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

Joel Robinson

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

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

Sammut secures approval for debut Brisbane apartment development in Toowong

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

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

Property developer One Living, backed by former Macquarie banker turned investment manager Chris Green’s investment firm, has unveiled plans to bring more institutional capital into housing to help address the national supply crisis.

The New York-based investor has focused his firm, GreenPoint Partners, on addressing the supply shortage hitting middle market housing in Australia.

It is backing the new One Living business to develop more than 1000 units along the eastern seaboard. The new firm is starting with a development on Mona Vale Road, on the border of Mona Vale and Pymble, in Sydney’s Northern Beaches, with around 140 apartments planned. They are eyeing off more sites across the city.

With cost pressures rising in the industry, One Living’s model is to be a vertically integrated developer-builder, so it can respond directly to the housing gap by removing the cost inefficiencies embedded in traditional residential delivery.

“We are building a platform designed to operate at scale and starting in a market where there’s a clear need for quality, attainable housing,” One Living joint managing director Joseph Scuderi said.

“It’s that missing middle – it’s that attainable end of housing… that’s what most Australians invest into and what Australians can actually afford.”

<img alt="Mona Vale" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="798dfa93-4941-4db6-a696-31e9dc18e81c" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-05-28%20at%202.31.50%E2%80%AFPM.png?VersionId=mKBqi5C_DmeiXS.AtJkcR8LQIxqCqmFi" />

GreenPoint Partners brings years of experience assembling and scaling real estate operating businesses across major markets. And Green sees a big opportunity in Australia.

“For its size, sophistication and importance to the community, Australia’s living sector has remained largely under-institutionalised, which represents significant opportunity,” Green said. “GreenPoint identified that gap, assembled the right team, and is backing One Living to build a platform that is aligned to market needs.”

Green said being a builder-developer would give the company the capacity and flexibility it required to deliver reasonably-priced homes.

“We want it to be at that attainable level; not super high end luxury but at that attainable level,” he said.

<img alt="Mona Vale" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="74a5344a-4b26-4d4a-ada3-056b1220be77" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-05-28%20at%202.32.15%E2%80%AFPM.png?VersionId=vY8hXHO4reBMdO8ZXMWCNtGZJofUPQ3j" />

&nbsp;

One Living will undertake a component of affordable housing in its schemes, which it will own and operate, and it could also run build-to-rent on some sites.

Green praised local policy settings.

“The NSW government is being very supportive, strategic and pragmatic in terms of how do we generate more supply of housing,” he said. “We think it’s actually positive for development and the bit that’s been lacking at that attainable level is that it’s lots of relatively small private developers, whereas we want to create an institutional platform.”

One Living is also&nbsp;looking at high-density projects and could take on more institutional funding in the future.

“The way we will be able to achieve economies of scale is through size,” Green added.

One Living enters Sydney's new apartment market with Northern Beaches site acquisition

It's been several years since there's been an opportunity to buy a brand new townhome in Melbourne's coastal suburb of Mordialloc. Even apartment developments in recent times have been few and far between in the area.

Local developer LDS Property identified the gap in new housing, securing a site on White Street, directly opposite&nbsp;Woodlands Golf Club Mordialloc. They've recently launched&nbsp;<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-townhouses/wm-residences-mordialloc-102-white-street-mordialloc-vic-3195">WM Residences</a>, just 13 townhouses which they have already started building.

Projects by Buxton Director Heath Thompson, who is selling WM Residences, says the townhouses x that perfect middle ground be

"Mordialloc residents have had limited options to downsize within the suburb, often forcing them to look elsewhere despite long-standing ties to the area," Thompson says.

"With very little comparable new supply coming to market, projects like WM Residences are well placed, particularly as buyers look to capitalise on current conditions amid constrained supply."

[smartcode_project:default project_id=134646 project_image_fid=6109]

The development, designed by regarded architecture firm&nbsp;<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/ewert-leaf">Ewert Leaf</a>,&nbsp;adopts a deliberately restrained architectural approach, focusing on simplicity, durability and liveability rather than overt design gestures.

