AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN PORT PHILLIP- THE ROLES OF THE …€¦ · City of Port Phillip’s affordable housing roles since the restructure of the housing program - 2007 onwards 1. Leadership-

AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN PORT PHILLIP-THE ROLES OF THE CITY OF PORT PHILLIP by Gary Spivak, Housing Development Officer May 2012

Key words

• Values

• Policy framework

• Experience

• Partnerships

• Commitment

Historical Overview Former City of South Melbourne• Strong advocate and facilitator of social (public and community) housing

• Contributions to development of public housing estates (1960s/70s) by Housing Commission Victoria-sponsorship agreements (3 estates)

• Supported the establishment in 1983 of South Port Rooming House Group (now South Port Community Housing Group) in collaboration with the City of Port Melbourne. Ongoing support provided until local government amalgamation in 1994

• Support for establishment of affordable residential care facilities (2 facilities: Claremont & Napier St)

• Employed a Housing Worker to provide casework, information and referral roles to persons facing homelessness or needing housing assistance

• No adopted housing strategy (draft strategy at amalgamation in 1994)

Historical Overview Former City of Port Melbourne• Strong advocate and facilitator of social (public and community) housing

• Contributions to development of public housing estates (1960s) by Housing Commission Victoria under Sponsorship Agreements (4 estates/properties)

• Supported the establishment in 1983 of South Port Rooming House Group (now South Port community housing group) in collaboration with the City of South Melbourne. Ongoing support provided until local government amalgamation in 1994

• Support for establishment of affordable residential care facilities (1 facility)

• Provided affordable housing for low income staff and undertook one community housing project under LGCHP in 1990/91

• No housing strategy prepared.

Historical Overview (incl. origins of the community housing program)

Former City of St.Kilda

• Contributed to development of public housing estates by Housing Commission Victoria-sponsorship agreements (1960s/70s - 2 estates)

• Adopted Housing Strategy 1985- focus on:– Planning mechanisms to prevent subdivision of rental flat blocks through subdivision– Support roles for retention of private rooming houses

• Many strategies unable to be progressed due to:– Lack of State support for planning mechanisms– Little effective means to support retention of rooming houses.

• Refocus on one strategy- seeking Commonwealth grants under the Local Government & Community Housing Program (this started the Housing Program). Justification:

- Less public housing in St.Kilda compared with South and Port Melbourne- Direct intervention in the housing market place- Council doing what the community demanded-responding to gentrification

• Community activists elected on Council late 1980s/early 1990s) and led to ongoing support for expanding the Housing Program

Historical Overview – the Three Main Community Housing Organisations in Port Phillip

• South Port Community Housing Group Inc.(formerly South Port Rooming House Group)– Established 1983 through collaboration of former Cities of South Melbourne and Port

Melbourne to manage rooming houses for the State housing authority– Now a registered housing Provider under the Housing Act– Focus on managing and developing singles and youth housing in South-Port area

• St. Kilda Community Housing Ltd. (formerly St.Kilda Rooming House Issues Group)– Established 1984 by the local community to manage rooming houses for the State housing

authority– Now a registered housing Provider of singles housing mainly in St.Kilda– Focus on managing and developing singles housing in St Kilda

• Port Phillip Housing Association Ltd. (formerly St Kilda Housing Association)– Established 1986 jointly by City of St Kilda and the local community to manage Council

community housing– Now a registered Housing Association under the Housing Act – Focus on managing and developing housing for all main target groups across Port Phillip (also

operates across Greater Melbourne)

Affordable housing roles: City of Port Phillip 1996-2006 (post amalgamation)

• Re-commitment to the Housing Program reconfirmed by City of Port Phillip after the 1994-96 local government amalgamation process (1st council meeting)

• Preparation, adoption, implementation of a comprehensive and consistent policy framework (Housing Strategy 1997, Council Plans, Port Phillip Planning Scheme and its Municipal Strategic Statement, associated other strategies/plans) with clear values

– Recognition that commitment needs to also be in higher order policy to be effective (Council Plan, planning scheme)

• Development of community housing• Facilitation of affordable housing, including social (public & community) housing

provided by any community housing organisation, developers, Office of Housing • Housing and homelessness officer- direct assistance/casework, information and

referral• Administering sponsorship rights of 5 public housing estates (437 units) due to historic

contributions to Housing Commission Victoria• Promotion of lessons, strategies, research findings, models and achievements.

