Episode 294: The Biggest WA Subdivision Shake-Up in Decades (With Anton Flynn)

Listen and Subscribe:

Omny | iTunes | Google Podcasts | Spotify

Could 50,000 more blocks in Perth soon become subdividable?

The WA Government has announced major proposed changes to the Residential Design Codes, potentially unlocking thousands of new subdivision and infill-development opportunities across Perth.

But before property owners and investors rush to buy development sites, there are important risks, timeframes and practical issues to understand.

In this episode of Perth Property Insider, Jarrad is joined by Anton Flynn from Subdivision Experts to reveal what the proposed WA R-Codes reforms could actually mean for R20-zoned properties, 700m² blocks, granny flats, dual-key developments, and Perth’s future housing supply.

You’ll hear why the reforms could be a major opportunity for existing property owners - with one important caveat.

You’ll learn:

✅Why some 700m² R20 blocks could potentially be subdivided into two
✅How the proposed changes differ from current R20 subdivision requirements
✅What the reforms could mean for Perth property values and development potential
✅The specific group of people who owners may benefit most from the changes
✅A potentially overlooked issue that may create congestion in established suburbs
✅Why local councils may resist parts of the proposed planning reforms
✅The critical timing factor that determines when investors should avoid buying property
✅Two things that may be just as important as rezoning land

Let’s go inside 👇🎙️

Episode Highlights:

1. 00:00:00 Intro
2. 00:03:20 Fixing code complexity
3. 00:06:40 Parking and street chaos
4. 00:09:40 Don't buy on hype
5. 00:12:40 New property tax edge
6. 00:15:40 What's actually confirmed
7. 00:18:40 Councils get bypassed
8. 00:21:40 The build cost seesaw
9. 00:24:40 Watch the backlash

Resource Links:

• Connect with Anton Flynn from Perth Subdivison Experts https://www.subdivisionexperts.com.au/
• Get your Rental Health Score now to ensure your Perth rental property is optimised for returns and sleeping well at night https://rentalhealth.scoreapp.com/
• Would you like to get clear on your current property’s outlook and the best strategy for you? Email Jarrad for your Strategic Property Review: jarrad@investorsedge.com.au 
• Get your Strategic Portfolio Plan and our help with Buying Your Next Perth Property  (https://www.investorsedge.com.au/invest-in-perth-property/)
• Take our Property Investor Readiness Scorecard to uncover your blind spots and make smarter investment decisions before you buy: https://investorsedge.scoreapp.com/
• View upcoming property investor webinars, events, and networking sessions: https://www.investorsedge.com.au/events/ 
• Thinking of selling? Get expert advice on timing and strategy https://www.investorsedge.com.au/appraisal 
• Get email updates about suburb intelligence reports and exclusive invites to our webinars, events, and workshops. Join (https://www.investorsedge.com.au/join) 
• Join the Perth Property Investment Facebook Group (https://www.facebook.com/groups/perthpropertyinvestors)
• Join Jarrad Mahon’s Property Investor Update with insights on your suburbs of interest (https://www.investorsedge.com.au/join)
• For more info on our award-winning and highly rated Property Management services that give you guaranteed peace of mind (https://www.investorsedge.com.au/perth-property-management-specialists/)
• For more info on how our Property Sales services can ensure you get the best selling price while handling all the stress for you (https://www.investorsedge.com.au/selling-your-perth-property/)

Thank you for tuning in! If you liked this episode, please subscribe, tune in, and share this podcast.

Connect with Perth Property Insider:

• Subscribe on YouTube:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCgT9-gB6RS69xSgc8J9KrOw

• Like us on Facebook:

https://www.facebook.com/investorsedge

Listen and Subscribe:

Omny | iTunes | Google Podcasts | Spotify

Episode Transcript

[00:00:00] G'day, and welcome to Perth Property Insider. You may have seen the announcement by government, all proud of themselves, saying that they're gonna have some of the biggest changes to the residential codes in decades. They're looking at having a 700 square meter block that could [00:00:20] not be subdivided yesterday, potentially now subdivided if it's, uh, in, uh, R20 zoning.