The boutique scale is central to the offering. With only 13 three-bedroom residences, each home is configured to prioritise functional layouts and everyday use, supported by private terraces and secure two-car garages.

Ewert Leaf’s design response leans into a calm, neutral material palette. Interiors are defined by oak flooring, white walls and soft finishes, creating a consistent and understated backdrop. The approach avoids trend-driven detailing in favour of longevity, with an emphasis on natural light and spatial clarity.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=134646 project_image_fid=6110]

Beyond aesthetics, the homes are designed to meet contemporary performance expectations. Each residence targets a minimum 6-star energy rating, incorporating double glazing, comprehensive insulation and all-electric Bosch appliances.

The project’s location supports a walkable coastal lifestyle, sitting within close proximity to Mordialloc’s foreshore, Main Street retail strip and the train station. Local cafés and dining venues, including Suburbia Deli and Hendriks Café, are within a short walk, reinforcing the area’s established neighbourhood character.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=134646 project_image_fid=6116]

While <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developments/mordialloc-vic-3195">Mordialloc</a> is often defined by its beach and pier, the project taps into other areas of day to day living, offering easy access to local food, casual dining and transport, rather than positioning itself purely as a lifestyle retreat.

WM Residences reflects a continued trend across Melbourne’s coastal suburbs towards smaller-scale, design-led townhouse developments, particularly on infill sites where proximity to amenity is already established.

With construction commenced prior to its market entry, the project aligns with a growing preference among buyers for developments with visible progress and defined delivery timeframes.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=134646]

