澳洲Australia property Inner vs Outer suburbs and Yardney&#0


在澳大利亚 The pool at of an IP needs to be resurfaced (or so the pool doctor says), the cost was estimated to be $10K ($10,000), after recoverying from my impresssion of a cat coughing up a fur ball, it just seems far too much. Its just a standard poo I need some advice regarding a property purchase. Property - semi-detached house Bedrooms - 2 Condition - average needs internal reno to modernise Street - one of the best in suburb Location - excellent Close to schools - yes Transport - 50m


From Michael Yardney's latest newsletter on the topic of Labour's Housing Affordability Fund:
........................................................................................
[U]"The National Rent Affordability Scheme. [/U]

Property investors may initially see this as a bonus - build a new home and get a one-off payment of $8,000 from the government for leasing it at 20% less than the going market rent.

On the surface this may look good.

The problem is that this is really a cleverly disguised re-invention of public housing. The scheme will be co-funded by the Commonwealth, State and Territory governments and is designed to encourage new dwellings specifically for tenants on Public Housing waiting lists at a reduced rent of 20% below market value.

Not only will average working families, struggling to meet the rising cost of rent miss out with this scheme but so will investors.

By taking up the offer of $8,000, investors will be forced to build a new home in a less than optimal area (most likely the outer suburbs), thereby foregoing the strong capital growth available in the inner suburbs.

While it may look like the government is finally encouraging residential investment and giving us something for doing our part in supplying much needed rental accommodation, they are in fact enticing investors into areas that may not provide the best long term returns. ............."


..................................................................................

We have had multiple discussions on inner vs outer on the forum over the last few years however the above statements in my opinion are quite absurd and very far from actual truth. Inner DOES NOT provide any medium - long term advantage over outer suburbs as far as investment potential goes. I have my foot in all camps. From blue chip inner portfolio to outer and middle as well as interstate cities and interstate regional.

In my last 6 years, my inner portfolio has increased the least in % terms than middle or outer or even regional. The yields are half of outer suburbs and the above statements at best are misguided.

For someone who takes pride in being "Aus leading commentator on residential property", I believe it is paramount to follow factual information without making broad based and generalised statements which dont hold any water. Expressing an opinion is fine however when statements are made with a single point agenda to achieve one's own vested intrests, then it becomes highly questionable.

Over medium to long term, inner suburbs have never outperformed outer. Through factual data sourced from ABS, Residex, APM and REIV/ REIQ etal, it has been proved many times that all areas grow at similar rate in equity growth.

To "rubbish" an initiative by government which might benefit investing in outer areas and might not serve vested interest for someone promoting property development in inner areas,and then presenting that information as "valid statements" is twisting the truth.

I have looked at prop portfolio of a lot of investors from SS and discussed indepth the actual growth from different areas they actually realised and have not come across a single example where inner prop have somehow experienced acclerated growth than outer over a 5-7 year term.

Given the current investing climate, the above statements cannot be further from the turth. In my opinion it is definitely not the time to be investing in inner/ bluechip areas which experienced highest growth in the last 12-24 months and are set to take a long breather.

My inner portfolio (otherwise considered bullet proof by some) has actually lost around 10% value compared to Jan 08 valuations. Second valuation done 5 weeks ago. That is a big drop and totally discounts the theory that inner suburbs offer better stability than outer and always maintain their values.

Compare this with my outer portfolio, which not even defied the trend but increased another 5% in the same quarter that inner shed around 10%.

Now also compare this with the fact that most of my investments in outer suburbs have given me over 50% growth in the last 3 years. My 2 properties in lowly Frankston North have appreciated 65% in the last 24 months..!

The $8,000 gov grant will help low cost housing in outer suburbs and will increase demand for available vacant parcels of land and will indirectly benefit the existing prop values that will go higher as a direct result of that - Almost the same effect that introduction of FHOG did to prop values.

Sorry for the long rant however I was disappointed at the blanket statements in the newsletter and thought it needs to be corrected in the context of providing balanced and correct information and not merely information that serves one's own short term vested interests.

Cheers

Harris  

评论
Thx harris, i was reading the same newsletter, but i got nothing to compare against.

yours is the best real life example here.

and thx again for sharing with us here.

