The residential transformation of St Kilda Road is set to continue into with more new apartment plans for the sought-after boulevard.

Wing Tai Asia has lodged plans for a major residential tower at 464-466 St Kilda Road, replacing the former VACC House with an 18-storey mixed-use development designed around a retained heritage podium and a sculpted contemporary tower.

The proposal, prepared under Victoria’s Significant Residential Development with Affordable Housing pathway, would deliver 325 apartments and ground-floor retail across the prominent 4,653 sqm boulevard site in Melbourne’s St Kilda Road North Precinct.

The project centres on the adaptive reuse of the site’s heritage-listed VACC Building, an eight-storey office designed by Bernard Evans that has occupied the address for decades. Planning documents state the development would involve “carefully dismantling and conserving off-site the original metal fabric of the podium visible from St Kilda Road,” before reinstating it as the defining frontage of the new scheme.

Above the restored podium, Wing Tai is proposing a curvilinear residential tower. The scheme includes 172 one-bedroom apartments, 63 two-bedroom apartments, 66 three-bedroom apartments, and 24 four-bedroom apartments, alongside two ground-floor food and beverage tenancies fronting St Kilda Road.

The tower has been designed with substantial articulation and variable setbacks to minimise perceived bulk and maintain view corridors along the boulevard. Urbis, which prepared the planning report, said the design “has been significantly articulated through a curvilinear design” with “an interplay with materials, façade expression and depth” to create visual separation and visual interest.

The proposal also includes 254 basement car spaces, landscaped pedestrian links connecting St Kilda Road and Queens Lane, and a biophilic landscape strategy featuring canopy trees, raised planters, cascading greenery and a glass oculus pool overlooking the eastern frontage.

Planning documents confirm the $270.1 million development will contribute 3 per cent of project costs to the Social Housing Growth Fund as part of the application process.

Wing Tai acquired the St Kilda Road property in 2018 alongside Abacus Property Group for $95.38 million, before later consolidating ownership of the site. The property previously served as the Victorian Automobile Chamber of Commerce headquarters for around 60 years.

The transformation of the St Kilda Rd boulevard is already beginning to materialise, with a number of high-profile projects recently completed, launched, or approaching launch as developers continue to back the long-term appeal of the precinct.

Among the most notable recent completions is Louise by Samuel Property Group, just off the strip on Queens Lane, the same pocket Hirsch &amp; Faigen recently launched The Queensbury. Mirvac is too on the same street with The Albertine, which is approaching completion.

Dexus recently secured approval for its slice of St Kilda Road, while Gurner also has approved plans for the precinct.

Joel Robinson

Wing Tai unveils 325-apartment St Kilda Road tower on former VACC House site

Malaysian developer <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/s-p-setia">SP Setia</a> is the latest to jump into St Leonards booming Transport Oriented Development precinct.

The developer, which has previously delivered Sapphire by the Gardens apartment development in Melbourne, identified the Atchison Street site in 2023. It filed a Scoping Report around 12 months ago, and now has revealed the designs for the new&nbsp;40-storey mixed-use tower.

The State Significant Development Application covers <a href="https://next-portal.urban.com.au/projects/14650/summary">20-22 Atchison Street</a>, a 1,374 sqm site positioned between St Leonards Station and the new Crows Nest Metro station.

Designed by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/cox-architecture">COX Architecture</a>, the project would deliver 181 apartments, above a four-storey commercial podium, five basement levels, and new public domain works along Mitchell Street. The apartment mix comprises 35 one-bedroom apartments, 39 one-bedroom-plus-study apartments, 85 two-bedroom apartments, and 22 three-bedroom residences.

The proposal has been lodged as a shop-top housing development under the NSW Government’s TOD planning pathway, which allows increased density around key transport infrastructure. The site sits within the recently rezoned Crows Nest Accelerated TOD Precinct.

<img alt="First look: SP Setia targets St Leonards skyline with 40-storey TOD tower" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="b799673d-48e2-46b0-801a-0e33a9330100" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/atchinson%20site.png?VersionId=dPh0UfwfaHpbFL1R7H1cbZNbIW0CHbCC" />

SP Setia acquired the Atchison Street site as part of its continued expansion into the Australian apartment market. In comments made to City &amp; Country (The Edge Malaysia) in 2023, SP Setia President and CEO Datuk Choong Kai Wai described the acquisition as “a strategic move” aligned with the group’s post-pandemic market recovery strategy.

“Our target for this exceptional development is local and overseas buyers, including first-home buyers, downsizers and investors,” Choong said.

The tower has been designed as a slender vertical form rising from a mixed-use podium, with COX Architecture positioning the development as a response to the evolving St Leonards and Crows Nest skyline.

“The purpose of the project is to facilitate the delivery of high-quality housing at a strategically located site and deliver a built tower outcome that is consistent with the desired future character of St Leonards and aligns with the TOD controls,” the design report stated.

<img alt="First look: SP Setia targets St Leonards skyline with 40-storey TOD tower" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="b1a85eee-76f7-436c-a6da-73ba827b9b13" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/atchinson%20entry.png?VersionId=dA9jHGPMcm.dDbwk4QfxqWiY5bfh3UVt" />

The podium would incorporate retail uses fronting Atchison Street, commercial tenancies, landscaped communal areas, and pedestrian improvements along Mitchell Street. Vehicle access and loading would be consolidated via Atchison Lane.

Residents would have access to more than 665 sqm of communal indoor and outdoor spaces, while the development proposes 96 parking spaces across five basement levels.

The proposal also includes a commitment for 10 per cent of residential floor space to be allocated toward affordable housing through a monetary contribution.

COX said the tower form responds directly to the emerging high-density character of the precinct while seeking to maximise solar access, cross ventilation, and outlook from apartments.

<img alt="First look: SP Setia targets St Leonards skyline with 40-storey TOD tower" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="2163f85c-f63b-4be3-aafa-f8763976cec5" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Article%20Feature%20Image%20%28Grid%29_5.png?VersionId=WiAmtIKJ6.ZQ41EtYEQ1fol7AeorKBlL" />

“The building is orientated towards north,” the Apartment Design Guide compliance report noted, adding that the tower’s slim form was driven by the constrained inner-urban site dimensions.

The design also incorporates landscaped setbacks and communal open space at podium level, intended to soften the interface with surrounding streets and improve pedestrian amenity.

The project adds to a growing wave of redevelopment proposals reshaping St Leonards and Crows Nest following the opening of the Sydney Metro City line and the NSW Government’s push for higher-density housing around major transport nodes.

Last week Stockland filed plans just down the road. They want to build a <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/601-pacific-highway-st-leonards-nsw-2065">52-storey tower on Pacific Highway</a>.

Read more:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/news/nsw/first-look-stockland-plans-52-storey-538-apartment-st-leonards-tower">First look: Stockland plans 52-storey, 538-apartment St Leonards tower&nbsp;</a>

First look: SP Setia targets St Leonards skyline with 40-storey TOD tower

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/urban-property-group">Urban Property Group</a> has revealed plans for a new mixed-use tower at 10 Dangar Street, Wickham, advancing a proposal that would reshape the southern gateway to Newcastle’s city centre with one of the city’s tallest residential buildings.

