Research & Evaluation Team Social housing and surrounding property values Social housing and private property values in residential neighbourhoods This review of the Australian and international peer reviewed research literature answers the question: “What evidence is there that inclusion of social housing within a mixed residential area depresses, or does not depress, non-social housing residential property values in that neighbourhood?” 1. Executive Summary Mission Australia’s strategic goal is to reduce homelessness and strengthen communities and one of its strategies to achieve this is by providing and managing social housing in residential neighbourhoods. Mission Australia Housing (MAH) provides social and affordable housing to individuals who are low and moderate income earners. We aim to work alongside residents to create sustainable neighbourhoods and to enhance the quality of life for all community members. This report specifically examines the research literature around the impact of social housing on the surrounding property values in a residential neighbourhood. Our review of the literature found that there is no consensus internationally that social housing has a consistent or significant positive or negative impact on surrounding property values. Much of the literature supported the finding that the presence or scale of social housing in a neighbourhood had less of an impact on surrounding property values than factors associated with the development, management and planning which takes place alongside the physical building project. Recent Australian studies have found that social housing has no appreciable positive or negative impact on surrounding property values and that the scale of a social housing development was not associated with surrounding property values.
Transcript
Research & Evaluation Team
Social housing and surrounding property values
Social housing and private property
values in residential neighbourhoods This review of the Australian and international peer reviewed research literature answers the question: “What evidence is there that inclusion of social housing within a mixed residential area depresses, or does not depress, non-social housing residential property values in that neighbourhood?”
1. Executive Summary
Mission Australia’s strategic goal is to reduce homelessness and strengthen communities
and one of its strategies to achieve this is by providing and managing social housing in
residential neighbourhoods. Mission Australia Housing (MAH) provides social and affordable
housing to individuals who are low and moderate income earners. We aim to work alongside
residents to create sustainable neighbourhoods and to enhance the quality of life for all
community members.
This report specifically examines the research literature around the impact of social housing
on the surrounding property values in a residential neighbourhood. Our review of the
literature found that there is no consensus internationally that social housing has a
consistent or significant positive or negative impact on surrounding property values.
Much of the literature supported the finding that the presence or scale of social housing in a
neighbourhood had less of an impact on surrounding property values than factors associated
with the development, management and planning which takes place alongside the physical
building project.
Recent Australian studies have found that social housing has no appreciable positive or negative impact on surrounding property values and that the scale of a social housing development was not associated with surrounding property values.
page 2
Social housing and surrounding property values
Many studies in the literature highlighted the need to incorporate a renewal and
redevelopment strategy into planning for developments which include social housing. These
strategies should be responsive to current neighbourhood amenities, access and buildings
and should work closely with residents and local councils to ensure that the community
understands and accepts the new development and has a say in how the development
impacts on their neighbourhood.
The literature also highlighted that the neighbourhood context performs a strong role in
determining the best approach to be taken when introducing a new development which
includes social housing. Where social housing is introduced into an at-risk, low income area
with poor infrastructure, proactive renewal programs should be incorporated into both small
and large-scale developments to increase the likelihood of a rise in surrounding property
values. In addition to this, factors such as crime, traffic, proximity to quality schools and the
condition of surrounding properties should be considered when determining the relative
impact of social housing on property values in each location. Exploration of these factors will
be highly localised and contextual and should take place during any early scoping of
prospective locations for new social housing developments.
A close analysis of the literature suggests the following recommendations:
Broader renewal strategies should be incorporated into all social housing
developments, particularly in more deprived neighbourhoods.
Community development programs should form a component of larger renewal
strategies to ensure social cohesion in the neighbourhood, as well as improved
wellbeing outcomes and housing outcomes for social housing tenants.
Renewal strategies should be responsive to the needs of each community, including
the current amenities (e.g. parklands, infrastructure), the current quality of existing
housing and the demographic of the region (e.g. socio-economic status, main job
types).