So I thought I'd get Anton on the show to cut through all of this excitement that the government has and- Yeah … break it down, what it actually might mean for [00:00:40] us, what's the sort of potential timeframes ahead, and how it might shake out along the way. So pretty important changes proposed. Anton, is it, is it as, uh, exciting and as big a game changer as it could be?

Well, look, um, good to be back, and yeah, what a, what a shakeup. My phone's certainly been [00:01:00] ringing off the hook. And look, it, it can be a game changer. The government's flagged as, you know, about 50,000 extra housing units at least that, that we could supply that way. So look, it's… What I'd say is it's potentially exciting.

It's currently in idea formation stage, like just as a start point, and it's one of several changes that they're looking at, um, which we don't yet have [00:01:20] full detail on. Yeah. Well, w- other than your phone getting bombarded, what was some of your first reactions to it? Did you think it was gonna be potentially a good thing, or were you worried about how it might be implemented or…

What, what came up for you? Oh, look, all sorts of things. So I suppose a bit of an amusement is that one of the last times you and I [00:01:40] did some podcast recording is we've got a habit of talking about a topic, and then a week later the- Yeah … you know, the government announces something else or changes their mind.

So I suppose what I'd say to people is that there's opportunity. This is a first announcement, and it's some parts of the ideas that are flying around in, in the background, right? Right now there are working groups in government offices and [00:02:00] with industry surveyors and town planners. I'm not party to knowing what they're talking about, but this is just one of the ideas.

So right now everything's getting put together. Um, and what I'd say to people is get excited about it, but what's proposed now and what the final format will be when this all washes out might be something completely different. And how significant are these changes? And, [00:02:20] and let's ta- take us through sort of the headline one that they've proposed- Yeah

for R20. Well, the a- the, the major thing here is that right now to subdivide, um, a lot at R20 in two, we've got a minimum and an average site area calculation to comply with. So there's a 450 square meter average and a th- a 350 square meter minimum. So in plain English, [00:02:40] we need two times the average Right, without applying any variations or concessions, that'd be two times 450 is 900 to subdivide a block in half.

If they're saying at R20 we only need the minimum, which is 350, all of a sudden that's only 700 square meters. So, you know, there'd be a whole heap of lots all through different suburbs and areas that all of a suddenly can then be subdivided [00:03:00] in half. Well, that could open up a lot more infill housing, which we do desperately need if it's done, done well, I guess.

Yeah. What was some of the- What, what I'm- … some of the details to it? Yeah. Look, the other, look, the other details, they've got other proposals there too around, um, which I'm more hopeful of this will achieve more things is, you know, bringing back approval [00:03:20] timeframes, streamlining approvals processes. So the statutory timeframes we have right now for things take a long time.

Also, other ways to increase yield on the same size lots that they're looking at, you know, increasing, let's say at R40, for example, we can go to three stories. What I'm also hopeful to see is some sort of consolidation. Right now we've had an attempt at fixing [00:03:40] the R codes a couple of years ago or improving it, and there would be some argument that what we've just added, done is added complexity, um, and inconsistency across parts of the R code.

So, like a great example, um, there's a part B and a part C at the moment. So in, in part B, that's everything R25 and under, we have what are called [00:04:00] SBDs, single bed dwellings, and they get a one-third, uh, percentage, like a lot size concession on the minimum and the average. And they can be 70 square meters internal with one habitable room, okay?

Can only have, only have a single bedroom. If I go up to the part C assessment, they're what's called small dwellings. They get a 35% concession on the minimum average, about the same, but in [00:04:20] those there is no restriction on the number of, of habitable rooms, so they can be two bedders, for example. So for all intents and purposes, they're the same size dwelling, but one's more restricted than the other.