Cheers  

评论
Thank you Harris for giving me food for thought. Freedom to go ahead and rant is granted. That is what I like most about this forum. :D

I know Michael has enjoyed much success doing things his way, but what you have stated gives me growing confidence in our own little portfolio in a lowly outer suburb. Please continue to keepypur pearlers coming!

Regards Jodie  

评论
Harris said:
In my last 6 years, my inner portfolio has increased the least in % terms than middle or outer or even regional.Click to expand...
Could that also be because you bought your inner city properties at the wrong time in the property cycle?

Harris said: ↑
have not come across a single example where inner prop have somehow experienced acclerated growth than outer over a 5-7 year term.Click to expand...
Are you saying that if someone spent 350k on a house in inner Melbourne in Jan 2004, and another person spent 350k on a house in outer Melbourne in Jan 2004...by about Jan 2009 (5 years), both would have grown by roughly the same amounts?

You can't be serious??

PS: I'm not 'anti-outer suburb', I live in Franga, see :p!  

评论
JIT said: ↑
Could that also be because you bought your inner city properties at the wrong time in the property cycle? !Click to expand...

It could be. The point I am making is that over medium - long term it has been demonsrtated umpteenth time that inner does not outperform outer. The fact that outer can deliver almost double the rental yield means that the total holding value of a portfolio for an investor dramatically increases in outer vs inner, so effectively a large portfolio in outer would have a compounding effect and more equity, even if it achieved slightly less increase in value than inner suburbs.


JIT said: ↑
You can't be serious??
Are you saying that if someone spent 350k on a house in inner Melbourne in Jan 2004, and another person spent 350k on a house in outer Melbourne in Jan 2004...by about Jan 2009 (5 years), both would have grown by roughly the same amounts? !Click to expand...

Absolutely , I am serious. Infact when I look at my own examples, my outer prop purchased in 2005 have increased at almost similar level in % terms compared to my inner portfolio purchased way back in 2002.

The regional bought mostly in 2003/ early 2004 increased at 2.5 times than my inner portfolio !  

评论
From my own observations I tend to agree that outer returns similar to inner (obviously there are always individual exceptions).

Returns can be higher when taking into account gentrification in inner vs. buy and sit in outer - where Michael's focus is, so I guess that would alter his opinion.

As far as the $8k govt. grant goes - I can't see that doing much to stem any of the problems that are/will arise. If I had the choice of building a house tomorrow in the outer suburbs, I would choose market rent and freedom to do as I please as opposed to taking up the government $8k incentive offer. They still haven't outlined how market will be determined, and whether you need approval through a govt. dept. for annual increases etc. I can see way too many potential problems arising. Not to mention that by definition, you will be attracting potential problem tenants who are already having difficulty making market rent payments.  

评论
Harris said: ↑
We have had multiple discussions on inner vs outer on the forum over the last few years however the above statements in my opinion are quite absurd and very far from actual truth.

Inner DOES NOT provide any medium - long term advantage over outer suburbs as far as investment potential goes. I have my foot in all camps. From blue chip inner portfolio to outer and middle as well as interstate cities and interstate regional.

In my last 6 years, my inner portfolio has increased the least in % terms than middle or outer or even regional. The yields are half of outer suburbs and the above statements at best are misguided.

Over medium to long term, inner suburbs have never outperformed outer. Through factual data sourced from ABS, Residex, APM and REIV/ REIQ etal, it has been proved many times that all areas grow at similar rate in equity growth.

I have looked at prop portfolio of a lot of investors from SS and discussed indepth the actual growth from different areas they actually realised and have not come across a single example where inner prop have somehow experienced acclerated growth than outer over a 5-7 year term.

Given the current investing climate, the above statements cannot be further from the turth. In my opinion it is definitely not the time to be investing in inner/ bluechip areas which experienced highest growth in the last 12-24 months and are set to take a long breather.

My inner portfolio (otherwise considered bullet proof by some) has actually lost around 10% value compared to Jan 08 valuations. Second valuation done 5 weeks ago. That is a big drop and totally discounts the theory that inner suburbs offer better stability than outer and always maintain their values.

Compare this with my outer portfolio, which not even defied the trend but increased another 5% in the same quarter that inner shed around 10%.

Now also compare this with the fact that most of my investments in outer suburbs have given me over 50% growth in the last 3 years. My 2 properties in lowly Frankston North have appreciated 65% in the last 24 months..!