Values embedded in council’s affordable housing policy and roles• That socially sustainable communities are diverse communities

• That affordable and appropriate housing assists in maintaining personal well-being and health

• The need to encourage community tolerance towards social diversity and disadvantage

• The importance of policy based on social equity and social justice principles

Port Phillip Housing Program achievements (City of St.Kilda/Port Phillip)Largest Local Government housing program in Australia (1985-2006)

• 21 years of project development • 389 units (housing some 490 persons at any time)• 17 projects (including 2 PPHA projects)• Leveraged a total $39 M, of which $27 M was from the State and

Commonwealth governments• Unit output: 18.5 units/annum average over 21 years• Includes Australia’s first developer contributed community housing

(Inkerman Oasis)• Partnership with PPHA, established in 1986 to manage council’s housing

stock, becoming a developer after 12 years in its own right after 1998 in parallel with council, delivering 2 projects

• Won 19 international, national, state and industry awards (CoPP-16, PPHA-3): environment-5, design-8, planning-4, management-2

Housing Program Restructure (2004-07)- Reasons:

• To ensure the program is financially and politically sustainable in a gentrifying community- highlighted by increasing NIMBY reactions to proposals where council was both developer and statutory planning authority

• To protect the legacy of Council’s project achievements and provide a vehicle for ongoing contributions- protected in perpetuity

• To create a capacity for a higher level of project delivery/growth than what council could achieve on its own

• Because the State Government was to restrict future joint venture funding to registered and regulated community housing organisations through its own concurrent restructuring of the Victorian community housing sector.

Housing Program Restructure-What it Involved• Establishment of the Port Phillip Housing Trust (PPHT)

– Trustee (PPHA)– Governor (council)– Trust Deed outlining purposes and powers of the Trustee and Governor

• Transferring ownership of 12 properties worth $36 million to the Trust– Transfers in the form of title transfer, not leases to enable PPHA to leverage bank

finance from the asset cash flows, secured against titles

• Transferring ongoing developer role for new projects in Port Phillip• Continued support for growth of community housing by PPHA through:

– Annual cash contributions to PPHA as Trustee of the PPHT- $400,000 for 10 years 2002/06-2014/15, to increase PPHA’s debt finance leverage capacity

– Opportunity driven land transfers/donations to PPHT, eg. car parks for air space development (2 assets valued at $6.08 million in 2008)

– Initial assistance with insuring Port Phillip located properties under council’s global insurance cover- PPHA pays the premiums (42% savings to market rate)

Port Phillip Housing Association’s growth capacity Data as at April 2012

Social Housing Growth Funding - State GovernmentEquity 25% PPHA: 75% DHS-OoH• 4 approved projects (1 completed)• 178 units (28 units completed)• $67.5 million Total project cost (TPC)Nation Building - Federal economic stimulus packageEquity 25% PPHA: 75% DHS-OoH)• 2 completed projects• 101 units• $32.7 million TPCAshwood - Chadstone public housing estate redevelopmentEquity 49% PPHA: 51% DHS-OoH)• Social housing - 210 units• Private housing – 72 dwellings• Approx. 200 additional social housing dwellings around Greater Melbourne leveraged against ACGP assets• TPC: $139 million (for ACGP and additional projects)Total• 689 social housing units (including projected leverage units)• TPC: $239.2 million

Community Housing Partnership Benefits

• Growth of community housing to provide more affordable housing options• Housing for locals- can have allocation to residents with designated links

– 100% of Port Phillip Housing Trust (PPHT) residents have significant residency links to Port Phillip (prioritised for residents with longer links)

– 87% of other projects located in Port Phillip but not under the PPHT have significant residency links

– Provides an alternative to public housing that is regionally allocated with little ability to nominate a local area for housing

• Local management- better asset maintenance, more responsive tenancy management and support services, opportunities for tenant involvement, effective response to any neighbour complaints

