Affordable housing component slashed in Brunswick and Coburg developments
A developer who brands himself ethical alternative A profit-driven industry was allowed to convert 248 promised affordable homes into market-rate units just months before completion.
Planning Minister Sonya Kilkenny’s department approved permission changes This week, Assemble Communities to significantly reduce the affordable housing component of its projects. in brunswick And coburg.
So-called “affordable” housing is not social housing reserved for low-income tenants on a government waiting list and managed by the government (public housing) or non-profit organizations (community housing). “Affordable housing” means private rental stock that is available only to middle-income people for a specified period of time at a discount of 25 percent of the market price.
Both Assemble properties were initially fast-tracked under the state government’s Development Facilitation Program (DFP) with a requirement that 60 per cent of the units be “affordable”. The sites have received government approval for controversial height concessions related to these promises.
As it first appeared Age The change, made last month, now allows the developer to jettison its “rent-to-own” model, which was pitched as a unique path to homeownership for young workers who can’t rely on their “mom-and-pop bank,” and instead build-to-rent flats in the standard market, which Assemble will retain as the corporate landlord.
According to the new permits, the proportion of affordable flats in the portfolio of 622 flats will decrease from 60 percent to 20 percent.
In Brunswick, the affordable component dropped from 170 units to 57 units. 203 affordable units were planned in Coburg and there are currently only 68 available.
Merri-bek City Council did not support the move, finding in its analysis that it reduced the overall affordable housing contribution by a third. The council argued the initial 60 per cent entitlement was a “public benefit” granted in exchange for height concessions that allowed Coburg towers to rise to 16 storeys, well above local rules.
State planners dismissed the council’s concerns, arguing that although there would be fewer affordable units, the “public interest” was actually greater because the new plan introduced 10-year rent reductions. In the original model, residents paid full market rent for five years before having the option to purchase their homes at a fixed price; this is a now scrapped property route.
Department planners clearly referenced Age’It reports on the request in decision documents. While they acknowledged community concerns that commitments were being “quietly” reduced, they ultimately rejected the objections. In the reports, while the “decrease in the housing ratio” was accepted, it was stated that the decision was made according to the “planning basis” and in accordance with the plan.
A Victorian government spokesman defended the accelerated programme.
“We have fast-tracked more than 10,000 homes through this programme, more than 2000 of which are for social and affordable housing,” the spokesman said.
The government noted that although the Development Facilitation Program requires a 10 percent affordable housing component, Assemble is still delivering 20 percent.
Assemble, which is 80 per cent owned by AustralianSuper and HESTA superannuation funds, has previously branded itself as an ethical alternative to profit-driven developers. Previously, this move was referred to “changes in demand and basic conditions”.
A Parliament spokesman said: “We respectfully disagree with the Council’s position. There will be 125 households with 25 per cent discounted, below-market rents, while the community benefits from a stable, long-term rental supply. This is a different model of affordable housing, providing a new supply of housing close to public transport and services. We want to see more Australians in homes and these projects deliver that.”
Victoria Greens housing spokesperson Gabrielle de Vietri has previously accused developers of using affordable housing as a “Trojan horse” to gain approval and “then defeating those commitments to make their projects more profitable”.
State opposition planning and housing spokesman David Southwick previously said: Age He said developers were using Labour’s crash program to deliver extra height and looser planning controls “to then move away from commitments to affordable housing”.
Start your day with a summary of the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter.
Rachael Dexter is a journalist working on The Age’s City team. Contact her at rachael.dexter@theage.com.au, rachaeldexter@protonmail.com or via Signal at @rachaeldexter.58.Connect with: Facebook or email.