But then if I go to part B, the lower density part, if I want to chop up a block and just put SBDs all over it, I can do that If I go to R30 and R40 in [00:04:40] Part C, they can only be 50% of the dwelling mix. So I think there's things like this that they can look to streamline, and I hope that's happening in the background too in proposal format, to, um, make the codes less onerous to navigate and be less restrict- for us as developers and subdividers with regards to what we can do.

'Cause ultimately, changing [00:05:00] coding and stuff, this is all wonderful, it's lines on a bit of paper. We need to do what is of economic benefit. So- Mm … you know, for us, whether I've got a small, a, a dwelling with two bedrooms in it or one, that's gonna impact the rent return and the valuation. And ultimately, its biggest private industry is, is driving infill.

We need to see R-R on paper, and anything they can do to help [00:05:20] us get stuff to market quicker and give us more flexibility in what we can do, and make it more navigatable for your, your average mom and dad developers. Mm. You know, if it's too complex, they're gonna, they're gonna stay away from it. And I guess when we look at the typical 700 square meter property, what do you think is actually more likely to work?

Because you [00:05:40] mentioned there that- Mm … you'd still potentially have to have a minimum lot size of 350, I'm gathering. Mm. Or I g- I guess the detail will still come out on that. So look, I, I, I see, as an example, a 700 square meter block. If they're saying just comply with the average 350, okay, what does that look like?

Need more detail. But with that lot, you know, there are… [00:06:00] I could do two lots. On each of those lots, um, we've got some flow-on effect that I'm also seeing in what they're, um, proposing in their reform. I could put a normal dwelling on each one of those lots, but provided I don't go over site coverage, which is currently at 50%, I've got 350 squares there on a block, let's say.

I could… There's 175 square meters of building [00:06:20] footprint on that. So on each one of those lots, I could put, let's say 120 square meter, you know, small three by one, three by two. Yeah. And also let's say 50 square meter granny flat as an example, right on each lot. So all of a sudden then I've got four tenancies on two lots in a low residential density area.

Another part of the proposal of their reform is to [00:06:40] get, a do away with minimum parking requirements for granny flats. Now, right now I can tell you the work I'm doing and peers in market, we're all adding ancillary dwellings onto all sorts of different types of lots, which is great for rent yield and dwelling diversity and pr- providing accommodation.

But I put to you, like, they need to think about the fact that if I've got a, an R20 low residential density [00:07:00] area, and they're mostly 700 square meter blocks, everybody subdivides those and puts ancillaries on them. Mm. And they don't have to provide parking for the ancillaries. I can tell you what the streets are gonna look like in what was a low residential area.

You know, there'll be two to four extra cars parked on the street- Yeah … for every single house. We've got all the stormwater runoff from additional roof space. I mean, [00:07:20] if I'm in an area where, um- You know, the soil profile's very bad and we have to connect to council drainage, it's all clay. Can the local council drainage infrastructure cope with that?

Let alone other servicing, you know, water, sewer, power- Mm … all this sort of stuff. You- in a certain suburb, you might double the number of potential housing overnight. What's the capacity of infrastructure to cope with it? So [00:07:40] what I'd say to people, it's a great announcement, but there's a lot of other moving parts in the background.

User group consultation, there's the whole process that's gonna have to be followed to get us to a final result. You definitely need to look at the practicality of things. I mean, I had a client who was looking to build a, um, HMO or sort of multiple living occupancy- Mm … [00:08:00] type property in Cloverdale, and they were taking the, the 900 square meter property.

They were dividing it into two HMOs on the front with an ancillary dwelling behind each, and then two further dwellings behind that. And you look at what would've been maybe two cars on that 900 [00:08:20] square meter block for parking's now gonna be, God knows, 15 people- Yeah … or something trying to park, and the overflow to the area.

Imagine if you put a few of those on the, the same street, what'll happen to- Yeah … you know, the challenges of congestion, so. Ex- exactly. So we're, we're balancing two things here, is we need to understand lines on a [00:08:40] bit of paper, subdivision is one thing. Number of lots, that's great, but there's also gonna be a impact based on the built form- Mm

that goes with all the lots, right? So yeah, there's an enormous part of the study work that has to happen for this, and that's what's happening right now. So I'd encourage people to understand that there are user groups. We- we're, we're in idea gathering phase at the moment. [00:09:00] That's getting consolidated.

