Melbourne’s middle urban areas are broadly underutilised, and the current Governmental approach of focusing on a small number of activ- ity centres—while a step in the right direction— has been slow to roll out, and ignores large swathes of our urban landscape that would strongly benefit from enabling medium density.
The answer to the housing supply shortage, therefore, will not be found in this handful of designated activity centres and precincts. Rather, it will be found through the delivery of permissive planning reforms across every one of Metropolitan Melbourne’s existing 1,992 train and tram stops.
Melbourne’s existing rail network provides fre- quent, high capacity transport options across the whole city, and by building near these sta- tions, we give more people access to this net- work, while simultaneously providing more destinations that are close to rail.
Through broad transit-oriented upzoning and development, the Victorian Government can deliver housing abundance and provide more housing choices to all current and future resi- dents across the entirety of the city. This will fulfil the original goal of Plan Melbourne creat- ing a vast array of 20-minute neighbourhoods, rather than a small number of scattered activ- ity centres.
YIMBY Melbourne’s Missing Middle report recommendeds the introduction of a new “Missing Middle” Zone which:
In Melbourne, 7,270 properties would be up-zoned to missing middle, providing a Parisian like density near transit in Melbourne.
While this report focuses on the provision of the Missing Middle Zone around existing transit infrastructure, the Government must in addi- tion to this undertake broad upzoning to enable more development in existing suburbs. While the MMZ enables a thriving Parisian-style density for Melbourne, broader upzoning of all land currently designated Neighbourhood Resi- dential Zone (NRZ) or equivalent will encourage a more diverse array of housing options across the city through an increase in gentle density.
YIMBY Mel-bourne endorses a complete elimination of the current NRZ across Metropolitan Melbourne, and its replacement with the General Residen- tial Zone (GRZ). In turn, all land currently zoned GRZ should also be upzoned to the Residential Growth Zone (RGZ).
Todo - figure out current zoned capacity and then figure out how much we are icnreasing it.
should have x% of Melbourne’s housing as a target.
With current state target that means xyz homes per year over the next 10 years.
Melbourne has been building housing, but cannot rest on its laurels params$area has amazing public transport, and it needs to do more to ensure that housing is abundant.
Not enough housing is being built in Melbourne because it has not been zoned for housing.
| Number of properties | Area (sqm) | Share of properties that are heritage | Share of land that is heritage | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Already developed | ||||
| Free from heritage controls | 505 | 846,694 | 34% | 50% |
| Subject to heritage controls | 969 | 849,264 | 66% | 50% |
| Civic land | ||||
| Free from heritage controls | 973 | 5,011,298 | 56% | 33% |
| Subject to heritage controls | 750 | 9,990,828 | 44% | 67% |
| Commercial only | ||||
| Free from heritage controls | 461 | 723,544 | 43% | 75% |
| Subject to heritage controls | 610 | 243,329 | 57% | 25% |
| Commonwealth land | ||||
| Free from heritage controls | 1 | 2,062 | 100% | 100% |
| General residential | ||||
| Free from heritage controls | 1,992 | 388,428 | 43% | 34% |
| Subject to heritage controls | 2,614 | 738,456 | 57% | 66% |
| Industrial | ||||
| Free from heritage controls | 498 | 4,640,645 | 98% | 97% |
| Subject to heritage controls | 9 | 136,652 | 2% | 3% |
| Mixed use | ||||
| Free from heritage controls | 1,520 | 1,741,436 | 37% | 52% |
| Subject to heritage controls | 2,598 | 1,606,916 | 63% | 48% |
| Neighbourhood residential | ||||
| Free from heritage controls | 32 | 2,580 | 1% | 0% |
| Subject to heritage controls | 2,987 | 649,259 | 99% | 100% |
| Residential Growth | ||||
| Free from heritage controls | 11 | 11,712 | 61% | 77% |
| Subject to heritage controls | 7 | 3,541 | 39% | 23% |
| Total | ||||
| Free from heritage controls | 5,993 | 13,368,399 | 36% | 48% |
| Subject to heritage controls | 10,544 | 14,218,246 | 64% | 52% |
| Total where new housing can be built | ||||
| Free from heritage | 3,555 | 2,144,157 | 30% | 42% |
| Subject to heritage controls | 8,206 | 2,998,172 | 70% | 58% |
Housing is falling behind because nothing gets built in NRZ/GRZ.
insert building approval data for this LGA by zone category
City of Melbourne is using heritage to stop more people from living
in the areas that should support the most housing. Heritage covers 69%
of lots in Melbourne that are zoned to allow housing covering 56% of the
developable land in the LGA. There is much more heritage in the
residential only zones of NRZ and GRZ, where 78% of land is taken up by
heritage.
Heritage areas make up some of the highest amenity locations in all of Melbourne.These areas were developed first because they are the best located. They have access to the best parks, and the best public transport, and the least traffic pollution.
The preservation areas around City of Melbourne are closest to the best park land such as the Botanic Gardens, Princess Park and Royal Park. While the city has gone to considerable effort to build more parks in brownfield zones, they cannot overcome the advantage that comes from being near these huge oasis in the middle of our city.
Heritage areas are also much better connected to public transport than the rest of the city. 95% of the land subject to heritage controls in Melbourne is within 500m of a tram stop or train station, while only 80% of non-heritage properties area.
‘Neighbourhood’ areas also suffer much less pollution, noise, and traffic risk. While Eureka tower was approved right above one of Melbourne’s most polluted roads, the areas without freeways or dangerous trucks such as Carlton tend to get zoned as ‘established areas’ and denied more housing. Using evidence on the relationship between traffic pollution and respiratory disease, paired with traffic road data from VicRoads, YIMBY Melbourne estimates that the residential areas (zoned GRZ and NRZ) in City of Melbourne’s heritage plan have 2.4 greater risk from road traffic noise and pollution than renewal precincts (zoned CZ,DZ,MUZ etz).
Melbourne’s current heritage plan aims to make this situation worse. Rather than situating growth in the high-amenity, low pollution suburbs the plan suggests potential new precincts right next to the dirty port as well as the new West-Gate tunnel’s overpasses. YIMBY Melbourne is not against building more housing in ex-industrial areas, but that should not be at the cost of preventing new housing where people most want to live.
Heritage designation across large swathes of residential areas denies people the opportunity to live on a quiet, unpolluted street. New housing would not add much to pollution, because new apartments can limit parking and most existing traffic is through - not local. While electric cars are coming, the noise and particulate pollution they produce is unchanged and in some cases greater than for petrol engines. As a result City Road will likely always be a noisy, polluted and dangerous road. And under this heritage plan, more people will not be permitted where it is much safer and nicer to live.
This LGA has big lots, but we can build on small lots anyway.
Larger lots can be easier to develop, but Melbourne has been sucssessful in developing even on small lots
Recycle text from missing middle report.
There are 16,537 parcels of land in Melbourne. But not every piece of land can have housing on it. Of these parcels, 1,714 are on civic land like schools, hospitals, or train stations where development is challenging. Another 1,655 are in zones that do not development. Finally 1,407 properties have already been developed with more than 1 unit, making re-development difficult.
That leaves 11,761 that are available for development. The size of these lots is 5,142,329 square meters, or 257 MCGs worth of space to build housing.