Privacy Capire Consulting Group and any person(s) acting on our behalf is committed to protecting privacy and personally identifiable information by meeting our responsibilities under the Victorian Privacy Act 1988 and the Australian Privacy Principles 2014 as well as relevant industry codes of ethics and conduct.

For the purpose of program delivery, and on behalf of our clients, we collect personal information from individuals, such as e-mail addresses, contact details, demographic data and program feedback to enable us to facilitate participation in consultation activities. We follow a strict procedure for the collection, use, disclosure, storage and destruction of personal information. Any information we collect is stored securely on our server for the duration of the program and only disclosed to our client or the program team. Written notes from consultation activities are manually transferred to our server and disposed of securely.

Comments recorded during any consultation activities are faithfully transcribed however not attributed to individuals. Diligence is taken to ensure that any comments or sensitive information does not become personally identifiable in our reporting, or at any stage of the program.

Capire operates an in-office server with security measures that include, but are not limited to, password protected access, restrictions to sensitive data and the encrypted transfer of data.

For more information about the way we collect information, how we use, store and disclose information as well as our complaints procedure, please see www.capire.com.au or telephone (03) 9285 9000.

Consultation Unless otherwise stated, all feedback documented by Capire Consulting Group and any person(s) acting on our behalf is written and/or recorded during our program/consultation activities.

Capire staff and associates take great care while transcribing participant feedback but unfortunately cannot guarantee the accuracy of all notes. We are however confident that we capture the full range of ideas, concerns and views expressed during our consultation activities.

Unless otherwise noted, the views expressed in our work represent those of the participants and not necessarily those of our consultants or our clients.

© Capire Consulting Group Pty Ltd. This document belongs to and will remain the property of Capire Consulting Group Pty Ltd.

All content is subject to copyright and may not be reproduced in any form without express written consent of Capire Consulting Group Pty Ltd.

Authorisation can be obtained via email to info@capire.com.au or in writing to: 96 Pelham Street Carlton VIC Australia 3053.

Glossary 3

1 Engagement overview 5

2 Introduction 6

2.1 Project background 6

2.2 Purpose and objectives 7

3 Sketch plan 10

4 Engagement Activities 12

4.1 Community leaders’ workshop 12

4.2 Community information sessions 13

4.3 Online survey 15

4.4 Stakeholder interviews 16

5 Participants 17

5.1 Age 17

5.2 Gender 17

5.3 Interest group 18

5.4 Phase one involvement 19

6 Engagement findings 20

6.1 General feedback on sketch plan 20

6.2 Safety and security 21

6.3 Sense of community 23

6.4 Facilities and services 24

6.5 Movement 26

7 Evaluation 28

7.1 Measure of success 28

7.2 Evaluation 30

8 Appendices 31

8.1 Appendix 32

8.2 Appendix 34

8.3 Appendix 35

Glossary

Stakeholders: Stakeholders are individuals or organisations, that affect, or can be affected by,

project decisions. Stakeholders can include different groups, government departments, media,

business, industry and the general community.

Stakeholder engagement: Stakeholder engagement is a planned process with the specific

purpose of working with stakeholders to encourage discussion or active involvement in a

project.

Public housing: The Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) provides public

housing and support for low-income Victorians, targeted to those most in need. The department

also works directly in partnership with not-for-profit registered housing agencies to provide

community housing.

Community: A community is a group of people who have a relationship or a shared interest. A

community of place is a group of people who are connected by the area they live, work and/or

visit. This could include a community who live in the same street, neighbourhood or suburb; a

community who work in the same building; or businesses located in an activity centre. A

community of interest is a group of people who have a shared interest, for example the natural

environment, local history or contemporary art. A community of affiliation are a group of people

who are members of the same group or club for example members of a sporting club, Rotary or

a church group.

Community engagement: Refers to the process by which community organisations and

individuals build ongoing, permanent relationships to apply a collective vision for the benefit of

a community.

Culturally and Linguistically Diverse (CALD) Communities: These communities represent

the diversity in cultural backgrounds, language groups and religions in the broader community.

1 Engagement overview

2 Introduction

2.1 Project background

The Flemington Housing Estate (Estate) is located six kilometres from Melbourne’s Central

Business District (CBD) and is within proximity to public transport, healthcare, jobs and

education. The site is eight hectares and is home to over 2,000 people residing in a total of 916

dwellings. The residents of the Estate come from a diverse range of cultural backgrounds, and

the most commonly spoken languages (other than English) are Arabic, Vietnamese, Somali,

Cantonese, Hakka, Mandarin, Amharic, Oromo and Tigrinya.

The ground level of residential buildings accommodates a mix of uses, including offices and

meeting rooms. The site includes a men’s shed and playgrounds, with large areas allocated to

approximately 750 onsite care parking spaces. Abutting the Estate is the Hopetoun Children’s

Centre, Flemington Community Centre, a sports pavilion, Debney Park Oval, tennis courts, and

a car park which are all owned by Moonee Valley City Council (Council). Debney Meadows

Primary School also abuts the Estate.