Sometime in the, at the end of this year, probably between October and December, you'll see your first, you know, position statement, you know, policy piece come out. There'll have to be public consultation, um, some advertising. There will be feedback from different user groups- You know, there'll be a whole process unfold.

But in my honest opinion, if that is [00:09:20] in any form of full gazette by the middle of next year, based on how the last time we went through this process worked, that, that would be a miracle. Um Yeah. Okay. Well, what are some of the opportunities, I guess, for owners and investors? We've gotta see how it shakes out.

It could take some time. It- From what you're saying, a year minimum, maybe a few. [00:09:40] It's pretty hard. You know, I wouldn't, certainly wouldn't advise people to start making decisions based on, you know, stuff that isn't even, um, confirmed- Yeah … and, and coming. And you know, I even had someone on the weekend asking me about it at a home open.

Um, we had an 845 square meter R20, um, property. They were already aware of the potential changes and I just, [00:10:00] you know, most agents would probably oversell that potential, but I just said to them, "Hey, it's great that it's proposed and yes, it could be a potential down the track, but at this stage you can only really make decisions on what- Yeah

what's in front of you." So. Well, once bitten, twice shy. I'll tell a story. The last time we had the R code shakeup and the revisions, in the medium [00:10:20] density part, there was a proposal there for different, different yield scenarios based on your proximity to a train station. It's like a type A, B, C thing. I can't remember the full detail.

Okay. And that was in format and it was in the advertised document, did all the workings on it, and people were around like builders, developers who were making [00:10:40] acquisitions based on that being pretty much home and hosed. Mm. Um, this idea like we, we liked the look of that. Now by the time it finished through a format, the parts C got, w- got pulled.

The legislation actually, th- they took it away and, and worked it again and then reintroduced it in March a couple of years ago. That disappeared right after that. So what I'd say to people is that right [00:11:00] now there actually isn't… Until you've seen the first policy position statement and what the format could start to look like, you can then start to think about what to do.

Mm-hmm. Like, I wouldn't waste time. Then I'd go, "Okay, this is what I'm allowed to do now based on the, on the document." The opportunity is to pick some sites around suburbs, right? And do up some dummy models to, you know, you might find an [00:11:20] opportunity, a way you can work something on yield or dwelling mix that is gonna work well in the new proposal.

But it would still be very high risk at that point to then go and make acquisitions or give people advice to make acquisitions based on that. So my advice right now is that the opportunity would be wait until October, November, December, when the first piece comes out, and then start to [00:11:40] do your homework on what you can do with that site under the new- new legislation so you're ahead of trend.

But I certainly wouldn't be making any acquisitions yet. The final format from where we are now to then is, could be something completely different, and you don't wanna be sitting there with, um, you're not gonna get any compensation, you know, for making a sp- a speculative purchase. But where I see the, uh, [00:12:00] potential is for existing property owners that have already bought the property because it stacked up as part of their strategy, and they're gonna keep it anyway, and this can just add- Yeah

an option longer term for them to look at subdividing or developing, and that, that would be, you know, great if that happens. Yeah. And look, and that plays in nicely, too, with, you know, the last time we were having a, a chat about some tax [00:12:20] reform. Now, look, since we've talked last, the, um, the CGT and the gearing changes are through, and I'm watching that already in real time, how that's adjusting behavior in the market.

Now, for me, investors will get active again and return to the market, but they just have to get clear from a tax position on what is the most beneficial thing for them to do. And [00:12:40] it's new property, so what I can foresee, if you're gonna increase opportunity for people to subdivide and develop, that's great.

