Great read - townhouses are def the move. I also think zoning, setbacks and NIMBYism has had the most corrosive impacts on our nation’s health.
Some councils mandate that a ratio of bedrooms to car parks for new developments which is negligent at best, and just plain idiotic at worst because you are forcing developers to build something that the market may not demand. That extra garage spot could have been a bedroom. If the market demands car parks then I’m sure some private developer will build a multistory parking lot
Locking in 2-3 generations of Aussies into car centric infrastructure with suburbia focused housing surely results in higher obesity rates and a sub par noisey quality of life.
Generally agree. But there should still be some standards for livability.
I have seen where some friends live and the 10-20 story ghettos that are developing in the "large-scale towers around train stations" and other places. I think this is happening because developers want to maximise their return, so squeeze more apartments in at the cost of shrinking the living space and therefore affecting livability.
5 - 6 member families living in apratments meant really for a couple and a baby/toddler/one kid. Instead you have small apartments lived in by mom, dad and three kids. Squeezed into 2 bedrooms, no spare area, possibly one parking bay. I am not suggesting that is the norm, but it is happening.
My view is that the 4-5 level large room European apartments (think Paris, Rome not Amsterdam) would be a better fit taking up more suburbia (no problem) and not being an eyesore on the horizon. Plus probably better design for parking.
The second problem with apartments is strata management. Especially where they are not professionally run.
It’s a step in the right direction and worth doing, but I don’t think $2 billion (or $1.5 for non-regional areas), spread across each state and territory over four years, is a big enough carrot. Certainly not for the kind of reform you’re after. The political constraints are likely to outweigh the money.
Agree- I think something more like 10-20% of the GST bucket should be quarantined to drive housing supply reforms. Would sure force states to think very carefully about if they are serious on reform.
Great read - townhouses are def the move. I also think zoning, setbacks and NIMBYism has had the most corrosive impacts on our nation’s health.
Some councils mandate that a ratio of bedrooms to car parks for new developments which is negligent at best, and just plain idiotic at worst because you are forcing developers to build something that the market may not demand. That extra garage spot could have been a bedroom. If the market demands car parks then I’m sure some private developer will build a multistory parking lot
Locking in 2-3 generations of Aussies into car centric infrastructure with suburbia focused housing surely results in higher obesity rates and a sub par noisey quality of life.
You’re gonna really like the deluge of research coming out over the next three weeks!
Super keen mate. Keep it up ⭐️⭐️
Generally agree. But there should still be some standards for livability.
I have seen where some friends live and the 10-20 story ghettos that are developing in the "large-scale towers around train stations" and other places. I think this is happening because developers want to maximise their return, so squeeze more apartments in at the cost of shrinking the living space and therefore affecting livability.
5 - 6 member families living in apratments meant really for a couple and a baby/toddler/one kid. Instead you have small apartments lived in by mom, dad and three kids. Squeezed into 2 bedrooms, no spare area, possibly one parking bay. I am not suggesting that is the norm, but it is happening.
My view is that the 4-5 level large room European apartments (think Paris, Rome not Amsterdam) would be a better fit taking up more suburbia (no problem) and not being an eyesore on the horizon. Plus probably better design for parking.
The second problem with apartments is strata management. Especially where they are not professionally run.
It’s a step in the right direction and worth doing, but I don’t think $2 billion (or $1.5 for non-regional areas), spread across each state and territory over four years, is a big enough carrot. Certainly not for the kind of reform you’re after. The political constraints are likely to outweigh the money.
Agree- I think something more like 10-20% of the GST bucket should be quarantined to drive housing supply reforms. Would sure force states to think very carefully about if they are serious on reform.
All available research tells us these policies explain less than 5% of house prices.
It's quite the opposite, house price inflation has nothing to do with supply and everything to do with speculative demand
and the "research" supporting the later is all paid/interest propaganda