Oversupply

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
As mining investment falls, Australia’s growth has needed to rebalance to other sectors of the economy. A key driver of this rebalancing act has been a pick-up in housing construction, motivated by low interest rates and rising housing prices. Dwelling approvals have been at record levels in recent months.
This has been a positive story, as Australia did not build many houses when the mining boom was at its height and had an accumulated housing undersupply. But for how long will it be a positive story? When will we have built enough houses, or potentially too many? These questions have become more pertinent recently, given both the ramp-up in housing construction and a slowdown in population growth.
Answering these questions is tricky. There are good measures of the number of new houses being built (supply), but estimates of housing oversupply or undersupply also rely on growth in the number of households (demand). This is affected by population growth and the number of people in each dwelling, which is poorly measured and a swing factor when there are housing shortages or affordability changes. For example, when housing prices rise, more people live together. In short, the numbers are quite ‘rubbery’.
However, despite the uncertainties, it is clear that the recent ramp-up in housing supply means the cumulative housing deficit is diminishing. Our estimates see the national housing market in balance by 2017. Across the states, Victoria has the highest risk of oversupply, while NSW and Queensland will have undersupplies for some time yet.
The bottom line is: Australia does not currently have an oversupply of housing, but a further jump in approvals could increase the risk of building too many houses. This could affect the house price outlook. It may also make the RBA more cautious about cutting rates further from here, as the costs of cutting further could start to outweigh the benefits.  
<div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="section">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
<a href="/images/2015/09/09/Screen%20Shot%202015-09-09%20at%209.04.07%20AM.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2015/09/09/Screen%20Shot%202015-09-09%20at%209.04.07%20AM.png" alt="" width="713" height="326">
 
<div class="page" title="Page 2">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
Housing supply is ramping up, while population growth slows 
Housing supply has been ramping up in the past couple of years in Australia (Chart 1). Indeed, a pick-up in housing investment directly contributed 0.4ppts to GDP growth over the year to June 2015, which has been helping to rebalance growth as mining investment falls. 
Leading indicators of construction activity have recently risen to record levels with over 200,000 dwellings approved in the past year. The number of new dwellings approved in H1 2015 was 40% higher than in H1 2013. As building approvals typically lead dwelling completions by around 1-3 quarters, the current high level of approvals implies that some further ramp-up in construction is likely in coming quarters. We expect housing construction to continue to be a support for GDP growth in 2016. 
However, the ramp-up in housing investment has come at a time when population growth is slowing. The latest estimates show that population growth slowed to 1.4% in 2014, down from a recent peak of 1.7% in 2012 (Chart 2). The slowdown reflects slower growth in inward migration, with the largest driver of this trend being an increase in the net flow of Kiwis back to New Zealand. 
At first glance, these contrasting trends may seem worrisome. If housing supply is ramping up at the same time that demand is weakening, surely there could be excess supply in the market at some point? However, the story is more complex than this. Much of the recent ramp-up has been needed to work off an accumulated implicit undersupply of dwellings that occurred over the past decade. 
Australia has an accumulated housing undersupply 
Measuring the extent of undersupply in the housing market is, however, also quite tricky. This is partly because there is no literal housing shortage. Instead, the number of people per household adjusts to keep demand in line with supply. For example, when there is insufficient supply of housing at a reasonable price, young people may choose to live in their family home for longer. 
This pattern has been apparent in recent years with population growth exceeding the rate of growth in new households between the 2006 and 2011 censuses (Chart 3). Over that period, the average number of people per household levelled out, rather than falling in line with the historical trend. Importantly, small variations in the number of people per household can make a big difference to estimates of growth in the number of households (which drives housing demand). Measuring housing demand is further complicated by the fact that data on the number of people per household are only available on a five-year basis. 
<a href="/images/2015/09/09/Screen%20Shot%202015-09-09%20at%209.05.55%20AM.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2015/09/09/Screen%20Shot%202015-09-09%20at%209.05.55%20AM.png" alt="" width="896" height="418">
 
