What exactly are "land releases?"

Apologies for asking just about the dumbest question on a property forum...

Whenever there is any discussion about future housing development there is almost always a mention of land release.

Who is releasing the land? Federal govt? State govt? Local govt? Private owners? Agricultural land being rezoned and sold by farmers?
 
Who is releasing the land?

Federal govt?

maybe 2% if you make forward projections based on the last 4 year's fiscal policy, add in a demographics study and attach it to a bill banning gay marriageand expect a 100 lot land release to solve all the country's problems.

State govt?

more likely - DHW is selling large parcels of land here in WA. Satterley are developing it for 50% of the profit - not a bad deal!

Local govt?

local what now? government? surely you jest. those guys couldn't trip over a wine barrel in a wardrobe.

Private owners?

again, more likely - but the larger releases are generally development companies, private or publicly listed. land releases generally come forom these guys.

Agricultural land being rezoned and sold by farmers?

possibly - never seen any LARGE development, though. nothing newsworthy, anyway.

local government, he says........
 
All the land releases I see are huge patches of brown (or red) dirt with enormous billboards on them with pictures of pretty happy people, marketed by large development companies like Delphin. Quite often you'll find said patch of brown dirt *used* to be owned by the government or a farmer but it was sold to said large development companies, who then subdivide them, whack in some roads and plumbing and stick the ubiquitous billboards up. I'm sure it varies and there's more to it than that but that's what a random nosy passer-by sees.

We like to watch them and count the number that have "lakes" in the title. Especially the inland ones far away from any waterways. There's one on the far inland edge of Whyalla, overlooking saltbush, blowflies, desert, kangaroos and a very distant dry dusty horizon called "Ocean Eyre" which always makes me giggle.
 
"whacking" some roads and water through a development costs about $65k per lot created, plus retaining.....

where do you come up with that figure? seems a bit high for me for 750-900sqm blocks, I don't have any experience, just seems high, would love to know what the breakdown of that is.
 
where do you come up with that figure? seems a bit high for me for 750-900sqm blocks, I don't have any experience, just seems high, would love to know what the breakdown of that is.

More like 450-500sqm blocks - 750-900sqm would be about 45k a lot round-a-bouts....?
 

Attachments

  • green-title-lot-creation.JPG
    green-title-lot-creation.JPG
    35.8 KB · Views: 110
i thought it was an inverse relationship - the less power/water/sewer run ins required, the cheaper it is, therefore the balance between yield / cost is quite a juggling act.
 
Sorry did'nt explain myself.
Looking at the end, generally, result 2 x 500m blocks will bring more income than
1 x 1000m.
Around Sydney the fees imposed by local govs can be quite ridiculous and bring costs to >100k :eek:.

That's why so many projects are halted, not worth doing.
They can hark on about land shortage, pop growth, housing shortage all they like,
but if people can't pay enough for the developers to make a profit, they don't get built intil then.
Many of those building have enough clout to get concessions and/or are working with a very low cost base.
 
yeah fees..... City of Cockburn in the new area near the trainstation want $13k PER BLOCK CREATED in developer contributions.....:eek::eek::eek:
 
"whacking" some roads and water through a development costs about $65k per lot created, plus retaining.....
I had the council works guy around today (do remember I'm rural) and I swear he actually said they'd just whack a driveway in right there :D

Very technical term, it is.
 
It means government rezoning land which in turn makes a hand full of existing property owners very rich overnight, usually farmers who then sit on the block without selling and instead turning it into their retirement savings 10 years down the track.

Simply put it means nothing to developers and bring no new housing to the market.

Here is an idea, how about letting us developers find the land and the government promise to rezone it within our lifetimes without the need of brown paper bags being handed over to the NSW government in exchange for them to simply turn up in the morning and do their bloody job.
 
wow, people sure do hate local govt. I cant complain, they have paid me well over the years.

The actual "release" part of land release is when a state govt responds to the local council submission for rezoning ( a lengthy process for something really large like a new town) and grants the rezoning and the consent becomes operational. (at least, thats how its done in NSW). google "gugong nsw" if you want to see how land releases work on a grant scale.

In the ACT, the Govt owns all the land so they just run rleases as a commercial proposition, another reason why they only let a very few multi-unit developments in established areas, reletive to the size of most suburbs here as they make soooo much from their greenfields sites....one of my pet peeves !!!!
 
Thank you everyone for the responses.

The actual "release" part of land release is when a state govt responds to the local council submission for rezoning ( a lengthy process for something really large like a new town) and grants the rezoning and the consent becomes operational.

So is this submission for rezoning something that a state government bureaucrat makes a decision about, or is this a submission that gets put into parliament as a bill to be voted on?
 
well, let's take this little diddy from the City of Canning, WA.

the local government implemented a structure plan 30 yeas ago (that's right - THIRTY F**KING YEARS AGO) across a few sites in the ACNF20 region of East Cannington. It showed a stupid little cul-de-sac running in between properties Each new development is not allowed to have new access off the main streets.

Meanwhile re-zoned the land to R15 - this particular block is a 5 unit site. Canning TPS shows 4 units.

9 months, advertising, lobbying and no guarantee of a favourable outcome to get 5.

i told them how unviable it was, and all i got back was some lalala rainbow land socialist retort of how private developers don't care about neighbourhoods and it should all be governed by local government because we care and aren't chasing the dollar.

i just said "good thing there's plans in the wings then to reduce the powers of local govt, because last time i checked, people don't buy these things to be nice - they buy them to make money" to which i got a very heated response about it all being about money and investors not living there etc.

"so what about the R Codes then? are you saying that the statutory planning body in WA have it all wrong?"

"we have an 'extra over policy' see, what really needs to happen is that all the people should get together and agree to the road and make life easier."

"and who's goign to foot the bill for building the road? there's over 12 owners and the road isnt 50/50 through each lot."

"the splitting of costs aren't our problem, and that cost is borne by the developer"

"but these poeple arent developing, they're trying to sell their land and have this restriction across the rear that doesn't allow development"

"we are allowing development, but the road has to be built first""

"uh huh. okay, well, just to let you know, you've essentially cheated yourself out of all these rates, because i'm about to advise my client to look for another site. i'd like to see you explain that one to your electorate in the name of socialism."

....and hung up.
 

Attachments

  • dumbfucks_CofC.JPG
    dumbfucks_CofC.JPG
    58.6 KB · Views: 70
Top