The State Significant Development proposal, now on exhibition, seeks approval for a <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/bowline-10-dangar-street-wickham-nsw-2293">43-storey tower</a> immediately adjacent to the Newcastle Interchange. The project would deliver around 200 apartments, including 42 affordable housing dwellings, alongside 99 co-living units, a 171-room hotel, retail space, and new public domain integrated through the site.

The scheme marks a significant escalation of plans previously approved for the site. Urban Property Group took over the prominent 2,904 sqm parcel, where excavation and demolition had already commenced under an earlier consent for a 14-storey mixed-use development.

<img alt="First look: Urban Property Group unveils Newcastle’s next supertower at Wickham interchange" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="58a96dd9-407f-4d20-86b4-94e4bfeef74b" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/wickham%20podium.png?VersionId=LGlf08pdFGAZDzvx_CXC4XakHNZRuEE0" />

Designed by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/sjb-architects">SJB</a>, the tower has been conceived as a landmark transit-oriented development anchored to the Newcastle Interchange precinct. The proposal includes 245 build-to-sell apartments across a mix of one, two, and three-bedroom residences, as well as two penthouses. Fifteen apartments and one operational unit are earmarked for NDIS housing. The co-living component would add a further 99 units, while the podium would accommodate retail uses and hotel facilities.

SJB said the site presents “a valuable opportunity to anchor the precinct by setting the standard for design, active ground planes and character at the key southern gateway.”

The architecture responds directly to the site’s position beside major transport infrastructure and within one of Newcastle’s fastest-evolving urban renewal precincts. The tower form sits above a sculpted podium designed to frame new public spaces, including a through-site pedestrian link connecting Station Street to Hannell Street, landscaped plazas, and activated retail edges.

<img alt="First look: Urban Property Group unveils Newcastle’s next supertower at Wickham interchange" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="a7bd6ff0-f7db-4ce8-a6dc-ea56e72c6149" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/wickham%20lanne.png?VersionId=xzf39VADyhj7zBQY2I9fx9vI62u2tuSb" />

The design report describes the project as part of the broader transition of Wickham into “a vibrant, high-quality mixed-use urban precinct” that leverages proximity to the station, open space, and regional connectivity.

A detailed public art strategy has also been prepared for the development. The strategy positions the project as “a transit-oriented development of state significance at the gateway to Newcastle’s city centre” and outlines a series of integrated artworks responding to Newcastle’s industrial and transport heritage.

Creative Road’s curatorial framework for the project, titled Unveil, draws on “stratified surfaces, carved volumes, and light-filled apertures” while referencing Newcastle’s transformation from an industrial city into a contemporary education and technology hub.

<img alt="First look: Urban Property Group unveils Newcastle’s next supertower at Wickham interchange" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="77a882bb-14b1-4d28-99ff-9438e39508c0" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/wickham%20site.png?VersionId=cevgo_vN0eKPK78P8YcEu3mKPLkpFqE7" />

The proposal is being advanced through the NSW Housing Delivery Authority pathway after being declared State Significant Development in June 2025. The accompanying scoping report states the development aims to “maximise the site’s proximity to the Newcastle Interchange by delivering transit-oriented development” while increasing housing supply and affordable housing provision within the Newcastle LGA.

Urban Property Group’s plans align with the long-term strategic vision established under the Wickham Master Plan, which identified the interchange precinct as suitable for substantial uplift in height and density. The current proposal would significantly intensify that vision, positioning the tower among the tallest developments proposed for Newcastle.

The site sits immediately north of the Newcastle Interchange, bounded by Dangar Street, Hannell Street, and Charles Street. It is surrounded by a rapidly growing cluster of residential towers and mixed-use projects that have emerged following the completion of the light rail and transport interchange.

First look: Urban Property Group unveils Newcastle’s latest tower at Wickham interchange

Bottega House has completed settlement of a landmark riverfront site in Macquarie Street, St Lucia, representing its first major Brisbane development.&nbsp;

Positioned on the banks of the Brisbane River, the <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/180-macquarie-street-st-lucia-qld-4067">premium site at 180 Macquarie Street</a> features uninterrupted river frontage in one of Brisbane’s most tightly held residential precincts.&nbsp;

The proposed development, currently under assessment with Brisbane City Council, has been designed by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/plus-studio">Plus Studio</a> with interiors by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/interior-designers/mim-design">Mim Design</a> and will deliver a boutique collection of premium residences positioned specifically for owner occupiers and downsizers.&nbsp;

The residences are set to redefine luxury apartment living in the area, with a focus on architectural quality, refined finishes, landscape integration and elevated amenities including curated wellness facilities, resort-style pools and recreation spaces rarely seen in the local market.&nbsp;

Exclusive sales for the project will be led by Keenan &amp; Byrne, ahead of an anticipated launch later this year.&nbsp;

Bottega House Managing Director Nick Malloch said the project reflects the group’s ambition to deliver a highly curated residential offering within one of Brisbane’s most tightly held precincts.&nbsp;

“This is an incredibly rare riverfront opportunity and one we have approached with a long-term perspective,” Malloch said.&nbsp;

“Our vision from the outset was to create a boutique collection of residences that feel more like private homes than traditional apartments, with generous proportions, refined finishes and exceptional amenity throughout."

Malloch says there is a&nbsp;lack of premium owner-occupier stock of this quality in the market, particularly for downsizers wanting space, privacy and a true lifestyle offering without compromise.&nbsp;

"Demand is expected to be strong given the scarcity of premium riverfront opportunities of this nature within Brisbane’s inner-west."&nbsp;

Bottega House secures landmark riverfront site in St Lucia 

<section data-scroll-anchor="false" data-testid="conversation-turn-6" data-turn="assistant" data-turn-id="request-WEB:84a2af5e-d7cf-4ddf-922a-f4d44d6c6caa-2" data-turn-id-container="request-WEB:84a2af5e-d7cf-4ddf-922a-f4d44d6c6caa-2" dir="auto">
<section data-scroll-anchor="false" data-testid="conversation-turn-2" data-turn="assistant" data-turn-id="request-WEB:5a5ab36c-8dd3-454c-b456-c501f22f0eb4-0" data-turn-id-container="request-WEB:5a5ab36c-8dd3-454c-b456-c501f22f0eb4-0" dir="auto">
The arrival of the first piling rig officially marks the commencement of construction at SIERA’s new beachside apartment development, Exhale, in Northcliffe.

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/exhale-surfers-paradise-8-enderley-avenue-surfers-paradise-qld-4217">Exhale</a>, a glass-encased tower featuring 54 large-scale apartments at 8 Enderley Avenue, is SIERA’s third Gold Coast development. It follows the recently completed PIPIS Bilinga beachfront project, which achieved suburb-record prices, and the soon-to-be-completed Chevron Island development, Tapestry.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=112661 project_image_fid=359603]

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/siera">SIERA</a> Founder and Managing Director Brent Thompson said the arrival of the piling rig represented a significant milestone for the development, which is scheduled for completion in late 2028.