DHHS have identified that the 22 walk-ups with 199 flats which were built in the 1960s, are now

run down resulting in low amenity and high maintenance costs. To address this, the Victorian

State Government is contributing $30 million to kick-start the redevelopment of the Estate and

to replace the walk-ups. Part of the $30 million will be used to develop a masterplan for the site

to seek planning approval, conduct site investigations for due diligence, soil testing for

contamination and to undertake stakeholder engagement. The stakeholder engagement is

proposed to be implemented in three phases.

Phase one

Phase one of the stakeholder engagement was conducted in October 2016 by Capire

Consulting Group. The following groups were informed of the project and were invited to have

their say about the future of Flemington Housing Estate:

Estate residents

community leaders who represent many of the cultural groups residing on the Estate

community organisations that service and have close ties to the Estate

key stakeholder groups

Each of the groups were asked for their views on what they valued most about the Estate and

were asked to identify priorities and opportunities for improvement.

Phase two

Phase two engagement was held in February and March 2017. Residents and groups who were

consulted in Phase one, as well as surrounding residents, landlords and businesses, were given

the opportunity to provide feedback on a draft sketch plan for the proposed public housing

renewal on the Estate. The sketch plan included the Holland Court walk-ups and other identified

residential areas throughout the Estate.

Figure 1. Site plan of the Flemington Housing Estate

The non-negotiable, or agreed, elements of the second phase of the project are outlined below:

the 22 walk-up buildings will be demolished and replaced with at least 10 per cent

additional social housing units

the high-rise buildings will be retained

the entire redevelopment will include mixed tenure housing to provide more diversity on

the Estate

existing tenants of the walk-ups will be relocated in a staged process. The DHHS

housing and support team will endeavour to minimise disruption to the lives of residents

who need to relocate

current residents of the walk-up buildings will have the opportunity to return to a new

social housing unit on the estate based on their housing needs

the replacement buildings towards Victoria Street will be stepped down to provide a

transition in height and mass

higher density and taller buildings will be accommodated closer to the existing high-rise

towers.

The negotiable elements of the sketch plan that participants were invited to comment on are

outlined below:

suggestions on improving the safety and helping people to feel more secure on the

Estate

opportunities to encourage connections with each other on the Estate and ideas to build

a sense of belonging to the broader Flemington community

suggestions of any retail, commercial and community spaces that would help service

the Estate

ideas to improve the milk bar on the Estate

suggestions for a possible new location for the community centre and preferred services

and activities

improvements to the walkways to and from and through the Estate and towards the

Flemington Bridge Railway Station

comments about the proposed improvements to the vehicular access to the Estate

comments about the proposed off-road cycle path along Racecourse Road that will

connect to the Capital City Trail

Phase three

Phase three of the engagement process will aim to deliver a Design Framework for the public

housing site. A high-level structure plan for the Debneys Park Precinct will also be developed in

collaboration with Moonee Valley City Council. The timeframe for Phase three engagement will

be determined once timeframes for the development of the Design Framework and structure

plan is confirmed.

2.2 Purpose and objectives

Phase two engagement for the renewal project sought to reconnect with Estate residents,

community leaders and community stakeholders who have expressed an interest in the renewal

process, providers of services to residents, and others who had taken part in the Phase one

engagement. In addition, feedback was sought from surrounding residents and businesses.

The purpose of Phase two engagement was to seek feedback on five key themes presented in

the draft sketch plan. The sketch plan encompasses a broad planning framework and site plans

for the proposed Estate renewal and included the themes identified as priority areas in the

Phase one community and stakeholder engagement:

safety and security

sense of community

facilities, services and activities

place management

open space

The Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) have responded to the priorities

identified in Phase one and are in the process of undertaking the measures illustrated in the

Figure 2 below. This poster was made available at each of the engagement sessions in Phase

two to inform the participants of the responses related to their expressed concerns.

Figure 2. DHHS responses to the feedback from Phase one engagement

In a collaborative process with the DHHS project team, objectives for the Phase two

engagement were developed to guide the line of enquiry, develop the questions asked and

provide a framework upon which to measure the engagement success. The objectives of the

Phase two engagement were to:

ensure community needs and desires contribute to the renewal process, a commitment

made by the Minister for Housing, Disability and Ageing

provide ongoing information and feedback to the local community about the

redevelopment process and outcomes of the engagement process

adopt an inclusive engagement process to seek feedback from the community and

stakeholders on the key topics, concepts and ideas presented within the sketch plan

build the capacity of the community to provide feedback on the sketch plan

consult with a wide cross-section of residents and community leaders of the Estate,

community service organisations, service providers, as well as surrounding residents

and businesses, and to strengthen existing relationships where possible

strengthen existing relationships where possible

3 Debneys Precinct Sketch Plan

Following the Phase one engagement, a draft sketch plan incorporating community feedback was

developed for Debneys Park and the Flemington Estate precinct. The sketch plan sought to address the

five key themes as follows:

