthiest households in Australia are couples over 65.          
The survey, released by the Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research found a decline in home ownership between 2001 and 2014 fell more rapidly for younger age groups, concentrated on those aged under 55.
It said there was also a slight decline in home ownership among persons aged 55–64, from 75.1 percent in 2002 to 72.9 percent in 2014 and little change in home ownership among those aged 65 and over.
"Home ownership among persons aged 25–34 declined from 38.7 percent in 2002 to 29.2 percent in 2014, with much of the decline occurring between 2010 and 2014.
"Among persons aged 35–44, home ownership declined from 63.2 percent to 52.4 percent, and among persons aged 45–54, it declined from 75.6 percent to 67.4 percent.
"Median home values are similar among the three middle age groups (35–44, 45–54 and 55–64), and lower among the youngest (25–34) and oldest (65 and over) age groups. Growth in median home values is somewhat similar across the five age groups. "
<a href="/images/2016/07/21/Screen%20Shot%202016-07-21%20at%2012.59.31%20PM.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<div class="page" title="Page 70">
<div class="section">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
<div class="page" title="Page 70">
<div class="section">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
<img src="/images/2016/07/21/Screen%20Shot%202016-07-21%20at%2012.59.31%20PM.png" alt="">
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body></html>

jonathanchancellor-7SQnKwU6yx

Just half of Australian adults own their own home: HILDA

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
For more than 100 years the average Australian family was able to buy its first home on one wage. The median house price was around three times the median income allowing young home buyers easy entry into the housing market.
 As can be seen from the graph below (ï¿½ Real Home Price Indexï¿½), the median house price has increased, in real terms, by more than 300% - from an average index of 100 between 1900 and 2000 to an index over 300 by the year 2008. Relative to incomes, house prices have increased from three times median income to more than nine times income. 
<a href="/images/2016/01/27/Screen%20Shot%202016-01-27%20at%209.21.37%20AM.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2016/01/27/Screen%20Shot%202016-01-27%20at%209.21.37%20AM.png" alt="">
Thatï¿½s $600,000 they are not able to spend on other things - clothes, cars, furniture, appliances, travel, movies, restaurants, the theatre, childrenï¿½s education, charities and many other discretionary purchase options. 
It is a similar story in the UK, US, Canada, New Zealand, Ireland and Japan. The economic consequences of this change have been devastating. The capital structure of these countriesï¿½ economies have been distorted to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars and for those on middle and low incomes the prospect of ever becoming homeowners has now all but vanished. 
Housing starts are below what they should be and so have all the jobs associated with them - civil construction, house construction, transport, appliances, soft furnishings, you name it. Not to mention billions of dollars in lost taxes and other housing-related revenue to the nation state. 
The distortion in the housing market, this misallocation of resources resulting from the supplydemand imbalance is enormous by any measure and affects every other area of a countryï¿½s economy. New home owners pay a much higher percentage of their income on house payments than they should. Similarly, renters are paying increased rental costs reflective of the higher capital and financing costs in turn paid by landlords. 
12th Annual Demographia International Housing Affordability Survey (2015: 3rd Quarter) The economic consequences of all that has happened over these past 15 years have been as profound as they have been damaging. 
The housing industries of these countries have been decimated as have industries supplying that sector. Economies have been distorted and getting them back into alignment is going to take some time. But it is a realignment that is necessary. A terrible mistake was made and it needs to be corrected. Home ownership has long been a feature of western life. Levels of home ownership rose sharply in the postwar period. 
Home ownership had become both a symbol of equality and a means through which average citizens could provide security and stability for themselves and their families while building wealth and claiming a tangible stake in their nation. For the vast majority, owner-occupation of the home in which they live was, and remains, a great ambition. So what happened? Why have ï¿½house pricesï¿½ skyrocketed?
 While influential bodies in Australia like the Productivity Commission and the Reserve Bank focused their attention on demand drivers like capital gains tax treatment, negative gearing, interest rates, readily accessible finance, first home buyers' grants and high immigration rates, few were looking at the real source of the affordability problem - land supply for new housing stock. 
It is undeniable that demand factors played a role in stimulating the housing market and those factors were, for the most part, in the hands of national governments. However, the real culprit, the real source of the problem, was the refusal of local and state governments and their land management agencies to provide an adequate and affordable supply of land for new housing stock to meet demand. 
The graph below (Capital Cities: Price of Land per sq/mï¿½) highlights the growth rate in the price of serviced allotments in Australiaï¿½s five mainland capital cities. This massive escalation in the price of land carries with it a multitude of detrimental impacts. Establishing affordable rental accommodation for those in greatest need becomes even more difficult for social and public housing authorities as they seek to purchase land and housing in a greatly inflated market. 
<a href="/images/2016/01/27/Screen%20Shot%202016-01-27%20at%209.23.19%20AM.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2016/01/27/Screen%20Shot%202016-01-27%20at%209.23.19%20AM.png" alt="">
Road widening and major infrastructure projects experience cost blow-outs as land acquisition costs skyrocket, and establishing schools, community centres, health services and business facilities becomes difficult, and at times impossible. 
The whole community suffers as a result of increased 12th Annual Demographia International Housing Affordability Survey (2015: 3rd Quarter) tax, transaction, finance and establishment costs. It is important to remember that the "scarcity" that drove up land prices is wholly contrived - it is a matter of political choice, not geographic reality. 
It is the product of restrictions imposed through planning regulation and zoning. The problem is, it is young home buyers, hit with spiraling costs of home ownership who end up paying. They are mostly forced into overpriced units and will never be able to afford their primary ambition ï¿½ a free-standing family home of their own. Quite apart from the economic foolishness of it all, it is morally wrong for legislators to be enriching some (established home owners) while impoverishing others (first home buyers). 
We cannot deny the rising generation a home of their own merely to satisfy the ideological fantasies of urban planners and the financial concerns of State and Territory Treasury officials. We cannot deny ourselves the joys of grandchildren because young women have to work to pay mortgages instead of raising a family. The joke that high mortgages are the new contraceptive is becoming no laughing matter. Young women used to be afraid of getting pregnant, now, as they approach 40, they are afraid of not getting pregnant. 
We have to get back to the situation where a couple can pay off a mortgage on one income so they can start a family in their 20s, not in their late 30s or early 40s. In creating the conditions for home ownership to become the privilege of the few rather than the rightful expectation of the many, governments have produced intergenerational inequity and breached the moral contract between generations. 
In human affairs this imprecise, and at times neglected, moral contract between generations dictates that we should leave things better than we find them. When it comes to home ownership this contract has been breached. In making home ownership much harder for the next generation we have denied them much more than a home. We have denied them the security and benefits that go with home ownership and the opportunity to build wealth that will provide them with options in later life. 
Many are now choosing to defer having a family in the hope that they will be able to somehow put together the funds to buy a home later in life. If they can't afford to buy a house, they certainly can't afford to have children! 12th Annual Demographia International Housing Affordability Survey (2015: 3rd Quarter) When the time for retirement comes, those who own their homes have much more control over their lives than renters. 
They can choose where they will live and how they will live. Given the vast social and economic benefits that flow from homeownership, restoring housing affordability should once again become one of a nationï¿½s most important priorities. 
Senator Bob Day, a former National President of the Housing Industry Association, <a href="https://www.demographia.com/dhi.pdf" target="_blank" style="line-height: 1.3em;">wrote the forward for the 12th Demographia report</a>. He was elected as a Senator representing the State of South Australia at the 2013 Australian Federal election.
</body></html>

Home Ownership

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Home Ownership

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News