• Better housing design- integration, quality and normalisation, integrated art, ESD• Cheaper to buy and build- housing associations have charitable tax status• Increase in the asset value (eg. $36 M in 2006 - $45.77 M (CIV) in 2008). Assists with

bank finance securitisation• Rates growth- payment by PPHA (or option to waiver/rebate as an additional council

contribution for charitable purposes)

City of Port Phillip’s affordable housing roles since the restructure of the housing program - 2007 onwards1. Leadership- Policy, Advocacy and Research• Policy framework- preparation, adoption and implementation of a

comprehensive and consistent policy framework (continued role): – Housing Strategy 2007-17– Homelessness Strategy 2008-13– Council Plans eg. 2009-13– Port Phillip Planning Scheme– other strategies/plans

• Advocacy- on affordable housing issues (continued role)– Submissions, lobbying, presentations

City of Port Phillip’s affordable housing roles since the restructure of the housing program - 2007 onwards1. Leadership- Policy, Advocacy and Research• Completed research projects to support affordable housing (new role):

– Housing in Victoria website (2008)– Community Engagement and Community Housing (2009)– Review of Social Housing Car Parking Demand (2009)– Affordable Housing Development Models (2010/11)– A model for an Affordable Housing Overlay (inclusionary zoning) in Inner

Melbourne region (2004-11)• Current research projects

– Affordable Housing and the Subdivision of Buildings (2012/13)– Community Land Trusts Research Project (Council as partner in national project)

City of Port Phillip’s affordable housing roles since the restructure of the housing program - 2007 onwards2. Project Facilitation (continued role)• Facilitation of affordable housing proposed by any community housing

organisation, the State Housing authority or any private developer:– Purpose of role:

• Increase the number of new community housing projects• Maintain a high standard for community housing• Encourage housing innovation• Improve/assist with project related information for the development approval process

– Type of assistance provided:• Property identification • Project procurement and feasibility advice• Project examples, models and standards• Local government housing policy, roles and partnerships• Research promotion/assistance

City of Port Phillip’s affordable housing roles since the restructure of the housing program - 2007 onwards3. Direct Contributions to the Port Phillip Housing Trust (new role)

• Cash contributions – $400,000 per year for 10 years (2005/06 - 2014/15) – total of $4 million – to increase PPHA’s bank finance leverage capacity

• Property contributions– Opportunity driven contributions – Balaclava car park site -1,800 m2 (commitment, yet to be transferred & developed)– Kyme Place car park site – 944 m2 (being developed by PPHA, then to be

transferred)

City of Port Phillip’s affordable housing roles since the restructure of the housing program - 2007 onwards4. Other roles (continued roles)

• Housing and homelessness direct assistance/casework, information and referral (continued role)

– Older persons– Persons at risk or homelessness/are homeless– Persons with a disability

• Administering sponsorship rights for 5 public housing estates with 437 units under a Deed of Sponsorship Agreement with the DHS (continued role)

– Council nomination rights for older persons units due to cash and land contributions in the 1960s/70s

– Council 50% rebate of property rates

Findings of the City of Port Phillip Research Projects to Support Affordable Housing:

1. Community Engagement & Community Housing: Lessons and practical Strategies for Local Government for Responding to Contested Community Housing Proposals (July 2009)

-Prepared by the consultant, Mandy Press

Building on City of Port Philip’s experience with the Woodstock project

Based on 9 community housing case study projects across Greater Melbourne, located in 7 municipalities, provided by 5 community housing developers

Status: Endorsed November 2009 for public release

Community engagement- key lessons and practical strategies

• Councils with a comprehensive, supportive policy framework tend to respond better and more consistently to proposals. This framework can include:

– Municipal Planning Schemes including their Municipal Strategic Statements

– Council or Corporate Plans– Housing Strategies

• Ensure that policy is supported by housing needs data and information


• Understand the life-cycle of community opposition:– Initial reaction (where the number of objectors is large)– Getting organised– ‘In for the long haul’ (where numbers of objectors diminish)– Post occupancy (where community acceptance or indifference tends

to be widespread. Initial, negative perceptions diminish over time, often to a few or even a single objector or appellant and there are few complaints post occupancy)