WM Residences fills gap in Mordialloc townhouse market

Sharing Culture

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
If you’ve been in central Brisbane recently, you will know there is a new visitor in town. <a href="https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/politics/queensland/hundreds-of-electric-scooters-appear-on-brisbane-streets-20181116-p50ghq" target="_blank">Lime e-scooters have popped up all over the CBD</a> and neighbouring suburbs. It’s early days for this new mobility provider, so we can’t say if this is a permanent fixture with certainty, but here’s a transport research team’s view on the Brisbane trial and its implications.
Transport disruption makes life difficult for policymakers and transport agencies. Queensland at first <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-21/taxi-drivers-vs-uber-ride-sharing-drivers-face-heftier-penalties/7344300" target="_blank">attempted to deter illegal ride-sharing</a> but then <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-08-11/uber-to-be-legalised-in-queensland/7719078" target="_blank">legalised Uber and Ola</a> in response to public demand. E-scooter sharing systems might be just as transformative for people’s travel.
You can download an app, sign up quickly and for only a dollar unlock a scooter, hit the accelerator and zip down the street at up to 25km/h. Scooters can be picked up and dropped off on footpaths throughout the central city. They offer low-cost travel and produce low carbon emissions.
Previously, North American cities, such as San Francisco and Washington DC, were inundated with e-scooters. In response, some cities banned e-scooters outright, others used regulations to control the new players.
The trial in Brisbane is helping the city and state see if it works and <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-12-23/the-rules-around-scooter-sharing-in-australia/10639170" target="_blank">determine an appropriate regulatory approach</a>. Lime was initially given a “<a href="https://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/state-politics/scooters-given-a-temporary-weekend-pass-in-brisbane/news-story/f81f9d19fd99327923077337d009a6b4" target="_blank">temporary pass in Brisbane</a>”, allowing up to 500 e-scooters. As long as riders wore helmets (either provided by Lime and attached to each scooter, or bring-your-own) and rode them responsibly, there would be no problem.
Kudos to the Queensland transport minister and his department for being the first in Australia to allow a trial and, more recently, for improving the regulation of these operations. Well done also to Brisbane City Council for allowing the trial in the central business district and working with Lime on the roll-out. It was especially helpful that the council’s contract with its bikeshare operator did not prevent e-scooters from competing for riders.
When you take off on one of these e-scooters, it is liberating. If you’ve used a kick scooter before, even as a child, these new versions are relatively intuitive to ride. The electric motor means Brisbane’s hills are suddenly no problem. A trip from our South Bank campus across the river and through the botanic gardens to connect to a downtown meeting took six minutes and cost just over $3.
No other mode of transport would compete in terms of either time or cost for such trips, unless you bring your own bike or e-scooter with you into town. <a href="https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/politics/queensland/lime-wants-to-roll-out-more-scooters-on-brisbane-streets-20181204-p50k1c" target="_blank">Thousands of residents and tourists are using the e-scooters</a> in Brisbane each day. Our sources tell us over 100,000 users have made over 300,000 trips since the mid-November launch.
There are <a href="https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/politics/queensland/fractures-and-head-injuries-scooter-crashes-becoming-a-regular-occurrence-20190120-p50shv" target="_blank">reports of injuries from falling off the scooters</a>. This highlights a need to take it easy your first few trips, to look for problems on any scooter you hire and to wear your helmet.
So what are the problems?
Our observations this last couple of months suggest user behaviour has changed. Some unruly behaviours we saw in the first few days seem have given way to new social norms.