We'll have more accessible infill land, stop the sprawl all the way up to Geraldton, as Mr. Carey says. But we're gonna have all this new land available, and it's gonna be new property on new land, whether that's a single house or specifically, for me, I think the dual [00:13:00] key stuff's gonna be really good. So that's taking any normal lot, putting a house on it and a, an ancillary on it, so you've got two different occupancies.

That sort of stuff, I'm not 100% what the values of those are at the moment. We're not building many of them. No, it's under development. But that will suddenly become… Yeah, it'll be the only type of property, you know, a single house proper- Like a, a lot with one house and [00:13:20] ancillary on it. If that's new and unlived in, right, uh, an investor can purchase that from 2027 next year, and that's the only property type they will have the choice to choose.

They'll have the, be able to elect between a 50% CGT discount or the indexation method. And of course, it's got the highest capacity for, for gearing, you know, for depreciation. So- Mm … I think [00:13:40] we'll have more, more lots in different areas we can put stuff on. But new property itself, I mean, it's always attractive to, to owner occupiers, but for investors it's gonna become invaluable.

So I think we'll watch a, maybe a shift for a period as the market balances out, um, between far more demand for new property than there will be for older stuff. Mm. And it's [00:14:00] interesting because I'm not seeing it Any, any sort of demand for development sites yet from the sort of stuff that I'm selling. Mm.

Mm. It w- pe- there was buyers before the budget that were considering it, and I, I think as you say, they just need to get their heads around what the new settings allow them to do. Mm. And [00:14:20] the other thing that I'm seeing people still coming to terms with is that many people don't understand that they get to carry forward the loss on an established property and offset that against future income when it turns positive cash flow or future sale when you come to- Yeah

when and if you come to sell it. Yeah. So the losses aren't lost, [00:14:40] so to speak. Like, they, they can carry forward some benefit and it, it still means you have to cash flow it in the meantime, which is the harder part for some devel- you know, developers because- Mm … or, or small mom and dads especially, because the property you can typically develop more like, more close to land value doesn't have as good a rental returns.

The existing [00:15:00] dwelling may not be up to scratch. Yeah. So that makes it harder to, to, if you don't have negative gearing in the meantime. Correct. Correct. Yeah. Cool. So was there anything else in the rest of the R code overhaul that is worth mentioning, or is a lot of it noise? Uh, I, I, I think a few things- They've dribbled us out a few little bits [00:15:20] and pieces.

What I'd say to people is, um, your information, don't worry about the media announcements. They're just gonna, I suppose, make, uh… I'm saying mainstream media. They're gonna interpret what's being said by the government, and they will, you know, dribble out their own version, basically saying that this is how it's gonna be so.

I'd reiterate that this is your first [00:15:40] glimpse at some information that's gonna come out. October, November, December, around there, you'll have your first position piece, and there'll be more detail in there. Right now they've simply made a statement on the government website that they're looking at that change at the R20.

They've added a few other things. So removing minimum parking requirements for apartments and granny flats. Increasing, uh, density at [00:16:00] R4 areas by allowing up to three stories, up from the two stories. And redefining baseline high to medium and high density areas. That's really about as much real detail as we've got.

So there isn't too much more at this point in time. Mm. I, I do have consultants that I work with in industry, and some of them are in the working groups. Um, but you know, even if I press them, they're all [00:16:20] sworn to secrecy. Yeah. They've, you know, they've got… So they can't, they can't make premature, um, announcements.

So that's really… Get excited. There's, the general flavor I'm getting is that we're gonna look to streamline things, improve approval process timeframes. That to me is of more importance. Yeah. So we, we have conflicting parts of how, um, different parts of the R codes [00:16:40] work. We can, for single houses or certain types of applications, reduce the, um, approval timeframes.

That would be fantastic. And to give people some more choice, I suppose, what they can do with their land. So- Mm … there will be opportunities, we just don't know fully what they are yet. I would just say verbatim, just as this is put up as a statement, and we learnt this the last time [00:17:00] with- … the, the Part C addition, is that the first media announcement, this is gonna go through a whole process and continued, um, refinement and iteration.

