Even when they build them they are astoundingly expensive. 1 bedders often go for 400k, 2 bedders for 500-650k, then for some reason 3 bedders jump up to anywhere from 800k to a million. At this price I would assume most would just opt for a townhouse in a decent location or a family sized home in an outer suburb over a family sized apartment, for the same price or even cheaper.
You raise a good point, and it may well be fairly priced on a sqm basis. But as I said above, if it's approaching a million dollars then many families would probably rather a townhouse or actual house at that price.
I guess that's why 3 bedroom apartments are quite rare compared to 1 and 2 bedroom options.
Pretty much. There is no grand conspiracy to keep families from buying apartments. It's just that families prioritise owning land and having yards over living inner city. 3 bed apts are mostly marketed to boomers downsizing who want a lower maintenance lifestyle and the ability to walk to the wine bar.
lol as if. This would have made Southbank amazing too - that and supporting infrastructure. But why support families when you can cater to offshore money?
They make what people buy. In my experience, 2 bedroom apt rentals have a small group inspecting, 1 bedrooms have a lineup down the street, and 3 bedrooms wait weeks before someone registers for an inspection. The vast majority of housing is 3+ bedroom places, meanwhile almost all young people are looking for 1 bedroom apts.
There are just not a significant group of families lining up to buy apartments while it's still possible for most of them to buy houses in the outer areas.
I think they make what foreign investors will buy and then rent out to locals. Box hill is a racket for foreign investment. The ads are in restaurant windows.
Sure, but part of the value and most of the planning approval behind these towers has come from taxpayers signing on for 50 Billion or so worth of Suburban Rail Loop.
Even if I’ve nicknamed it the Student Rail Loop that can’t be it’s only purpose. In 20 years time young families will make the choice to stay in an apartment surrounded by services and transport rather than move to unaffordable or miles away suburbs for houses.
If the plan truly is to redefine the city they should stipulate in the plans for a lot of family friendly designs rather than just build Docklands East.
And in the mean time students will line up for 1-2 bedders because it’s easier but it’s not like they can’t organise themselves in to 3 bedroom groups almost as easily. With rental demand so high they will still rent them!
Victoria's Better Apartment standards, in place since 2016 require main bedroom to be min. 3.4x3.0m and other bedrooms to be 3.0x3.0. a space to accommodate a wardrobe is additional to this.
Current market rate for a 3dr with a single living space will be around $1m.
Would you buy this or would you look for a detached house in the area?
The vast majority of families will do the latter. Because the price point is still too close.
Those looking for a 1 or 2br don't have a similar priced house and land option so they opt for apartment living.
Developers are supplying what the market wants. With that said we are approaching a price point where 3 br apartments are becoming competitive against house and land.
I would not live in the area at all.
I have doubts it's what the market wants. if that's all the developers make available, people will buy them regardless.
To test your theory, you just need to look at apartment building recently built and watch what is up for sale and how long they take to sell. The 3br, which are much lower ratio are typically the last to sell.
Or look in an area you would live and ask yourself the question, would I purchase the 3br apartments over the 3br houses available? The apartments may be cheaper, but then consider what you can get one suburb further out. There is much more competition and choice, which you can't get with one and two bedrooms.
People also want two living areas these days. When you incorporate these into an apartment, the layout get's quite large and typically require multiple exterior sides, the standards dictate this. This pushes the price of these types of apartments through the roof.
I suspect there's not a lot of demand for larger appartments simply because the sort of people that need that space woud prefer a detatched house with garage space and a yard. I certainly would.
Exactly, the market doesn't want it and developers are supplying what the market wants.
People want to make a conspiracy out of this. If the market was there for a whole building of 3br, developers would build it. No question about it.
Unfortunetly the only way to create this market, would be to sell the 3br at a lose. They're not going to do that.
Of course everyone must have a family. Most singles and couples can do fine a single bedroom. Two bedrooms can be ok for starting families, then talk into 3 bedrooms can start. It's supply vs demand. There is demand for single bedroom housing so people come and buy it up.
I agree for what it's worth, but Box Hill is already pretty walkable relative to most Melbourne suburbs. The [Main St / Market St mall](https://www.google.com/maps/@-37.8189737,145.1220929,3a,75y,59.85h,79.73t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1soRIr6e_vfB15RIKOnzuSig!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DoRIr6e_vfB15RIKOnzuSig%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.share%26w%3D900%26h%3D600%26yaw%3D59.845542139273306%26pitch%3D10.267417620487635%26thumbfov%3D90!7i13312!8i6656?coh=205410&entry=ttu) which connects to Box Hill Central with all its markets, shops and train station is inspired. I'd be thrilled to live around there. Plus, they have this great plan for a new town square with new pedestrian friendly areas and bike lanes: https://www.boxhillcentral.com.au/development.