• This helps Councils to understand what to expect over time, to maintain their support and undertake their role in planning for affordable housing and the interests of the broader community


• Aim to ‘see through their eyes’ to understand the perspective of persons opposed to community housing. – Do not dismiss their perspectives– Understanding their perspectives informs the response of municipalities

and community housing developers in a manner that understands and respects the perspectives of opponents

– One tool to assist this is to structure key messages as follows:

What they say about us

What we say about them

What they sayWhat we say


• Effective preliminary consultation (pre-application). This is encouraged to reduce the adversarial nature of the statutory planning process– Avoid standard, theatre style public meeting formats which alienate

objectors, are dominated by the vocal minority, intimidate/exclude more diverse representation, fail to respond to real-life issues facing opponents and tend to be over technical in in presentation and meeting structure.

– Instead use more informal information sessions (eg. two or more)providing information, project plan displays and attended by thecommunity housing developer and its architect. This may not always be well attended but enables effective, individual and two way communication.

– Consider if it is possible to include prospective tenants at preliminary sessions to de-stigmatise community housing and provide a human face


• Use community education campaigns and other strategies aiming tode-stigmatise and outline the nature and benefits of community housing and the proposal. This can include:– Preparation of explanatory material on what is community housing, what

is its purpose, how it is managed and who lives in it. Make this available at sessions and include in mail-outs

– Undertake individual, informal meetings with key, immediate neighbours at their homes at a time that suits the neighbours to explain the proposal/hear their concerns

- Hold an open day with morning/afternoon tea at a similar, completed project for the benefit of residents living near a proposal or

- Hold such an open day after project completion to assist with community integration and acceptance


• Clarify the parameters for negotiation:

– ‘Use’ and tenant types is not a valid planning matters for consideration. Indicate that valid planning considerations may relate to designadjustments, eg. built form (municipality and community housing developer to provide this)

– An explanation should also be provided indicating the minimum density required to ensure that a project is viable and addresses housing need, subject to the decision of the council, eg. that detached dwellings are unsuitable if the proposed built form is medium density (community housing developer to provide this).


• Impact on property values:– There is no evidence that suggests that well designed and managed

community housing reduces surrounding property values • Building partnerships:

– Between community housing developers and local government– That agrees on an effective, consistent and less adversarial community

engagement process– That engenders mutual support for working in the interests of addressing

affordable housing need and effective community development.– Where opposition persists, be prepared for planning appeals from

residual, core objectors rather than delay or reject projects. Local government needs to show leadership and resilience.

2. Establishment of the Housing in Victoria WebsiteA completed initiative under Inner Melbourne Action Plan (Cities of Melbourne, Stonnington, Yarra and Port Phillip)

• In part to support investigation of a regional inclusionary zoning scheme• Funded by $100,000 DP&CD grant (Local Area Planning Support Program)• Lead consultant: Swinburne Institute for Social Research (data selection, data requirements and establishment of website)• Purpose: to inform the identification of housing needs and targets• Provides tables, graphs and maps for suburbs, SLAs, LGAs and regions on:

• 6 affordability indicators (home ownership & rental housing)• data on house sales and prices• data on housing and tenure and• demographic data, SIEFA, Centrelink and rooming houses

• 11 municipalities have participated/joined the website (as at April 2010). Plan to expand across Victoria

Go to www.housinginvictoria.com.au

3. Review of Social Housing Car Parking Demand 2009

Empirical study justifying reduced car parking rates based on 61 Inner Melbourne social (public and community) housing projects

Consultants: GTA Consultants

Status: completed October 2009 for public release

Social housing car parking rates study-key findings• Built on existing, inner Melbourne Region survey data (from CoPP/PPHA/OoH) for

rooming house and older persons housing that support reduced levels of car parking

• Has adopted new empirical rates for social housing car parking to be used through thePlanning permit process to support housing associations and municipal planners andtraffic engineers. Discretion allowed for further reduced rates for well-located properties

• Rates have been adopted by council, to be also incorporated into a Port PhillipPlanning Scheme amendment

0.351: 2.813Family units (2-4 bed)

