It’s homebuilders’ last push, and their business and channel partners operate through friction on every front.

• Scarce, costly capital
• Slow approvals and entitlement drag
• Workforce constraints and generational handoffs
• Climate-driven costs and insurance uncertainty
• Buyer fear, hesitation, and confusion
• Margin compression stretching every variable
• An epic underbuild of new homes to the tune of somewhere between three and five million new ground-up homes, ranging up to a $4 trillion housing deficit weighing on people for the next decade or more.

It’s not a normal market. It’s come to this:

Owning a home – especially a newly built one – in too many markets, for too many of America’s working households, means owning a luxury good, not for people with area-mean incomes and livelihoods.

A fact we know. Modern U.S. housing policy is a product of layered localism, political risk aversion, entrenched homeowner incentives, outdated zoning, fragmented governance, and procedural systems that reward obstruction.

The default setting is delay, deny, or shrink—long before “approve” ever enters the conversation.

It’s structurally easy to stop new housing—and structurally complex to produce it. In 20-plus years of listening, learning, and observing, a dozen reasons for this jump to mind.

Still, this is all in a day’s work for people whose livelihood is making homes and neighborhoods for others.

1. Local political incentives tilt toward delay or denial

How it works:

• Elected officials face far more political risk in saying “yes” to new housing than in blocking or delaying it.

Why it happens:

• Existing residents vote; future residents don’t.
• Opposition groups are loud, organized, and reliable voters.
• Approvals spark criticism; denials rarely do.
• A single contentious proposal can jeopardize a political career.

2. Homeowners have strong incentives to protect their wealth

How it works:

• Most Americans’ net worth is tied up in their home value.

Why it happens:

• Homeowners fear density or new development will soften values.
• Neighborhood groups mobilize around “property value protection.”
• Even small changes in traffic, school crowding, or streetscape spark resistance.
• Financial fear easily gets framed as “community character” concerns.

3. Zoning codes were designed to exclude

How it works:

• Most zoning in the U.S. prioritizes low-density, single-family patterns.

Why it happens:

• Codes originating in the 1920s–1970s still dominate.
• Minimum lot sizes, height restrictions, and parking mandates restrict supply.
• “Downzoning” is politically easier than “upzoning.”
• Local control favors exclusion rather than accommodation.

4. Permitting & entitlement processes are cumbersome by design

How it works:

• Developers face multi-year approval pipelines full of procedural tripwires.

Why it happens:

• Numerous agencies each hold a veto point.
• Reviews are sequential, not parallel.
• Regulations accumulate but rarely sunset.
• Every step creates an opportunity for delay or obstruction.

5. Infrastructure is often inadequate—nobody wants to pay

How it works:

• Many jurisdictions claim they cannot support new homes without new infrastructure—then refuse to fund it.

Why it happens:

• Infrastructure deficits from decades of underinvestment.
• Local governments resist tax increases or bond measures.
• Impact fees escalate to plug funding gaps—raising home prices.
• Easier to block a project than solve infrastructure financing.

6. Environmental & climate review systems empower obstruction

How it works:

• Environmental review laws—well-intentioned—can be weaponized to slow or stop projects.

Why it happens:

• Appeals processes create endless cycle opportunities.
• Vague criteria let opponents challenge anything.
• Climate adaptation requirements increase cost and complexity.
• Environmental review is often the strongest local veto.

7. Fragmented governance creates endless veto points

How it works:

• Cities, counties, regional boards, utilities, school districts, and state agencies each control a piece of the puzzle.

Why it happens:

• No single entity is responsible for the overall housing supply.
• Multiple conflicting jurisdictions create multiple opportunities to say “no.”
•  Regional housing goals are seldom enforceable.
• Decision-making frameworks favor caution over production.

8. Community opposition Is organized, loud, and persistent

How it works:

NIMBY groups are highly coordinated, while pro-housing voices are diffuse and less motivated.

Why it happens:

• Opponents have immediate, personal stakes.
• Supporters (future residents) don’t exist yet.
• Public meetings favor those with time and resources.
• Fear-based messaging mobilizes quickly.

9. Developers carry all the risk—making public decisions even easier

How it works:

• Private developers invest years and millions before approvals.

Why it happens:

• Local governments bear little downside for delays.
• Costs accrue only to the developer and eventual consumers.
• If a project dies, the jurisdiction loses nothing politically.
• This creates asymmetric risk: developers risk failure; officials risk nothing.

10. Litigation risk is high—even for approvals

How it works:

• Almost any approved project can be challenged in court.

Why it happens:

• Broad standing makes lawsuits easy to file.
• Neighbors use litigation to run out the clock.
• Judges are reluctant to overrule local decisions.
• Developers face months or years of legal uncertainty.

11. Public misconceptions about housing supply are deeply rooted

How it works:

• Many communities believe more housing worsens affordability or erodes “character.”