<div class="page" title="Page 3">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
‘Underlying’ demand, therefore, has to be estimated, usually based on historical trends. To do this, we have used different scenarios for the number of people per household (Chart 4). In all cases, however, growth in the number of households has exceeded growth in the number of dwellings on average over the past 15 years (particularly between 2007 and 2010). So, on average, we have an accumulated implicit housing undersupply because in previous years we had built too few houses to meet new housing demand at a constant household size. 
When will the housing undersupply be worked off? 
Although there is significant uncertainty in these estimates, it is likely that we are now working off some of the undersupply that had previously built up. This is because dwelling construction is quite clearly growing faster than population growth. Our central estimates show that the housing undersupply probably peaked in 2012 at around 200,000 dwellings and has been falling since then (Chart 5). 
<a href="/images/2015/09/09/Screen%20Shot%202015-09-09%20at%209.10.52%20AM.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2015/09/09/Screen%20Shot%202015-09-09%20at%209.10.52%20AM.png" alt="" width="831" height="381">
 
<a href="/images/2015/09/09/Screen%20Shot%202015-09-09%20at%209.12.09%20AM.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2015/09/09/Screen%20Shot%202015-09-09%20at%209.12.09%20AM.png" alt="" width="835" height="388">
<div class="page" title="Page 4">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
Just how quickly we will work off the housing undersupply will depend on a number of factors, including how many dwellings are built from here, how much population growth slows and, of course, how many people there are per household. 
In Chart 5, we set out three scenarios based on varying rates of growth in the number of households and all assuming that dwelling construction continues at its current level, with completions running at around 220,000 dwellings (net of 15% for demolitions and un-occupied dwellings). In the central case, with household growth of 1.4% a year this sees the undersupply of housing worked off by 2017. 
Supply imbalances differ across the states 
Although there has been a lift in residential construction in most states recently, there have been stark differences in housing supply and demand dynamics over the past decade (Charts 6 and 7). 
Victoria and New South Wales (NSW) have experienced similar levels of population growth since around 2007; however, in Victoria, construction has kept pace with the increase in the population, while in NSW it has not (Charts 8 and 9). Since the beginning of 2007, the population of NSW has grown by an estimated 813,000 people. In Victoria, the increase was almost identical at 815,000 people. However, over that time, NSW has added 214,000 dwellings, while Victoria added 307,000.
<div class="page" title="Page 5">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
These disparities across the states mean the national story of a housing shortfall does not apply evenly. Our estimates show significant shortfalls seem likely in NSW and Queensland. In contrast, Victoria, South Australia and Western Australia appear to be much closer to balance. These trends in housing demand and supply are no doubt contributing to the strong growth in housing prices in Sydney and weaker housing price growth elsewhere (Chart 10). 
Looking forward, housing construction has been lifting in all states and recent building approvals suggest further growth to come. In Queensland and Western Australia, there has also been a sharp slowdown in population growth. These factors combined point to a rapid improvement in the level of the housing stock relative to demand. In NSW, a significant upswing in housing construction is underway, and population growth appears to be slowing modestly. However, the accumulated housing deficit appears to have been largest in NSW, so adjustment may take some time yet. In Victoria, as discussed above, housing construction appears to have kept pace with population over recent years. Slower population growth and even stronger construction poses the risk that certain parts of the market may become oversupplied. 
<a href="/images/2015/09/09/Screen%20Shot%202015-09-09%20at%209.14.28%20AM.png" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2015/09/09/Screen%20Shot%202015-09-09%20at%209.14.28%20AM.png" alt="" width="851" height="388">
<a href="https://www.about.hsbc.com.au/hsbc-in-australia/management-team" target="_blank">P</a>aul Bloxham is chief economist (ANZ) for HSBC . Daniel Smith is economist. They can be contacted <a href="https://www.about.hsbc.com.au/hsbc-in-australia/management-team" target="_blank">here</a>.
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body></html>

