HOUSING IN MELBOURNE’S NORTH
Jarel Cheah 998651
Studio Leader: Ben Cooke 1
CONTENTS Introduction
Pp. 3
Site Analysis
Pp. 4-7
zoning map of site area Issue 1: More affordable housing needed Issue 2: Lack of housing quality Issue 3: Lack of diversity in housing typology
Vision
Pp. 8
Objectives and Actions (overview)
Pp. 9
Objective 1: Increase supply of affordable housing
Pp. 10
Objective 2: Improve living conditions of current and potential residents
Pp. 12
Objective 3: Create a more diverse housing typology
Pp. 12
Implementation
Pp. 13
Conclusion
Pp. 14
Reference List
Pp. 15 2
INTRODUCTION The city of Melbourne is. The area is approximately 12 hectares, with the edges being LA Trobe Street/Elizabeth Street and Russel Street/ Victoria Street. The site study area will be called “Melbourne North�.
Lincoln Square
Site boundary: The site boundary was chosen because Victoria Street is one of the main access points towards to Hoddle Grid. The major landmarks close to the site are the State library and Queen Victoria Markets. The area has similar characteristics and issues which can also be found in other areas of the Melbourne CBD, and can therefore represent the whole of Melbourne CBD. However, limitations could occur due to factors like differing land use.
Royal Exhibition Building
The site is defined by the RMIT city campus, student accommodations and apartments, and restaurants. This site was chosen because the majority of apartments has a strong aspect of convenience and is well serviced by public transport and amenities,
State Library of Victoria
Flagstaff Gardens
This report aims to analyse current and potential housing issues of Melbourne CBD supported by research and data. Site observations will also be used to understand the current situation of housing. The report will then discuss actions and objectives to improve the housing situation and meet the vision and come up with strategies to implement themsupported by research and data. Site observations will also be used to understand the current situation of housing. The report will then discuss actions and objectives to improve the housing situation and meet the vision and come up with strategies to implement them.
Fig. 1. Site study area. Source: Author
3
SITE ANALYSIS
Fig. 2. zoning for chosen site. Source: Assignment 2 planning report.
Housing types are determined by the demographics, infrastructure and zoning of the area. The housing sector in our chosen area- Melbourne CBD is an important aspect of city planning as it caters to a dominant student population studying in tertiary education. Based on ABS, most of the population living in private dwellings are either couples or individuals, there are little to no families in the CBD having children. The housing type seems to reflect this as well, based on the 2016 Residential dwellings map, the dominant housing typology in our chosen area are apartments, and that number is expected to have risen in present day, with one or two student accommodations popping up recently. Renting is the dominant housing market, with 66.8% of people renting in the CBD. This can be attributed to the high student population, as the majority of students will be staying for the short term.
Fig. 3. Population forecasts. Source: Assignment 2 planning report.
The investigated area is comprised of 3 zones: -Capital City Zone 1: This applies to land situated in Melbourne’s central city -Mixed Use Zone: This applies to land which encompasses a variety of residential, commercial and industrial uses -Public Use Zone - Education: This applies to land of public utility, used to provide educational services. (McGuane, assignment 2).
4
SITE ANALYSIS
Issue 1: More Affordable Housing Needed City of Melbourne states that households experience housing stress when more than 30% of their weekly income goes towards rent or mortgage payments, and this means that housing becomes unaffordable for them. 34.4% of households in Melbourne CBD have a gross weekly income of below $650, 14% more than Victoria and Australia as a whole due to its high student population. As a result, almost 40% of households are paying 30% or more of their weekly income for accomodation, this figure is almost 3 times more than the average Victorians. ALthough the supply of private rental housing has increased, this i=has mainly happened in the upper end of the market. This will result in social segregation and disadvantage for those with low socioeconomic status (Buxton et al. 2016). Fig. 4. Apartment buildings in Melbourne North. Source: City of Melbourne, 2013.
Opportunities: Based on site observations, plenty of vacant lots and unused plots of land can be found, most notably along smaller streets like Little La Trobe Street. This means that there is strong potential for infill developments in Melbourne CBD.
Fig. 4AB. Apartment buildings in Melbourne North. Source: author.