Why it happens:

• People conflate new housing with population growth, not vice versa.
• Persistent myths about density, crime, traffic, and schools.
• Local media tends to amplify controversy.
• Narrative wins over data.

12. The fiscal math often works against housing

How it works:

• Cities claim new housing—especially entry-level or rental—costs more in services than it generates in taxes.

Why it happens:

• School funding formulas penalize districts for new students.
• Retail/commercial uses generate more local revenue.
• Cities chase sales tax, not homes.
• Housing becomes a “net cost,” making “no” the easier answer.

It’s easier for local officials who take all the political risk and none of the upside. Easier for neighbors afraid of change. Easier for stretched municipal staff, for fatigued lenders, and for buyers second-guessing every decision in an economy that shifts week to week.

And yet, through that noise, a set of patterns emerged in 2025—patterns that show which builders, developers, land strategists, and capital partners are figuring out how to create conditions where “yes” becomes possible again.

Here are the 10 lessons that rose to the top this year.

1. The real friction isn’t the economy—it’s the local operating environment

Whether the Fed paused or cut or stood pat, most of the performance story came down to the same stubborn points of failure: misaligned zoning, extended entitlements, jammed inspection queues, unpredictable off-site requirements, and ballooning impact fees.

The leaders who made gains in 2025 weren’t those with the rosiest macro read—they were the ones who precisely diagnosed the local barriers that were making the math break. They treated local friction as a solvable operating challenge, not a fate.

2. Policy can be redesigned—and builders who show up with specifics are shaping it

Quiet but meaningful openings appeared this year: modernization of permitting workflows in several metros, bipartisan support for zoning flexibility, and active federal conversations around AD&C liquidity, NEPA modernization, and Davis-Bacon guardrails.

The builders and developers who came with data, operational clarity, and implementation-minded proposals are now embedded in those policy conversations. They’re securing predictability because they’re helping rewrite the rules.

3. Labor is today’s most consequential constraint—and tomorrow’s competitive differentiator

If 2025 reinforced anything, it’s this: labor scarcity is not a passing nuisance; it’s structural. Skilled workers are aging out faster than they’re replaced, and the volatility of starts makes consistent work hard to guarantee.

The firms that treated trades as business partners—not cost centers—protected velocity, tightened construction cycles, and preserved customer trust. Workforce investment became strategy, not charity.

---

4. Culture separated the organizations that executed from the ones that endure

Culture stopped being a “soft” concept this year. It became the clearest marker of which organizations could maintain discipline through margin compression, softening demand, and rising period costs.

The leaders who centered team member empowerment, cross-functional clarity, accountability, and purpose didn’t just weather turbulence—they outperformed. Culture became the operating system that kept promises made in sales centers actually delivered in the field.

5. The builders who won approvals also won the narrative by showing who the homes are for

A persistent approval challenge this year was narrative mismatch. Too many proposals couldn’t articulate—credibly—who the future residents would be and why a community needed them.

The organizations that used real, current buyer data—singles, downsizers, multigenerational households, long-commute essential workers—cut through skepticism. When the people behind the project become visible, approvals become more attainable.

---

6. Connected digital tools transformed hesitancy into commitment

Where buyers hesitated, digital pre-sales often closed the gap. Tools that linked interactive design, real-time pricing, connected estimating, permitting, and field execution didn’t just modernize the customer experience—they reduced cancellations, cut construction errors, and accelerated cycle times.

In a year defined by buyer caution, the builders who eliminated operational friction created customer confidence.

---

7. Capital became more selective—and more clarifying

With regional banks still constrained, private capital stepped deeper into the AD&C space. But this wasn’t 2019’s capital cycle. It was more disciplined, more scenario-tested, more velocity-dependent.

Builders who documented—clearly—how they manage pace, profitability, cash conversion, and downside scenarios kept deals alive. Those without that clarity struggled.
Capital said “yes” where operators proved they could perform through volatility—not around it.

---

8. Land strategy shifted from accumulation to optionality

2025 rewarded land teams who behaved like portfolio managers, not collectors. Asset-light players won with disciplined project-level underwriting. Land-heavy operators won by securing long-duration positions that could flex into changing use cases—housing, mixed-use, logistics, data-adjacent, or phased alternatives.

The common thread: a land strategy that explains why a position exists, how it performs under multiple futures, and who benefits at each turn.

---

9. Consolidation isn’t just reshaping the map—it’s raising the bar

Global capital, Japan-based platforms, and large public builders continued to absorb regional operators. But beneath the market-share headlines was a deeper shift: consolidation is creating new expectations around operational discipline, systems integration, customer experience, and sustainable cost structures.

Private and regional builders that leaned into specialization, digital operations, and partnership models held their ground. Those relying on old formulas found the walls closing in.

