 A report presented to Manly Councillors this week (14/7/14) proposed a review of the land under the Affordable Rental Housing SEPP 2009, to permit Boarding Houses in more appropriate, strategically determined areas through Manly.
Under the Manly Local Environment Plan (LEP) Boarding Houses are permissible in residential and business zones , however recent changes to the planning laws has seen a need to update the LEP following a number of Land & Environment Court challenges and concerns by local residents that DAs are being lodged for 'inappropriate' locations. Following extensive work undertaken by Manly Council staff, Clr Adelle Heasman has championed the case, with the likely outcome that sections of Manly's local government area will be excluded from the application of the Boarding House provisions of the SEPPs (State Environment Planning Policies) in certain locations. Predominately these include Clontarf, Balgowlah Heights and Seaforth for example. Council is now approaching the Department of Planning and Environment with a substantial report for the review of the exclusion area . Once agreement is received in principal, a planning proposal will then be submitted for a Gateway Determination enabling Council to make the LEP changes.
7 Comments
Sue Sacker
20/7/2014 10:26:13 am
I am not aware of any reason why certain areas of Manly are 'too good' for Boarding Houses. A mix of affordable housing is a responsibility of a caring society. Many people struggle to live in Manly near their families. Council used to have a proactive approach to getting more affordable housing in Manly, but the current regime seems to have a different view of the needs of the less well off. Perhaps a better approach is to more closely define 'boarding house' and manage the situation through other controls.
Manly Resident
28/8/2014 04:30:39 pm
Oh, of course I support affordable housing, you know, just not in my neighbourhood. Boarding houses are really great; it's just they should be strategically determined in appropriate areas, you know, elsewhere.
John
29/8/2014 02:54:04 am
I am curious as to what you consider 'inappropriate locations', especially when you focus on suburbs, suburbs that objectively might be considered more affluent. Would you consider the boarding house built near a public school at Ermington in appropriate? Do you consider the boarding house at 120 Pittwater Rd appropriate, when rents exceed $600 pw and were never going to be affordable because of the design and location?
Manly Resident
29/8/2014 04:30:51 am
In fact it is these very suburbs that have the greatest need for affordable housing like boarding houses, which Manly Council has gone to some pains to stress are really just studio apartments.
Chris
29/8/2014 05:13:25 am
Dear Councillor Bingham, could you explain why there would be any need for such exemptions when elsewhere you have gone to great lengths to assure the community that, regarding new age boarding houses, "we are in effect talking about “Studio Rooms” not the old-style boarding house accommodation." (http://www.goodformanly.com.au/latest-news/boarding-house-das-on-the-rise#.U__bhpIaySM)
Chris
29/8/2014 12:03:52 pm
According the the affordable housing policy, the types of people that live in new generation boarding houses include nurses, teachers, child care staff and young professionals. When did it become 'inappropriate' to provide affordable rental housing to the people who service, and are an essential part of, the Clontarf, Balgowlah Heights and Seaforth communities?
Chris
30/8/2014 12:34:03 am
Clontarf, Balgowlah Heights and Seaforth, and once a precedence is set, Mosman, Point Piper, Vaucluse, Bellevue Hill, Double Bay, Balmoral, Watsons Bay, Darling Point--you know, the other 'inappropriate' suburbs. Leave a Reply. |
AuthorCandy Bingham, Manly Ward Councillor on Northern Beaches Council posts what's making news and issues relevant to Manly on this blog. Categories
All
|
RSS Feed
