Tina Perinotto’s Post

https://lnkd.in/g-TCX9a8 There has been a tendency lately for an 'all or nothing' approach to the blame game in the housing supply/affordability matrix. The message from the media seems to either put it all on local government for slow or no housing approvals or developers for being too greedy. A more sophisticated and nuanced approach is necessary if we are going to fix this. There are many levers that are contributing to the lowest supply of new housing in Australia since 2011. Yes, its partly about uncertainty in the planning system and the time delays. Yes, its about construction and labour costs and the challenge in getting approvals already obtained to stack up financially. Yes, its also about taxes and levies, which in Victoria are higher than any other State. And yes, its also about interest rates and a range of other factors that have come together to create a perfect storm to make this an incredibly challenging time for the market to bring new dwellings into fruition. Lots of solutions are required but can we stop the black and white messaging which simply works to divide the community? Instead, lets focus on solutions that enable the supply of housing to get back on track but also allows the broader market to adapt to regulatory changes, such as grandparenting provisions around affordable housing. If these provisions had been done 10 years ago, we would be reaping the benefits of those changes now! Property Council of Australia UDIA Victoria Cath Evans, GAICD Mike Zorbas Linda Allison

The government introduced a number of measures through the Levelling Up and Regeneration Act (LURA) 2023 to incentivise the prompt build-out of housing sites. These measures include: - Requirements to provide formal development commencement notices and annual development progress reports; - Refined powers for LPAs to serve completion notices; - New powers to allow LPAs to decline to determine applications made by developers who fail to build out at a reasonable rate where there have been earlier permissions granted on any land in the authority’s area. Further regulations are required to allow these measures to be fully commenced. Alongside these measures in the LURA, there are proposed changes to national policy including: publishing data on failed build-out commitments; requiring explanation on means of increasing tenure mix to maximise absorption rates and highlighting delivery rates as a material planning consideration in planning applications. On 25th April, DLUHC published an update indicating that there will be a consultation to test the practical implications of these measures. Furthermore, there is a suggestion that there will be a further consultation seeking views on a build out financial penalty to incentivise developers to build out homes more quickly. Improved data and monitoring will undoubtedly assist in strategic planning for housing need. However, applying blunt measures that fail to take account of the nuances and range of factors that influence housing delivery rates rather than tackling the root-cause and failings of the current planning system could be counter-productive. It will be essential that the development industry engages with the consultation when it goes live. 

Pace and detail needed on grey belt to deliver ambitious planning reforms “Labour’s housebuilding targets and planning reforms are welcomed, but pace, along with funding or incentives, will be needed to encourage SME developers to build on grey belt.” These insights come from Richard Nowell, Senior Relationship Director at Secure Trust Bank Real Estate Finance, a leading provider of finance for property development and investment. He hails the government’s ambitions as positive but believes one of the five ‘golden rules’ for developing on grey belt land may lock SME housebuilders out of being able to regenerate these sites. The grey belt refers to brownfield sites such as disused car parks and wasteland within parts of protected green belt land. Specifically, Richard says the aim to ensure 50% of the homes built on grey belt land are affordable housing will make it extremely difficult for local and regional developers to justify developing on these plots. Richard said: “If I were to sum up the events since Labour won the election in three words, those would be ambitious, pace, and delivery. The reinstatement of housebuilding targets and intent to reform planning is ambitious from Rachel Reeves, and we now need pace from the Chancellor and our new Housing Secretary, Angela Rayner, to deliver on these plans. “One of the key challenges I see is enabling small-to-medium sized housebuilders to rejuvenate these sites which include old car parks and petrol stations on the borders of our countryside.

TWO MILLION, that's the number of homes we have failed to build just to keep pace with demand since the previous conservative government stopped Council house building. We consistently, year on year, under deliver on the number of homes we need. And what was the government's solution? Change the planning system...something developers had been calling for for years, only this wasn't the reform they were asking for. Instead of clearing the way for developers to build more homes, Gove gave power to the NIMBYs to oppose developments together with allowing Councils to reduce the amount of housing they require. And as everyone bar the Housing Secretary predicted, it has resulted in fewer homes being built! Housing developers need a government that is serious about housing building, and people need a government that will supplement developers building with more Council houses. But this government is done and out of ideas. The latest polls show absolute decimation for them in the polls, let's home the next person is more serious about building homes. https://lnkd.in/evnXngma.

The Prime Legacy of Global Powerhouse | Hon. Nick Champion, Premier SA Peter Malinauskas Rebecca Pickering Stephen Knight Will Frogley Bruce Djite Liam Golding—Pioneering a Vision for Sustainable Housing Development: A Strategic Roadmap Towards Tomorrow's Communities In the captivating era of housing development, a powerful wave of sustainability and resilience is sweeping across the globe, transcending boundaries and uniting nations in a shared vision of empowerment and prosperity. This transformative movement calls for empowering strategies and innovative solutions that address current challenges while empowering individuals and communities to build a sustainable future filled with promise and opportunity. The global imperative of sustainability and resilience in housing development empowers nations to envision a future of empowerment and growth. A resounding call to action echoes the need for empowering strategies that inspire and uplift communities towards a brighter tomorrow. The unveiling of the Housing Roadmap in South Australia, led by Minister Nick Champion and Peter Malinauskas, marks a significant milestone in empowering communities through sustainable housing development. The urgent global imperative of sustainability and resilience in housing development is driving nations towards a unified vision for a sustainable future. This vision serves as a clarion call to action, urging stakeholders to innovate, strategize, and pioneer solutions that will shape a sustainable tomorrow. Leaders in the field, such as Minister Nick Champion of South Australia, are at the forefront of this movement, unveiling groundbreaking initiatives like the Housing Roadmap that set the stage for transformative change. The Housing Roadmap in South Australia, guided by Minister Nick Champion and Peter Malinauskas, represents a strategic blueprint for achieving sustainable housing excellence by outlining key initiatives and actionable steps to steer the housing sector towards a more sustainable and resilient future. By embracing innovative technologies, sustainable building practices, and community engagement, this roadmap sets a new standard for housing development that prioritizes environmental stewardship, social responsibility, and strategic planning to ensure the availability of homes and prosperity for future generations. #Southaustralia #salutation #housingdevelopment #housingroadmap