Parking behaviour is also improving. Riders cannot lock the scooter (and stop paying for it) in locations where it might cause a nuisance, such as on the main green bridges. They are both encouraged to park out of harm’s way and forced to submit a photograph of their parking attempt. Park poorly a few times and Lime will suspend your account.
<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/zOMYOBBRtM8?wmode=transparent&amp;start=0" frameborder="0" width="440" height="260"></iframe>
Lime itself emphasises the need to ride safely and follow the rules.
There are some issues though. The guidance provided to riders about where you can legally ride, whether on the departmental website, news media, the system app or its website, is at times missing, contradictory or just confusing. Fixing that should be easy enough.
Brisbane has not built much bicycle infrastructure in the last five decades, a few notable bridges and riverside paths aside. Nor have we reduced local street speeds to 30km/h, as is now standard European practice. There aren’t obvious safe routes to use when scootering through parts of the central city.
Fixing these issues will be more challenging, but quiet non-polluting e-scooters are clearly preferable to a city centre clogged with cars.
What are the best regulatory options?
Lime has proven these systems work well in Australian cities. But key regulatory questions remain. North American cities are introducing various regulatory systems. These include:
<ul>
<li>permits (often awarded via tender)</li>
<li>maximum fleet sizes</li>
<li>vehicle regulations – especially maximum speeds</li>
<li>go/no-go zones</li>
<li>parking controls</li>
<li>high fees to pick up and impound scooters that operators fail to collect.</li>
</ul>
Our city managers have to decide what options they prefer.
We have five suggestions.
1. There is no need for scooters in Australian cities that have more power or go faster than the current Lime scooters. The decision to choose 25km/h seems appropriate at present. Restricting speeds to 10km/h, as previous laws did in Queensland, would be nonsensical.
2. E-scooter systems are likely a natural monopoly, or perhaps duopoly. This is because one needs many scooters from the same operator available across a wide area to ensure efficiency in operations, keep costs low and provide wide coverage for users.
Brisbane City Council is talking of a probable monopoly, awarded via tender. This is the approach used since the city’s first tram operations in the 1880s. If Australian cities do award monopoly rights we hope they adopt Santa Monica’s use of a levy on the operator that is hypothecated towards improving the city’s bike lanes and bike paths, to create more safe riding space.
3. We recommend scooter parking locations be designated in key locations, such as close to Brisbane’s Queen Street mall, difficult as this will be given the competition for space on the city’s narrow streets and footpaths.
4. Cities should enter into meaningful partnerships with scooter companies that include data sharing for research and analysis of overall city transportation. <a href="http://www.goldcoast.qld.gov.au/thegoldcoast/bike-share-43914" target="_blank">Gold Coast’s MoBike scheme</a> is, without much fanfare, the best-used bicycle-sharing scheme in Australia and an exemplar partnership model.
5. These scooters need to be part of the coming move towards subscription mobility services. Soon we are likely to be offered “<a href="https://theconversation.com/for-mobility-as-a-service-maas-to-solve-our-transport-woes-some-things-need-to-change-105119" target="_blank">mobility as a service</a>” and pay one monthly fee to get public transport plus rideshare, bikeshare and scooter-share trips, some car-sharing and maybe some taxi kilometres. Based on the demand seen in Brisbane, e-scooters should be included in these packages.
This regulatory mix would cover most of the <a href="https://theconversation.com/can-e-scooters-solve-the-last-mile-problem-theyll-need-to-avoid-the-fate-of-dockless-bikes-102633" target="_blank">issues raised by others</a>. Get all this right and e-scooters can help create a safer, more sustainable and liveable city with a better set of mobility options.
Benjamin Kaufman, PhD Scholar in Transport, Griffith University and Matthew Burke, Associate Professor, Cities Research Institute, Griffith 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/limes-not-lemons-lessons-from-australias-first-e-scooter-sharing-trial-108924" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