5
Issue 2: Lack of Housing Quality Currently, apartment standards in Melbourne are poor and many of them do not meet the needs of residents. Better apartments (2017, pp.4) conducted a study that measured how well houses in Victoria meet Victoria’s housing standards. In the study, it is found that 92.3% of apartments are too small. Additionally, it was also found that only 52.79% of apartments passed the standard of having at least one window located on an external wall for every habitable room (including bedrooms). The city of Melbourne (2013, p. 65) also analyzed recent housing developments and found that common design issues that many housing developments met poorly were small apartment sizes, lack of apartment choice, and poor internal amenity such as light and ventilation). They concluded that the more dense a building is, the more likely they measured poorly on design standards. Due to the financialization of the housing market, the houses designed in Melbourne North are catered to maximise profitability and drive up investments. City of Melbourne (2014-18, pg. 32) states that 85 percent of apartments purchased in the municipality are used as a financial product instead of as a home. This has incentivised developers to produce low quality 1-2 bedroom apartments and lower type and mix of housing that have a lower financial risk. City of Melbourne (2014-18, pg. 6) states that Approximately 50% of new dwellings have one bedroom and dwelling size is shrinking with 40% of new dwellings having less than 50m^2 of floor space.
Fig. 4. Percentage of apartments meeting design criteria Source: secret agent, 2017.
Fig. 6. Case study results for each height category. Source: City of Melbourne, 2013. Fig. 5. An example of the features included in a ‘poor’ housing development. Source: City of Melbourne, 2013.
6
Issue 3: Lack of diversity in housing typology
Social diversity is an important factor for a socially healthy city. Wide range of housing choices allow the city of Melbourne to cater for different household demographics, income and age. Issues such as social polarisation and locational disadvantage can be addressed when there are diversity. Due to the the reliance on the private market to provide housing supply, there are dominant and increasing prevalence of 1 to 2 bedroom apartments in Melbourne North , the household demographics will naturally be couples or individuals. The site observation also found an overwhelming majority of young adults, based on data collected online, these people are mostly students in tertiary education. This lack of diversity in housing typology means that there is a real danger of social polarisation. The unsustainable aspect of this is the inflexibility that comes with an ageing population. NHSC (2010, p. xvi) states that the proportion of ageing household is projected to grow from 19 per cent to 28 pepr cent over the next 20 years. This will put pressure on existing housing typology as demand for increased bedrooms rise. The data in fig X. shows the dominance of 1-2 bedroom apartment units based on different statistical areas within the boundary of the site.
Fig. 7. Dominant type of apartment units in Melbourne North. Source: ABS, 2016. City of Melbourne states that there are demand for family friendly apartments in the city of Melbourne, as couple families will make up 9 per cent of total households by 2030. Currently, supply will not meet demand based on current development trends.
Fig. 8. Dominant type of apartment units in Melbourne. Source: City of Melbourne, 2016.
7
VISION
To create a comfortable and affordable housing environment that caters to a diverse demographics in Melbourne North.
8
OBJECTIVES & ACTIONS Objective 1 : Increase supply of affordable housing states that the current housing options do not cater for low income earners. s. In 2012, only 6 per cent of available housing in the municipality was affordable to the lowest 25 per cent of earners; of this only 1 per cent was provided in the private open market.
Fig. 9. Affordable housing Source: City of Melbourne, 2013.
Between 2001 and 2011, there is an increase in the median rental payment in the city of Melbourne, income growth was exceeded by 150 per cent and inflation growth by 213 per cent. The affordability of housing is now impacting households on incomes of up to $100,000 per year.
Objective 2: Improve living conditions of current and potential residents The quality of homes are just as important as the quantity of homes available to ensure a sustainable living outcome in Melbourne North. As much of the new housing will be delivered via high density living, it is ever more important to make sure that Melbourne North do not sacrifice quality in pursuit of quantity. Apartments in Melbourne North mainly follow the standards of the national building code of Australia (BCA), and as a result developers are attempting a minimum compliance approach. The future living case study conducted by the city of Melbourne concluded that a lack of clear planning policy guidelines and current BCA requirements that are not designed for higher density living is resulting in poor living conditions of apartments. Fig 10. the differences between a small one bedroom and a standard one bedroom apartment. Source: City of Melbourne, 2013.
9
Objective 1 : Increase supply of affordable housing Action 1.1 : Encourage infill developments through government intervention City of Melbourne (n.d.) states that projected housing growth within the CBD is expected to be concentrated mainly on apartments, and there’s strong opportunity for future high density developments. Currently, it is stated that the factors affecting the affordability of homes are not due to the lack of land supply in metropolitan Melbourne. In fact, according to the plan Melbourne document, the CBD can accommodate up to 80,000 more homes than the projected housing growth than 45,000.