---

10. The industry’s winners treated housing as a systems problem—and built systems to solve it

The most successful organizations in 2025 didn’t rely on timing luck or market tailwinds. They integrated the full stack—policy engagement, land discipline, culture, digital workflows, buyer insights, capital transparency, and field execution—into an operating model that converts resistance into progress.

They recognized that America’s default posture toward new housing is still “no,” and responded by building the capability to turn ambiguity into action and complexity into advantage.

A hopeful barometer for 2026

If 2025 taught anything, it’s this: the obstacles aren’t going away. In many markets, they’re multiplying. But the positive signal is unmistakable. Across every region, we saw teams—large and small—prove that it’s still possible to deliver housing at scale with discipline, creativity, and courage.

When leaders diagnose precisely, partner intentionally, invest in people, deploy technology with purpose, and operate with transparency, the “no” that defines today’s system becomes far less durable.

2026 will not be easier. But it can be more productive. The playbook is taking shape as solutions seekers apply brilliance, all in a day’s work..

Sydney’s luxury holiday rental market is hitting eye-watering highs, with some properties commanding rents of up to $210,000 a week as the summer influx begins.

With visitors chasing prime vantage points for New Year’s Eve fireworks or seeking a high-end escape over the festive period, a handful of Sydney homes are being listed at prices more commonly associated with international superyachts than short-term stays.

Among the most lavish is Contemporary Hotels’ “The Residence” in the CBD, which is being offered for $210,000 a week over Christmas and New Year.

The multi-level property accommodates 14 guests and features a private rooftop pool as well as an in-house chef.

In Bellevue Hill, a week at the aptly named “One” comes in at $100,000, while “La Corniche”, a harbourside residence with uninterrupted views of the Harbour Bridge, is available for $70,000 a week.

MORE: Worst performing Sydney suburbs for home prices since 1995

Industry insiders say demand for prestige rentals remains resilient, driven by a mix of international travellers, high-net-worth visitors and locals seeking a once-a-year splurge for Sydney’s marquee summer events.

Luxury property rentals service Cobbold & Co owner Penelope Cobbold was tight lipped on what the current most expensive rent was but said New Year was driving up demand.

Ms Cobbold said 85 per cent of inquiries over the summer period come from overseas.

“There’s only a small number of houses that are available to rent for New Year’s Eve, because most people who own those houses overlooking the harbour don’t need to rent their houses or don’t want to, but we have a handful of houses where the owners might be overseas – that are happy to open their doors to a nice family as long as they are screened very carefully,” she said.

MORE: Sydney pilates Queen’s big $5.5m win

Ms Cobbold said they offer about 50 high-end luxury houses with four to six bedrooms, pools, gyms and saunas that are rented out over the Christmas and New Year period to people coming in to watch the cricket and see the fireworks.

“That week of New Year’s Eve is obviously the absolute premium week and you can charge two to three times what that house might get any other time of year,” she said.

“Families get together, there may be two families taking a lovely house, they may bring their nannies, they may bring a housekeeper, we will normally find them a private chef, pick them up from the airport with a private car and then if they want anything like a seaplane, or a private boat on the harbour – we can organise it for them.

MORE: Inspiring way 24yo bounced back from cancer

“Those sort of wealthy families that come in they book a long time in advance, pay a premium dollar and they expect a premium service … everything from lobster for breakfast if they fancy it to private car, private boat.

“Some of them will hire boats on the harbour and spend up to $100,000 to have a private yacht.”

Ms Cobbold said there are four or five houses they rent for $12,000 a night for a minimum seven night stay.

“What people want is a really modern house with a large garden, a large swimming pool, harbour or sea view and access to a jetty and a private beach would be the icing on the cake,” she said.

“If you can get that you will be paying well over $10,000 a night and a minimum of seven nights.”

MORE: It’s double: Real cost of Sydney homes exposed

This comes as Sydneysiders face a deepening struggle with the average renter battling unsustainable costs and shortage of housing.

The median rental price for houses in Greater Sydney sits at $800, while units have a $750 median, according to PropTrack data.

This year also saw several suburbs across NSW recording more than 30 per cent year-over-year rent price hikes.

A confronting report also revealed three in four renting households nationwide are now in “rental stress”, spending an unsustainable share of their income just to stay housed.

“Although rental growth has typically slowed of late, there are still many people arriving in Sydney, particularly from overseas, that need somewhere to rent which maintains the upward pressure on rents,” Cameron Kusher director of Kusher Consulting said.

Mr Kusher said the country wasn’t building enough new housing to cater to the growing population.

“Rental affordability is clearly a challenge and renters will have to consider their willingness to pay higher rents for a better location, their capacity to do so and the impact paying more on rent may have on their quality of life.”

MORE: Home prices to jump 16pc in major new forecast

The post Insane reason Aussie homes are renting out for up to $210k a week appeared first on realestate.com.au.

