Question details

(1209) My adjournment matter this evening is for the Minister for Planning, and the action I seek is a review of clause 52.23-2 of the Latrobe planning scheme. I have spoken in this place before about the proliferation of rooming houses across my electorate, and one example in Churchill proves developers are exploiting a loophole in the planning scheme to the detriment of residents in that town. In a quiet court there will soon be three rooming houses within 50 metres of each other. Two were constructed on the block earlier this year and a third is under construction. Under the planning scheme each of these rooming houses could home up to 12 people, representing potentially 36 additional people in this very narrow court. Aside from obvious issues around parking and space, residents are rightly concerned about what this means for them and their town.

There is no doubt that rooming houses are a necessary part of our affordable housing and provide accommodation for some of our most vulnerable. But they are often occupied by people who have been released from prison. The undeniable and glaring fact is that this poses a great risk to other residents, and the concentration of three rooming houses and up to 36 people in one court is a recipe for disaster. This situation is a clear breach of the requirement to protect residential character under the Planning and Environment Act 1987. Developers are posting videos on social media about how much money they can make by cramming up to 12 people into one house without any planning permit. The developers are doing everything aboveboard, but they are laughing at how lax this state’s planning legislation is – standing on one block where two rooming houses have been built and claiming, ‘You can’t do this anywhere else in Australia.’ Rooming houses are high-performing properties. They say if you have 12 people in these places you can earn up to $6000 a week.

Residents are rightly outraged and are demanding action from the Minister for Planning to address the loopholes that have allowed this to happen. I have written to the minister with details about this situation in Churchill. The locals are waiting for a response to their concern. Minister, again, will you review clause 52.23-2 of the Latrobe planning scheme to include an amendment which restricts the number of high-density rooming houses in any one area?