Legend Approved residential dwellings Constructed residential dwellings
N
Identified infill potential Site Boundary
Fig 11. CLUE dwelling situation. Source: City of Melbourne, n.d. Instead, factors influencing housing affordability are mainly high infill urban renewal and construction costs. According to the Construction costs in melbourne cbd are 3 times more expensive than in Sydney. The reasons for this were due to the difficulties and uncertainties in “delays in securing development finance, lengthy and sometimes uncertain planning and development assessment processes and community opposition to high density dwellings� (NHSC 2010). Buxton, Goodman and Moloney (2016, p. 57-58) explained that although high density infill construction costs are higher when compared to greenfield construction costs, the total costs for greenfield development is more expensive when aggregate costs like infrastructure costs are properly accounted for. However, due to the perceived higher costs of infill developments, developers are discouraged from infill developments. To increase supply of housing in Melbourne North, unused or under utilized sites can be identified, and planning guidelines should be clear and consistent to allow certainty in development, planning approvals will also be streamlined. These will produce an outcome that could potentially save development costs and encourage devlopers to develop infill land.
10
Action 1.2 : Implement inclusionary zoning policies A compulsory requirement for developers to dedicate a proportion of new housing developments to affordable, lower priced units will take advantage of the over-reliance on private developers to provide housing and use it to achieve social outcomes. Buxton et al. (2016) explained that introducing planning regulations to provide a broader range of affordable housing is considered more effective than releasing land for development on the city fringe. It is also explained that results clearly show that mandatory requirements placed on developers work more effectively than voluntary schemes based solely on incentives. This action aims to replicate the success of case study 2 by creating an inclusionary zone overlay that requires developers of new infill sites to dedicate a small proportion to affordable housing units that falls below market price. This shall be evaluated on a case by case basis to increase the likelihood of success. The implementation of mandatory 5% inclusionary zoning is expected to lead to contrasting goals for action 1.1 by discouraging developers from developing sites that could potentially be infilled. Due to the contrasting nature of action 1.1 and action 1.2, the two action should be implemented together in addition to tax incentives and planning incentives that provides encouragement for developers to achieve this objective. Fig. X illustrates the inclusionary zone overlay in Melbourne North, due to the education zone for RMIT, the space is restricted. It is defined by Elizabeth street, Swanston street and Victoria street, La Trobe Street. This action is likely to apply to Residential developments approved and potential infill sites.
Case study 1: Inclusionary zoning policies in the U.K. This method has been steadily accepted by developers in the U.K. and they now contribute the most to affordable housing supply. They are analysed on a case by cae basis by the planning authority based on the housing market and cost of development. One of the main reasons why these are being accepted by developers is because when inclusionary planning model is applied consistently, they help developers factor in the total costs for development. Most models also work in addition to other incentives and subsidies, further extending the value of this model. So far, this model has only been replicated in South Austrlia, with other states favouring a more voluntary mechanism. (The Conversation, n..d.)
Case study 2: Mandatory provision of affordable housing in South Australia Legend Inclusionary zoning overlay Approved residential dwellings Identified infill potential
N
Fig 11. Inclusionary zoning overlay in Melbourne North. Source: Author
Site Boundary
In South Australia, state targets of mandatory 15% affordable housing in new residential areas coupled with some planning incentives and tax incentives produced 17 percent of affordable housing in SA. This outcome is the highest compared to other states in Australia and have been praised by the general public as having led to positive outcomes for the affordable housing market. However it should also be noted that most of the affordable houses produced has been government owned sites, and there is a weaker impact on privately owned, infill sites due to the lack of financial incentives. One recommended way of rectifying this based on interviews of industry professionals is to vary local planning controls and grant density bonus, and to also evaluate the mandatory requirement on a case by case basis (Gurran et al. 2018, p. 31-37).
11
Objective 2: Improve living conditions of current and potential residents
Action 2.1: Implement building Codes and guidelines in Melbourne’s North As population in Melbourne’s North grows, there will be a greater need for high quality apartment design. Building codes and guidelines aims to provide clarity from the beginning of new developments and better communicate what outcomes are expected. This will ensure basic housing quality and improve on the guidelines provided by the BCA. Case study 1: City of Moreland Higher Density Design Code.
Action 2.2: Implement building Codes and guidelines in Melbourne’s North “Design review offers a simple, robust and tested method to assess and improve design quality. It is essentially about making a scheme better than it otherwise would have been, by challenging, advising and offering recommendations on developments,” (CIty of Melbourne, 2013). Panels involved will include industry experts in different fields. They will offer advice on new developments happening in Melbourne North, and how to best meet standards set out and ensure good outcomes for every stakeholders.