0.191: 5.212Singles units (1 bed)

0.251: 3.916Older persons’units (1-2 bed)

0.091: 10.620Rooming houses (rooms with shared communal facilities or rooms mixed with bedsits)

Parking rate (car space per unit)

Parking ratio (1 car space per no of units)

No. of sites/properties surveyed

Housing Type

• A study by consultants, Affordable Housing Solutions, that investigated models for delivering affordable housing for moderate income households falling between ability to access social housing and ability to access market rate, private housing

• The models investigated comprise:- Public-private partnerships- Private sector finance (in the context of NRAS)- Rent-to-buy schemes- Shared equity housing

• The study also recommended relevant Local Government incentives and support roles for local government

• The study provided 5 principles in which local government assess the models to determine any role in supporting a model

• Status: completed February 2011 for public release

4. Affordable Housing Development Models

Affordable Housing Development Models Low Moderate HighVery Low

Affordable Rental (NRAS)

Supported

Market Purchase

Social

Rent-to-Buy

Market Rental

Income Spectrum

Shared Equity

• The 5 principles in the study for Council to assess if it wants to support any model:

• The intervention should not replace the role of another level of government. However, a small intervention may leverage action from other levels of government

• Any intervention should have a measurable benefit to the municipality and in particular to the current and future constituents

• Any local government contribution should leverage further investment from the public and private sectors, thereby multiplying the overall economic and social benefits to the municipality

• The value of the intervention is captured for future generations by ensuring that any incentives or contributions are not simply a windfall to the first generation of recipients of the affordable housing

• Above all it is essential that the municipality is not exposed to commercial risk through the affordable housing initiative

• Council assessed it’s role for supporting any model against 5 principles provided in the study and decided to:

• Support Community Land Trusts as a form of shared equity housing through• Contributing $10,000 towards $140,000 total funding required to produce a Community Land Trust

Manual on how to establish CLTs in Australia that was already proposed for preparation by the University of Western Sydney and the law firm, Derek Mortimer & Associates

Affordable Housing Development Models

5. Modeling of an Inclusionary Zoning Scheme for the Inner Melbourne Region

A joint initiative under the Inner Melbourne Action Plan (IMAP)- Port Phillip as lead council in partnership with the Cities of Melbourne, Stonnington, Yarra

• Involves modeling for a proposed Inner Melbourne Region Affordable Housing Overlay(inclusionary zoning) in the Victorian Planning Provisions and then municipal planning schemes

• Aim is to require developers to contribute units or cash-in-lieu for affordable housing through the planning process across the region

• Intervention seen as necessary to maintain social mix as an environmental objective in the built environment through the statutory planning process.

• Lead consultant SGS Economics & Planning, peer review by Biruu Australia

• Contributions directed to registered housing associations for community housing

• Aim for the planning mechanism to maintain or increase the % social housing by 2033

• Targets and contributions calculated and projected over 25 years based on development activity (rates/m2 of development floor areas)

Modeling of an Inclusionary Zoning Scheme for the Inner Melbourne Region

• Broad based: targeting all res. developments >1 unit + all commercial/industrial development

• Market impact assessed as being not material (1-1.3% of development value)

• To be transparent, reasonable and predictable (mandated/limited discretion) to provide developer certainty

• Regional collection and allocation mechanism that addresses regional housing need

• Scheme not implemented due to a lack of support from the State Government for inclusionary zoning. Modeling reports are available for public release.

• Being undertaken by University of Western Sydney and law firm, Derek Mortimer & Associates

• Council is one of 7 current national partners funding this project• Purpose to provide a practical guide/manual on how to establish CLTs in Australia• Incorporating the lessons from the US and UK CLT sectors • CLTs maintain ownership of land and sell or rent dwellings under Ground Leases.

The leases maintain perpetual affordability via affordability formulas & sharing of equity gain between CLTs and dwelling sellers.