New developments which include social housing and redevelopment of existing social
housing stock should be done in consultation with residents and local government to
ensure acceptance and feelings of ownership of the development.
Exploration of local context (e.g. crime, traffic and proximity to quality schools) should
take place during any early scoping of prospective locations for new developments
which include social housing.
Good property and tenancy management in social housing properties should take
place once the development has been completed to ensure the maintenance of the
positive impact of well-designed, attractive and good quality developments on
surrounding property values.
page 3
Social housing and surrounding property values
2. Introduction
Mission Australia seeks to understand the impact of social housing on neighbouring property
values within a broader view of improving social housing and its services to the community.
Mission Australia will use this report in its discussions on social housing with partners such as
developers. The findings of this report are drawn from a literature review on peer reviewed
articles.
The literature on this issue identifies that, where neighbourhoods include social housing, the
property values of the surrounding homes are not solely influenced by the presence of social
housing, rather that broader contributing factors make a more significant contribution.
These factors, and the implications of addressing these to positively impact on property
value, will be outlined in this report. A contextual understanding of these factors will be
important for community housing providers, developers and communities when planning
new developments.
This literature review is comprised of three sections.
Firstly, contributing factors and their impact on property value will be examined.
Secondly, Australian, United States and United Kingdom case studies will be analysed to find common trends.
Lastly, these case studies will be compared to discuss how social housing can be successfully integrated into communities.
3. Definitions
In this report, social housing and affordable housing are both referred to and it is important
to note the difference between the two.
‘Social Housing’ refers to ‘housing that is provided for people on low and moderate incomes that is supported with some form of direct or indirect government subsidy…social housing providers may include the government as well as private and Not for Profit (NFP) housing providers’ (Social Housing Taskforce, 2009).
‘Affordable Housing’ refers to housing that is appropriate for the needs of a range of very low to moderate households and priced so that these households are also able to meet other basic living costs such as food, clothing, transport, medical care and education (NSW Government, 2016).
Although they are different to each other, evidence on both types is informative to the research question because both are types of housing sold at below-market prices.
‘Neighbourhood’ in this report refers to the proximal area or community within a town in which the social housing is placed. The proximal area defined within each study may differ but has been defined where relevant in each case.
page 4
Social housing and surrounding property values
4. Contextual conditions of social housing
The surveyed literature confirms that there is no absolute answer to whether the presence
of social housing in a neighbourhood depresses surrounding property values. In fact, newly
developed social housing has the potential to positively impact on price level and growth in
its neighbourhood under certain conditions (Bramley, et al. 2007; Schwartz, et al. 2005).
This study found that the impact of social housing on property sales values was minimal
compared to the impact of more general housing and locational characteristics (Davidson, et
al. 2013).
Where clear positive effects on property values do occur, these can be attributed to positive
environmental effects due to removal or replacement of abandoned vacant lots or through
neighbourhood revitalisation projects (Ellen, 2007). One US-based study found that in New
York, large-scale subsidised housing developments may act as a catalyst in revitalising urban
neighbourhoods in-part though the flow-on effects of increased property values (Schwartz,
et al. 2005). This study found that housing investment made by New York City through new
subsidised housing builds was able to deliver a tax benefit to the city in excess of the cost of
provided subsidies in addition to the increase in surrounding property values for
neighbourhood residents.
Importantly, it was also found that large, multi-unit developments generated a greater effect
on surrounding property values in more disadvantaged neighbourhoods whereas smaller
developments has a lesser impact when spread throughout similarly disadvantaged regions
(Schwartz, et al. 2005). It is likely that larger-scale developments create such an impact due
to the effect of necessary renewal in the surrounding area (access roads, parking,
landscaping) while smaller developments do not require the same amount of change or
improvement.
