The Productivity Commission’s report on housing and land supply is, well, excellent. It’s very detailed, asks the right questions, and provides a lot of the evidence needed to help us towards solutions.
But in one area in particular I really think they have it wrong.
Chapter 10, “Planning and Funding our Future”, discusses the potential role for compulsory property acquisition in assembling large-enough land parcels for achieving proper economies of scale in construction.
I can see where ProdComm is coming from in this. They’ve previously identified bespoke housing as a problem for construction costs and the lack of large developments as one reason for it.
Hold-out problems are the usual justification for use of eminent domain. Suppose that you’re a property owner. You get wind that a big developer is planning something substantial for the neighbourhood – and that it would include your property. If you know that everybody else…
View original post 787 more words
Utopia, you are standing in it! 
Recent Comments