• Growing national interest in establishment of CLTs, eg. NSW, Vic and WA from local government, state government, community housing sector and groups of residents

Phase One (2011/12): Phase Two (subject to funding)Financial products Financial modelingLegal manual Case studies

6. Community Land Trusts Research Project Current project

Study aims to identify the owners corporation (formerly bodies corporate) implications through the subdivision process of mixing community housing with either private housing or commercial usePrepared by City of Port Phillip with specialist advice from consultants:

– Mallesons Stephen Jaques (legal)

– k20 Architecture (architecture) and

– Breese Pitt Dixon (surveying)

Status: to be completed 2012

7. Affordable Housing & the Subdivision of Buildings

• Anticipates the future increase/interest in mixed housing/mixed use development– Community housing mixed with private housing– Community housing mixed with commercial use

• Uses 9 development typologies to generalise most development scenarios and assess if an OC is likely to be established

• Typologies assume degree of built form mix, entrance and location characteristics

• Identifies 5 options for responding to the Owners Corporation implications:- Avoid mixed development if owners corporation is unavoidable/unintended- Restructure the mix to avoid establishment of an Owners Corporation- Use a ‘Limited Owners Corporation’ under the provisions of the Owners Corporation Act

to deal with common areas- Accept bodies corporate membership if desired (be aware of limitations/risks)- Social housing provider becomes the owners corporation manager (but informed of

limitations/risks)

Affordable Housing & the Subdivision of Buildings

SELECT PROJECTS FROM PORT PHILLIP COMMUNITYHOUSING:Inkerman Oasis development, a public-private partnership built on surplus municipal depot land that was transferred to a developer for the delivery of community housing and good design Units: 345 (12.6 % social housing)

•28 community housing units transferred to council at no cost

•3 units spot purchased by DHS-OoH

•214 private apartments and 5 retail tenancies

Target group: Singles, families, youth, older persons, persons with a disability (community h)

Partnership roles:

• COPP- initiation, land transfer

•Inkerman Developments P/L- financier, developer

•DHS-OoH- 3 units spot purchase

•PPHA- management, owner of 31 units under Port Phillip Housing Trust

TPC: $90 million

Status: staged completion (all community housing completed)

Photo: tony Millar Architect: Williams Boag P/L Architects (current stages), architects eat (final stage)

SELECT PROJECTS FROM PORT PHILLIP COMMUNITYHOUSING:Excelsior Hall, Port Melbourne.Recycling of a historic hall Units: 15

Target group:

•Singles

•Persons with a disability

Developer: City of Port Phillip (25% funding)

Partner: DHS-Office of Housing (75% funding)

Owner & manager: PPHA (transferred to Port Phillip Housing Trust)

TPC: $2.85 million

Unit cost: $190,100

Status: Completed April 2005

Architect: Michael McKenna Architecture and Interiors

SELECT PROJECTS FROM PORT PHILLIP COMMUNITYHOUSING: Woodstock rooming house, Balaclava built in air space above a replacement council car park- the project that has had the highest level of community opposition. Units: 31

Target group: singles, persons with a disability

Developer: City of Port Phillip (25% funding)

Partner: DHS-Office of Housing (75% funding)

Owner & manager: (2 lot plan of subdivision):

•PPHA owns community housing (transferred to Port Philip Housing Trust)

•City of Port Phillip owns car park

TPC: $4.9 million

Unit cost: $158,200

Status: Completed mid 2006Architect: MGS Architects Photo: John Gollings

SELECT PROJECTS FROM PORT PHILLIP COMMUNITY HOUSING :Pyrmont singles infill housing

Units: 35

Target group: Singles, including persons with a disability

Developer: Port Phillip Housing Association Ltd. (25% funding)

Partners: DHS-Office of Housing (75% funding)

Owner & manager: PPHA

TPC: $8.2 million

Unit cost: $303,700

Status: completed Sept. 2008

Architect: Michael Mckenna Architecture Interiors. Photo: Trevor Mein

SELECT PROJECTS FROM PORT PHILLIP COMMUNITY HOUSING:Ormond Rd, Elwood older persons housing

Units: 11 (redevelopment of 1st

CoPP housing project)

Target group: Older persons

Developer: Port Phillip Housing Association Ltd. (25% funding)

Partners: DHS-Office of Housing (75% funding)

Owner & manager: PPHA (transferred to Port Phillip Housing Trust)

TPC: $4.59 million

Unit cost: $242,500

Status: completed Nov 2007

Architect: De Jong Architects

PORT PHILLIP COMMUNITY HOUSING PROGRAM:Kyme Place rooming house project, Port Melbourne built in air space above a replacement council car park. Another heavily opposed project.