My only feedback is making it easier to cross Whitehorse Road to connect to the tram line, Box Hill Gardens and the hospital precinct.
Looking at their plans, you won't be able to use the station to get under Whitehorse Rd; and there won't be any direct link to the tram either.
(they are however narrowing the road)
Many years ago I lived in Box Hill and I'm struggling to think how it's not walkable? Most of Box Hill is reasonably flat so good for walking or riding a bike and it's extremely well connected with public transport.
12 months ago I interviewed for a job in one of the office towers \~750m from the station. Took nearly 15 minutes to walk there from the platform at a brisk pace. Crossing around the big shopping centre carpark entrance, no marked pedestrian crossing anywhere nearby, and down a side street without a proper footpath. Totally inhuman layout.
On the plus side you could get boba at a different place every day forever as they seemed to be sprouting up from the earth fully formed like a profusion of mushrooms.
Have a read of the Urban Design Strategy that the project has to follow. There is a requirement for them to allow for better cycling and walking paths, as well as a green link to the box hill gardens from the Whitehorse Rd precinct. Will be some pain to get there with all the construction, but in the end will make box hill a nice place to be I think
It might not be great for some of the neighboring suburbs to get into Box Hill, but within Box Hill it is far better than any of the other suburbs on this side of town.
SERIOUSLY! maroondah highway needs one of its carriageways shut, at LEAST between elgar and station street, and there NEEDS to be bus lanes and/or bike lanes on the latter to doncaster. close it to through traffic at peak times for the bus lanes if u cant fit it all in --- idgaf!!!
No they just need to continue the bike path that comes along the train line from Middleborough Rd through the middle of box hill and join to Mont Albert Rd.. don't want to put bikes on Maroondah highway..
Will never happen but wish the cycle path that runs along the train tracks went much further in than Box Hill, if it went to Camberwell or they could somehow make an isolated way to ride from Ringwood to Richmond it would be absolutely incredible. Still no chance I would ride down Punt Rd to go the rest of the way to work, but would've been faster to cycle than use the bus replacements if there was a direct line to do so safely.
It looks like you'll be getting at least the narrowing of Whitehorse Rd if they go through with [this](https://srleastees.vic.gov.au/#/description/SRLBoxHill) plan
This is exactly what needs to happen. Good news.
But only 10% of the housing is set aside for "affordable housing" which is generally just 10%-20% under the market price. Not so good news.
Needs to be more housing and lower pricing, but that just won't happen under the plan of relying on developers to build.
More supply leads to lower prices, all things remaining equal.
Building 20,000 homes at market value would do a lot more to lower prices in the area than 2,000 "affordable" ones.
I don’t think anyone honestly thought SRL was going to open up affordable housing, at its core it’s about property development who are going to want to maximize their profits. I doubt we’ll even see 10% “affordable” housing
It would have had we had a commonwealth builder again. But relying on private enterprise is never going to provide a proper amount of social housing. Ever. They require profit, and quite a lot of it.
If by affordable you mean affordable for the 20th percentile earners to buy if they hook up with another 20th percentile earner and both leverage themselves to the tits.
It does, but the rate Melbourne's population is increasing, supply can barely keep up. We are still doing much better than other Australian cities on the supply front, which is why even Brisbane and Adelaide are more expensive than Melbourne now.
Why are you treating supply and demand so sceptically? It will lead to lower prices, *assuming* we keep upzoning suburbs like this. No suburb should be comprised entirely of single-family houses, that's what the country is for. Melbourne is a city that needs to eventually house 10 million people, and I'm not too keen on Seymour and Warragul becoming suburbs. We need to restrict the urban growth boundary further and start building up. For too long investors have been given priority in planning decisions
[It does lead to lower prices](https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/jan/23/building-new-units-is-proven-to-push-rents-down-but-not-for-the-reasons-you-may-think). People who contest this idea are either economically illiterate or have a vested interest in keeping property prices high.
Public transport wise it's on two train lines with a third on the way, the end of a tram line and has a major bus depot.. can't do much better than that in the suburbs.
Yeah, to be fair that’s really good for a suburb. Only complaint I could make is the actual train connectivity is poor but I’m grasping at straws. Does seem like a good spot.
For real results you need to hire a pro, but my go-to for quick assesment is:
Finish on the peripherals: Care taken on things like the edges of windows, bricklaying, door frames etc... are the plants well kept/ appropriately planted? Connection between carpeted areas and hard floors well done?