A recent Australian study found that where social housing is developed in an area close to services, public transport, general infrastructure and amenities such as parks or water frontage, such a development is unlikely to impact in any noticeable way on surrounding property value (Davidson, et al. 2013).
page 5
Social housing and surrounding property values
Many studies highlighted that while proximity to social housing is one factor in to any
analysis of surrounding property value, a number of other contributing factors such as crime,
traffic, proximity to quality schools and the condition of surrounding properties should also
be explored to determine the relative impact of social housing on property value in each
location. Exploration of these factors will be highly localised and contextual and should take
place during any early scoping of prospective locations for new social housing developments.
With this in mind, a number of characteristics of social housing developments have been
identified as influencing surrounding property values:
Replacement or removal effect
Concentration of social housing units
Host neighbourhood context
Management of buildings and tenants
4.1 Replacement or removal effect
Social housing can have a positive impact on the value of surrounding properties when it
replaces depressed conditions (Ahrentzen, 2008). This is because the new housing is
updating the neighbourhood’s design. The visual appearance of renewal estates is an
important aspect of renewal development. This includes upgrading to roads, landscaping,
parks and other physical and environmental facilities of the renewed areas (Randolph, 2004).
Upgrading a neighbourhood with new social housing is likely to enhance the community and
attract people to the area to live or invest. An example of this is the brownfield residential
development in the UK. A revitalised neighbourhood led by social housing development can
see improvements in economic and income deprivation by altering the socio-economic
dynamics of the area, potentially leading to an increase in property values (Baing & Wong,
2011).
4.2 Concentration of social housing units
Although some studies highlighted the positive impact of large-scale subsidised housing
developments on surrounding property values, others suggest that there may be a threshold
in scale of these developments and that overconcentration of social housing units may result
in social residualisisation of a region (Ahrentzen, 2008). Nguyen (2005) reported on studies
by Galster, Tatian, and Smith (1999) of the effect of subsidized housing on property values.
The findings found that there was a positive association on housing value when there were
low numbers of subsidized households in the neighbourhood.
page 6
Social housing and surrounding property values
This study also shows that there may be a threshold below which social housing can be
integrated into a neighbourhood without having a negative effect on surrounding property
values. The threshold number has not been explicitly identified in research, although it would
be dependent on the community and its existing economic value (Ahrentzen, 2008). Despite
these findings from the US, recent Australian research has found no correlation between the
size of a social housing project and the impact on property sales values in the surrounding area
(Davidson, et al. 2013).
4.3 Host neighbourhood context
The impact of concentrated social housing in an area appears to be somewhat dependent on
the region in which it is placed. Where this region consists of connected and supported
residents, good public infrastructure and higher market value properties, embedding social
housing properties will likely have no effect on the value of surrounding properties. However,
embedding small-scale social housing properties within neighbourhoods with poor public
infrastructure, many lower income households, little or poor building design and poor
management of the new social housing buildings, surrounding property values are more likely
to be negatively impacted (Nguyen, 2005). However, it must be noted here that, as previously
cited, large-scale social housing developments which are well-designed and managed and
which incorporate urban renewal strategies (particularly in collaboration with local residents)
can positively impact on surrounding property values even in lower income, more dilapidated
neighbourhoods (Schwartz, et al. 2005).
Effective urban renewal programs target the physical and social environments to improve the
social capital, social connectedness, sense of community and economic conditions of residents
of the neighbourhoods. As a result of such initiatives, residents are more likely to report
improvements to safety and wellbeing (e.g. feeling safe walking down the street after dark) and
to be more likely to stay for a number of years rather than move elsewhere (Jalaludin, 2012).
Urban renewal programs in social housing neighbourhoods can be an effective way to mediate
the impact on surrounding property values and should be incorporated into any social housing
development, particularly in more at-risk neighbourhoods.
