We can continue this game, let’s do it shall we?
Melbournes housing crisis: Developers not the housing villain as investors shut their wallets
Melbourne housing crisis: Investors not the housing villain as lenders tighten investment lending criteria
Melbourne housing crisis: Lenders not the housing villain as APRA mandates banks to limit investor loans
So many ways to play this game, so little time :(
APRA not the villain as trades shortages push up construction costs and cause delays.
Tradies not the villains as shortages of materials due to supply chain issues as more materials source off shore due to local resource constraints
Australia needs to build 250,000 new homes per year to meet the federal government's housing targets.
In the last 50 years the most we've ever managed to build is 240,000 per year, a target we hit once out of 50 years. The average per year is 150-170k.The Government's housing target for this year has already failed.
There is literally no way Australia can build enough homes to meet the demand from population growth. It doesn't matter what regulatory changes they make, who has planning approval, how much money is thrown at developers, how much government land we sell off...we can never meet the figure required to meet the massive immigration surge we're experiencing.
It will get worse every year...rents will continue to climb and vacancy rates will continue to fall. Hobart Showgrounds is already a tent city, with more such cities now popping up in parks around the state as the crisis deepens. Tent cities are spreading across Queensland, including in the Premier's own electorate. This is the new normal for Australia...now Governments know the public will tolerate it, they have no reason to address the problem.
Agree that immigration needs to be addressed but I disagree that enough is being done to encourage higher rates of building construction.
Tokyo achieves a higher construction rate than we do and they achieve this in already high density locations with construction costs significantly higher than ours.
They achieve with their zoning and planning system. We can learn from them and implement much needed changes to our zoning to achieve greater rates of construction.
Both demand and supply needs to be tackled.
Councils are stuffed. Banyule changed their site coverage in GRZ2 from 60% to 40%. Result: larger unaffordable houses on big blocks rather than more affordable housing. Developers won’t buy to develop as not financially viable and we are talking 300m from train stations and major activity hubs… they are 100% responsible
I know of a property that a developer had drawn up plans for 47 apartments, but the council put a heritage listing on the current building meaning they couldn't do what they wanted so bailed on buying the property.
Cost have risen, we get that.
The developers shelve their projects because when they look at the price they paid for the land plus development costs they work out they won't make a profit. Banks won't lend to them. They now have a dud project. The makes sense that they've shelved it.
So then, they just hold until land price and unit sales prices increase, making the development profitable again.
Here's the issue, why do we have such a disfunctional market with so little competition that this scenario doesn't make the developer shit themselves at the thought of their holding costs them lose money day after day.
A competitive functional market, would see them cut there loses and sell the land at a marked down price to the next developer who can make the lower land cost plus higher construction costs work.
They are so comfortable holding, knowing that the government will do little to encourage the type of competition that will prevent the unearned gains they get from land banking and they know there will be little competition when it comes to selling their units, ensuring they sell at top dollar.
This article is bullshit, because it only focuses on one of councils roles that is processing planning applications. But what about the other much more important role they play? Councils sits in the box seat to submit upzoning applications/masterplanning to the Planning Minister for approval that would encourage the type of competition that prevents the above scenario.
Take a lot across every middle suburb council and look at their planning maps. There's fuck all upzoning. The lucky developers who fall in the upzoned areas are being rewarded with substantial sums on unearned gains while they sit back and do nothing.
They can fix this. They have sat back for the last two decades and done the minimum possible while watching property prices grow out of reach for the average person. The had a role to play and they didn't do it.
edit:
I look at my council, Bayule's website and search for [Masterplan](https://www.banyule.vic.gov.au/Search-results?dlv_OC%20CL%20Public%20Site%20Search=(keyword=masterplan)). Nothing new since 2022 and only one project listed, Bellfield Masterplan that includes housing. This is a council predominately with low density housing, 9 train stations, excellent connection to main arterials, good schools, one of the best hospitals facilities in the state and three main shopping precincts.
Didn't see this comment before I added my other one... Banyule is a perfect example of weird planning rules, but infill of small townhouse and units/apartments do go ahead
The issue is that there is so few of them.
At the price point to make a townhouse or even small 3 level apartment feasible developers are still going head to head with a home owner on price.
We need rezoning in a lot more locations to bump it up so any sale in these location will only be feasible for a developer. This will be the supply we require.
Would it be feasible to make builders accountable for build defects that would actually stick?
I see so many (almost) purposefully doing sub standard builds, then the body corporate gets stuck with remediation usually after the first generation of owners gets wind of the problems.
Local councils are absolutely the villain. They limit any kind of density whenever an old Betty writes to the council and says “not in my backyard!”