Cheers

HarrisClick to expand...
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

Dear Harris,

1. Thank you for sharing with us, your own personal property investing experience and outcomes, in this forum.

2. Your post has served to confirm my own assessment and personal belief/"conviction" regarding the viability of investing in the various outer suburbs areas, which are located more than 40KM away from the various capital cities, and which are more affordable with with good growth potential, being located near to the beach area, with good transport infrastructure and direct access to the CBD areas, as well as with high owners-occupation rate, and with more than 100,000 local resident population and growing local economy and expanding business providing adequate employment opportunities in the locality areas.

3. I have sort of developed this personal beliefs/conviction, reportedly based on what I have personally observed and compared the various inner-city vis-a-vis- outer suburbs property market developments over the last 10-15 years, in particular, the Goldcoast area vis-a-vis Brisbane CBD area/ Capital City, property market developments.

4. Yet when I study the long term capital growth statistics/trends of the various suburbs areas, be it say, within the Perth Metropolitan Region housing market, the local housing statistics as reported by REIWA, do bear out a pattern that shows a general trend that the median house price for suburbs located nearest to the ocean as well as nearest to the CBD areas, far exceed the median house price for similar coastal suburbs in the outer suburbs areas, correspondingly speaking.

5. Similarly for the Melbourne Property market, as far as its various Eastern coastal suburbs are concerned, I believe that there is also a similiar trend and patterns emerging there too, at this point in time.

6. Can you please further confirm/disconfirm for me, if this is indeed true and correct, at this point in time.

7. If so, then why do the local housing statistics shows that median house price for inner cities coastal areas far exceed similar coastal areas in the outer areas.

8. Looking forward to learning further from you, please.

9. Thank you.

Cheers,
Kenneth KOH  

评论
Kenneth, if you're talking about prices of near vs outer properties as in your Perth example - there's no denying the price levels are different. But we're talking about growth % not $.

But if I've misunderstood you, ignore me. ;)  

评论
Over medium to long term, inner suburbs have never outperformed outer. Through factual data sourced from ABS, Residex, APM and REIV/ REIQ etal, it has been proved many times that all areas grow at similar rate in equity growth.

I have looked at prop portfolio of a lot of investors from SS and discussed indepth the actual growth from different areas they actually realised and have not come across a single example where inner prop have somehow experienced acclerated growth than outer over a 5-7 year term.

Given the current investing climate, the above statements cannot be further from the turth. In my opinion it is definitely not the time to be investing in inner/ bluechip areas which experienced highest growth in the last 12-24 months and are set to take a long breather.

My inner portfolio (otherwise considered bullet proof by some) has actually lost around 10% value compared to Jan 08 valuations. Second valuation done 5 weeks ago. That is a big drop and totally discounts the theory that inner suburbs offer better stability than outer and always maintain their values.

Compare this with my outer portfolio, which not even defied the trend but increased another 5% in the same quarter that inner shed around 10%.

Now also compare this with the fact that most of my investments in outer suburbs have given me over 50% growth in the last 3 years. My 2 properties in lowly Frankston North have appreciated 65% in the last 24 months..!

Cheers

Harris[/QUOTE]
***************************
Dear Harris.

1. Can you please provide the same relevant data from ABS, REIV, Residex and APM which you have used to study/analyse, to support your own claim that both the medium and long term capital growth for inner city suburbs do not neccessarily exceed that in the outer suburbs or/and middle suburbs, please.

2. Given the high growth for the Melbourne's inner suburbs over the last 24 months and the ongoing rippling effects of the present Melbourne property boom into its surrounding outer suburbs areas, I am personally, not surprised to read that the valuation for your inner properties have fallen 10% whereas corresponding valuations for your outer suburbs properties has further increased by 5% presently.

3. According to Herron Todd White Valuers, the Melbourne Property market boom has reportedly peaked last year, though it is still rippling towards its outer areas, at this point in time.

4. For your further comments and discussion, please.

5. Thank you.

Cheers,
Kenneth KOH  

评论
Harris

My own experiences have been more in line with Michael Yardney's so I can see where he is coming from. GoMichael and his two siblings bought properties in 1991/1992(within 6 months of ech other) within a similar budget and the differnce in performance between inner and outer has been extraordinary. I guess this also explains why the disparity in current prices between inner and outer. If the growth of the outer suburbs had been the same as the inner over the years then Carlton would be similarly priced to Berwick. Some of those differences are greater than they initially appear by just looking at median prices as the properties outer tend to be larger than those inner.