4.4 Management of buildings and tenants
Good management of social housing properties also has an influence on increased values of
surrounding properties. Good property and tenancy management more often coincides with
properties developed by not-for-profit community organisations than it does by for-profit
developers (Ahrentzen, 2008). This may occur because not-for-profit housing organisations are
more attentive to designing affordable housing that suits the neighbourhood it is developed in,
such as matching size, scale, design and amenities. Not-for-profit organisations also generally
spend more resources developing benefits for the broader community needs than for-profit
counterparts (Agnew, 2016; Ahrentzen, 2008).
page 7
Social housing and surrounding property values
The likelihood that property values will decline as a result of proximity to affordable housing
increases with poor quality design and management of the affordable housing (Nguyen,
2005). Subsidised housing built in a lower value market also represents an ambiguous case. If
we continue to assume that subsidised housing is well-designed and managed it would be
expected that it would have a positive impact in low-value, more dilapidated
neighbourhoods (Freeman & Botein, 2002).
5. Case Studies
Various studies of the effects of below-market (social or affordable) housing development
on surrounding property values have been conducted, using a range of models, especially in
the USA. This report uses these case studies to demonstrate how social or affordable
housing has influenced surrounding property values in practice.
5.1 Australia – Brisbane
A recent Australian study conducted quantitative hedonic modelling1 of the influence of new
affordable housing developments in Brisbane on property sales prices in surrounding areas
(Davison, et al. 2013). This research used this technique to test whether proximity to
affordable housing has an influence on property sales values.
It was found that, at intervals of 300, 400 and 500 metres away from the affordable housing
developments, proximity had positive impacts on property sales values. In other words, the
closer a property was to an affordable housing development, the higher its sales value was,
compared to other properties of similar characteristics (number of bedrooms, number of
bathrooms etc.).
These positive impacts were, however, generally minimal, accounting for less than 6 per cent
of a property’s sales value. In comparison, considerably higher impacts on property sales
values were associated with: the number of bedrooms (30% or higher); the number of
bathrooms (20% of higher); and the number of off-street parking spaces (20% or higher). The
author concluded that proximity to affordable housing developments may have positive,
although minimal, impacts on sales values of properties located up to 500 metres away from
those developments.
1 The hedonic model is a regression technique used to estimate the prices of qualities or models that are not available on the market in particular periods, but whose prices in those periods are needed in order to be able to construct price relatives.
This case study suggests that affordable property can have positive impact on sales prices if it is dispersed across the neighbourhood.
page 8
Social housing and surrounding property values
5.1 Australia – Parramatta, NSW
During 2009-10, Parramatta City Council raised considerable public opposition to the
proposed development of government and privately financed social housing projects in the
Parramatta area. Political opposition was intense and incited certain sections of the
community into stronger, more public opposition. Much of the political opposition also
played out in the media, with the majority of this centred around the City Council’s decision
to erect large steel signs outside development sites stating ‘Unsupported development:
brought to you by the State Government’.
One Australian study assessed the qualitative impact of these developments by visiting
neighbourhoods in Parramatta where the sites had been opposed and asking residents
about each project’s impact on them and their perceptions about the local government’s
opposition tactics (Davison, et al. 2013). Across Parramatta, 154 interview-surveys were
completed.
Results from these interviews reveal the impact that local politicians and local media can
have in raising opposition and legitimising disapproval for social housing development in a
community. In this case, political motivation may have been due to political positioning
rather than opposition to the social housing development as part of planning policy. Some
interviewees identified that local politicians may have been using the social housing
development to discredit the NSW Labor Government of the time, increasing their own
profile and gaining local support from residents by ‘exploiting the fears of the community by
telling them that you’re going to get a slum next door’ (Davison, et al. 2013).
While the impact on property values was not explored in this case study, it must be
acknowledged that public perception can play a role in market response to social housing
developments – leading local residents to ‘panic sell’ and thereby lower surrounding
property values.
New social housing developments can mitigate local campaigns by working closely with local politicians, residents and the community more broadly to gauge and manage public opinion and address issues where they arise.
page 9
Social housing and surrounding property values
5.3 USA
Goetz et al. (1996) conducted a study on the effects of affordable housing development on
property values in Minneapolis neighbourhoods. It was found that not-for-profit developers
effectively improved the value of surrounding properties in that neighbourhood. However, the
developments by for-profit and public housing organisations had a slight negative impact.