General feedback

o initial reactions to the location and heights of buildings

Safety and security

o measures including improvements to lighting, increased activity around building

entrances, designs for increased surveillance and improvements to car parking security

Sense of community

o a mix of public and private housing

o the potential for new retail and commercial opportunities to assist in integrating the

Flemington Estate into the local neighbourhood

Facilities and services

o potential for new retail, commercial and community spaces

o improvements to the current Flemington Community Centre for the Estate residents and

the local community

o new opportunities for open spaces within the Estate

o recreation opportunities in the Debneys Park area

Movement:

o straightening the internal road and improving access to the Holland Court entrance

o widening internal roads and improving pathways to and from the Estate, within the Estate,

and to and from the Flemington Bridge station

o addressing the issues of car parking to make it easier for Estate residents to park

o potential for an off-road shared cycle path along Racecourse Road connecting to the

Capital City Trail.

The Debneys Precinct Sketch Plan is provided at Figure 3.

Figure 3. Debneys Precinct Sketch Plan

4 Engagement activities

4.1 Community leaders’ workshop

An informal workshop was held with the community leaders representing the following

multicultural groups within the Estate: Somali, Vietnamese, Arabic – Tigre, Eritrean, and other

African-Australian multicultural groups. A full list of the workshop attendees can be found in

Appendix 4. The workshop was held at on Monday 20 February 2017.

Figure 4. Photo from the community leaders’ workshop

Photo: DHHS

The community leaders who had participated in the Phase one engagement were invited to take

part in the workshop. Additional emerging community leaders were also invited to attend.

Participants were welcomed by local MP, Danny Pearson who is well respected by many

residents on the Estate. DHHS staff were in attendance to provide an overview of the

Flemington Estate redevelopment. A representative from the Planning area of Moonee Valley

City Council was also present to explain the plans for the Debneys Park area and about related

Council-owned facilities. The workshop enabled the community leaders to review the sketch

plan and to see how feedback from the community in the Phase one engagement had helped to

inform the design.

The aims of the workshop were to:

keep the community leaders involved with the renewal project by informing them of the

project’s progress

present the sketch plan to show how their input had been incorporated and ask for their

feedback around emerging themes

encourage participants to continue communication about the project through their

various communities (e.g. provide flyers listing the upcoming information sessions for

distribution to their respective communities).

The workshop was facilitated by Capire and was designed as an informal participatory

workshop to obtain informed feedback into the sketch plan around four identified themes:

safety and security

facilities and services

sense of community

movement

A presentation providing an overview of the project background and the sketch plan was

provided by DHHS.

Participants were divided across two tables, with each table discussing two of the themes.

Participants were then asked to swap tables half way through, to ensure each participant had

the opportunity to discuss each of the four themes. The workshop format is outlined in Appendix

5.

At the close of the workshop, community leaders were given an information flyer in their

respective languages to distribute among their communities. The flyer included an invitation to

two upcoming community information sessions at which residents of the Estate could find out

more about the renewal project and the sketch plan.

4.2 Community information sessions

Three community information sessions were held at the Flemington Community Centre on

Mount Alexander Road:

Wednesday 22 February, 6.30-8.30pm

Wednesday 1 March, 10am-6pm

Thursday 2 March, 6.30-8pm.

The information sessions were promoted by DHHS to residents of the Estate and to the broader

community by:

letter box drop

posters in key areas

via the community leaders at the workshop.

The sketch plan was displayed at the Flemington Community Centre for people to view (see

Figure 4). A poster outlining how DHHS had integrated the feedback received from the Phase

one engagement into the sketch plan was also on display. The poster can be found in Section

2.2 of this report.

The community information sessions were complemented by a barbecue, face painting, balloon

animals, and a petting zoo. The addition of these family activities created an enjoyable

atmosphere to attract passers-by. Officers from DHHS and Council explained the elements of

the sketch plan. The attendees were then asked a series of survey questions via an iPad based

on the key themes. Representatives from the Victorian Public Tenants Association were also

available to answer questions.

Information flyers that were translated into some of the major languages spoken on the Estate,

namely Arabic, Oromo, Turkish, Vietnamese, Somali, simplified Chinese and Traditional

Chinese, were available at these sessions. These flyers provided information about the dates

and times of the upcoming community information sessions (see Appendix 3). Local interpreters

from the Estate were available to help interpret the sketch plan and survey questions. The

interpreters that attended the full day community information session and their language groups

are listed below:

Adam Mohamed – Somali and Arabic

Shardia Mohamed Aly – Arabic and Tigre

Kim Nguyen – Vietnamese

Official interpreters were engaged to assist at these sessions where required.