In terms of yield I think the pressure is now on inner property rents far more than outer properties. I know I can let a space above my garage for as much as 3 bedrooms homes in other suburbs.:eek:

You will of course have different experiences depending upon the time you buy in the property cycle, the ability to value add and whether you have paid a premium for new property. Of course those areas coming into fashion, undergoing changes to amenities such as freeways will experience more growth in the short to medium.  

评论
steveadl said: ↑
As far as the $8k govt. grant goes - I can't see that doing much to stem any of the problems that are/will arise If I had the choice of building a house tomorrow in the outer suburbs, I would choose market rent and freedom to do as I please as opposed to taking up the government $8k incentive offer. They still haven't outlined how market will be determined, and whether you need approval through a govt. dept. for annual increases etc. I can see way too many potential problems arising. Not to mention that by definition, you will be attracting potential problem tenants who are already having difficulty making market rent payments.Click to expand...
Steve

I was reading in one of the newspapers earlier this week (AFR? Australian?) that the whole scheme is to be administered by a government organization/department which will have control over the rents charged, who the tenants are, and all other aspects of the lease for a period of ten years (i.e. as long as the $8000 pa subsidy exists). There was no mention of what fees this government body would charge for doing this. Whilst this would probably suit institutional investors, I cannot imagine that individual property investors would find this an attractive proposition.

Comments, anyone???

(If I can find the article - if hubby hasn't already 'recycled' the newspaper - I will post references later this weekend).

Cheers
LynnH  

评论
steveadl said: ↑
Kenneth, if you're talking about prices of near vs outer properties as in your Perth example - there's no denying the price levels are different. But we're talking about growth % not $.

But if I've misunderstood you, ignore me. ;)Click to expand...
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Dear Steveadl,

1. I am looking at both nett $ price level as well as % Growth Rate over the last 1 year, 5 years, 10 years, as posted at REIWA.com (as well as some of the older data, over the 15 years, 20 years), as in the case of the Perth Property Market

2. Of course, since the the outer suburbs coastal suburbs are coming from a lower price level, we will naturally expect its % growth rate to be higher, assuming that both are actually growing at about the same dollar value price growth levels, all things being equal.

3. Perhaps, we should see/study these data in the context of the suburb's particular stage of urban development cycle/process, hypothetically speaking, whereby at certain developmental stage and price thresholds, we can further expect the local suburb housing price to suddenly spiral upwards in a significant manner or/and level out correspondingly once certain development stage status or/and price level, for the particular suburb area in question, has been achieved.

4. For your further comments and discussion, please.

5. Thank you.


Cheers,
Kenneth KOH  

评论
LynnH said: ↑
Steve

I was reading in one of the newspapers earlier this week (AFR? Australian?) that the whole scheme is to be administered by a government organization/department which will have control over the rents charged, who the tenants are, and all other aspects of the lease for a period of ten years (i.e. as long as the $8000 pa subsidy exists). There was no mention of what fees this government body would charge for doing this. Whilst this would probably suit institutional investors, I cannot imagine that individual property investors would find this an attractive proposition.

Comments, anyone???

(If I can find the article - if hubby hasn't already 'recycled' the newspaper - I will post references later this weekend).

Cheers
LynnHClick to expand...
Hi LynnH,

Just reading through what you have posted makes the plan seem very unattractive to a private investor. 10 yrs is an awfully long period of time to be effectively giving away the right to manage your own property. What happens if an investor wants to sell their property? Would there be an exit clause? I think this plan is fraught with all kinds of dangers for an investor.

Can anyone really see this providing a viable solution to the current 'housing affordability crisis' that is being promoted ad nausium by Kev '07?

Regards Jason.  

评论
jingo said: ↑
Hi LynnH,

Just reading through what you have posted makes the plan seem very unattractive to a private investor. 10 yrs is an awfully long period of time to be effectively giving away the right to manage your own property. What happens if an investor wants to sell their property? Would there be an exit clause? I think this plan is fraught with all kinds of dangers for an investor.

Can anyone really see this providing a viable solution to the current 'housing affordability crisis' that is being promoted ad nausium by Kev '07?