Galster et al. (1999) conducted a study on whether proximity of rent-assisted households had
an impact on the property values of single-family homes in Baltimore County. This study found
that a small number of rent-assisted households had a positive impact on the surrounding
property values of more established neighbourhoods, whereas a large number of rent-assisted
households in depreciated neighbourhoods can have negative impacts on property value.
Santiago et al. (2001) conducted a study of Denver public housing sites. Similarly, it was found
that rehabilitating vacant buildings had a positive effect on property values of surrounding
properties.
The above case studies show that redevelopment of social or affordable housing does not
necessarily lower surrounding property values. However, large concentrations of social housing
developments can have a negative effect on neighbourhoods. Research suggests that below-
market housing can generate positive effects on the value of neighbourhoods through building
renovations and good property management, but negative impact is mainly caused by poor
maintenance and management of properties (Goetz et al. 1996, Galster et al. 1999, Santiago et
al. 2001).
Research by Ellen (2007) and Ellen et al. (2007) found that property values were not depressed
by subsidised rental housing but depended on other characteristics, such as location, scale and
management. This may also include the physical structure of a new development; a poorly
maintained development may depress property values, while one that is attractive and well
maintained can have a positive effect. The population mix of tenants, extent of the
characteristics of future residents and the concentration of subsidised housing in a
neighbourhood can all potentially create positive or negative effects.
Freeman and Botein (2002) also reviewed the literature on the neighbourhood impacts of
subsidised housing in USA and found that the presence of affordable housing in a place can
have both positive and negative impacts on property values in surrounding areas. The type of
impact will differ according to context. Factors identified by Nguyen (2005) include the quality,
design and management of affordable housing, its location and its quantity in a neighbourhood.
Nguyen (2005) examined 17 studies from the US that have attempted to measure the effect of
affordable housing development on property values. She concluded that the research does not
provide a conclusive answer as to whether property values are adversely affected by proximity
to affordable housing. Where property values were lowered by affordable housing
developments, generally the amount of value loss was minimal.
page 10
Social housing and surrounding property values
5.4 United Kingdom
Physical regeneration can act to address the decline of neighbourhoods in inner city areas
and older industrial estates because businesses tend to hold back from investment in
declining areas and will be drawn towards investing in more well-developed, functional
physical spaces. The UK Government’s brownfield land housing development target was
introduced in the late 1990s and became an important component of its wider urban
regeneration and housing policy agenda throughout the 2000s.
In spite of the absolute increase in the price differential between the most deprived areas
and average house prices in England, the relative house price gap has narrowed since 2001.
This was due to a relatively higher increase in property values between 2001 and 2008 in
deprived areas: an increase of 102 per cent and 96 per cent respectively in the 10 per cent
and 20 per cent most deprived neighbourhoods (Baing & Wong, 2011). Between 2005 and
2008, the amount of house price increase in the deprived neighbourhoods outperformed the
English average. The relative house price performance was stronger in deprived areas with
brownfield development (an increase of 113.5 per cent and 105.7 per cent respectively in
the 10 per cent and 20 per cent most deprived areas) throughout 2001-08. This was mainly
due to the strong housing market performance of brownfield housing development between
2001-2005 (Baing & Wong, 2011).
This case study reveals the potential impact of redevelopment and urban regeneration on
property values in more deprived regions. Where possible, urban regeneration and
redevelopment strategies should be incorporated into early stage planning for any social
housing development and particularly when developments occur in more deprived
neighbourhoods.
6. Australian redevelopment of existing social housing stock
Research has shown that renovations and renewal programs undertaken on existing public
housing estates have the potential to significantly increase the underlying property values of
the renovated stock (Randolph, 2004). This is due to a number of contributing factors. Based
on the results from one study, it was found that:
In locations where renewal programs had taken place, the proportion of economically active people increased at a rate above that of local metropolitan averages;
Tenants in the renewed social housing estates reported a significant reduction in the social stigma they felt had been attached to their estates and were satisfied with their housing outcomes, although evidence of other social welfare outcomes was limited;
page 11
Social housing and surrounding property values
Improvements in local amenity and landscaping were implemented, at times in partnership with local councils.