Figure 5. Community discussions around the sketch plan during a community information

session

Photo: DHHS

The final session was specifically targeted to young people who live on the Estate. Members of

the project team visited them at their weekly drop-in session. It was an opportunity to re-engage

with the young people who had been consulted in Phase one and to feed back to them how

their concerns have been addressed in the sketch plan. The session was organised at a time

when local teenagers use the Flemington Community Centre for learning and recreation after

school. They were shown the sketch plan, and were asked to take part in the survey via the

iPads. Pizza was served to them following the session, to thank them for participating. The

participants were asked the following questions:

Do you have any initial comments to make about the draft sketch plan?

Do you have any suggestions for how we can make the Estate safer?

Are there any improvements to community spaces needed or anything new you would

like to see on the Estate? (Retail, commercial, community space, milk bar

improvements)

Are there any services or activities that aren’t currently offered at the community centre

that you think should be? (Where would the ideal location for the community centre be?)

Do you have any suggestions for how we can make it easier for people to walk and

drive in and around the Estate? (e.g. Connection to the Flemington Estate railway

station, off road cycle path along Racecourse Rd, vehicle access, walkability)

A total of 61 surveys were completed at these three events however not all the surveys can be

classified as single survey responses. Single surveys were often completed by groups of

people, assisted by an interpreter, with group comments being consolidated into the one survey.

4.3 Online survey

To complement the face-to-face engagement activities and to attempt to reach a wider group of

respondents, an online survey using the Survey Monkey tool was publicly available for feedback

on the DHHS website: www.dhs.vic.gov.au/flemingtonrenewal

The website included the information about the project, the sketch plan and an interpretive

guide to help participants complete the survey. Participants were asked to answer 10 open-

ended questions (listed below) based on the key themes as well as the following demographic

information: age group, gender, interest group and Phase one involvement.

The online survey was promoted via the flyers that were dropped into residential letterboxes,

and via social media and the Department’s website.

The participants were asked:

Do you have any comments, questions or concerns about the proposed design of the

Estate?

Do you have any suggestions in relation to the design of the Estate that will improve

safety and make people feel more secure?

Can you suggest any opportunities to improve the combined Debneys Park and

Flemington Estate areas?

What retail, commercial or community space would you like to see included on the

Estate?

Are there any improvements to the community spaces and milk bar that you would like

to see on the Estate?

The current community centre is run down. If a new community centre were to be built,

where would you prefer to see it located?

What services and activities would you like to see in a new community facility?

What issues or opportunities are there to improve ways to walk around the Estate, to

and from the Estate, and towards Flemington Bridge station?

Do you have any comments about the proposed improvement to vehicle access to and

within the Estate?

Do you have any comments about the proposed off-road cycle path along Racecourse

Road that will connect to the Capital City Trail?

A total of 10 surveys were completed online: seven of these were completed by those who

identified as interested community members, one by an Estate resident, one from a local

resident, and one by a service provider.

Figure 6. Graph showing the online participants per their relationship to the Estate

4.4 Stakeholder interviews

Capire conducted 11 structured phone and face-to-face interviews with representatives from

organisations who have an interest in the renewal project or those who directly provide services

to the residents on the Estate. Four of the interviewees had taken part in the Phase one

engagement. The stakeholders who were interviewed hold rich local knowledge from their day-

to-day interaction with residents.

The participants were asked the same questions from the online survey. They provided

feedback on the sketch plan in relation to the challenges and opportunities relating to housing,

open space and integration with the surrounding area. A list of stakeholders who participated in

the phone and face-to-face interview is provided in Appendix 6.

10%0

10%

0

70%

10%

Resident of the estate Local business Service provider

Community leader Interested community member Other (please specify)

5 Participants

5.1 Age

Interviewees who took part in the online survey via the DHHS website were asked their age. Of

those, the most common age group was 21-30 years (40%) followed by 41-50 years (30%), 31-

40 years (20%) and 51-60 years (10%). A graph providing an overview of the online survey

participant is located at Figure 7.

Figure 7. Graph indicating the age groups of online survey participants

The community information sessions were designed to reach a broad representative of age

groups and were scheduled at times when regular community activities were taking place at the

Flemington Community Centre, such as the “Exercise for older adults”, “B Minor Music for

toddlers”, the “FILLS – Family Inclusive Language and Learning Support program” and the

weekly youth drop-in session. Data of participants age groups was not obtained.

5.2 Gender

Overall, more females than males participated in the Phase two engagement, with 58% female

and 42% male. This is likely due to the large attendance of female residents at the Flemington

Community Centre, especially during after school activities. A graph outlining the gender

breakdown of participants is provided in Figure 8.

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45%

Under 16

16-20

21-30

31-40

41-50

51-60

61-70

70+

Age Group

Figure 8. Graph indicating gender of participants

5.3 Interest group

The majority of Phase two engagement participants were Estate residents (57%), while the

remaining participants were interested community members (23%), service providers (16%) or

“other” (4%). Figure 9 provides an overview of the interest groups who participated.