j.ballantyne1990-6AQqhLzZaK

Lessons from Australia’s first e-scooter sharing trial

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
Car sharing arrived on the Australian scene in the early 2000s. These are commercial services that give people access to vehicles they can rent by the hour.
Services in Australia currently include GoGet and Car Next Door. While GoGet has a fleet of vehicles available for rent, Car Next Door supports private vehicle owners renting out their cars to others in the community (kind of like Airbnb).
Car sharing is now an established transport option in most major Australian cities, but it’s faced its fair share of teething problems. Some of these are unique to Australia, with its powerful system of private car dependency. We’re now on track to overcome many of these issues, but more work is required to really make Australian car sharing a success.
Why is car sharing important?
Car sharing is key component of any transition away from a dependence on private cars. Most of us are now aware that using private cars is one of the most carbon intensive and least healthy ways to get around.
To challenge the place of the private car, we need to supply a network of options. The hope is that owning a car will one day become unnecessary in an integrated system of public and active transport options, where shared cars would play a role in more complex or load-carrying trips.
Car sharing is particularly important in a world on the cusp of the arrival of autonomous vehicles (AVs). AVs could herald either “carmageddons” of congestion, where private autonomous vehicles roam the city at the whim of their owners, or a more palatable system, where on-demand AV services seamlessly match trips to riders. Which version of the future we get depends on whether AVs are shared or privately owned.
Here are some key factors that will shape future success of car sharing in Australia.
1. Car sharing is an inner city thing
Heading the list of barriers to increased uptake of car sharing is that it’s currently a service that is generally contained within the inner urban core of our cities.
Commercial options – where companies maintain their own fleet of vehicles – rely on a critical mass of people, the allocation of prized on-street car parking, and a viable public transport system to satisfy the day-to-day mobility needs of their members. These things generally don’t exist outside of the inner city, so neither does commercial car sharing.
Peer-to-peer (P2P) options – where the carsharing company facilitates the sharing process between individuals – offer some hope of a breakthrough in this space. P2P car sharing is more likely to succeed in lower density areas because it does not need the critical mass of users, nor the gift of on-street car parking.
While the slow creep of P2P services into the suburbs is a process bound by the notorious sluggishness of cultural adjustment, we are witnessing some increased suburbanisation of car sharing as a result of P2P services.
2. Australians don’t share
The need for cultural adjustment raises a second key barrier to car sharing in Australia. Anyone living through the recent bike sharing fiasco in Sydney or Melbourne, where bikes were dumped in parks and rivers, will attest to the fact that (some) Australians are not great at respecting property that is shared. In fact, there are indices of national culture that could have easily predicted the vandalism associated with this catastrophe.
And when it comes to our cars, we are a nation particularly attached to the independence, autonomy and privacy of our own vehicle. Sharing – whether it be lending your own car to a stranger, or making use of a car regularly driven by others – challenges these notions.
But parts of our cities are slowly but surely adapting to living in closer proximity to one another – albeit by necessity, not by choice. And as a nation, we are becoming less attached to owning the spaces and objects we depend upon.
This shift away from personal space and private ownership can primarily be seen in changes to residential densities and tenure-types. But it’s also seen in the way we work, play and eat. Think of the rise of hot-desking, the shift from private backyards to public parks, and the move from the family table to the café.
3. It’s all too hard
At first, car sharing wasn’t easy. Car sharing parking spaces were few and far between, insurance arrangements were somewhat obtuse, and the platform for sharing enforced rigid time frames and payment structures.
The pioneers of car sharing in Australia – both the business entrepreneurs and the policy makers – have had to navigate some pretty tricky regulatory, legislative and technological territory.
Commercial operations have negotiated with local government for parking space, and P2P ventures have had to work through complex registration and insurance regulations that vary from state to state. Both approaches have had to design and implement technology that allows cars to be booked and accessed seamlessly.
Fortunately, for those doing the sharing, a lot of these barriers have now been broken down. Most metropolitan local councils now maintain a policy for the allocation of car sharing parking spaces. Insurance cover for P2P sharing is now a standard option.
The future of car sharing
There are changes on the horizon all designed to make the concept of sharing even easier. One of the most interesting is the imminent arrival of “share ready” cars on the Australian market.
Designed primarily for the P2P market, these are cars that come with an app, which connects owners’ vehicles to their phones, enabling them to list their car for rent on car sharing websites. The sharer will then be able to access and drive the vehicle using their smart phone, entirely negating the need for traditional keys.
Involvement of the auto-industry is always an interesting development in car sharing. It has been proven empirically that people who use car sharing services drive less and own less cars. This implies less business for car manufacturers. Does this mean the car industry is accepting fissures in the dominance of private cars and protecting whatever share of the transport market it can? Or is it another way of keeping cars king in our cities?
Only time will tell. For the time being, car sharing’s survival is one positive sign that a sustainable transport future is possible.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/104389/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;">
Jennifer Kent, Research Fellow, University of Sydney
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/why-car-sharing-had-a-slow-start-in-australia-and-how-thats-changing-104389" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