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

Australia’s housing supply ramp-up: HSBC's Paul Bloxham

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
News of Macquarie Bank tightening its loan to value ratio (LVR) for apartment high-rises has sparked fears of an oversupply in certain markets.
The bank named 46 postcodes where high-rise apartment lending would shrink to 70 percent of the value of the property.
The problem in these postcodes – which are concentrated in inner Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane – is not one of supply and demand, at least not in the sense that there are more apartments than there are people to live in them. Supply and demand in these markets is not a question of how many people need a place to live versus how many places there are to live. Rather it is how many owner-occupiers and investors demand assets.
The former conception of supply and demand ignores the tax and finance incentives that encourage people to hold more property than they need to live in. These incentives include cash-free equity deposits, negative gearing and capital gains concessions, which have been introduced one by one into the housing market over the last 30 years. It makes sense then, that our understanding of supply and demand in real estate should be dynamic. As long as there is an investor looking for a property to put their money in, there is demand. As long as there is an investor demanding property, a developer is willing to supply.
Professor Laurence Murphy of the University of Auckland notes that when the price of property begins to fall, developers become less willing to supply dwellings. Graph 1 and 2 compares high-rise approval data in Victoria and NSW (which we have to assume is a proxy for inner city unit development) with quarterly growth rates in their respective unit markets.
Graph 1: Quarterly Approval Figures Victoria vs. Melbourne Units Quarterly Growth Rates
<a href="/images/2016/06/01/Graph_1.jpg" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2016/06/01/Graph_1.jpg" alt="">
Source: Residex
Graph 2: Quarterly Approval Figures NSW vs. Sydney Units Quarterly Growth Rates
<a href="/images/2016/06/01/Graph_2.jpg" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a> <img src="/images/2016/06/01/Graph_2.jpg" alt="">
Source: Residex
The graphs show that approvals are highly responsive to changes in unit growth rates.
As demand for units falls away due to tighter LVRs, slowed wage growth and higher premiums on foreign investment purchases<a href="https://www.blog.residex.com.au.tmp.anchor.net.au/2016/05/26/may-market-update/?utm_source=membersNewsletter&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_campaign=Cid=ResiMay16&amp;mc_cid=d432d199da&amp;mc_eid=1c64ff30b3#footnote-1">[1]</a>, the first thing to crash will most likely be applications and construction of dwellings. This has wider economic implications, particularly for NSW and VIC, where construction has been a significant contributor to growth in gross state product.
The construction of units – whether in the application phase, construction phase or completion phase – moves in much larger fluctuations than the values of the units themselves. For example, in the September quarter of 2010, the number of approvals for units in blocks of four or more stories grew by 124% in NSW, yet nothing dramatic happened with Sydney unit value growth. Values grew steadily until 2013 when they began to grow at a higher rate. I am not saying that the supply of units to speculative investors is sustainable where population growth is low, nor is it optimal for the people living in them. However, it is clear that price movements and investor interest in units are a better indicator of expected supply movements than population growth rates.
The graphs also show the approval figures for other dwelling types over the past decade. Most strikingly, the number of high-rise units began outperforming detached housing approvals from March 2011. The salience of this phenomenon increased around the beginning of the 2013 housing boom.
Less important than the effect of supply on the value of a unit is the way units are supplied and how they are integrated with wider planning. Residential dwellings crowding out commercial and cultural facilities, which are partly what makes a city desirable in the first place, can limit a city’s desirability. A lack of diverse planning can also increase pressure on transport and road congestion. This is one of the many risks of investing in rapid high-rise growth areas, and has caused some young families and retirees to move to regional parts of the state.
Eliza Owen is housing market analyst for onthehouse.com.au and can be contacted <a href="https://www.onthehouse.com.au" target="_blank">here</a>.
 