Over the next month, around 260 piles are expected to be installed as work progresses on the basement structure. The building is anticipated to rise above ground level early next year, before unveiling its sculptural glass curtain wall, developed in collaboration with specialist façade engineers.

“The façade was designed to maximise panoramic coastal views while creating a distinctive architectural identity,” Thompson said.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=112661 project_image_fid=355935]

Designed by BDA Architecture, Exhale will comprise just 54 two- and three-bedroom residences across 26 levels, a level of low-density living rarely delivered in this beachside pocket between Surfers Paradise and Broadbeach.

The project has been conceived as a resident-only building, with no short-stay accommodation permitted. SIERA says the model is intended to appeal to long-term owner-occupiers rather than transient holiday demand.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=112661 project_image_fid=361052]

Residences have been designed with large-format layouts and expansive glazing, with most apartments featuring more than 30 metres of glass frontage to maximise natural light and ocean views.

The amenity offering spans two levels and centres on wellness and lifestyle, including a heated magnesium pool, sauna, yoga and Pilates studio, gymnasium, private dining facilities, cinema lounge, and dedicated surfcraft storage.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=112661 project_image_fid=359607]

More than half of the apartments have already sold. SIERA has also opened a sales gallery for Exhale at its Chevron Island commercial premises, near its Tapestry tower and the site of its second Chevron Island apartment development, which is slated to launch in early 2027.
</section>
</section>

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=112661]

SIERA kicks off construction at Northcliffe tower Exhale

Housing

<html><body>
EXPERT OBSERVER
When governments rolled out international travel restrictions, closed state borders and banned unnecessary travel as well as closing pubs, restaurants and casinos along with a variety of other facilities it was clear that the tourism and hospitality sectors would be some of the hardest-hit sectors.
However, it is still striking that 70% of food and accommodation employers reported a reduction in staff hours.
Food and accommodation employs about 8% of Australians, or about 1.2 million people. This is where a more granular view of employment data can highlight risks to the property market.
The detailed quarterly survey data provides insight into what industry residents work in, at the SA4 level.
The February edition suggests that most food and accommodation workers are highly concentrated in Sydney’s Inner West, followed by the Sunshine Coast and the Coffs Harbour-Grafton region.
<img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2020/4/9/CL%20food.png" alt="">
The risk to demand-side factors for property is particularly susceptible in areas of high employment in food and accommodation, as the sector typically has more ‘precarious’ work arrangements. About 62% of those employed in the sector are employed on a part time basis, compared with the broader workforce, where 32% of staff are employed part time.
Interestingly, some of these areas also have more precarious housing arrangements, with higher portions of rental housing than ownership.
In Sydney’s Inner West, 35.4% of households are estimated to be renting households, as opposed to 31% nationally. This means that lesser hours in food and accommodation services may affect property values indirectly, because value estimates may be reconsidered based on rental return.
For Hobart, where 9.3% of the population are employed in food and accommodation, the CoreLogic home value index shows there has already been a drop in dwelling values, of -0.2% in March.
However, it is worth noting that the Hobart market was arguably due for correction even before the onset of COVID-19, having seen annualised capital growth of 7.7% each year for the past 5 years to March 2020.
Therefore, even though high concentrations of food and accommodation employment are indicative of greater risk to the property market, ongoing assessment of price and employment shifts will be necessary to isolate the full impact of COVID-19 on values. 
ELIZA OWEN is the Head of Research Australia at CoreLogic
</body></html>

pchatterjee-seVgoiQgz5

Food and accommodation work is more precarious for housing and employment: CoreLogic's Eliza Owen

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
People’s quality of life, their health and their comfort can suffer when living in poor-quality housing. It can also impose high ongoing costs of maintenance, repairs, heating and cooling. And these problems are more likely to affect low-income households, as <a href="http://www.shelternsw.org.au/uploads/1/2/1/3/121320015/poor_quality_housing_report_2019.pdf" target="_blank">our report</a> for Shelter NSW shows. In it, we review the evidence on housing quality problems and consider ways to resolve these, especially for low-income households.
There is extensive evidence of the impacts of poor-quality housing on <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27712557" target="_blank">physical health</a>, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1257572/" target="_blank">mental wellbeing</a> and <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10942447" target="_blank">comfort</a>. For example, poor design and maintenance can lead to the <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1398-9995.1998.tb03859.x" target="_blank">build-up of mould</a>.
These negative impacts vary by income groups and tenure. From the recently completed <a href="https://dataverse.ada.edu.au/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=doi:10.26193/RDMRD3" target="_blank">Australian Housing Conditions Dataset</a> we know, for example, that renters on very low incomes (the bottom fifth of households for gross income, about $20,000 a year) are most likely to have unmet repair needs. They also have a harder time staying comfortable during winter and summer, as the table below shows.
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/276912/original/file-20190529-181266-12d6trt.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=1000&amp;fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/276912/original/file-20190529-181266-12d6trt.PNG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip" alt=""></a>
<a class="source" href="https://dataverse.ada.edu.au/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=doi:10.26193/RDMRD3" target="_blank">Source: Australian Housing Conditions Dataset</a>, Author provided
What are the reasons for poor-quality housing?
There are several underlying reasons for substandard housing.
Properties may enter the rental market after years in owner-occupation with no formal checks on their state of repair.
Another problem is some private renters do not assert – <a href="https://rentingfair.org.au/need-to-know" target="_blank">or feel unable to assert</a> – their legal right to habitable premises in a reasonable state of repair and upkeep. This is often because of the insecurity of their leases and lack of affordable alternative housing.
Another issue is “split incentives” – landlords decline to upgrade properties because they would not receive any benefit themselves.
There are also problems in public housing. Disinvestment by governments has both reduced the supply of housing and caused a <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.ahuri.edu.au/research/final-reports/148" target="_blank">backlog of maintenance for much of the remaining stock of dwellings</a>.
Housing quality is covered by myriad regulatory regimes. Lately, governments have been focused on questions of <a href="https://ncc.abcb.gov.au/" target="_blank">how best to regulate construction of new buildings</a>. Less attention is given to the ongoing use of existing buildings.
Recent state and national reviews have highlighted problems in the certification of building design and construction, and in the public agencies that oversee the certifiers. Some state governments have begun to respond. The New South Wales government, for instance, is moving to consolidate the regulation of construction practitioners under a new <a href="/news/nsw-government-to-appoint-building-commissioner-following-industry-reform-report">building commissioner</a>.
We spoke to a range of housing sector stakeholders and the theme from the recent reviews that most struck a chord was inadequate policy governance. There was no comprehensive overview or oversight of the issues of housing quality. As a result, some important issues escape policymakers’ attention.
Many stakeholders indicated that the current focus on problems in new buildings is an example of this. Although that’s plainly an issue in need of attention, other problems in existing buildings and more fundamental solutions are being overlooked – such as increasing social and affordable housing supply.
So what are the solutions?
<ul>
<li>Empowering tenants and regulators</li>
</ul>
One way in which the quality of existing housing is regulated is through tenancy laws. This will become more important as rental housing becomes an <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02673037.2017.1301400" target="_blank">increasingly common option, particularly for the long term</a>.
Recently, some state governments have amended tenancy laws to specify <a href="https://www.cbos.tas.gov.au/topics/housing/renting/beginning-tenancy/minimum-standards" target="_blank">“minimum standards” for rental housing</a>. Our research participants supported these moves, but said security of tenure also had to be improved to protect renters when they assert their rights. The onus of legal enforcement could also be shifted from tenants to regulators.
<ul>
<li>Mandating improvements to overcome the split incentive problem</li>
</ul>
The <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://apo.org.au/node/178481" target="_blank">split incentive problem for housing quality</a> means some landlords are reluctant to pay for upgrades – such as insulation or other energy-efficient features – where tenants are the beneficiaries. As a result, renters, especially those on low incomes, are likely to be <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.ahuri.edu.au/research/final-reports/159" target="_blank">living in housing of lower standards or quality</a>.
A potential solution is for governments to take the minimum standards approach and legislate energy efficiency and other improvements as mandatory. This is <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-private-rented-property-minimum-standard-landlord-guidance-documents" target="_blank">already commonplace overseas</a>.
One of our workshop participants observed that “energy poverty” was another way of framing the policy issue that had proved compelling in overseas jurisdictions. While this framing had not had the same impact in Australia, <a href="https://www.acoss.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/EEC-Survey-online-FINAL-.pdf" target="_blank">this may be changing</a>.
<ul>
<li>Improving transparency of housing standards</li>
</ul>
Social housing providers have a role in leading by example. Increased investment in social housing could contribute to improved quality across the housing system.
To this end, social housing landlords – particularly state and territory public housing authorities – need to be more accountable to tenants and the general public. Transparent reporting on property conditions, maintenance and tenant satisfaction, led by the social housing sector, can and should be rolled out as standard practice across the sector.
To do this, however, <a href="https://theconversation.com/australia-needs-to-reboot-affordable-housing-funding-not-scrap-it-72861" target="_blank">enough funding must be provided</a> to reverse <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/may/17/national-obscenity-australias-story-of-housing-boom-and-homelessness" target="_blank">decades-long underfunding</a> in the sector.
Collectively, these options can deliver more equitable housing outcomes, not only to low-income households but to all. The challenge lies in having the political and industry will to act on them.
Edgar Liu, Senior Research Fellow at City Futures Research Centre, UNSW
Chris Martin, Research Fellow, City Futures Research Centre, UNSW
Hazel Easthope, Associate Professor, City Futures Research Centre, UNSW
This article is republished from <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/chilly-house-mouldy-rooms-heres-how-to-improve-low-income-renters-access-to-decent-housing-116749" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

