News
'They are members of the local community’: Social housing tenants hurt by ‘ugly’ debate
Social housing providers Beyond Housing and Wintringham have labelled the characterisation of clients who would be housed in a proposed development above a car park in Shepparton’s central business district as ugly and disgusting.
In presentations to Greater Shepparton City Council both organisations said some commentary was unacceptable.
Beyond Housing business development manager Laura Harris said the Nicholls electorate was seventh in the top 10 of social housing shortfalls and 2700 homes were needed to bridge the gap.
“We’re in a housing crisis, that should not be a surprise to anybody in this room,” she said.
“What we have seen in the discussions online and in the media is some of the most disgusting, discriminatory and false language used to describe our renters in social housing.’’
Wintringham deputy chief executive Michael Deschepper also addressed “rather ugly” comments about the proposal.
“The men, women and children that will be housed at this site are members of the local community, they are members of the local community who are homeless, or at risk of becoming homeless, simply by being priced out of the local private rental market,” he said.
“Beyond Housing clients are already part of our community; they live, work, shop and try to go to school alongside us every day, and their contribution is valued,’’ Ms Harris said.
“We’ve even had feedback from our renters that this conversation is impacting their life, they feel ashamed to say where they live and describe themselves as being deemed as losers, that’s unacceptable.”
She appealed to council to support the use of the airspace above the Made, Nixon and Edward St car park for urgently needed social housing.
“We are asking you to consider the most vulnerable, those whose voices are often drowned out by those with louder voices and deeper pockets,” she said.
The comments were made in oral submissions to council over the prosed sale or gifting of the airspace.
Ms Harris said designs circulated were done by council planners and were not the final design.
“We are held to a higher standard than most because of who we house, and while it’s not fair we do embrace the opportunity to do the best by our community,” she said.
“At this stage we haven’t secured land or funding, the plans are in development.
“It is certainly not in the community interest to have a poorly designed property and it’s not in our interest either.”
Mr Deschepper said council had to make a decision on the principle of partnering with social housing providers to develop unique solution.
He said objections raised about overlooking, overshadowing and other design elements would have to be addressed through a separate planning process.
“At that point, if the project can’t meet the planning requirements, it will fail,” he said.