City of Moreland came up with a guideline document that sets standards for assessing developments that are higher than four storeys high. The code provides clarity on what is expected of new developments and creates an efficient system for development applications. (City of Melbourne 2013, p.73)
Objective 3: Create a more diverse housing typology Action 3.1: Encourage and incorporate diversity in policy and planning guidelines To create more diversity, building guidelines implemented for Melbourne North should encourage larger bedroom units to be designed or the incorporation of alternate configurations for future change of use , and encourage to inclusion of more family friendly elements like children communal areas. This action will also be integrated with action 2.2 in advising developers on best residential building forms to meet different needs. Case study 1: CIty of Sydney- Flexible housing dwelling mix The Sydney Development Control plan (DCP) and Residential Flat Design code makes sure that developments proposing 10 dwellings or more must provide different proportion mix of units. Neew developments are also required to design for adaptation of use such as easily removable wall configurations. (City of Melbourne 2013, p.59)
Fig 12. Different building forms allowing for same density. Source: City of Melbourne, 2013. p. 64.
12
IMPLEMENTATION SHORT TERM: 0-5 YEARS OBJECTIVE 1: ACTION 1.1
MID TERM: 1-5 YEARS
LONG TERM: 5-15 YEARS
Work with interested developers Work with City of Melbourne for approval
Identify potential infill sites
Approve and construct new dwellings
Bring awareness streamlined guidelines
ACTION 1.2 Stakeholders: City of Melbourne Community Developers
OBJECTIVE 2: ACTION 2.1
1.Consult council on inclusionary
Construction of new, affordable dwellings
2.Apply inclusionary zoning policies 3.communicate changes to stakeholders
1. Review National Building Codes Australia 2. Consult with stakeholders 3. Implement modifications and communicate chnages
ACTION 2.2
1. Review profiles of industry professionals 2. Communicate action and send invitation
Stakeholders: 3. Communicate changes to stakeholders City of Melbourne planning Community Developers Australian Building Codes Board (ABCB)
OBJECTIVE 3: ACTION 3.1
Implementation of building guidelines Incorporation of diversity guidelines
Stakeholders: City of Melbourne planning Community Developers Australian Building Codes Board (ABCB)
13
CONCLUSION Melbourne North’s housing market is financially driven to and designed for investments instead of shelter and occupation. All of the housing are apartments and are mainly rental driven. It is vital that policies are in place to make Melbourne North liveable and affordable to sustain future generations, especially when population growth is expected to skyrocket in the coming years. The 3 key issues identified are: Lack of affordable housing, lack of housing diversity and Poor quality housing. The strategy proposal to rectify these issues are: - Increase supply of affordable housing - Improve living conditions of current and potential residents -Diversify current housing typologies. By implementing these strategies, the vision of having comfortable and affordable housing environment that caters to a diverse demographics in Melbourne North will be realised.
14
Reference List
City of Melbourne n.d., Homes for People Housing Strategy 2014-2018, accessed 1 September 2018,<https://www.melbourne.vic. gov.au/SiteCollectionDocuments/homes-for-people-housing-strategy.pdf>. Buxton, M, Goodman, R, Moloney, S 2016, Planning Melbourne: lessons for a sustainable city, CSIRO Publishing, Clayton South, Victoria. Australian Bureau of Statistics 2016, advanced geographies search, accessed 1 September 2018, http://www.abs.gov.au/websitedbs/D3310114.nsf/Home/2016%20search%20by%20geography https://www.melbourne.vic.gov.au/about-melbourne/research-and-statistics/city-economy/pages/indicators-liveability-economy.aspx The conversation April 2018, “England expects 40% of new housing developments will be affordable, why can’t Australia?” accessed 6 September 2018, http://theconversation.com/england-expects-40-of-new-housing-developments-will-be-affordable-why-cant-australia-94581 City of Melbourne n.d., City of Melbourne: Population forecasts: Melbourne CBD, accessed 2 September 2018, http://melbournepopulation.geografia.com.au/areas/CLSA01 Gurran, N, Gilbert, C, Gibb, K, van den Nouwelant, R, James, A. and Phibbs, P 2018, ‘Supporting affordable housing supply: inclusionary planning in new and renewing communities’, AHURI Final Report No. 297, viewed 18 Oct 2018, https://www.ahuri. edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/17272/AHURI_Final_Report_No297_Supporting_affordable_housing_supply_inclusionary_planning_in_new_and_renewing_communities.pdf. https://static.treasury.gov.au/uploads/sites/1/2017/06/stateofsupplyreport_2010.pdf City of Melbourne May 2013, “ Future Living A discussion paper identifying issues and options for housing our community”, accessed 5 October 2018, https://www.melbourne.vic.gov.au/SiteCollectionDocuments/future-living-discussion-paper.pdf
15