j.ballantyne1990-6AQqhLzZaK

Chilly house? Mouldy rooms? Here’s how to improve low-income renters’ access to decent housing

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

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

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
When it comes to access to housing in Australia, the playing field is far from even.
<a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/1745-5871.12313" target="_blank">Our recent research</a> has found that “race” matters. Many Australians experience racism and discrimination based on their cultural background.
This is particularly the case for Asian Australians. They experience much <a href="https://www.sbs.com.au/news/no-place-for-racism-mayor-fights-back-over-anti-asian-poster-blitz" target="_blank">higher rates of racism across a variety of everyday settings</a>, but particularly when renting or buying a house.
Asian Australians’ experiences of racism
<a href="https://www.westernsydney.edu.au/challengingracism/challenging_racism_project/our_research/face_up_to_racism_2015-16_national_survey" target="_blank">An online national survey</a> of 6,001 Australians measured the extent and variation of racist attitudes and experiences. We examined the impacts of where Australians are born and what language they speak at home on their experiences of racism.
<a href="https://researchdirect.westernsydney.edu.au/islandora/object/uws:39004" target="_blank">Our research</a> revealed that if you were born overseas, or if your parents were born overseas and you speak a language other than English at home, you are likely to have many more experiences of racism than other Australians. Racism is experienced in a variety of settings –workplaces, educational institutions, shopping centres, public spaces and online.
Survey participants born in Asia were twice as likely as other Australians to experience everyday racism. In fact, 84% of these Asian Australians experienced racism.
For those born in Australia to parents who were both born in an Asian country, rates of racism were just as high (86%).
If you speak an Asian language at home, your experiences of racism are also likely to be high. Speakers of South Asian and East Asian languages experience racism at alarming rates – 85% and 88% respectively. Those who speak Southwest/Central Asian and Southeast Asian languages experience rates of discrimination (79% and 78% respectively) similar to those for all participants of a non-English-speaking background (77%).
Anti-Asian housing discrimination
<a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/240629570_Racism_in_Australia_Cultural_imperialism_disempowerment_violence" target="_blank">Published findings</a> for New South Wales and Queensland in the 1990s revealed that 6.4% of Australians reported having experienced ethnic-based discrimination when renting or buying a house. Our <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/1745-5871.12313" target="_blank">recent national study</a> has found this proportion has increased dramatically. In recent years, 24% of Australians have experienced housing discrimination.
As with the broader pattern of everyday racism, Asian Australians are feeling the brunt of housing discrimination. Almost six in ten (59%) Asia-born participants in our study experienced racism in accessing housing. This compares to only 19% of non-Asian-born participants.
Asia-born respondents were also more likely to report frequent experiences of housing discrimination. Some 13% reported these experiences occurred “often” or “very often”. This is more than three times the average exposure of non-Asian-born Australians.
In particular, participants born in Northeast and South/Central Asia are more frequently exposed to racism in housing. And 15% and 16% respectively reported housing discrimination occurred “often” or “very often”. This compares to only 9% of those born in Southeast Asia.
The survey also found that if you have two Asia-born parents you are highly likely to experience such racism (44%). Similarly, if you speak a language other than English at home (especially an Asian language), you are more likely to experience housing discrimination (45%).
South Asian language speakers (e.g. Hindi, Tamil, Sinhalese) experience housing discrimination at a much higher rate of 63%. The rate for East Asian language speakers (e.g. Chinese, Japanese, Korean) is 55%. Only 19% of English-only speakers had the same experiences.
Why is this happening?
These findings suggest that the owning and occupying of space by Asian Australians is seen as a threat to Anglo-Australian hegemony. Alternatively, or perhaps relatedly, many real estate agents and owners assume Asians are somehow suspect, or will be a lesser quality tenant or owner. This would be an echo of colonial racist thinking in which Asians were seen as <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1745-5871.2010.00647.x" target="_blank">biologically inferior and a potential source of racial impurity</a>.
The repression of Chinatowns and more recent <a href="http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&amp;rct=j&amp;q=&amp;esrc=s&amp;source=web&amp;cd=6&amp;ved=2ahUKEwjW5c2sk_ndAhXHEXAKHaeiBdYQFjAFegQIBBAC&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fmyassignment.help.com.1.s3.amazonaws.com%2F175156_318938547.pdf&amp;usg=AOvVaw30E4JYk4Q9glqwo1SDQmVE" target="_blank">moral panics about Indo-Chinese settlement areas in Sydney and Melbourne</a> – such as Cabramatta and Richmond – point to these stereotypes of vice, uncleanliness and chaos. Perhaps this 20th-century troubling of the white spatial order is continuing today.
Sinophobia in Australia is also emerging in debates about <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-australian-cities-are-adapting-to-the-asian-century-103917" target="_blank">housing investment</a>, donations to political parties, university campus politics, the purchase of agricultural land for mining, as well as general concerns about Chinese government influence, geopolitics and human rights issues in China. Public debate is appropriate, but emerging hysteria and sensationalism are shifting into <a href="https://www.humanrights.gov.au/news/opinions/chinese-influence-debate-must-avoid-racism" target="_blank">animosity towards people with Chinese heritage in Australia</a>.
Authorities need to act
Exclusion from an important urban resource like housing can generate <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953699004967" target="_blank">profound levels of substantive inequality</a>. This in turn is associated with health issues and poorer access to other elements of life chances like employment, transport and education. It can also generate society-wide issues like segregation and intergenerational inequality.
Australia has laws against racist discrimination in access to goods and services like housing. Our findings, <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/08111146.2015.1118376?journalCode=cupr20" target="_blank">among others</a>, indicate that housing discrimination is more acute for some groups than others, particularly Asian Australians. So where is the coordinated response to this clear injustice?
Alanna Kamp, Postdoctoral Research Fellow in Australian Cultural Geography, Western Sydney University
Ana-Maria Bliuc, Senior Lecturer in Social Psychology, Western Sydney University
Kathleen Blair, PhD Candidate, School of Social Sciences and Psychology, Western Sydney University
Kevin Dunn, Dean of the School of Social Science and Psychology, Western Sydney University
This article is republished from <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/asians-out-not-in-this-suburb-not-in-this-apartment-103919" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