Figure 9. Graph of phase two engagement participants by interest group

48%

52%

Male Female

57%23%

16%

4%

Resident of the Estate Interested community member Service provider Other

5.4 Phase one involvement

Residents who attended the community information session had taken part in the Phase one

engagement by completing the postcard survey or attending a drop-in session. Of those who

participated in the community leaders workshop, the online survey, and the stakeholder

interviews, the majority (70%) had not been involved in the Phase one engagement. Figure 10

shows the percentage of participants that were involved in the Phase one engagement.

Figure 10. Graph showing percentage of participants who were involved in Phase one

engagement

30%

70%

Yes, I was involved in phase one No, I was not involved in phase one

6 Engagement Findings

This section of the report outlines the main themes of discussion heard throughout the

engagement activities. The combined feedback of both community and stakeholders is

summarised following.

6.1 General feedback on sketch plan

General feedback on the draft sketch plan from both community and stakeholders was relatively

positive, though some concerns were raised about the estimated heights of the new buildings.

The main themes are highlighted in Figure 11.

Figure 11. Graph showing the main themes in relation to the overall sketch plan

BUILDING HEIGHT AND DESIGN

Participants living in the current walk-ups were generally excited about the redevelopment of the

buildings, and had questions about the design and amenity of the new apartments, such as the

number of bedrooms especially for larger families. Overall there was support for the plan to

include a mix of public and private housing on the Estate.

“Looks good. Positive thing is that it’s public and private mix. Hasn’t affected open space a lot,

which is good.” - Community leader, male

“Lot of changes looking forward to changes. More neighbourhood like area. More residents.

More activities.” - Estate resident, female

“Concerned about the percentage increase in the footprint of new buildings, especially height.” - Interested community member, male

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%

Connectivity

Public transport

Services

Youth involvement

Recreation

Retail

Social inclusion

Safety

Community space

Sense of community

General amenity

Car parking

Building height & design

CAR PARKING

There is some concern over the provision of car parking, especially once the new buildings are

completed, which will see an increase in residences. Safety and security in the car parks

continues to be an area of concern.

“Very wary of car park space that will be taken up. Density-concrete jungle. Harder for security

guards to manage. Car parks-at night security guards patrol, if underground could be unsafe.”

- Service provider, male

“How will parking be "policed" so that residents are not at a disadvantage?” - Community leader,

female

GENERAL AMENITY

Some participants asked if NBN would be made available to the Estate, while others were

concerned about the noise from the freeway, and the cleanliness of the Estate.

“I’m a gamer. The internet here is only cable. I would really love if the NBN would be

considered for this project.” - Resident of the Estate, male

“The freeway is very noisy.” - Resident of the Estate, female

“Area is very dirty and has rubbish, need to work with community leaders on this.” - Resident of

the Estate, female

6.2 Safety and security

Safety and security on the Estate remains a key concern for Estate residents and for the local

community who live near the Estate. Issues relating to drug use and crime and safety at night

are of concern to the residents who live in the current walk up buildings. Participants in the

Phase two engagement were asked what suggestions they had for improving security and

making people feel safer. The main themes are shown in the Figure 12.

Figure 12. Graph showing the main themes in relation to safety and security

SECURITY PATROLS AND POLICE PRESENCE

There were 29% of participants that expressed that regular security patrols and police presence

on the Estate would help them to feel safer, and would help to deter drug-related crime.

“Need 24 hour patrols. Security officers should have a master key to all the buildings.”

- Community leader, male

“More security services - like security guards. A lot of people who are not residents at the estate

come on to the estate and make trouble.” - Resident of the Estate, female

“The dealers cause more trouble than people living on the estate. Police need to do something

about this.” - Resident of the Estate, female

CCTV

“CCTV and more security walking around.” - Resident of the Estate, male

“CCTV cameras would be good to ensure people are preventative in their presence, also to

capture footage.” - Resident of the Estate, female

LIGHTING

“More lighting, make more attractive to make people want to go through. “- Resident of the

Estate, female

“More lighting and open space.” - Resident of the Estate, female

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%

Littering

Sense of community

Increased activity near building entrances

Crime & drug prevention

Increased foot traffic around the estate

Lighting

CCTV

Security patrols/police presence

6.3 Sense of community

A sense of belonging to the broader Flemington community is the main aspiration for residents

of the Estate. Within the Debneys Precinct, an increase in recreation uses and services offered

by the Flemington Community Centre are important for growing resident’s sense of community.

The key themes identified throughout the Phase two engagement, for increasing a sense of

community is listed in Figure 13.

Figure 13. Graph showing the main themes in relation to sense of community

COMMUNITY OPEN SPACE

When asked how DHHS could help create greater sense of community, 16% of participants felt

that expanding community open space throughout the precinct would give residents a greater

opportunity to connect with others.