Regards Jason.Click to expand...
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Dear Jason,

1. If Wayne Swan as the new Australian Federal Treasurer, has publicly tried to "twist" his own language regarding his purported "spending cuts" in his first Budget when the new Federal Govt is actually imposing more taxation on the Australian peoples at a time when the working class Australians are experiencing severe housing/rental stress at this point in time or/and has openly "lied" to the Australian peoples, then I think it is safer that we wait out and see first how the actual National Housing Affordability Rental Scheme will eventually evolve out and progress into before doing our own neccessary due diligence on it.

2. For your further comments and discussion, please.

3. Thank you.

Cheers,
Kenneth KOH  

评论
Harris said: ↑
Absolutely , I am serious. Infact when I look at my own examples, my outer prop purchased in 2005 have increased at almost similar level in % terms compared to my inner portfolio purchased way back in 2002.

The regional bought mostly in 2003/ early 2004 increased at 2.5 times than my inner portfolio !Click to expand...
My own experience is of a house I bought in inner Melbourne that was worth 350k in Jan 2004, and 600k in Jan 2008...with no major reno/development, just a passive B&H.

(AND, the rent has gone from $250 per week to $375 per week in the same time period.)

I can't imagine buying any 350k house eg. outer suburb McMansion, at the same time that would be worth anywhere near 600k?

Individual experiences vary of course.

Can you show me any evidence that inner = outer over the medium-term period of 5 years??

I can agree with you on the long-term view that inner = outer, but this for me is over 10 years.

Spiderman showed this on a thread some time ago.

I am not convinced that the same applies over 5 year periods, which is my personal investing time frame.  

评论
LynnH said: ↑
Steve

I was reading in one of the newspapers earlier this week (AFR? Australian?) that the whole scheme is to be administered by a government organization/department which will have control over the rents charged, who the tenants are, and all other aspects of the lease for a period of ten years (i.e. as long as the $8000 pa subsidy exists). There was no mention of what fees this government body would charge for doing this. Whilst this would probably suit institutional investors, I cannot imagine that individual property investors would find this an attractive proposition.

Comments, anyone???

(If I can find the article - if hubby hasn't already 'recycled' the newspaper - I will post references later this weekend).

Cheers
LynnHClick to expand...
Wow, that's even worse than I had imagined Lynn! 10 yrs!!! So for $800 per year (tax benefits or cash?) you relinquish rights to both selection of the tenant and say over what is market rent.

Yeah, that's going to generate lots of investor interest! :rolleyes: I couldn't even imagine institutions interested in a deal like that where you lose control of the asset!  

评论
JIT said: ↑
My own experience is of a house I bought in inner Melbourne that was worth 350k in Jan 2004, and 600k in Jan 2008...with no major reno/development, just a passive B&H.

(AND, the rent has gone from $250 per week to $375 per week in the same time period.)

I can't imagine buying any 350k house eg. outer suburb McMansion, at the same time that would be worth anywhere near 600k?

Individual experiences vary of course.

Can you show me any evidence that inner = outer over the medium-term period of 5 years??

I can agree with you on the long-term view that inner = outer, but this for me is over 10 years.

Spiderman showed this on a thread some time ago.

I am not convinced that the same applies over 5 year periods, which is my personal investing time frame.Click to expand...
I can only add my own experience to this topic as well:

1) Inner Ring suburb Ip (2kms from CBD) bought in 2001 has achieved around 14% p/a.

2) Inner Ring suburb Ip (10kms from CBD) bought in 2003 has achieved around 12% p/a

3) Middle suburb Ip (17kms from CBD) bought in 2004 has achieved around 7% p/a.

4) Outer suburb Ip (40 kms from CBD) bought in 2005 has achieved around 7% p/a.

5) Outer suburb IP (40 kms from CBD) bought in 2006 has achieved around 10% p/a.

6) Inner suburb (2km from CBD) bought in March 2007. Grew by around 34% in that year.

7) Inner suburb (2km from CBD) bought in September 2007. Has achieved around 5% growth to date.


Rents are increasing strongly in the inner areas at the moment. Perhaps the outer areas will follow in due course?

I think a lot of people's results depend on when they bought. I expect that the rapid growth I obtained in IP 6 will level off dramatically. It will be interesting to revisit this in 10 years time and see what the growth has been like. I expect a long period of stagnation and falls along the way........