As championed in our newest report, Missing Middle Housing Targets, Melbourne needs accountable targets to ensure that we build enough homes in our inner city areas. Middle- and inner-suburban suburbs are simply not keeping up with Melbourne’s need for more housing. The status quo is untenable. (See more here: https://lnkd.in/guZCsNSg) We agree with Municipal Association of Victoria (MAV) that councils' zoned capacity is fundamental to ensure that housing can be built where people want to live. This is why we need to upzone around our public transport. However, we do not agree with MAV that today’s temporary economic conditions are a good enough reason NOT to build a system for tomorrow. This logic is defeatist and benefits only those who want to keep house prices high. Now is the time to lay the foundations for a better and bolder planning system so we can get onto building more homes where people want to live. https://lnkd.in/ggAWrKVH

This article begins to explain the deficit in Council-issued dwelling approvals recently. Within 6-months of Amendment VC242 being gazetted, a supply backlog of 30,000 dwellings has been released to the State's Development Facilitation Program. I wonder how long this pipeline had been anticipating the Premier's Housing Statement and what impact that has had on housing affordability? Meanwhile Council planning and building departments have been mired in interpreting and implementing the inept and ambiguous reforms relating to Amendment VC243. The current planning reforms have emerged as a strategic ploy to wrest planning controls away from local government and Victorian communities, centralising them within announcement-hungry State agencies. It's easy to annouce a number of dwellings in an approvals pipeline. What's more cumbersome? * Discharging complex permit conditions * Reviewing and approving changes to plans * Liaising with referral agencies and parties * Carrying out necessary enforcement actions, and * Coordinating local infrastructure delivery All of these actions are needed to facilitate the construction of the 30,000 dwelling approvals. It seems the State expects Councils to carry out these actions pro bono, with little meaningful input into initial dwelling approvals. Sonya Kilkenny Jacinta Allan Planning Institute of Australia VPELA Property Council of Australia Department of Transport and Planning Harriet Shing Homes Victoria Patrick Fensham https://lnkd.in/gv9hSDXJ

In reality there are few levers the Government can pull to get house prices down and, in theory, this is one of them. However, let’s hope the law of unintended consequences doesn’t play out here. Why? Because development charges on city fringes currently seem to be a fraction of the true cost of all those new roads, sewers, power lines etc., meaning existing ratepayers are effectively subsidising new home buyers. So I wonder if lower land prices, and more demand for new homes, will be offset by councils etc. increasing development charges to recover the extra costs. They might be more than the reduced land charges save future buyers. Only time will tell. In the meantime, higher density zoning will definitely increase house supply. The economics are much simpler there, because the infrastructure is already there, and paid for.

📉 Ontario's New Affordable Housing Prices Pose Challenges for Developers 🏘️ Ontario's recent initiative to boost affordable housing amidst a cost-of-living crisis is facing significant pushback from the development community. The Ford government’s new definitions of affordable housing, which are necessary for developers to qualify for tax rebates, are being criticized for making it financially unfeasible to build. For example, developers in Toronto would need to sell a detached home for $366,500 to meet the affordability criteria, while the cost of land and construction far exceeds this amount. As Richard Lyall, President of the Residential Construction Council of Ontario, noted, it is “impossible” to build at these prices without incurring losses. Jessica Bell, Ontario NDP housing critic, voiced concerns that these measures might be "set up to fail," calling for alternative strategies like leveraging government land and offering grants for deeply affordable projects. The Building and Industry and Land Development Association (BILD) shared a case study illustrating that a home in Vaughan would need to be sold for $531,000 to qualify, yet the costs surpass $1.3 million. The government intends to monitor the situation and adjust annually, but the current scenario highlights the complex balance between policy intentions and market realities. 🏗️ What are your thoughts on this approach to tackling the housing crisis? Is there a better way forward? #AffordableHousing #HousingCrisis #Policy #RealEstateDevelopment #ConstructionIndustry

Absolutely correct FT. The glacial planning system in the UK not only dramatically reduces supply of housing and the ability of developers to respond to changing demographics, it also drives up cost of housing, and (perversely) reduces the quality of homes through decreasing competition in the home-building marketplace. Existing homeowners might foolishly think they personally benefit through this reduced supply, but the end result is higher prices and reduced supply of everything, because every worker and business owner needs housing and will factor this cost into their pricing structure. Some planning is beneficial, but the UK’s system has to be one of the most unnecessarily bursensome in the world. Options the UK government could explore include: enable private building certification providers, transferring opt-in planning approvals to opt-out approvals, introduce annual land taxes, reduce social housing (which also simply soaks up supply thereby excacerbating the very problem it purports to solve), replace ‘green belts’ with ‘green wedges’, or one of a thousand potential other improvements? The UK also needs significant work on its inefficient conveyancing system, improving tenants rights (esp abolishing Section 21 notices), and improving the democratisation of housing generally. https://lnkd.in/eHhXYR35