We need a response to Anti-Asian housing discrimination

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/79997/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
The Victorian government’s recently released housing strategy allows for the transfer of the state’s public housing stock to the community housing sector.
In a recent Conversation article, Kate Shaw raises an important question – “Why should the state wriggle out of public housing?” – and condemns the transfer of public housing to private developers for redevelopment.
However, if one is really interested in providing more housing for people on low to moderate incomes, the community sector is the way to go – not public housing.
Criticism of community housing provision – in part because of its role in the UK’s liberal market reforms to public housing – neglects the reality. Community housing has underpinned the growth and viability of what many would see as some of the fairest and best-performing social housing systems in the world — those of Sweden, Denmark and the Netherlands.
Management and/or ownership of land (including state land) by not-for-profit community groups ensures affordability in perpetuity. It is not lost to the private sector. And it can provide the same security as public housing, but with more innovative management practices, such as co-operatives and housing trusts.
Not-for-profits serve a range of needs
Importantly, in the Australian context, the not-for-profit sector offers a range of housing options pitched at different household needs. These include rental housing for households on low and moderate incomes and affordable home ownership.
One reason for this flexibility is that, unlike government instrumentalities, Australian community sector providers can borrow against their assets. In the appropriate financial environment (as exists in the aforementioned social democratic countries), they can then grow their asset base to meet a broad range of housing needs.
And it does appear we are slowly moving toward such a financial environment. In its budget in May, the federal government announced the creation of a National Housing and Finance Corporation (NHFC) to offer community housing agencies access to lower-cost loans. While cheaper loans are not the full financial answer (there is still a substantial yield gap between rents and loan costs), the government has established an expert panel to look at this and report back later this year.
On top of these developments, the recent Productivity Commission draft report on human services, including social housing, recommends growth of the sector including an increase in Commonwealth rent assistance. This is vital for community housing viability.
International trends aligned with the direction of policy reform in Australia suggest the not-for-profit community sector is the future for social housing growth. And this could be done in a way that addresses Shaw’s other concern — the privatisation of public land.
On this, I agree with her. Losing valuable, well-located land to the private sector creates an enormous opportunity cost; once sold it will never be available for future use.
And all we might get out of it is a 10% increase (a few thousand units) in social housing stock. But merely to keep social housing stock at the current 3.5% of all housing (the lowest in Australia) we need at least an additional 31,000 in Victoria by 2031.
Making up for decades of neglect
We do have to acknowledge that decades of underinvestment in Victoria’s public housing has left a legacy of housing estates that have gone well beyond repair and maintenance. And, given their low density, these estates are not achieving their potential in terms of either number or quality of dwellings.
In this context, the fact that the state government has set aside $185 million for its Public Housing Renewal Program is to be welcomed.
Some argue that the less-than-ideal result of a public-private partnership renewal of the old Carlton estate demonstrates that mixing public and private housing is problematic.
But what if it was a mix of public and community-managed rental and ownership housing instead?
The community sector can act in the same role as a private developer (with the state not expecting as big a financial reward), renewing the site with a mix of affordable properties for sale.
Unlike conventional private ownership, these would be covenant-protected to ensure, as with equivalent models in the US, that home ownership remains affordable. While privately owned, the properties remain within the affordable housing stock. A community housing association manages their sale and resale.
Also, the rental housing could be a mix of public and community housing. The focus would be on both high-need deep-subsidy households and moderate-income low-subsidy households. Such transformed estates would be genuinely integrated mixed communities, rather than an uneasy balance of high-need public housing at one end and high-end private housing at the other.
Across Australia, many community housing organisations have demonstrated their ability to deliver successful public housing renewal projects with a mix of households and tenure types. They have done so in an integrated and cohesive way, with privately owned units underpinning the financial viability of the projects.
Transfer of stock to the community sector is an important and valuable process of substantial community benefit, both in its own right and as part of a considered process of estate renewal.
Shaw is right. We need much more social housing, and relying on the private sector to drive the process will have an enormous opportunity cost. This will very likely constrain the capacity for future growth and affordability.
But the leaves in the tea cup suggest that the bulk of future growth should be in the not-for-profit sector. The sector can grasp the opportunities offered by policy reform in a way the public sector cannot, and provide sustained affordability and security.
 