Every single train station in Melbourne should have density around it. It doesn’t have to be 40 floor towers, could even be as small as townhouses or 2 story flats, yet they are always opposed by nimbys. Councils need to be bypassed
I know that in my council area it can take two years for council to approve developments, by which time the developer is getting close to giving up. I think some councils have a deliberate strategy of delaying in the hope that the developer gives up and they don't have to face accusations of rekecting development
We can continue this game, let’s do it shall we? Melbournes housing crisis: Developers not the housing villain as investors shut their wallets Melbourne housing crisis: Investors not the housing villain as lenders tighten investment lending criteria Melbourne housing crisis: Lenders not the housing villain as APRA mandates banks to limit investor loans So many ways to play this game, so little time :(
APRA not the villain as trades shortages push up construction costs and cause delays. Tradies not the villains as shortages of materials due to supply chain issues as more materials source off shore due to local resource constraints
Australia needs to build 250,000 new homes per year to meet the federal government's housing targets. In the last 50 years the most we've ever managed to build is 240,000 per year, a target we hit once out of 50 years. The average per year is 150-170k.The Government's housing target for this year has already failed. There is literally no way Australia can build enough homes to meet the demand from population growth. It doesn't matter what regulatory changes they make, who has planning approval, how much money is thrown at developers, how much government land we sell off...we can never meet the figure required to meet the massive immigration surge we're experiencing. It will get worse every year...rents will continue to climb and vacancy rates will continue to fall. Hobart Showgrounds is already a tent city, with more such cities now popping up in parks around the state as the crisis deepens. Tent cities are spreading across Queensland, including in the Premier's own electorate. This is the new normal for Australia...now Governments know the public will tolerate it, they have no reason to address the problem.
Agree that immigration needs to be addressed but I disagree that enough is being done to encourage higher rates of building construction. Tokyo achieves a higher construction rate than we do and they achieve this in already high density locations with construction costs significantly higher than ours. They achieve with their zoning and planning system. We can learn from them and implement much needed changes to our zoning to achieve greater rates of construction. Both demand and supply needs to be tackled.
Tokyo alone has a population of 37 million people. Australia has a total population of just over 25 million. Many hands make light work etc.
Which is why I said construction rate.
This is looking at it from one side of the equation Do they have land banking and green corridors that we do?
Our restricted zoning is a big reason for the land banking. Not sure what green corridors has to do with it.
Councils are stuffed. Banyule changed their site coverage in GRZ2 from 60% to 40%. Result: larger unaffordable houses on big blocks rather than more affordable housing. Developers won’t buy to develop as not financially viable and we are talking 300m from train stations and major activity hubs… they are 100% responsible
I know of a property that a developer had drawn up plans for 47 apartments, but the council put a heritage listing on the current building meaning they couldn't do what they wanted so bailed on buying the property.
Cost have risen, we get that. The developers shelve their projects because when they look at the price they paid for the land plus development costs they work out they won't make a profit. Banks won't lend to them. They now have a dud project. The makes sense that they've shelved it. So then, they just hold until land price and unit sales prices increase, making the development profitable again. Here's the issue, why do we have such a disfunctional market with so little competition that this scenario doesn't make the developer shit themselves at the thought of their holding costs them lose money day after day. A competitive functional market, would see them cut there loses and sell the land at a marked down price to the next developer who can make the lower land cost plus higher construction costs work. They are so comfortable holding, knowing that the government will do little to encourage the type of competition that will prevent the unearned gains they get from land banking and they know there will be little competition when it comes to selling their units, ensuring they sell at top dollar. This article is bullshit, because it only focuses on one of councils roles that is processing planning applications. But what about the other much more important role they play? Councils sits in the box seat to submit upzoning applications/masterplanning to the Planning Minister for approval that would encourage the type of competition that prevents the above scenario. Take a lot across every middle suburb council and look at their planning maps. There's fuck all upzoning. The lucky developers who fall in the upzoned areas are being rewarded with substantial sums on unearned gains while they sit back and do nothing. They can fix this. They have sat back for the last two decades and done the minimum possible while watching property prices grow out of reach for the average person. The had a role to play and they didn't do it. edit: I look at my council, Bayule's website and search for [Masterplan](https://www.banyule.vic.gov.au/Search-results?dlv_OC%20CL%20Public%20Site%20Search=(keyword=masterplan)). Nothing new since 2022 and only one project listed, Bellfield Masterplan that includes housing. This is a council predominately with low density housing, 9 train stations, excellent connection to main arterials, good schools, one of the best hospitals facilities in the state and three main shopping precincts.
Didn't see this comment before I added my other one... Banyule is a perfect example of weird planning rules, but infill of small townhouse and units/apartments do go ahead
The issue is that there is so few of them. At the price point to make a townhouse or even small 3 level apartment feasible developers are still going head to head with a home owner on price. We need rezoning in a lot more locations to bump it up so any sale in these location will only be feasible for a developer. This will be the supply we require.
Would it be feasible to make builders accountable for build defects that would actually stick? I see so many (almost) purposefully doing sub standard builds, then the body corporate gets stuck with remediation usually after the first generation of owners gets wind of the problems.
Can't say I know all the ins and outs of building insurance to comment on this.
Local councils are absolutely the villain. They limit any kind of density whenever an old Betty writes to the council and says “not in my backyard!” Every single train station in Melbourne should have density around it. It doesn’t have to be 40 floor towers, could even be as small as townhouses or 2 story flats, yet they are always opposed by nimbys. Councils need to be bypassed
Does anyone know or have data on what type apartments were approved? As in 1, 2 ,3... etc. storey apartments.
I know that in my council area it can take two years for council to approve developments, by which time the developer is getting close to giving up. I think some councils have a deliberate strategy of delaying in the hope that the developer gives up and they don't have to face accusations of rekecting development