</body></html>

Oversupply fears rise as LVRs drop: Eliza Owen

pwargent-M4siyDbqQY

Does Australia have a greater housing oversupply than the US? Pete Wargent

<html><body>
Forecaster BIS Shrapnel this week used apartment oversupply as part of the justification for predicting (minor) price decline in some of our major cities over the next three years.
While I certainly share their concerns about over-building of high-rise apartments, I don’t agree that this means prices generally will fall in those cities.
Does a unit over-supply in inner-city Adelaide or Brisbane prevent house prices from growing in housing markets in the middle-ring and outer suburbs?
On the Gold Coast, past oversupply has resulted in key locations like Surfers Paradise having pricing levels lower than 10 years ago. But it hasn’t prevented inland housing suburbs from delivering price growth averaging 4-5 percent per year over the past decade.
So I expect price growth in housing markets in Brisbane, Adelaide, Canberra and Hobart – as well as the Gold Coast – regardless of the over-supply issue in the high-rise areas of those cities. I’m not expecting much from Sydney or Melbourne in the next few years, because those markets have passed their peaks and sales levels have fallen away dramatically, leading to price stagnation or minor decline.
The unit oversupply is a separate issue – and a serious one. It’s significant that lenders are including high-rise areas on blacklists, that developers are deferring planned projects and that vacancy rates are rising in key areas.
This week I updated vacancy rates for Brisbane inner-city suburbs for a seminar presentation. There has been a market blow-out in vacancies in all six suburbs I reference in that presentation. Most now have vacancies in the 5-6 percent range, according to SQM Research figures. 
In the space of three months, the vacancy rate for the Brisbane CBD has increased from 4.4 percent to 5 percent, while Woolloongabba is up from 4.8 to 5.5 percent and New Farm has increased from 5.3 to 6.1 percent.
These statistics will worsen as projects now under construction are completed and their apartments join the rental pool – because very few of the sales are being made to owner-occupiers.
Apartment markets with current or looming surpluses of stock make up half of the 10 markets highlighted in my No Go Zones report (the only half being regional areas impacted by the resources sector).
This really is one of the core issues facing the property industry. While the developer lobby keeps running the party line about dwelling shortages – despite two years of record building approvals pumped up by apartment projects – the big issue is the opposite problem of surplus.
It’s inevitable that, in some markets, vacancies will rise, rents will fall and values will be impacted.
As BIS Shrapnel senior director Angie Zigomanis says: “Nearly all capital cities are building apartments at record rates on the back of the recent strength in investor demand. As these projects are progressively completed, it is likely that there will not be enough tenants in a number of cities to support rents and consequently values upon completion.”
I’m amazed at how many people are still buying apartments in Surfers Paradise, inner-city Melbourne and inner-city Brisbane, and by the number of new projects seeking approval in oversupplied markets like Perth, Brisbane and Melbourne.
Across the key high-rise suburbs of the Gold Coast, Melbourne and Brisbane, 8,242 people have bought apartments in the past 12 months, including 1,588 in Surfers Paradise and 1,501 in the Melbourne CBD. 
Do these people not read? Don’t they have access to the Internet? The warnings from analysts, commentators, lenders and the Reserve Bank over the past 12-18 months add up to a deafening roar.
If you’re ignoring all that and still buying high-rise units off-the-plan in these markets - or if you’re oblivious to it because you haven’t done even the most basic research - you deserve to lose money.
 
Terry Ryder is the founder of hotspotting.com.au
<a href="mailto:hotspotting@gmail.com">hotspotting@gmail.com</a>
twitter.com/hotspotting
 
</body></html>

terryryder-YECXbqmri2

Apartment over-building doesn't mean prices will fall: Terry Ryder

<html><body>
An undisclosed major bank has a blacklist of 6700 apartment projects across Australia.
The projects are where buyers are either refused loans or are offered reduced loan to value ratios (LVR).
The list has been obtained by The Australian Financial Review from the mortgage broker, Home Loan Experts. The newspaper article only pinpointed a handful of effected projects.
<div>
<div>
It reveals projects where buyers have either been denied loans or offered less funding are 19 Larkin Street in Camperdown in inner-city Sydney, Finbar's Aire apartments in West Perth and Meriton's developments on Main Beach on the Gold Coast and 1 Janoa Place in Chiswick, inner west Sydney.
Sydney-based Home Loan Experts noted "blacklisted" projects vary across the banks. 
Areas which are consistently "blacklisted" however include Wolli Creek and Zetland (above) in inner south Sydney and the Brisbane CBD given a potential oversupply of new units or the bank reaching maximum exposure of loans on a project, managing director Otto Dargan said. 
Earlier this year RiskWise declare Zetland as the <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/news/80436-zetland-the-riskiest-off-the-plan-suburb-in-2018" target="_blank">riskiest off the plan suburb</a> in 2018.
No Lending (Exposure Reached)
19 Larkin Street, Camperdown, NSW;
58 Cairds Avenue, Bankstown, NSW;
23 Mcintyre Street, Gordon, NSW;
10 Rosamond Road, Footscray, VIC.
Restricted Lending
29 Woodroffe Avenue, Main Beach, QLD, Maximum LVR: 70%; 
1 Janoa Place, Chiswick, NSW, Maximum LVR: 80%; 
Cromwell Road, South Yarra, VIC, LVR: 80%; 
275-277 The Esplanade, Cairns North, QLD, LVR: 70%; 
36 Griffith Street, New Farm, QLD, LVR: 90%; 
659 Murray Street, West Perth, QLD, LVR: 80%
</div>
<div>A dense project is usually one which has more than 30 apartments, Dargan said.</div>
<div>
Serviced apartments or converted hotels are always considered as high-risk lending.
Assisting borrowers who have been rejected by banks is now a constant challenge, Dargan added.
</div>
</div>
</body></html>