Finder founder Fred Schebesta has agreed to suspend “corporate or commercial activities” at his Crypto Castle home after neighbours complained about noisy parties.

Schebesta bought the clifftop mansion at South Coogee for a record-breaking $16.8m in 2021 and has been recently advertising the property on Airbnb at more than $60k a week.

He’s also been promoting it for photo shoots on social media, with Cate Blanchett doing a photo shoot there and even Martha Stewart.

But it’s the wild parties, such as one by Omega Watches attended by 70 people, and others by Tik Tok and Glam by Manicare, that have reportedly really upset his wealthy and influential neighbours.

They’ve even called the police about the noisy rabble.

MORE:

Hemsworths eye billionaire’s playground

With the property zoned residential rather than commercial, they’ve also got the Randwick council involved, who met with Schebesta about their concerns on Monday.

A council spokesman has confirmed there were several complaints about noise, illegal parking and allegations that the property is being used as a venue for corporate functions without the required consent.

“Council owners met with the property owner on Monday 1 December 2025 to discuss these issues,” the spokesperson said.

“The area is zoned for residential use, and council has placed the owner on notice that any unauthorised use of the property, particularly where it interferes with the amenity of the neighbourhood, will be met with regulatory action.

“The owner is cooperating with council and has agreed to suspend any future corporate or commercial activities at the property.

“Council will continue to monitor the situation.”

It probably hasn’t helped his cause that Schebesa, who has described himself as an “internet rockstar”, is so active on social media discussing his events at the home.

He posted a video from a Finder party there on LinkedIn that showed he had DJs, a fire-thrower and lots of singing, dancing and drinking guests.

Other parties have featured circus performers.

And Myer held a runway show by the pool.

MORE:

Ex rugby star cops $23m discount on mansion

The post Fred Schebesta agrees to halt wild parties at Cypto Castle appeared first on realestate.com.au.

The city has unveiled a plan that would see up to 6000 new homes built in middle-ring suburbs over the next decade.  

Brisbane City Council (BCC) is proposing new changes to its low-medium density residential (LMR) zone, which could create up to 6000 new homes by 2032.  

Under the “More Homes, Sooner” planning amendment, building heights and lot sizes would be adjusted to enable more housing in the city’s middle-ring suburbs.

According to BCC, the LMR zone makes up 14% of the city’s residential areas and the changes would allow for more townhomes, units, apartments and row houses in locations close to public transport, shopping centres and other services.  

Suburbs that are either partially or fully located in LMR zones – and will therefore be impacted by the zoning changes, include: 

• Morningside 

• St Lucia 

• Moorooka 

• Zillmere 

• Bulimba  

• Indooroopilly 

• Nundah 

• Oxley  

• Toowoong  

• Wynnum  

BCC mayor Adrian Schrinner said the amendment forms part of the council’s “anti-sprawl” housing strategy. 

“We’re committed to an anti-sprawl approach that enables more homes to be built while protecting Brisbane’s incredible lifestyle and bushland areas,” he said.  

“Our changes will help relieve construction cost pressures and make it easier for younger people and downsizers to find a home in well-serviced middle-ring suburbs.”  

Specifically, the proposed changes for the LMR zone include:  

• Increasing the allowable building height from two to three storeys to three storeys  

• Increasing the allowable building height to four storeys in some sites located near public transport or shops 

• Reducing the minimum block size from 260sqm to 120sqm 

• Simplifying the development assessment process. 

The amendments would also allow low-density residential lots within 300 metres’ walking distance of a shopping centre to be subdivided into 300sqm blocks — up from the current 200-metre limit.  

Parking rules will also be adjusted to help deliver more affordable housing options. 

Urban Development Institute of Australia (UDIA) welcomed the proposal, noting the housing crisis demands that “no stone should be left unturned”. 

“Importantly, this means also looking at our existing suburbs in light of an evolving and growing city to see how we might be able to accommodate greater levels of housing diversity, with the ultimate aim of providing changes to facilitate people being able to find a home in a place that they want to live, at a price they can afford,” UDIA Queensland CEO Kirsty Chessher-Brown said.  

Housing Industry Association (HIA) said the changes would introduce more diverse housing options for a range of buyers.  

“It’s pleasing to see Council recognise that reducing the minimum lot size is a key step in increasing housing choice and a proven way to reduce the cost of new housing,” HIA Queensland executive director Michael Roberts said. 

“These suite of planning reforms will assist industry in constructing smaller, more affordable dwellings, which are often the entry point for first homebuyers and vital for downsizing seniors.”   

Local residents can share initial feedback via BCC’s website with formal consultation set to begin in early 2026.  

Are you interested in the latest in buying and building new? Check out our New Homes section.  

The post Middle-ring Brisbane suburbs set for zoning changes under ‘anti-sprawl’ plan appeared first on realestate.com.au.