I mean, even from the public comment that comes back, and local government. That's the next thing really, is that by just saying we're gonna strip away the, um, the average lot size at [00:17:20] R20 and go just to the minimum, you're basically bypassing the, the statutory planning process. Like there's a- How do I say this?

When, when we do strategic planning, right, every single local government area has got infill targets from the- Yeah … government, and that's probably where there might be some frustration is it's seen that maybe some of them are [00:17:40] not meeting those targets. But there's a whole, it's about a 10-year cycle of developing a planning strategy where there's opportunities for further infill, and then doing a revision of what's called their local planning scheme.

And on that planning scheme is where we have denoted, you know, different land use series. Here's residential, here's the industrial, here's activity areas, all these sorts of things, and it's up to the, the [00:18:00] government based on all the, the work they've done to that point, that local government, where they're gonna have R20, where they're gonna have R40, and so forth.

Oh, makes sense. Like, for a local government, you know, if they wanted, if they had an R20 area with lots of 700 square meter lots, their option through the planning framework process would be to go, if we want to increase the [00:18:20] density here, we're gonna up code that from R25, sorry, from R20 to R25. 'Cause at R25 there's a minimum site here of 300 and an average of 350.

So all of a sudden, if it's R25, that's also then subdivisible, um, at R20. But to get to that, we have to go through a whole planning framework shift and [00:18:40] develop a new planning scheme, get that advertised, approved by the planning commission, and so forth. That process takes time, and what's being proposed here is gonna perhaps bypass some of that control, and I can certainly see it, um, annoying- Yeah

some people at local government. I guess re- reiterating back to some of those reasons you mentioned earlier about other [00:19:00] considerations with services and parking and congestion and traffic flows and these sorts of things, I guess that's why they've come up with the zonings in the first place, and now they're effectively being almost bypassed with the overall, uh, code framework and now saying, okay, it, it's basically cha- almost changing something that is R20, as you say, to [00:19:20] R25 without the c- local councils- Yeah

having any say on that effectively. That's what they're doing. Yeah. And yeah, that's, and that's what's happening. I can foresee some resistance, Jarrod. I can foresee some, um, some fight along the way with that with certain councils. So- Yeah … our s- our infill capacity to reach infill target has improved. So we've, we were [00:19:40] lagging behind the nation.

Um, we've got a target of 47% of our new lots to come from infill in the Perth and Peel 3.5 million framework. We're now up to just under 40%, up from 35 in 2023. Okay. So people are infilling, right? Interesting. But they just want the rate to be faster and to stop the, yeah, the spread up to Geraldton. Well, I [00:20:00] have noticed that tends to be how the government does things, uh, whether it be, uh, the no grounds termination that they're, that they come out with and just announce, "Oh yeah, we're, we're doing it."

They, and then consultation with the industry comes after. Yeah. Um, or whether it be the fishing ban, uh, "Hey, we're doing it." Yeah. "But we'll do a bit of consultation just to, [00:20:20] just to, uh, push it through." So it'll, it'll be interesting as to whether they handle this delicately or whether they're just gonna, uh, push it through.

Yeah. Also, there, there's al- there's also the practicality of this is that this is just the planning consideration. Like I mentioned a bit earlier, if you're gonna double the infill in an area, does sewerage there have capacity to [00:20:40] take all that? What's gonna happen in, in, in the power grid, you know, to make sure there's enough power- Mm

for all potential new housing? There is such a complex web of, um, infrastructure and other things that feed in behind this. Le- And that's probably the easiest part, to be honest. The, the local politics, like the number of offices at local government, strategic planning people that will be up in arms over this, I can already foresee it.

[00:21:00] So I get the need for change and to improve the amount of infill. I think there can be just as much work done, um, to improve infill by improving process and reducing complexity in the framework so it's easier to get planning approvals and faster for built form outcome and the like, than just drawing imaginary lines on a bit of paper, 'cause ultimately [00:21:20] all you've provided then is potential.