Wolli Creek and Zetland apartment projects on "bank's blacklist" 

<html><body>
ABC News 24 seems determined to overtake the Sydney Morning Herald as the nation’s leading source of real estate misinformation.
Following recent instances of badly misinformed comments on property issues by presenters Michael Rowland and Virginia Trioli, News 24 did a dangerously inept report on Melbourne's inner city apartment market on Thursday last week.
The report characterised the situation as an exciting boom. Not a word about inflated prices, two-tiered marketing practices, high vacancy rates and potential for market decline - and only the slightest reference to the possibility of oversupply.
The report allowed spruikers and marketers to eulogise the building boom as an endless summer of possibilities, without asking those with vested interests a single hard question.
In essence, developers are throwing up towers and peddling apartments to distant investors at inflated prices.  You might think: well, who cares? If Asians with too many dollars and not enough sense pay silly prices for bad real estate, that's their problem.
<blockquote>
There’s a shakeout of major proportions in the offing and you really don’t want to be part of it.
</blockquote>
But it's everyone's problem. Australians own property in these markets. I regularly meet people who have bought apartments in inner-city Melbourne - and can't get tenants, because the market is oversupplied.
I recently met an investor who owns three investment properties, all of them off the plan apartments in Docklands and only now realising there might be a problem.
These people will have to settle contracts at prices much higher than their property's market value. It's a disaster in the making. It has the ability to drag down the wider Melbourne market, to the detriment of families and the nation.
The inner Melbourne “boom” is toxic growth if ever I’ve seen it. Vacancies in the Melbourne CBD, Southbank and Docklands have been fluctuating between 5% and 10% recently - and will get worse, given the weight of new construction.
State Planning Minister Matthew Guy appears determined to aid and abet any developer who wants to build another tower, to the point where you have to wonder about his motives.
There was no sense of any of that in the shallow piece put together by the ABC News 24 team. 
At the end of the item, Jim Middleton weighed in with misplaced comments on foreign investors in Melbourne high-rise forcing up general Melbourne real estate prices and forcing Aussie battlers outs of the market.
Middleton also prattled on about price bubbles, putting the finishing touches to a consummate piece of misinformation. He made a goose of himself but will probably never know.
I urge all investors to stay away from the inner Melbourne apartment market. There’s a shakeout of major proportions in the offing and you really don’t want to be part of it.
Paying $700,000 for a two-bedroom generic apartment, in a market with tens of thousands of identical products, is the essence of bad investing.
You can contact Terry via <a href="https://mailto:ryder@hotspotting.com.au" target="_blank">email</a> or on <a href="https://www.twitter.com/hotspotting" target="_blank">Twitter</a>
Photo courtesy of Vincent Q/Flickr.
</body></html>