Why car sharing had a slow start in Australia - and how that’s changing: Jennifer Kent

<html><body>
EXPERT OBSERVER
Can e-scooters solve the 'last mile' problem? They'll need to avoid the fate of dockless bikes.
As urban planners, we have not been good at integrating land uses, such as homes, shops and offices, with our transport infrastructure. Thus many people find the nearest train or bus stop is too far too walk and too close to drive (even if they could be sure of finding parking). This has created what is commonly known as the “last mile” problem.
In some Australian cities, hilliness and hot summers add to this problem. The consequences for people’s work commute are obvious. In the end, many people find it’s simplest to drive to and from work.
Over the past 12 months, something new has been promoted as the solution to the last mile problem. Shared e-scooters are <a href="https://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/state-politics/dockless-scooters-are-coming-but-may-push-their-luck-with-the-law/news-story/a9f588609ec0c0688e93b2ea7d16a5d6" target="_blank">reportedly on their way to Australia</a>. Powered by a rechargeable battery, these are dockless, have a range of 20-60 kilometres per charge and a top speed of 24 kilometres per hour.
Businesses on the move
The two main e-scooter companies, Lime and Bird, have attracted the most interest. Several other smaller companies have entered the e-scooter market this year, including Scoot, Skip and Spin.
While both are new ventures, Bird and Lime have raised considerable funding in a short time.
Bird (whose scooters are pictured above), founded by a former Uber executive late last year, has a <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com.au/scooter-startup-bird-raises-400-million-in-4-months-rockets-to-2-billion-valuation-2018-6?r=US&amp;IR=T" target="_blank">market valuation of US$2 billion after raising US$400 million</a> in venture capital over the past four months. Bird has e-scooters in <a href="https://www.bird.co/" target="_blank">74 US cities, Windsor (Canada), Tel Aviv and Paris, as well as on 22 university campuses</a>.
Lime was founded in January 2017 as a bikeshare business, but has branched out to e-bikes and e-scooters in the past six months. It operates in <a href="https://www.li.me/locations" target="_blank">49 US cities and seven European cities, as well as on 20 university campuses</a>, although e-scooters have not been deployed at all locations. A group of investors including Uber recently <a href="https://www.cnet.com/news/google-and-uber-invest-335-million-in-lime-scooters/" target="_blank">put US$335 million into Lime</a>, which is valued at US$1.1 billion.
Some believe Uber will buy Lime as a step in its quest to build a multi-modal transport platform that provides car, bicycle and scooter sharing services.
What’s the appeal of e-scooters?
Uber is interested in e-scooters and e-bicycles because <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/dr-gridlock/wp/2018/07/25/a-new-study-says-services-like-uberpool-are-making-traffic-worse/" target="_blank">many of its ridesharing trips are short ones</a> that could be made by e-scooters.
If Uber could shift its short-distance passengers from cars to e-scooters, it would be able to use fewer drivers and reduce operating costs. The remaining drivers would be transporting passengers over longer distances for higher fares.
Shared e-scooters provide a number of advantages over shared e-bikes. The rider can stand up which, for office workers, means no wrinkling of clothes. The posture is also easier for women wearing skirts and dresses.
Scooters are also easier than bicycles to manoeuvre along narrow paths. In some places, e-scooters are not subject to helmet requirements (unlike bicycles).
How to avoid the fate of dock-less bikes
E-scooters are not without some disadvantages. Because they are dockless, they tend to litter footpaths, parks and even rivers.
This is similar to the problems presented by dockless share bikes. A number of dockless bike share companies have been forced to withdraw services in Australia because of this.
Many communities lack appropriate means of regulating them. The question of whether e-scooters should be allowed on footpaths or only on roads and bike paths remains unanswered. (Given that they have a top speed of 24km/h, e-scooters travelling on footpaths pose a safety concern.)
Lime and Bird have tried to deal with these problems. For example, Bird has committed to a <a href="https://www.bird.co/sos-pledge-mar272018" target="_blank">Save our Sidewalks (SOS)</a> pledge and has encouraged other e-scooter share companies to do the same. The pledge has three components:
<ul>
<li>daily pick-ups of e-scooters every evening and redeployment the next day</li>
<li>responsible growth in the number of scooters deployed based on actual usage</li>
<li>revenue sharing of US$1 per scooter per day with host cities for the purposes of building and maintaining bike lanes and promoting safe riding.</li>
</ul>
Adopting an Uber idea, Lime pays for people to collect and charge the scooters each night.
While we have no e-scooter share systems in Australia yet, both Lime and Bird are reportedly <a href="https://www.news.com.au/finance/business/other-industries/if-youre-celebrating-the-end-of-obikes-be-prepared-for-something-much-worse/news-story/4ee06f9d00c124654611b42795a500a9" target="_blank">looking to launch here soon</a>. How will they fare? Are Australian cities prepared for them?
Neil Sipe, Professor of Urban and Regional Planning, The University of Queensland and Dorina Pojani, Senior Lecturer in Urban Planning, The University of Queensland
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. 
</body></html>