But it's still up to mum and dad punters doing infill or, you know, bigger- Yeah … scale developers. It's gotta stack up, it's gotta make sense, and it's gotta be easily navigatable. And I think we've got lots of opportunities and a long way to go here with that compared to frameworks in other states. Yeah.

Well, that makes sense, and no one's [00:21:40] gonna do a- build anything if it doesn't, um, still stack up and at least the tax incentives- Mm … and benefits tilt things a little bit more that way. But I'd imagine building costs are increasing pretty fast at the moment, too, and with established prices softening a bit, it's the gap between the return is sort of expanding [00:22:00] again.

Mm. So it does make it harder to close that profit margin gap when- Yeah … the cost to build's going up and the cost established is sort of softening. It's, yeah, it's a funny thing and it, it's, it- I'd almost call it more like a yo-yo, like I've watched over the last few years. Overall build prices are increasing, but so are values, but they're never at a sort of uniform rate.

What happens is the, the [00:22:20] build pricing escalates at a fast rate for a period. Yeah. Like we had a, you know, the first bit of last year, end of the year before, some of those months we were having nearly 1% a month, um, increase in pricing. And then by the middle of the year that had fallen away to, you know, 0.2, 0.4%.

So all of a sudden the rate of change in construction price index slowed so that the pricing [00:22:40] stabilized a bit, the values kept moving, then the margin was suddenly bigger again and everyone, "Oh, this is a great time to start developing," and off they went. So then we signed a heap more build contracts, got DAs underway, but we still had the same resource to deliver the projects- Okay

uh, but the demand had increased, so then the rates went up again. So there's this constant seesaw [00:23:00] we have with that, um, and there's a delicate balance. So for, for me, the tip for people is just to realize that you can't just sit and wait the whole time before you start a project. Is, you know, if you're sitting in the background, go develop your DA, get your subdivision approval, you know, get your work and drawings to a point.

It's still gonna take you, and that's an issue at the minute, you know, by the time [00:23:20] you've got a build, from the time you've started your planning approval process to a build permit in hand, if you're on site in 10 months from that point, you're doing really, really well, you know? And then it'll take us, if it's single story, 10 to 12 months to build it.

So what can we do to reduce that timeframe? But whilst it is that timeframe, use that time wisely, 'cause what it costs today compared to 10 to 12 months later will [00:23:40] be different. So will the end valuations. It's about doing the things you can do, recheck the business case, and if it doesn't work there, that's okay.

Reprice it in six months and see how things are going. No, awesome. Well, I think that's a really good place to end on the, the practical feasibility part of things and, but I think the government seems to be directionally [00:24:00] correct with their intentions and there is gonna be potentially- Mm … a lot of opportunity for existing property owners and others to- Yeah

to purchase and, and make more of this infill. It, I guess we'll just have to see how it shakes out, hey? Yeah, look, and that's it. The, it's, it's existing, uh, property owners that will probably have the biggest windfall. Obviously once there's the stampede of everyone trying to buy a [00:24:20] 700 square meter block- Yeah

you know what supply and demand does, so. But yeah, it's the, the people I think that own stuff, be diligent, watch the media announcements. When we get this first announcement stuff towards the end of the year, look carefully at, um, what they propose there, and spend a few months. We will witness, get the popcorn out, you'll, you'll see all the backlash from local government and, or the [00:24:40] local government authority and different parts of the planning commission.

You'll get a better feel, I think, by the end of the year as to what's coming, what's staying, and you know, what things might look like for next year. Yeah. Cool. Well, it might be time to get you back on by that stage, and we'll see what happens in the meantime, hey? Yeah, for sure. Let's, let's, uh- We'll prob- we'll probably have another announcement next week.

Uh, [00:25:00] every time we release a pod, uh- … a new announcement comes the week after. See what happens. Yeah, that's the opportunity, actually. Whenever you and I talk, something big's coming a week later. Yeah. Cool. Thanks for joining us again. No worries. Cheers, mate.