It hasn’t taken long for several of our neighbouring councils to present their views on the latest State Government’s housing target announcement. Glen Eira remains silent – at least in the public domain. God forbid that this council should ever criticise the government and god forbid that it should stand up for its residents.

Here are the responses from Bayside and Boroondara. They are presented in full.

BAYSIDE

Housing target looms large for Bayside

Tuesday 18 June 2024

A 70% increase in housing by 2051 could fundamentally alter the character of Bayside, dramatically compromising liveability.

Bayside City Council is deeply concerned regarding the 70% draft target announced by the Victorian Government.

Bayside Mayor, Councillor Fiona Stitfold said delivering this number of dwellings by 2051 without compromising the much loved, neighbourhood character of Bayside would be very challenging.

“Achieving a target of this magnitude would require dramatic change across Bayside,” Councillor Stitfold said.

“We are alarmed regarding the lack of transparency and are calling for the Victorian Government to provide Council with the evidence and data that has informed the target.”

“Bayside will work cooperatively with the Victorian Government however the process to date has not included effective engagement with either Council or the community. 

“Any engagement on the draft target should also include details on how the Victorian Government will fund additional community facilities, services and infrastructure to accommodate an influx of new residents as this is a key concern of both Council and the community,” Councillor Stitfold said.

Bayside has a strong record of approving housing planning applications with approximately 85% within the state government’s requisite timeframe.

Bayside City Council has previously expressed concerns regarding building heights and density proposed in the Suburban Rail Loop Precinct Key Directions statement which focuses growth in the communities of Highett, Hampton East, Cheltenham and Pennydale in particular.

Achieving a 70% increase to housing would require growth across Bayside as well as in the SRL precinct. This growth would most likely occur along the Sandringham Railway Line which has received no state government investment via Level Crossing Removals. 

“While the increase in the number of dwellings appears to be the simple answer to affordability and supply, the reality is that the current housing market is complex and impacted significantly by the state of the economy, supply chain issues, and State Government Taxation” Councillor Stitfold said.

Have your say on the draft housing target via the Victorian Government engagement website.  Source: https://www.bayside.vic.gov.au/news/housing-target-looms-large-bayside

BOROONDARA

State government’s approach to the housing crisis is disappointing and flawed

Tue 18 June 2024

The state government’s approach to the housing crisis is both disappointing and flawed. The need for additional housing is understood but any suggestion that setting housing targets will solve this challenge or even be an effective tool is misleading for several reasons.

First, the housing crisis is the result of poor planning policy by commonwealth and state governments over many years. The cost of government taxes, cost of borrowing for both developers and purchasers, the cost of building materials, shortage of skilled labour due to government projects, cost of living and immigration levels have created this crisis. These are matters for state and commonwealth governments, not local governments. The setting of housing targets does not address any of these fundamental causes.

Secondly, to release housing targets on the scale proposed (a 300% increase on the number of dwellings constructed each year to date in Boroondara) without making any commitment to the infrastructure required to support such exceptional growth is irresponsible planning. Our community has a right to such fundamentals as public open space, adequate drainage and sewage systems, education facilities, health services and transport networks. There is no analysis of this and no corresponding budget allocation over future years from the state. The government must be aware of the need for infrastructure planning given the experience of residents in growth areas, repeated over decades, who continue to have poor access to fundamental services.

Thirdly, housing targets do not produce housing. Developers do that. Councils cannot force developers to make planning applications for new development and councils cannot force developers to build the housing for which they have approval. This is clearly evidenced by the thousands of dwellings which have approval across the state but are not being built.

If the state and commonwealth governments were to accept their roles in planning for adequate housing supply in this country there would be a joint taskforce focused on the macro-economic factors required to stimulate supply and their respective budgets would allocate infrastructure funding required in long term financial plans. This will assist in ensuring quality neighbourhoods and living environments are created for our communities. Community wellbeing and sustainable housing supply should be our focus, not short term politically motivated measures designed to deflect responsibility.

We look forward to a more holistic approach.

Source: https://www.boroondara.vic.gov.au/your-council/news-and-media/boroondara-news/state-governments-approach-housing-crisis-disappointing-and-flawed