Can e-scooters avoid the fate of dock-less bikes

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
Many cities are keen on dockless share-bike schemes such as oBikes or Reddy Go, and for good reason. They promote greater physical movement, help solve transport problems in congested cities, and can be fun.
But there’s a downside. Share-bikes can litter our cities and be found in rivers, up trees, in gutters, and strewn around public places. One of the reasons for this is culture.
There are three factors influencing the use of share-bikes:
<ul>
<li>
There’s behaviour, or making choices about how to act.
</li>
<li>
There’s cognition, or how our brain works to process information.
</li>
<li>
And there’s context, or the environment we’re in at the time of the behaviour. National culture is a significant aspect of context.
</li>
</ul>
Cultural differences
To understand Australian culture and see why it’s problematic for share-bikes, let’s compare it to one of our neighbours – Singapore.
While there has been poor behaviour with share-bikes in Singapore, there are three key cultural reasons why a business model that could be successful in Singapore is much less likely to be so in Australia: power distance, individualism, and uncertainty avoidance.
The Hofstede model describes national culture using six dimensions, three of which apply here. A comparison of Australian and Singaporean national culture is shown in the figure below.
<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/2018/1/31/5362a5da41204752a04209d06c15b397.jpg" alt="">
Power distance could be thought of as respect for authority, or as the likelihood to be influenced by an injunctive norm.
Australians are much more likely to consider an edict from someone in authority as a general guideline or the starting point for negotiation, whereas Singaporeans are much more likely to take such messages literally. This is reflected in the relative scores on the Hofstede model, showing much greater power distance for Singapore at 74 versus Australia at 36.
So, how might this impact share-bike use?
Australians and Singaporeans both know share-bikes should be returned to a designated parking space, but Singaporeans are more likely to be open to messages telling them to park appropriately than Australians.
Put together with injunctive norms in Australia having been quite faint and you can see why Australians are not as likely to do the right thing at the end of a trip.
The second major difference is individualism. Australians are reported to be much more individual than Singaporeans; Singapore is a more collectivist society than Australia. If you add in the other differences in indulgence and long-term orientation, you can see why Australians are more likely to do what feels good for the individual in the short term rather than what’s best for society in the long term.
So, at the end of a share-bike trip, an Australian is more likely to leave the bike in a non-designated area if it suits them than a Singaporean is.
Uncertainty avoidance, or worrying about the unknown, is the third major way the two countries differ.
Singapore has one of the lowest uncertainty avoidance scores in the Hofstede database. This means Singaporeans are much more likely to be open to change, for instance, than almost any other country in the world. As a result, Singaporeans are more open to being influenced by what they see their friends do than almost anyone else.
This openness helps the adoption of new business models such as share-bikes. And if the right social norms around behaviour can be engineered, Singaporeans are much more likely to behave in pro-social ways, such as leaving the share-bike in the right place.
What Australia can do about share-bike littering
Changing national culture to make Australians better users of share-bikes would be extremely difficult, if not downright impossible in the short term. It’s questionable whether that would be a good thing to do, anyway.
So, if we can’t or shouldn’t change our culture, then we should try to modify the share-bike business model to better fit Australian ways.
It’s highly unlikely that the dramatic examples of share-bike littering we see, such as bikes in rivers or up trees, are caused by share-bike users themselves, as they would pay a penalty under most business models. What’s much more likely is that share-bikes are left in awkward or undesignated places for the “free spirits” in society to take advantage of.
By their carelessness, known users are contributing to the problem. As such they are a priority target for behavioural change.
Loss-aversion theory says we are much more likely to be motivated by the prospect of a loss than a gain. And the sense of being observed – for example, a visible police presence – can change our behaviour.
So, if it was made clear to a user that they were being watched when they were about to return a bike to a non-designated place – and that there would be immediate and certain consequences – they would be much more likely to do the right thing.
While most share-bike business models have deposits, incentives and penalties, they are too vague and uncertain when it matters.
The sense of being under scrutiny needs to be front of mind at the time of the behaviour. For some share-bike operators, such a solution is either in development or close at hand. And much more precise geolocation capability could give users a sense of being watched.
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/90312/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">If the share-bike business model is tweaked, Australians could embrace a clever and fun form of transportation.
Conor Wynn, PhD Candidate at BehaviourWorks, Monash Sustainable Development Institute, Monash University.
This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/three-reasons-why-share-bikes-dont-fit-australian-culture-90312" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

Sharing Culture

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Sharing Culture

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News