I used to stress over whether buying in inner or outer areas was better. Now I am more inclined to think in terms of 'multiple properties' bought in a range of areas, held for the long term, with equity being harvested along the way for further investments into shares or more property.


Regards Jason.  

评论
Kennethkohsg said: ↑
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Dear Steveadl,

1. I am looking at both nett $ price level as well as % Growth Rate over the last 1 year, 5 years, 10 years, as posted at REIWA.com (as well as some of the older data, over the 15 years, 20 years), as in the case of the Perth Property Market

2. Of course, since the the outer suburbs coastal suburbs are coming from a lower price level, we will naturally expect its % growth rate to be higher, assuming that both are actually growing at about the same dollar value price growth levels, all things being equal.

3. Perhaps, we should see/study these data in the context of the suburb's particular stage of urban development cycle/process, hypothetically speaking, whereby at certain developmental stage and price thresholds, we can further expect the local suburb housing price to suddenly spiral upwards in a significant manner or/and level out correspondingly once certain development stage status or/and price level, for the particular suburb area in question, has been achieved.

4. For your further comments and discussion, please.

5. Thank you.


Cheers,
Kenneth KOHClick to expand...
Kenneth,

1. Whilst the $$$ figure is very important for the individual investor as we obviously want to maximise the amount of equity $$$'s we have, it's only fair to judge the asset itself based on % terms.

2. Just because one assets has a lower starting value, you can't expect it to increase in $ terms faster to catch up to the more expensive asset. There is a gap in $$$ terms for a reason. ie. there will always be an $x gap between inner and outer, even though both could experience the same % growth. It's unreasonable to expect that a $100k house has to increase at 10% to match a $200k house's 5% increase to achieve the same $10k increase in value.

3. This I think is a key point. Certain areas and properties will become more attractive due to unique reasons ie. gentrification in a suburb and you have a quarter acre block with one small house on it surrounded by villas and townhouses. These types of houses may experience much larger growth than the villa next door (obviously in this case due to the land component).

4. See above.

5. You're welcome. ;)  

评论
JIT said: ↑
I can't imagine buying any 350k house eg. outer suburb McMansion, at the same time that would be worth anywhere near 600k?
.Click to expand...
I don't have the figures, but from a gut feel, places like Doncaster, Donvale, Glen Waverley (would have been a unit at that price), Mulgrave (maybe?) would likely have moved that much.

Cheers,

The Y-man  

评论
GoAnna! said: ↑
Harris

If the growth of the outer suburbs had been the same as the inner over the years then Carlton would be similarly priced to Berwick. Some of those differences are greater than they initially appear by just looking at median prices as the properties outer tend to be larger than those inner.Click to expand...
OK.. lets bust this myth with some factual evidence.

Through REIV website, I could not find Carlton's median 5 years ago however look at another inner suburb which apparently has done one of the best out of most inner in the last 5 years, Brunswick.

03 median $375k
08 median $605k

161% growth in value


Now look at your own quoted example of Berwick

03 median $275k
08 median $397.5k

144% growth in value

Now consider the fact that yields in Berwick would be higher than Brunswick and all of a sudden the value proposition balances both suburbs out in actual growth.

Now look at 2 extremes and the ones quite frequently talked about in the forum

Brighton -

03 median $823k
08 median $1.675mill

203% growth in value

Frankston

03 median $165k
08 median $318k

192% growth

Almost similar growth to Brighton.

Now consider the fact that Frankston back then and even now will get you twice the yield meaning that an investor can hold almost 1.5times to twice the value of portfolio in Frankston compared to Brighton...!

That means that if an investor had $ XX available to invest in property 5 years ago, as a total "value propostion" he would have been far better off buying in frankston than Brighton due to the overall size of portfolio and would not have missed out on any equity growth..!

Hope it sounds more convincing now

Cheers
Harris  

Property Investment

Australia property Selling Hints | Sydney

澳大利亚Hi folks I recall ready somewhere about what are some simple tricks for making your place more attractive during a home open. Im seriously thinking of selling my little pad and want to maximise my efforts. Any hints greatly appreciated. 评论 ...

Property Investment

Australia property Re-zoning | Sydney

澳大利亚What would the chances of a NSW Local Council allowing a community titled development (homes, community buildings, etc) on an area zoned Protected Agricultural land? Does anyone have experience in this area? Looking at the local council LEP, ...