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/terry-burke-1268" target="_blank">Terry Burke</a> is Professor of Housing Studies, Centre for Urban Transitions, Swinburne University of Technology and author for The Conversation.
</body></html>

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

Community sector offers a solid platform for fair social housing

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/79566/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
Does the Australian government have the policy, organisational and conceptual capacity to handle the country’s A$6 trillion housing stock?
We ask this question in a newly released research report.
The answer is critically important to both household opportunity and prosperity, and to the management of our largest national asset. 
Australians’ wealth is overwhelmingly in our housing. As of late 2016, our housing stock was valued at $6 trillion. That’s nearly double the combined value of ASX capitalisation and superannuation funds. 
Clearly, the way the housing sector is managed has huge implications for household prosperity and opportunity. The public debate about high house prices, for example, reveals a gnawing anxiety that the distribution of housing as an asset has shifted too far in favour of a growing class of rentiers rather than households. 
Housing also has clear national economic implications. This relates both to its scale as an asset, and to the way it provides shelter for those most in need where that need is clear. 
Any misallocation of housing to low-productivity uses is potentially a major drag on the economy. This necessarily requires a wide understanding of productivity. 
How is Australian housing policy framed?
We asked whether there is a clear systematic policy framework through which the Australian government understands the dynamics of the housing system and its contribution to productivity. We might expect such a framework to be clear and prominent given recent public and policy attention to housing questions. 
To better understand the Commonwealth’s approach, we surveyed recent major housing policy reviews by the government. We assessed how housing was conceived in terms of its economic and social dynamics, its influence on productivity, and the role of policy in shaping these effects. 
There is no shortage of documentation to appraise. Our sample included the Henry Review of Taxation (2010), the National Housing Supply Council report series (2009-2013), the Productivity Commission inquiry into planning (2011), the COAG Report on Housing Supply and Affordability Reform (2012), the Financial System Inquiry (2014), the Federation Report on housing and homelessness (2014), and (albeit not a government report) the Senate Inquiry into housing affordability (2015). 
We also prepared an inventory of housing policy instruments operated by governments in Australia to understand how these were conceived within the policy reviews. We found 13 policy instruments that influence housing systems. These operate across housing, economic and fiscal policy and at multiple tiers of government. 
A picture of incoherent policymaking
We were surprised to discover that few of the major policy reviews provided a systematic framework for understanding the economic role of housing. 
There is thin evidence, at best, that these inquiries constructed or articulated a systematic conceptual understanding of the links between the housing system and economic productivity. 
Even the Productivity Commission’s inquiry into planning and zoning, which focused on housing affordability, did not offer a conceptual framework for understanding the influence of planning regulaton on urban or national productivity. 
Our review of these documents further shows there is no coherent framework articulating how policy objectives link to instruments and their effects. Housing policy, despite the $6 trillion value of housing, seems strangely incoherent. Australia doesn’t currently have a minister for housing.
The debate over negative gearing during 2015 and 2016 partly demonstrates our contention. During this period we counted at least six reports by non-government organisations articulating a view on the purpose and effect of negative gearing. Nowhere could we identify a government policy document articulating a clear, extended and analytically based position on this policy explaining its purpose and effects. 
Our search for an explanation of these gaps in policy was not exhaustive. But we did assess the current administrative orders for housing within the Australian government.
Responsibility for understanding housing issues is divided. The Department of Social Services is responsible for social housing, rent assistance and home ownership. The Treasury has responsibility for housing supply policy.
Elsewhere, the Reserve Bank deals with monetary policy and financial stability. The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority APRA manages macroprudential policy. And the Tax Office (ATO) administers tax concessions. The Productivity Commission offers occasional advice on housing.
Yet there appears to be no obvious co-ordinating point in government that oversees housing. No one authority is responsible for formulating a coherent systematic understanding of housing and its effects on productivity and Australia’s economy or society generally. The National Housing Supply Council established in 2009 partly filled this role, but was abolished in 2013. 
Further dispersion appears via COAG, which is convened by the Commonwealth government. COAG periodically marks out a housing issue, such as land supply, for discussion with state governments and to formulate policy recommendations. But COAG communiques are typically short political statements and not analytically founded. 
Within state governments, responsibilities for different aspects of housing are typically spread across several agencies.
What needs to be done?
Our report demonstrates weaknesses in Australia’s approach to housing and housing policymaking. There is evidence this is deliberate. For example, the Coalition members’ minority response to the 2015 Senate inquiry into affordable housing rejected almost all of its policy recommendations. Many of these would rectify some of the deficits we have identified.
The weak formal coordination in housing policy contrasts with other sectors such as energy, defence, biosecurity, disability, heritage, drugs and road safety, among others. Each has a dedicated national strategy articulating policy objectives, problem conceptualisation and coordination of policy instruments.
It is doubtful that housing is less significant to the nation, economically or socially, than these sectors. 
We recommend that the Australian government reflects on the position of housing within the architecture of government. The $6 trillion national asset that housing represents deserves much better understanding of its dynamics and effects on the national economy, including productivity.
We argue that Australia needs a federal minister for housing, a dedicated housing portfolio, and an agency responsible for conceptualising and co-ordinating policy. The current fragmented, ad-hoc approach to housing policy seems poorly matched to the scale of the housing sector and its importance to Australia.
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/jago-dodson-2359" target="_blank">Jago Dodson</a> is Professor of Urban Policy and Director, Centre for Urban Research, RMIT University.
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/sarah-sinclair-385470" target="_blank">Sarah Sinclair</a> is Lecturer in Economics, RMIT University.
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/tony-dalton-135425" target="_blank">Tony Dalton </a>is Emeritus Professor, Centre for Urban Research, RMIT University.
</body></html>