Overall, the indications were that the property values increased by between 50 per cent and
90 per cent on the three estates included in the study (Leichhardt, Queensland; Feradon
Park, South Australia; Kwinana, West Australia) since the start of the renewal program in
late-2002 (Randolph, 2004).
In response to evidence that stigmatised housing in deprived areas was associated with low
levels of access to health and education services and poor wellbeing, Australian State
Housing Authorities introduced neighbourhood renewal programs to improve the quality of
public housing and to strengthen access to service delivery in areas of more concentrated
social housing. These neighbourhood renewal programs aimed to improve outcomes for
residents of social housing, strengthen social cohesion and reduce the socio-economic gap
separating these communities from more affluent communities.
In an Australian study evaluating the impact of neighbourhood renewal programs, house
price profiles were obtained from the Victorian Valuer-General’s database on property
transactions before and after the introduction of neighbourhood renewal programs in
Melbourne. This data found that new renewal programs had a positive impact on price
premiums in five of the seven sites analysed. The premium varied from 4 per cent in
Maidstone to as high as 17 per cent in Hastings. There were two new renewal areas
(Doveton and Werribee) where the renewal program had either a neutral or negative impact
on housing prices. This study found that neighbourhood renewal programs benefit the wider
community, with an average return of $2.20 in non-housing benefits for every $1.00 spent
on renewal. They can reverse negative perceptions of a disadvantaged neighbourhood,
consequently improving levels of wellbeing for residents and increasing surrounding house
prices (Wood & Cigdem, 2014).
This research indicates that investment in neighbourhood renewal programs can help to
reverse negative perceptions of a neighbourhood and consequently raise property values.
This study shows that higher house values occurred as a result of completing neighbourhood renewal programs.
page 12
Social housing and surrounding property values
7. Inclusionary zoning
One important planning tool which can be used to address a lack of social housing stock is
inclusionary zoning, allowing local authorities to require a proportion of new developments
to be contributed towards social and affordable housing. These proportions differ
internationally and within Australia and are influenced both by the need for new social
housing developments and the need for developers to retain an acceptable profit margin in
these new developments.
For example, in Holland 30 per cent of locations specified for new housing must be
affordable. In Ireland, new policies stipulate that 20 per cent of new development must be
for affordable housing. In the UK, the threshold for affordable housing is set around 25 per
cent, with the exception of London in which the percentage is between 30 to 50 per cent
(Atkinson, 2008).
In Australia, the South Australian Housing Trust considers 25 per cent an acceptable
benchmark for concentration of public housing at The Parks community, which represents a
58 per cent decrease in overall concentration. In the mid-1990s, the Queensland
Department formulated a ‘Social Mix Checklist’, which states that the concentration of
public housing should not exceed 20 per cent in any one locality.
In April 2007, the ACT Government released its ‘Affordable Housing Action Plan’ including a
requirement that 15 per cent of the blocks released each year in new housing estates were
allocated for affordable housing (Atkinson, 2008). A new affordable housing threshold
system was introduced from 1 July 2015. Under the new policy, there will be three separate
thresholds based on the size of the property. The new system will maintain the requirement
that 20 per cent of new homes within greenfield estates meet affordability thresholds.
Successfully mixed communities are able to attract diverse households because of the
quality of design and amenity of the locality. Design and layout ensure that affordable
housing is well blended into neighbourhoods so that it is not visible in the built environment
and they remain attractive to a diverse range of people. It may be argued that the inclusion
of a wide variety of residents into a neighbourhood has the potential to stimulate more
creative, vibrant communities, including residents who are low-income due to less profitable
but still highly valued activities (e.g. artists). Maintaining this type of vibrancy and diversity
close to metropolitan centres will ensure that these regions will continue to benefit rather
than driving residents further out into regional towns and satellite cities.