“Need area you can connect with others outside of your own dwelling.” - Resident of the Estate,

male

“Eritrean community - there are two facilities at 120 and 58 Holland - no space for the Eritrean

community, so there needs to be more spaces for them to gather. Bakery and grocery shops,

coffee shops needed on the estate. This will bring more people and make it a more mixed

community. Need more spaces for elderly residents to gather.” - Resident of the Estate, female

SERVICES

An increase in services at the Flemington Community Centre would help not only the Estate

community, but the broader community as well.

“Being creative about finding ways to support young mums - have something focused for them

and something for older mums.” - Service provider, female

0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16%

Programs

Access to public transport

Car parking

Lighting/cameras

Public art

Multi-culturalism

Youth services

No comment

Community Centre

Accessibility througout the Estate

Community facilities

General amenity

Integration with the broader community

Community Garden

Recreation

Services

Community open space

“Job centre, employment agency - link between school and work, also between arriving here

and finding work. Sense of responsibility, independence, increase quality of life.” - Service

provider, male

RECREATION

Increasing the provision of recreational activities on the Estate was mentioned by both residents

and service providers.

“Build more recreation spaces for youth, such as basketball, indoor soccer.” - Resident of the

Estate, male

“Gym space - physio gym to work with clients to improve their health and wellbeing.” - Service

provider, female

6.4 Facilities and services

Participants were asked several questions about the potential for improvements to community

spaces, including retail and commercial opportunities. Mooney Valley City Council were also

keen to find out the value of the Flemington Community Centre to the community, and what

activities and recreation the community wanted to see in the Debneys Park area. The key

themes are that emerged are listed in Figure 14.

Figure 14. Graph showing the main themes in relation to facilities and services

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%

Building design

Employment & vocational opportunities

Social enterprises

Sense of community

Community Centre facilities

Community Centre activities

Don't use the centre/no comment

Youth activities

Community Centre location

Recreation

Retail/commercial

RETAIL/COMMERCIAL

Retail and commercial opportunities were a popular idea among participants, with 30%

expressing an interest in seeing retail and commercial businesses included within the Estate,

specifically a café or restaurant and a large convenience store or mini mart. Some upgrades to

the existing milk bar were identified.

“The current milk bar is not particularly inviting; it looks like a bunker. It would be good to see

any community or retails spaces present a welcoming front.” - Resident of the Estate, female

“Retail take away shop, mini supermarket in the Estate, milk bar too basic, expand milk bar-

more accessible for elderly disabled and people with children.” - Resident of the Estate, female

“There should only be one type of retail facility there - no need for anything else. Racecourse

Road commercial/retail - would need to consider the impact that it would have on existing retail

along Racecourse Road - needs to be managed as to what sort/type it is.” - Stakeholder, male

RECREATION

Better sporting facilities, especially for the youth who live on and around the Estate, was an

important issue for many of the participants. Upgrades to existing facilities and increased

participation are important for building a sense of community.

“More activities-indoor soccer and basketball court. Whole community activities.” - Resident of

the Estate, male

“Gym space - physio gym to work with clients to improve their health and wellbeing.”

- Service provider, female

“Indoor soccer and basketball. Play time activities, arcade games for money or free.” - Young

resident of the Estate, male

COMMUNITY CENTRE LOCATION

The Flemington Community Centre is important to many of the residents on the Estate. Some

residents expressed frustration at not being able to access the Centre, as it books out months in

advance, while others found that it offered a broad range of services that they regularly use.

Many of the participants felt that the Centre should stay where it is, while others thought a

second community centre should be built within the Estate itself.

“Centre gets used a lot but space isn't too useable. Need some more small centres within the

Estate.” - Interested community member, male

“Perfect location but extended services for the elderly and more health-related activities, female

only gym. All residents should have equal access to facilities. We can’t hire community room at

all? They have no availability for Turkish women’s group. Should be only available for tenants

as they hire it out to external people.” - Resident of the Estate, female

“Keep it where it is; but if moved, then make sure it's in the same vicinity. If sports stadium is

built, then it will continue to be well utilised (mixed use).” - Stakeholder, male

6.5 Movement

Participants were asked about the issues and opportunities to improve pedestrian, vehicle, and

cycling access to, from and within the Estate, including pedestrian access to the Flemington

Bridge Station. The main themes discussed are shown in Figure 15.

Figure 15. Graph showing the main themes in relation to movement

PATHWAYS

Participants felt most strongly about pedestrian access in and around the Estate, and to the

surrounding public transport (both train and tram). Improved lighting along the paths would

increase feelings of safety.

“Need better connections to transport, even footpaths, more of a thoroughfare so that the estate

is safer. “- Interested community member, female

“Racecourse Rd footpath and paths to train station. Access to the station for the whole

community e.g. bike paths make the estate more open to the broader community. People who

don't live on the Estate, but who use Debneys Park could go through the estate rather than

around it.” - Stakeholder, male

“Better walking paths, hard for people to walk with limited mobility, for example crutches.” -

Resident of the Estate, female

VEHICLE ACCESS

There was general support for the proposed improvements to vehicle access into and within the

Estate. Car parking continued to be an area of concern.