Who’s responsible? Housing policy mismatched to our $6 trillion asset

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/76787/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
Australia has few places to capture the spill-over of talented workers priced out of the big cities. Some may leave the country altogether – and where talent goes, capital flows.
If the growth of cities in the 20th century was marked by “white flight”, the 21st century is shaping up to be the era of “bright flight”. The young, highly educated and restless are being priced out of many of the world’s major cities.
They are choosing instead to set themselves up in smaller, regional cities. These offer access to less expensive housing and abundant cheap workspace. The barriers to entering the workforce or starting up a business are lower.
The “metropolitan pressure” of rapid urbanisation is generating a talent spill-over effect, which is setting the stage for a new era of urban winners and losers. This talent leakage is primarily made up of the “forgotten ones” – those who don’t qualify for social housing, but who are unable to afford market-rate housing.
In this age of of hyper-urban migration, where talent goes, capital flows. Cities need to respond to this migration trend and provide adequate housing solutions to retain talent. If not, it could shape up to be a major economic challenge as many are relying on this cohort of knowledge sector and tech-focused workers to lead them into the digital age.
Lessons from the rise of the suburbs
Many will know the urban story, or rather sub-urban story, of the mid-20th century. It was an era marked by “white flight”, the term used to describe the phenomenon of predominantly middle and upper-class Caucasians leaving urban centres to live in the suburbs.
For some, it was a chance to have their dream home in a culturally and ideologically homogeneous neighbourhood replete with white picket fences and enabled by access to cheap debt and favourable tax incentives.
From the cities’ perspective, this migration was devastating. Cities saw their tax revenues drained as higher-income earners fled to the ’burbs. At the same time, these cities required increased investment in social services, housing and education for low-income residents who largely had no choice but to stay in urban centres.
Over a few decades, this exodus led to severe economic and social decay in many of the world’s cities. By the mid-1970s, even New York was on the verge of bankruptcy.
Reversal drives an urban renaissance
This era of “white flight”, however, began to fade in the later part of the 20th century as a new generation of urbanites flocked to cities across the world.
What we are experiencing now is nothing short of a modern urban renaissance. From the very young to the very old, from singles to families, people are moving to cities in droves, drawn by the excitement, cultural diversity, eclecticism and array of employment opportunities that urban living offers.
Global cities like London and New York have rebounded from this era of urban decay better than they could ever have expected. In many ways, however, they have been too successful for their own good. The reverse migration back to the city has placed enormous pressure on our metropolitan regions.
As urban populations grow, so too does the level of investment needed for cities to function well. The investment is required to improve ageing infrastructure, expand mass transit, increase housing supply and extend capacity of civil services.
But making all these upgrades to improve and sustainably grow our cities creates another challenge: it increases competition for space. The more we increase density in our cities, the more expensive land becomes. The more expensive land becomes, the more expensive housing becomes, so people get priced out of their city of choice and move on.
Spilling over to second-tier cities
This pattern has been playing out for a some time now in the US. The spill-over of talent from top-tier cities like New York, Chicago, Los Angeles and San Francisco has flowed into more regional cities such as Seattle, Portland, Austin, Philadelphia and Denver.
These second-tier cities have been the beneficiaries of this new wave of tech-savvy, knowledge sector workers. With all those bright workers around, companies like Google, Facebook, Apple and Amazon soon followed.
As a result, these cities now have some of the hottest property markets in the world. And they are now experiencing their own growing pains as housing prices have soared and the next wave of talent are being priced out.
And so the pattern continues and the talent spills into even more regional cities like Charlotte, Chattanooga and Minneapolis.
What does this mean for Australia?
Today, civic leaders and planning agencies are caught in the vice of balancing the need for increased density and growth while maintaining liveability, affordability and a sense of place.
Unfortunately for many cities, this vice has been tightened too much. We are pushing out the very workers who make our cities function (bus drivers, social workers, teachers), who define their culture (artists, designers, writers, musicians) and who will shape their future (data scientists, software developers, clean tech experts).
For Australia, this issue is much more acute. Unlike the US, which has a multitude of cities for talent to spill into, Australia has only a handful of cities. While places like Parramatta, Geelong and Newcastle will likely benefit from talent capture owing to the pressure build-up in Melbourne and Sydney, many more “bright ones” will likely seek their fortunes overseas and leave the country altogether.
We will rue the day if the companies follow suit, but cities can also take action to relieve some of this affordability pressure. Many cities are enabling innovative housing models such as Baugruppen in Berlin and Pocket Living in London. US cities like Seattle, Austin and Portland are leading the way on inter-generational urban co-housing models.
In Australia, Moreland City Council, birthplace of The Commons and Nightingale housing model, is doing its part to keep talented artists, designers, key workers, young families and downsizers within metro-Melbourne. Co-living models, such as Base Commons in Melbourne, are also making an entry here in Australia as a refreshed, millennial-driven approach to urban co-housing.
Watch this space. And cities: keep enabling housing innovation.
Jason Twill is a Innovation Fellow and Senior Lecturer at School of Architecture, University of Technology Sydney and author for The Conversation. He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/jason-twill-105833" target="_blank">here</a>.
 
</body></html>

From ‘white flight’ to ‘bright flight’ – the looming risk for our growing cities: Jason Twill

<html><body>
The federal government’s budget announcements to make housing affordable has met with mixed reactions, with top accounting and audit firm KPMG saying it won’t do much to cool the hot property market.
KPMG chief economist Brendan Rynne said the budget’s housing affordability moves were “fairly modest and unlikely to have a major impact”. 
“The measures aimed at boosting supply by encouraging the development of new dwellings and better use of existing stock might help the overheated Sydney and Melbourne markets a little,” said Rynne.
Even loan comparison website Mortgage Choice said the measures would not address the affordability crisis.
Mortgage Choice chief executive officer John Flavell said while the government has sought to address the issue of housing affordability, “their measures are likely to have no material impact on the problem”.
He even went further, saying the adjustment to the Medicare Levy “will only serve to increase the cost of living for many Australians, further exacerbating the issues we already face in this area”.
However, the Financial Planning Association of Australia (FPA) had a different take, citing increased complexity to the superannuation system following the announcement that a person over the age of 65 will be able to make a non-concessional contribution to superannuation of up to $300,000 from the proceeds of selling their home from 1 July 2018.
FPA CEO Dante De Gori said it would only add a layer of complexity to the superannuation system.
“The aim of this incentive is to encourage the baby boomer generation to sell, freeing up larger houses for younger families upgrading into more suitable homes. We support this initiative, however these changes add to the complexity of the superannuation system and are only tinkering with the housing affordability problem,” De Gore said.
First home buyers will be able to withdraw voluntary contributions to superannuation made from 1 July 2017, along with associated deemed earnings, for a first home deposit.
Under the measure, up to $15,000 per year and $30,000 in total can be contributed, within existing caps. Concessional contributions and earnings that are withdrawn will be taxed at marginal rates less a 30 per cent offset. Both members of a couple can take advantage of this measure to buy their first home together.
While the FPA supports initiatives to make housing more affordable, the association said accessing super was not the solution to the housing affordability issue, and is not in the national interest.
KPMG’s Rynne added that the First Home Super Saver Scheme will also help new buyers to compete against investors, but overall the Budget “is just a first step”. “More policy initiatives will be needed to tackle this complex problem, with greater co-ordination between all tiers of government and the private sector.” 
The SMSF Association similarly supported the downsizing and first-home buyer announcements, according to a post on the Professional Planner.
On downsizing, SMSFA CEO John Maroney said: “This means people can make a significant top-up contribution to their super funds, allowing them to fund a dignified and secure retirement. While the measure may not be a significant trigger to encourage downsizing, we welcome the ability for older Australians to top up their superannuation where downsizing their home provides them with funds to do so.”
On the first-home buyer scheme, Maroney said it was an “excellent opportunity to engage younger fund members in their superannuation.” 
Emma Power, author for The Conversation, was direct in her comments, saying housing will remain unaffordable, insecure and out of reach for the majority of Australian renters.
“There are no significant funding increases to social housing and homelessness services. There is no increase in rent assistance to help low-income renters in the private rental market,” she wrote.
“Capital gains tax and negative gearing settings remain largely untouched, and the proposed bond aggregator will support expansion of housing aimed at very specific groups.” 
</body></html>

