Politicians are starting to get the message, but is it all too late? Has the affordability horse bolted, permanently?
It is an article of faith for propagandists that if you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth.
Based on the last Census, the number of people who used rail – either in whole or in conjunction with some other form of transport – was 65,212. Not a big number.
The argument that Australian cities can significantly increase inner city density by replicating European housing forms is an argument for keeping newcomers out.
The wrangling isn’t over whether to reduce prices, but how. And that depends on where you fit in the city’s system of interests with a stake in property development and construction.
A significantly more compact urban form in a city like Melbourne would improve public health, but it doesn't seem a very compelling justification for strategic land use policy.
The point is that the light regulatory touch in Utah has not prevented innovation or world leading design in urban development.
In August this year, that journal of inner city indulgence The Sydney Morning Herald published a front page story boldly declaring 'Sydney’s ten most liveable suburbs revealed.' Attention grabbing headline? Tick. Rigorous methodology? Fail.
That also means it won't generate any extra revenue that could be applied to public transport infrastructure. It might also hobble the extent to which pricing can be used as a tool to manage traffic.
At 10% of AWE before tax, it takes 12.2 years to put aside a 20% deposit today versus 8.9 25 years ago. That’s a significant increase, and many purchasers just don’t have that much patience.
It's a common charge but Melbourne's city centre apartment towers aren't remotely like real slums and nor are they likely to be in the forseeable future.
Central business districts – long the glamourous headquarter preference for leading professional service firms – are under increasing pressure from competing centres.