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%

Active frontages

Landscaping

Security

Accessibility

CCTV/Crime

Car parking

Lighting

Pedestrian access

Public transport

No comment

Vehicle access

Pathways

“Good idea - widening it more and improving Holland Court will make it feel a little less like a

gated community. Beautify it. Opening it out will improve safety.” - Stakeholder, female

“I have concerns whether there will be sufficient parking and the consequent overflow onto

surrounding streets. Council perhaps to consider parking restrictions in streets. Need to ensure

people access estate can do so safely without risking accidents with other cars and pedestrians

with special consideration to commuters crossing the road to the tram. Bike rider’s safety as

well.” - Interested community member, female

PUBLIC TRANSPORT

Participants who identified public transport as their main form of transport noted that

improvements are needed to the access of the Flemington Bridge station.

“Easy to get to transport. Paths around park are good.”- Resident of the Estate, female

“Access to both platforms of the Flemington Bridge station could be significantly improved. A

pedestrian overpass that provides access to both platforms from both sides of the station would

be fantastic. Employing a spiral path, or even one that separates bicycles from pedestrians,

would make it safer and easier for cyclists and pedestrians who are using this path. Separating

station access from the path that links with the Capital City Trail would improve safety and

amenity for pedestrians and cyclists alike.” - Interested community member, male

“I don’t drive because how beautiful it is to catch public transport around here; we are so lucky.

For walking around Flemington Bridge station is kind of intimidating just because you’re near a

main road. Lights would probably help.” - Resident of the Estate, male

7 Evaluation

7.1 Measure of success

This section evaluates the engagement process in accordance with the parameters set in the

Stakeholder Engagement Strategy (SES) to measure project success. The project success was

measured by the quality of information provided, level of participation, the breadth of

participation and the value placed on participant feedback.

7.1.1 Quality of information provided

What was the quality and appropriateness of the information used for the engagement?

A Questions and Answers document was created to provide general background information

about the project.

The information flyers distributed at various stages of the engagement were translated into the

primary languages (namely Arabic, Oromo, Turkish, Vietnamese, Somali, simplified Chinese

and Traditional Chinese) of Estate residents thereby able to reach a broader cross section of

the Estate community. The feedback from Phase one engagement poster was a useful tool at

the community information sessions and complemented the draft sketch plan.

The guide to the Debneys Park sketch plan document, mainly used in the online engagement,

was not very clear in interpreting the sketch plan itself. The presence of DHHS and Council staff

at the community information sessions provided a verbal synopsis of the sketch plan, integral to

filling this gap. Their knowledge of the sketch plan and its implications for the site provided the

information that enabled participants to provide informed feedback.

The DHHS website will provide updates about the redevelopment process and copies of both a

summary document and the engagement findings report will be made publicly available.

7.1.2 Level of participation

Was there a good participation rate during the engagement activities? How could it have been

improved?

The participation rate was low with approximately 150 people giving their feedback. This result

is indicative of the short promotional lead time to engagement the activities, and a short

engagement period. The full-day community information session whilst planned to coincide with

existing community activities at the Flemington Community Centre did not illicit as large a

response as was expected. Some of the planned activities were cancelled on that day and

those who were attending the Centre did not necessarily want to talk about the renewal project.

This could be overcome by running more targeted information sessions on future phases of the

project.

The community leaders’ workshop was well received with participants showing a keen interest

in the renewal project. The leaders were important in sharing information with their communities

and a few leaders were available at the subsequent community information sessions to act as

translators for their communities.

The online engagement did not receive as many responses as anticipated. This could be due to

the way in which the information was presented online and how the online engagement was

promoted. For an engagement of this type, online is not always going to be as beneficial as

face-to-face engagement, especially if the interest of the broader community is low or they do

not know about it. Future use of the Engage Victoria platform, as a dedicated engagement hub,

may illicit more online activity.

7.1.3 Breadth of participation

Was the participation data obtained from a wide range of community members? What were the

barriers? How could this be improved?

Over half of the participants were residents of the Estate. This is not surprising given the

renewal directly impacts them. Engaging more broadly with Flemington residents proves a little

harder as they may not be directly impacted nor may the renewal be considered important to

them.

The engagement activities were centred around the Estate. Leveraging off community and

business meetings and events may have helped in capturing a broader community response.

7.1.4 Value placed on participant input

Did the participants have a clear idea of how their input will be used and confidence that their

views are being valued?

The presence of DHHS and Council staff at community information sessions gave the

community the opportunity to ask questions, particularly around the relocation during the

construction period.

