About a year ago, I entered a lottery to win a home. It felt like gambling, though I didn’t have to pay a cent.
I slipped my name into the ballot for Nightingale Housing in Marrickville: an affordable, build-to-rent housing development on Illawarra Road.
Nightingale Marrickville boasts 54 eco-conscious micro-apartments, rented at 20% lower than market value. The apartments are assigned through an equitable ballot system which prioritises low-income earners, essential workers, single women over 55, First Nations peoples, and individuals with disabilities.
Built in partnership with not-for-profit, faith-based organisation Fresh Hope Communities, Nightingale Marrickville combines small-space, sustainable living with architectural design.
So, what exactly is ‘build-to-rent’, and is it always synonymous with affordable housing?
According to the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute (AHURI), build-to-rent refers to “the process whereby developers and their financiers build multi-unit buildings and, instead of selling the units, retain them to rent to tenant households.” Unlike traditional rental housing owned by private landlords, build-to-rent developments are professionally owned and managed, with an expectation of greater security for tenants through long-term leases.
Increasingly positioned as key to tackling the housing crisis, build-to-rent developments have gained significant backing from the NSW Government. Since 2020, the state has offered a 50% land tax discount for qualifying developments, and is now entering the sector itself.
At the start of February, the Minns Labor Government announced a $450 million investment in build-to-rent units in Camperdown, aimed at providing affordable housing for essential workers. But how affordable is this so-called “build-to-rent, affordable housing”?
Even at Nightingale Marrickville, often framed as the most ethical model, rental prices for studio apartments range from $395-445 per week — set at 20% below market rates. While this includes all bills, access to large communal spaces, outdoor areas, and car-share options — all within a light and airy Scandinavian-chic building — affordability remains a barrier, particularly for students and young people.
For those students relying on the maximum Centrelink Youth Allowance payment of $663.30 a fortnight, even factoring in a meager amount of Rent Assistance, renting at Nightingale remains out of reach without earning a substantial supplementary income.
If affordability is a challenge for even build-to-rent’s most progressive, not-for-profit examples, what does that mean for larger, corporate developments entering the sector? Are we seeing a privatisation of public housing?
A new application for the biggest build-to-rent development in the state was recently submitted to the NSW government by ‘Rent to Live Co’, an offshoot of the controversial student accommodation company Scape.
Large, purpose-built student accommodation developments are, in effect, one of the earlier forms of build-to-rent housing in Australia — though affordability has rarely been a defining feature.
Scape, in particular, has a reputation for excessive rental prices and restrictive lease conditions. At its University of Sydney location, a single bed in a shared twin room — within a 6-8 person apartment — starts at an exorbitant $535 per week, while studio apartments begin at $886 per week.
Scape’s tradition of inflated rental prices raises concerns about the affordability of its build-to-rent spin-off.
Their latest venture, Rent to Live Co, claims to “address the current housing shortage and housing affordability crisis in Sydney” and prioritise “access over ownership”.
Yet to be approved by the state Government, the proposed $1.5 billion development will take over Marrickville Timberyards on Victoria Road. The project plans to deliver 1188 build-to-rent apartments and just 115 “affordable housing units”, along with communal areas and retail space.
Despite these commitments to “affordability”, Rent to Live Co has yet to disclose rental prices or allocation criteria for its dedicated ‘affordable housing units’, which make up a mere 9% of the proposed housing supply.
Public sentiment towards Nightingale Marrickville remains largely positive, now a year after its opening. But just a few streets over, some members of the Marrickville community have expressed their skepticism about the proposed Timberyards development online.
“A money grab dressed up as a solution,” one local expressed.
Another criticised claims of affordability, stating “Developers [are] just making more fistfuls of cash with no actual housing within a realistic budget for anyone less than middle to upper class.”
Others, however, welcome the new development, particularly as an alternative to housing dominated by small, private landlords. “More housing is desperately needed and as a society we should be open to all types of housing,” one resident said. Another added, “It’s not an either/or scenario.”
Unfortunately, my name wasn’t drawn in the ballot. But even if it was, Nightingale would be out of my budget, and many other student’s as well. Affordability is not a buzzword, but a commitment.
The type of new housing supply matters. While government and not-for-profit build-to-rent developments that prioritise sustainable, equitable, and truly affordable housing represent a step in the right direction, they are, at best, just that — a step, not a solution.
If you live in the Inner West LGA, have your say on the proposed Timberyards by RTL Co by making a submission: https://www.planningportal.nsw.gov.au/major-projects/projects/timberyards-rtl-co