prateek24-ezbwHMbNAk

Budget 2017's housing affordability plans likely won't have major impact: KPMG

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/75691/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
There are many hidden costs and inefficiencies in housing markets. Blockchain is poised to transform that.
An emerging technology, blockchain, could transform the way we buy and sell real estate by doing away with the hidden costs and inefficiencies of our housing markets.
Blockchain is an online ledger that records transactions. It’s capable of recording the movement of any kind of asset from one owner to the next.
It’s public and isn’t owned by any one corporation, there are no charges to record transactions. Its openness ensures the integrity of transactions and ownership, as everyone involved has a stake in keeping it honest.
This means there are fewer intermediaries; less middle-men who increase the costs and time to complete a transaction.
There are risks associated with the system as it’s only as strong as the code that supports it, which has come under attack in the past. Despite this, examples from overseas show it is possible to apply this technology successfully to our housing market.
Problems in how the property market is run
For buyers able to find the right property, secure a mortgage and save a deposit, they must also pay for a range of so-called “hidden costs”. These are additional payments associated with the transaction over the cost of the home itself. Many legal and title-related costs would become near-obsolete in a blockchain system.
The combined costs of title registration, title insurance, and legal fees associated with register the property transfer approach A$1,000 on the average Australian house. Costs continue to rise as the prudent buyer undertakes further due diligence, through building inspection documentation, previous sales records and so forth.
On top of the financial cost, it then typically takes over a month to settle a real estate transaction in Australia. The blockchain system can speed things up, as currently tedious checks undertaken by hand, move to an automated system overseen and approved by the relevant stakeholders.
There is also the risk that land titles offices with a single database simply get things wrong too. In 2016 it was reported that 300 incorrect certificates had been issued in NSW, with 140 of those being recent property buyers affected by government plans for major motorways in Sydney’s west.
There are now concerns that the system’s quality could be compromised in several states, including NSW and South Australia, as land titles offices become privatised.
A blockchain real estate market
If blockchain were applied to the property market in Australia, every property would be encoded with a unique identifier. Property IDs already exist in most land registry systems, so these would need to be migrated to a blockchain.
Next, the blockchain ecosystem then needs to have defined who the people behind the transaction are, those stakeholders that include the owner, lender, and government.
Transactions of property are conducted via “smart contracts” – digital rules in the blockchain that process the agreement and any specified conditions. Buying and selling could still take place via agents, or the smart contract can be advanced to incorporate the sale rules and make this decision automatically. The blockchain for each property grows as transactions are added to the ledger.
A housing market without agents, conveyancers and a land-titles office may seem decades away, but a handful of countries have already piloted blockchain land registration system.
In Australia, our current land titles system is among the world’s best, but it is not infallible. A range of hidden taxes and transaction costs increase market inefficiencies.
And while the electronic system Property Exchange Australia or PEXA, has brought us to the point of a near paperless property market, it’s still an intermediary between the parties and the record of the transfer in the Torrens system - our current land title system.
The added advantage of a blockchain system is in eliminating risks, in particular the risk of records being accessed fraudulently and altered or deleted because it is a permanent and immutable record. This means that a huge amount of computing power would be required, probably along with some collusion, and the alteration is easily detected across the ledger. That’s not to say the blockchain system is perfect.
Blockchain’s advantage in restricting any changes to historical records becomes a disadvantage when incorrect or fraudulent entries are added. Digital currency managers, Ether and Bitfinex, learned this the hard way through cyber attacks.
Last year these attacks siphoned off over US$50 million in ether tokens from The DAO, the largest crowdfunded venture capital fund. This breach led to a controversial split of Ether into two separate active digital currencies.
Only months later, Hong Kong-based crytocurrency trading firm, Bitfinex, had the equivalent of US$68 million stolen by hackers in a security breach reminiscent of the hack that bought down Mt Gox in 2014. It is little comfort to cautious market regulators that the thieves behind these attacks can not spend it without revealing their identity on the blockchain.
These hacks demonstrate that blockchain systems are only as secure as the code which supports them. As a nascent technology, its cracks are detected only when they are exposed.
Where blockchain has worked before
Sweden became the first western country to explore the use of blockchain for real estate in July last year. At the time, the Swedish Land Registry partnered with blockchain startup ChromaWay to test how parties to a real estate transaction – the buyer, seller, lender, government – could track the deal’s progress on a blockchain.
Other countries at the forefront of blockchain for real estate include The Republic of Georgia, Honduras, and Brazil which announced a pilot program earlier this month. While this might seem like a disparate list, it’s in these countries where the long-term potential of a blockchain for real estate are most significant.
Systemic corruption and insecure database management in these countries, and many other emerging economies, is seen as a major constraint on growth and prosperity. Why would you invest in a house, or any other asset, if there is a distinct possibility that the record of your ownership could simply disappear?
With ever increasing demands for improvements to transaction efficiency and local real estate industry giants like CoreLogic appointing research teams dedicated to new technology applications, it might not be long before we see a real estate blockchain system in Australia.
Danika Wright is a Lecturer in Finance, University of Sydney and author for The Conversation. She can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/danika-wright-121868">here</a>.
</body></html>

How the blockchain will transform housing markets: Danika Wright

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/75857/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
The current debate about housing muddles two separate issues: the affordability of housing, and the risk in the banking system of any significant fall in house prices. Clearly, they are both important issues and the link between them is the potential for a lot of home owners to overreach in their finances, to not be able to repay their loans, and so to bring down their banks.
When you look at the data (in three charts) on mortgage stress, the systemic risk of people not being able to repay their home loans appears small. Data from the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) reveals the average balance on housing loans has barely trended upwards over the last five years (see our first chart below).
This was during a period when house prices have risen quite strongly. In effect, this means that, on average, people have more equity in their houses to stand behind their borrowings.
This is not just true for the average but also if you look at investor loans or for low documentation (loc-doc) loans (these are aimed at those who cannot provide the usual required paperwork, for example self-employed people). The same trends emerge. It’s not clear from this that people are taking on excessive risk – and certainly not recently.
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/04/10/v1.jpg" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/c_scale,w_580,q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/po.images/2017/04/10/v1.jpg" width="600" height="432">
Source: ABS6416.0 and APRA Quarterly ADI Property Exposures
Even for new loans you get the same basic picture. The chart below shows the loan to valuation ratios for new loans. What is clear is that for most new loans people are borrowing between 60% and 80% of the value of their houses.
The proportion of people who have very high exposure to a fall in house prices – those with loan to valuation ratios above 90% – has been declining over time. Once again, the basic picture is one of prudent households, rather than a community of people gambling on house price rises.
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/04/10/v2.jpg" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/c_scale,w_580,q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/po.images/2017/04/10/v2.jpg" width="600" height="432">
Source: APRA Quarterly ADI Property Exposures
A lot of the confusion about housing arises because people make inappropriate comparisons. One common mistake is to compare the amount of housing debt with national income. This is highly misleading.
A more correct comparison is between your income and the amount of your income needed to service your loan. At a national level, this means we should look at the size of national income and the amount of income needed to service the debt (not the amount of debt).
An alternative that the Reserve Bank uses is to compare the amount of debt people have with the amount of assets they hold. As we can see in the chart below, the value of household liabilities has been increasing but the total value of assets held by households appears to have been rising faster. Again, there is no clear case that the household sector has borrowed excessively.
<a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/images/2017/04/10/v3.jpg" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/c_scale,w_580,q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/po.images/2017/04/10/v3.jpg" width="600" height="432">
Source: Reserve Bank of Australia
None of this is to deny that house prices can fall, or that some people are finding it very hard to buy somewhere to live in Sydney. Houses are much cheaper in other parts of Australia and property prices have even been falling recently in some regions.
Rodney Maddock is a Vice Chancellor's Fellow at Victoria University and Adjunct Professor of Economics, Monash University and author for The Conversation. He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/rodney-maddock-107543" target="_blank">here</a>.
 
</body></html>

Housing

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Housing

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News