Melbourne

1870 readers

52 users here now

This community is a place created for the people of Melbourne and Victoria. We are a positive, welcoming and inclusive community. We might not agree about everything, but we always strive to stay civil and respectful.

The focus of our discussions is based around things that affect Victoria, but we are also free to discuss our local perspective on wider issues. Or head to the regular Daily Random Discussion thread to talk about anything.

Full Community Guidelines

Ongoing discussions, FAQs & Resources (still under construction)

Adoption Certificate for Nellie, the Daily Thread numbat (with thanks to @Catfish)

Feedback & Suggestions

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

lodion@aussie.zone

RustyRaven@aussie.zone

briongloid@aussie.zone

bot001@aussie.zone

Four Melbourne suburbs targeted in government’s latest housing plan (www.theage.com.au)

submitted 3 months ago by Baku@aussie.zone to c/melbourne@aussie.zone

2 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 2 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] Deceptichum@quokk.au 7 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Fucking pathetic.

The government will seek expressions of interest from the private sector to develop the sites in Preston, Coburg, Alphington, and Malvern with bidders required to set aside 10 per cent of their proposed projects as affordable housing.

Let’s sell developers government land, but we’ll make them make 10% of it be “affordable”.

Fuckers, stop palming your responsibilities off to companies who only want to make a profit. Use 100% of the land you’re giving away to build public housing.

So disappointed by this govt and its neoliberal bullshit.

[–] Taleya@aussie.zone 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

eh, normally Id agree with you - nothing enrages me more than the bullshit move of "redveloping" 100% public housing as 90% private - but this looks to be more like bits of shitland they had reserved, like old government buildings, "didn't pay your rates" seizures or other government owned land that has no future use earmarked. So it is actually a net gain in public housing by mandating that a percentage be used as such.