Units: 27

Target group: Singles, including persons with a disability

Developer: Port Phillip Housing Association Ltd.(25% funding)

Partners: DHS-Office of Housing (JV 75% funding), CoPP (title transfer)

Owner & manager (2 lot plan of subdivision) on completion:

•PPHA to own community housing (Port Phillip Housing Trust)

•City of Port Phillip owns car park

TPC: $8.2 million

Unit cost: $303,700

Status: to be completed mid 2012Architects: MGS Architects

John Cribbes House, 3 Albion Street, Balaclava-post occupancy survey by PPHA in 2002:

– 61% of local residents/neighbours had concerns about the project proposal at the planning application stage

– 88% had no concerns after completion and 7 months operation– Many respondents stated they had positive experiences or the project

had no effect on them:• Well maintained• Improved appearance• Made acquaintances with community housing residents• Did not know it was community housing• Feel good about the social inclusion/social diversity• Most community housing residents polite, well behaved, quiet• Original fears not realised

– A majority felt PPHA’s management was excellent or very good

Post occupancy evaluation/experience

Woodstock post occupancy survey by PPHA one year after opening(Aug/Sep. 2007):

• 150 surveyed, 34 respondents • 18 out of 34 (53%) had no problems with the housing• Problems stated:

- Perceived increases in anti-social behavior, crime and reduced perception of safety

- Increases in local traffic and parking problems- Decline in property values

• Problems not supported by evidence- Local police stated that Woodstock residents have not caused problems/crime- At time of the survey, only one Woodstock resident had a car-could not be the

cause of perceived or actual traffic/parking problems- Property values for the area increased 11.9% for houses, 10.9% for units

between Sept 2006 – Sep 2007 (Australian Home Price Guide)


Woodstock open house Sept 2006:

• Afternoon tea for locals to view the premises, meet the residents of the community housing

• Expressed views by some attendees:

- Surprised at the quality of the interior design and finishes- Embarrassed by their opposition to community housing resident types after

meeting the residents- Appreciated opportunity

Woodstock- actual experience since opening in July 2006:

• One early incident of damage to front door by a resident of Woodstock. Resident quickly evicted by PPHA through VCAT

• One early complaint about smoke detector alarm sounding in the street. This quickly rectified by PPHA

• No other complaints since then


• Values- Underpin policy, projects, consultation and response to opposition by

clear and transparent social values• Policy framework

- Prepare, adopt and implement a comprehensive and consistent, supportive policy framework

- Ensure that policy is backed by housing needs data• Experience

- Develop in-house experience over time - Utilise an evidence-based approach - Learn from the experiences from other organisations- Utilise the experience of the community housing sector/housing

associations through partnerships- Experience generates confidence, confidence generates commitment

Elements for a successful role in affordable housing

• Partnerships- Form partnerships with one or more housing associations- Determine the nature of the council contribution, eg. cash, land, in-

kind- Determine the mechanism for formalising the partnership, eg.

housing trust (only if significant council interest to protect)- Plan community engagement strategies as a partnership

• Commitment- Understand and expect community opposition- Have preconditions for a confident council: values, policy,

experience, partnerships- Ultimately, be committed to community housing in the face of

opposition through being prepared and confident

Elements for a successful role in affordable housing

The most important reason for supporting affordable housing: people

“…It is the kind of place I can grow old in…

There is nothing more that I want. I feel as if I’ve come home.”

Daphne, WoodstockSource: RAIA 2006 Annual Review

Thank you

Contact information:Gary SpivakHousing Development OfficerCity of Port [email protected]: +61 3 9209 6752Private Bag 3PO St.Kilda 3182

Documents

AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN PORT PHILLIP- THE ROLES OF THE …€¦ · City of Port Phillip’s affordable housing roles since the restructure of the housing program - 2007 onwards 1. Leadership-