The use of interpreters and information printed in the primary languages (namely Arabic,

Oromo, Turkish, Vietnamese, Somali, simplified Chinese and Traditional Chinese) of the Estate

residents showed that their opinions were valued. Distributing a one page summary infographic

document to the engagement participants demonstrates a commitment by DHHS to keep

residents and stakeholders informed.

7.2 Evaluation

To evaluate the success of the community leaders’ workshop, a short evaluation form was

completed by each participant after the workshop. Participants were asked to rate aspects of

the workshop on a scale of 1 to 5; 1 being poor and 5 being excellent. The aspects being

evaluated were:

Quality of information: How well did we describe what we needed to? How well were

we in providing relevant information and answering your questions?

Use of time: How well did we use our time?

Participation: How well did we do on making sure everyone was involved?

Facilitation: How well was the workshop managed?

Organisation: How well was the workshop run?

The feedback from the community leaders workshop are shown in Figure 16. Overall the

participation, facilitation and organisation were rated as good whilst the use of time was rated

the lowest.

Figure 16. Workshop evaluation form feedback

0

1

2

3

4

5

Quality ofinformation

Use of time Participation Facilitation Organisation

Workshop evaluation

Poor Fair Satisfactory Good Excellent

8 Appendices

Appendix 1: Invitation letter sent out to residents of the Estate

and surrounding area

Appendix 2: Letter from the Director of Housing

Appendix 3: Invitation flyers translated into some key languages

spoken on the Estate

Appendix 4: Community Leaders and housing association

representatives

Appendix 5: Community workshop agenda

Appendix 6: Stakeholder interview participants and their

respective organisations

8.1 Appendix: Invitation letter sent out to residents of the Estate

and surrounding area

8.2 Appendix: Letter from the Director of Housing

8.3 Appendix; Invitation flyers translated into some key

languages spoken on the Estate

8.4 Appendix; Community Leaders and housing association

representatives

Name Organisation/Community

Ibrahim Hajj Eritrean Community Australia

Shadia Mohamed Arabic, Tigre Community

Salah Ibrahim Eritrean Young Mother’s Group

Adam Mohamed Somali Community

Yasseen Musa African-Australian Multicultural Employment & Youth

Services

Thanh Tran Vietnamese Community

John Dickie Flemington Association

Les Potts Flemington Association

Mark Feenane Victorian Public Tenants Association

8.5 Appendix: Community workshop agenda

6:00pm Official welcome Danny Pearson MP

6:05pm Workshop format

Kathlin Mayer facilitator, Capire Consulting Group (Capire)

6:15pm Presentation: Project background and purpose,

Phase one community feedback and emerging themes

Fiona Williams, Director of Property & Asset Services, Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS)

6:25pm

(15 min)

Table discussion 1: General feedback

Q1: What are your initial reactions to the proposed design of the Estate?

6:40pm

(30 min)

Table discussion 2: Issues and opportunities

Themes:

Safety & security

Q1: What issues and opportunities do you see relating to the design that will improve safety and make people more secure?

Facilities and services

Q1: What issues and opportunities do you see for retail, commercial or community space within the Estate?

Q2: What issues and opportunities do you see for improvements to the community spaces and milk bar on the Estate?

7:10pm Short break

7:20pm

(30 min)

Table discussion 3: Issues and opportunities (change tables)

Themes:

Sense of community

Q1: What issues and opportunities do you see to improve the combined Debneys Park and Flemington Estate areas?

Movement

Q1: What issues and opportunities do you see to improve ways to walk around the Estate, to and from the Estate and towards the Flemington Bridge station?

Q2: What issues and opportunities do you see with the proposed improvements to vehicle access to and within the Estate?

Q3: What issues and opportunities do you see with the proposed off-road cycle path along Racecourse Road that will connect to the Capital City trail?

7:45pm Plenary/summary Capire

7:50pm Wrap up and where to from here?

Evaluation forms

Fiona Williams, DHHS

8.00pm Close and thank you Capire

8.6 Appendix: Stakeholder interview participants and their

respective organisations

Name Role Organisation Phase one

participant

Vicki Watson Principal Debney Meadows Primary

School

Yes – via interview

Cathy Connop Centre Coordinator Farnham Street

Neighbourhood House

Yes – via

community

workshop

Rhonda Collins Manager Latitude Directions for

Young People

No

Will Cordova Representative Flemington Chamber of

Commerce

No

Kal Magano-

Niebling

Manager Hopetoun Children’s

Centre

No

Wayne

Hamworth

Principal Mount Alexander College Yes – via interview

Jill Kilpatrick Constable Victoria Police (Moonee

Valley)

Yes – via interview

Mina Stevenson Occupational Therapist CoHealth No

Mark Rayner SHASP & SFaR

Manager

Wombat Housing and

Support Service

No

Anthony Kelly Representative Flemington Kensington

Legal Service

No

Carol Espinoza Coordinator

Community

Development

Moonee Valley City

Council

No