One international example which specifically caters to the needs of low/moderate income
earners contributing to the vibrancy of a region can be found in the City of Boston. In this
case, public land were sold at extremely low, nominal prices to not-for-profit and for-profit
developers to build homes for purchase by those on a moderate income, earning less than
80% of median income. This included developments such as ‘ArtBlock’ a development which
page 13
Social housing and surrounding property values
included market rate (28 units) and social housing residences (28 units) designed to provide
live-work spaces for artists. In the ArtBlock development, public land was provided at no cost
and the Boston Redevelopment Authority advanced the cost of market rate units before
sale, ensuring that the project was adequately funded to completion (Gurran, et al. 2008).
While it has been suggested that significant shifts in policy and legislative reform would be
required for broader introduction of inclusionary zoning in the Australian context (Anderson-
Oliver, 2014), some successful implementations of inclusionary zoning here have taken place
in localised areas.
7.2 Pyrmont-Ultimo, NSW
Australia’s longest-running inclusionary zoning scheme applies to Sydney’s Ultimo Pyrmont
urban redevelopment precinct. The City West Affordable Housing Scheme set the target in
1994 for 600 dwellings in Ultimo Pyrmont to be developed or acquired as permanently
affordable rental stock for very low, low and moderate income households, a target which
has since been met. Key to this redevelopment is the successful incorporation of social
housing into a region while high income earners were also being drawn into the area and
major redevelopment works were scheduled to take place.
The NSW Government developed City West Housing Pty Ltd as a not for dividend company
responsible for developing social housing for the original residents of the Pyrmont-Ultimo
area. City West Housing Ltd has built or redeveloped 635 social housing units in Pyrmont-
Ultimo in the years 1994-2016 and there are plans to own 1052 units by the end of 2017
(City West Housing, 2015). Despite the prevalence of these social housing properties in this
area, property values have continued to steadily increase.
Median house prices have increased in the period 1994-2016 from $222,500 to $1,309,758
in Ultimo and from $250,000 to $1,356,077 in Pyrmont, while median unit prices have
increased from $155,000 to $722,648 in Ultimo and from $265,000 and $861,436 in Pyrmont
inflation during this period, these increases are still quite considerable in spite of the broad
inclusion of social housing properties in this area.
This case study shows that, similar to previous findings in this review, embedding well-designed and managed social housing developments into an area with positive amenities and with a carefully planned redevelopment framework can take place without causing a negative impact on property values.
page 14
Social housing and surrounding property values
8. Conclusion
There is no consensus in the international literature for an absolute conclusion that social
housing has a positive or negative impact on surrounding property values. Recent Australian
studies found that there was no appreciable impact on property value in either direction and
that the scale of a social housing development was not associated with surrounding property
value.
More important than the presence of social housing in a neighbourhood was the
development, management and planning which took place alongside the physical building
project.
Much of the literature highlighted the need to incorporate a renewal and redevelopment
strategy into planning for social housing builds. These strategies should be responsive to
current neighbourhood amenities, access and buildings and where possible should work
closely with local councils and residents to ensure that the community understands and
accepts the new development and has a say in how the development impacts on their
neighbourhood.
The literature also highlighted that the neighbourhood context performs a strong role in
determining the best approach to be taken when introducing a new social housing
development. Where social housing is introduced into an at-risk, low income area with poor
infrastructure, responsive renewal programs should be incorporated into both small- and
large-scale developments to increase the likelihood of a rise in surrounding property values.
In addition to this, factors such as crime, traffic, proximity to quality schools and the
condition of surrounding properties should be considered when determining the relative
impact of social housing on property value in each location.
Exploration of these factors will be highly localised and contextual and should take place
during any early scoping of prospective locations for new social housing developments.
page 15
Social housing and surrounding property values
9. Bibliography
Agnew, S, The Impact of Affordable Housing on Communities and Households, Minnesota Housing