The inner Melbourne “boom” is toxic growth

<html><body>
The Brisbane office market is facing a perfect storm.
A sobering report by forecaster BIS Shrapnel is predicting the sunshine state to be hit with an oversupply of stock for the next decade, along with a vacancy rate set to reach 18% plus in 2016.
The city's looming oversupply woes was just one of the topics examined in the Brisbane office market report. It looked at the strength of leasing and investor demand, all of which pointed to a challenging few years for the market.
Not mincing it's words, BIS Shrapnel said: "there’s a perception that further oversupply in the Brisbane CBD office market may be averted by withdrawing secondary buildings for conversion to residential or short term accommodation uses".
"While there are perhaps a handful of suitable candidates, it will be a case of too little too late."
The report warned that because of that oversupply pressure, rents and property values will take a hit. 
<img src="/images/2014/04/29/chart-of-the-week-april-29.-breakout.jpg" alt="">
Author of the report, Christian Schilling, said there were three towers currently under way in the CBD that would add another 186,000 square metres of new space before the end of 2016, equal to 9% of current stock. 
In contrast, withdrawals for conversion or re- development expected over the same time horizon, he noted,  sum to just 72,000 square metres, or 120,000 square metres to the end of 2017.
"On balance, that is still one tower too many", he said. "And this is on top of weak demand and a vacancy rate of 14.2% at January this year".
Among some of the buildings slated as withdrawals in the report were 80 Albert Street,plus a number of buildings to be vacated by the state government over the next three and a half years, which include Health House, 80 George Street, the Executive Building, the Executive Annex, Neville Bonner Building and Forestry House. The Primary Industries Building was also flagged as a potential withdrawal for redevelopment, along with some odd small buildings for conversion to residential or short term accommodation. 
Against this backdrop, BIS Shrapnel is also forecasting demand to be weak in the near, with the CBD expected to suffer "a triple hit in the form of the Government’s release of surplus space, tenants leaving for the fringe, and falling mining investment".
The forecaster estimates that since 2012, cuts to the public service and it's accommodation have resulted in 120,000 square metres of surplus space in the CBD, plus a further 20 square metres in the fringe, all of which the government intends to release as lease expire.
It is forecasting another 70,000 square metres of space to be released in the CBD over the next 3 years.
Compounding the situation, it notes is the space vacated by BOQ, Ventyx, Flight Centre and Robert Bird Group, all of which are leaving the CBD for the fringe, resulting in more than 40,000 square metres of vacated space.
Also constraining demand, it added, was the downturn in mining investment.
“I don’t want to talk the market down, but it’s simple maths”, said Schilling. “Unless mining investment takes off again, which is highly unlikely to happen over the next three years, vacancy rates will blow out to over 18% in 2016.”
As such, he believes, the Brisbane office market would represent a very challenging environment for building owners, developers and investors.
"Anyone contemplating investing in Brisbane in the short term should think carefully about the potential consequences, as the market weakness is likely to persist for the rest of this decade”, Mr Schilling warned. 
Photo courtesy of <a class="owner-name truncate" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/burningimage/" target="_blank" title="Go to Nam Nguyen's photostream" data-track="attributionNameClick" data-rapid_p="21">Nam Nguyen</a>/Flickr.
</body></html>

kjiminez-eaYKfU7qd2

Oversupply and vacancy rate creating a perfect storm for Brisbane office market

<html><body>
Perth’s construction of apartments and its surrounds has recently increased significantly, says RE/MAX WA managing director Geoff Baldwin.
However, he says that beliefs there is an oversupply coming are overstating the problem and are unlikely to come true.
“The property development industry is now much more regulated and sophisticated than it has been in past cycles and this has come about through hard lessons learned, not only by the developers themselves, but by the lenders that finance these projects,” said Baldwin.
“Prior to the global financial crisis lenders were much more liberal in their financing of prospective developments however today it is almost impossible to achieve financing without the developer having substantial equity in the project and certainly not before a majority of the apartments are sold off the plan on unconditional contracts.”
He notes that without 60% or 80% unconditional presales, the developments will not begin construction, and so, unlike in the past, developments that do not have the associated demand will not come to fruition.
He also noted that with most developments, they are sold out completely prior to construction leaving no flood of new stock to the market.
“It also must be taken into account the massive shift towards high density, low maintenance, secure living that is seeing an increasing number of people move away from the suburbs and into an apartment closer to the city.”
{module Do you believe an apartment oversupply is coming to Perth?}
</body></html>

Oversupply

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Oversupply

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News