I'm not expecting the government to retain ownership or management here. There's no mention of social housing as part of this precinct, only 'affordable', which is technically not territory the government currently operates (though council has and the state maybe should).Algernon wrote: ↑Tue May 02, 2023 3:44 pmIf it were a BTR scheme, the developer would retain ownership of all the apartments and provide all the services associated. A BTR development is really like having a single source for everything rather than an agent acting in between.Llessur2002 wrote: ↑Tue May 02, 2023 3:38 pmSo who becomes the landlord? Does the developer retain ownership of the building, or can this be purchased by another party? If so, what are the controls (if any) over onselling of the building and whether or not apartments can ever be converted to private ownership? Is this a regulated area, or is it a bit of a free-for-all?
This isn't a BTR, it's a public development or maybe will be a PPP to fund it. You'd expect management to remain with the state government because it's just a fancy way of saying public housing but using a fancy and wrong name for it.
Renewal SA's media release claims it will be the 'master developer', so I expect it to proceed in a commercial manner similar to Bowden or Keswick, with the apparent exception that design has been determined prior to private partner. Note, the government is also supporting BTR with Flagship at Kent Town and a yet-to-be named community housing partner at Eastwood.
I wonder (hope) if we'll see the government procure the West End Brewery and New Mayfield sites for similar projects on quicker timelines.