Greater Hobart needs more homes, but identifying the need is much easier than delivering the housing. A site can have strong demand, a suitable location and community benefit, yet still fail because the numbers do not work or the risks cannot be carried at the right time.
That gap between need and delivery has been the focus of my business placement with the Committee for Greater Hobart through the University of Tasmania. I have worked on the proposed Greater Hobart Renewal Trust and a practical question: what prevents well-located renewal and medium density projects from proceeding, and what would change their feasibility?
My work produced three reports. The first examined demand for missing middle housing. The second analysed the full cost stack, finance and delivery process. The third brought the two together as an integrated demand, feasibility and investment case. I also built the supporting evidence workbook and contributed modelling and source validation to the Committee’s response to the Productivity Commission’s interim report on housing supply.
The demand work began with a simple finding. Greater Hobart is forecast to add about 20,000 households between 2021 and 2046, or roughly 800 a year. That gives the region a clear reason to expand supply, but the headline number does not tell us which homes will be needed, where they should be located or what households can afford.
I examined household composition, age, dwelling size, tenure, rents, property values and affordability across Hobart, Glenorchy, Clarence and Kingborough. The analysis showed why housing choice matters. Smaller households, older residents, renters, first-home buyers and families do not all need the same product. Terraces, townhouses and low-rise apartments can meet different needs when their design, location and price are matched to the people they are intended to serve.
An accessible apartment close to services is a different offer from a house-like townhouse in a suburban centre. Both can add density without relying only on detached homes at the edge of the city, but each depends on a different customer group and affordability range. That is why demand analysis has to go beyond population growth. It must test whether interest can become qualified buyers or tenants, signed contracts and occupied homes at the pace a project requires.
The next step was to understand the development stack. Housing delivery depends on land, construction, design, planning, infrastructure, parking, finance and timing. These inputs cannot be assessed in isolation. A delay increases interest and holding costs while postponing revenue. A parking requirement affects both construction expenditure and the space available for housing. An infrastructure constraint can add cost and delay across several projects, not just one site.
This interaction is where apparently suitable developments often become unworkable. The issue may not be one dramatic cost. It can be the combined effect of several smaller constraints, the order in which money must be spent, or the period before sales and rents begin to return cash. A feasibility gap is therefore not simply a figure to be filled. It has a cause, a timing profile and a risk allocation that need to be understood.
To make that analysis practical, I developed models covering development costs, funding gaps, monthly cash flow, borrowing, investment returns and the timing of delivery. The workbook also tested land valuation and ground leases, shared infrastructure, construction and procurement options, and the economics of parking. At a portfolio level, I modelled when capital might be repaid and reused, because a renewal trust’s capacity to support later projects depends partly on when earlier investments return funds.
The modelling reinforced an important principle: the response should follow the constraint. Public land or a ground lease may reduce the upfront burden on one project. Earlier infrastructure coordination may be more important for another. Repeatable designs and joint procurement may reduce costs where several developments have common requirements. Patient or subordinated capital, a guarantee, or a purchase or leasing commitment may address different problems in finance, risk and demand certainty.
No single mechanism is appropriate in every case. The purpose of the proposed Greater Hobart Renewal Trust is to create a disciplined way to assess projects, identify the barrier that matters and coordinate the support and investment that could change the outcome. That also means being clear when a project should not proceed or when the underlying demand is not yet strong enough.
A staged demonstration program could help build the local evidence needed for better decisions. Carefully selected projects would provide information on construction costs, customer response, sales, rents and operating performance. Later projects could then be assessed using local results rather than relying only on assumptions drawn from other markets.
The strongest lesson from this work is that demand and feasibility must be considered together. Demand without a delivery pathway does not produce homes. Financial support without a clear market and measurable housing outcome does not make a sound investment. Unlocking renewal and density requires both sides of the equation to be tested with the same care.
The reports are intended to make that process more transparent. They give the Committee and its prospective partners a consistent way to understand the housing need, test the full development stack and decide whether a targeted intervention can unlock a viable project. For me, the placement has shown how economic research and financial modelling can turn a broad regional ambition into specific, testable decisions about what gets built.
Author note Kailem Irwin is an UTAS business and finance student who completed a placement with the Committee for Greater Hobart. This article accompanies the Committee’s publication of his reports on missing middle housing demand, renewal cost stack finances and delivery, and the integrated demand, feasibility and investment case.