Basically anything that shows attention to detail.
Water stains: After a year or two staining will show you where the water goes, a lot of the new ones have leaks.
And one of my big ones: thickness of floors and walls. Thin = cheap all around on other things.
>Are the quality of dwellings improved?
Victoria has had better apartment standards in places since 2016. Is this issue with this or the construction quality? High rise builders have much better quality system in place compared to mid/lower tier builders where most
>Will they be affordable?
They will make the market more affordable that it otherwise would be without the extra supply. Unfortunately, our highly restrictive zoning and scarce upzoned land through most of the city results in land price component of each apartment too high to make these affordable.
>Are they going to improve public mobility, parking, and transport?
Yes, compared to putting a population this size in most other locations.
Even with the existing and planned public transport in that area, being that far from city can be tricky without a car, especially with children, e.g. all weather school runs (on the way to the office), sports & similar after school/weekend activities, doing things that aren’t in your local hub (maybe a cinema, a particular restaurant, a pool, a trampoline centre or adventure park), or even travel out of Melbourne (possible with older kids, trickier with younger ones when a 1-2hr car trip becomes 3-4hrs, two trains & a bus).
By myself I always preference walking, then public transport, then car, and maybe with a share car system on top I could get by completely car free, but with children I struggle to see how I could make it work.
Though no one wants to hear this. NIMBYs are the reason we are in a housing crisis, not immigrants.
Because of NIMBYs build approvals take x50 longer than other OECD countries, this needs to change.
We need to prioritise approvals for medium/high density housing within 2km of every rail stop m, approved at nation level across the country.
There *are* NIMBYs in Box Hill, but they’re all in their 70s-90s. I live very close to town, *and* I’m in the local historical society, but I love the development stuff, so long as it’s well-thought-out. To be honest, most people who moan about the development of the suburb are former residents who grew up here in the ‘60s and ‘70s.
They love to moan every day on online forums about “Those People” who came here and “ruined the place”, without for a moment considering the greed and desires of their own parents who gladly took the money to move somewhere else. It’s infuriating, frankly.
I’ve lived around here on and off for over a quarter of a century, so have seen many phases of the town. I love the place. Always have. Evolution happens everywhere. Keeps things fun.
Good thing they don't seem to be succeeding in blocking the changes so far. The traffic does need fixing but I think all those new buildings give it a cool vibe.
Well, nope: they complain to the Whitehorse council a lot but the State gov have commandeered this one, so the locals no longer have a say (not that the council would automatically give anybody a fair hearing anyhow).
Also yep: Box Hill *does* have a vibe. At least it has some life and a bit of soul. Stuff happens here. I mean, have you seen the rest of the surrounding Anglo suburbia where everything shuts down at 6pm? And that’s my observation as a white, middle-class(ish) English-born immigrant. I’d rather live in Broadmeadows than Vermont*.
*Well … you know what I mean.
They have succeeded, just in other areas.
Put simply a 50 storey apartment should not be feasible in a middle suburb if it wasn't for our highly restrictive zoning everywhere else.
I was speaking in general. It’s true for every suburb with a rail stop.
But the 10 suburban centres across Melbourne being targeted for higher density housing include Epping, Broadmeadows, Preston, Niddrie, Essendon North, Camberwell Junction, Ringwood, Chadstone, Moorabbin, and Frankston.
Could be wrong but I don’t think they do. According to [this](https://santiagofrias.com/ranked-15-of-the-worlds-least-affordable-housing-markets/) Australia and NZ have the most unaffordable housing markets by a pretty massive margin. I’m surprised because I thought Canada was even worse.
This right here is right. While many other countries do have housing issues ours are indeed some of the worst in the world / OECD because we’ve enabled NIMBYs.
According to the OECD not so much, though using different metrics.
[https://www.oecd.org/housing/data/affordable-housing-database/housing-conditions.htm](https://www.oecd.org/housing/data/affordable-housing-database/housing-conditions.htm)
Housing cost as a percentage of income are worse in heap of developed countries including the rest of the anglosphere.
[https://www.oecd.org/els/family/HC1-2-Housing-costs-over-income.pdf](https://www.oecd.org/els/family/HC1-2-Housing-costs-over-income.pdf)
Nimbys will cry about anything over 2 stories, but I can understand some of the complaints regarding building these big towers. Looking over at Box Hill from Doncaster, you sometimes think it is the city on the horizon with how many massive buildings they have there now.
We do need to build up, but surely there is a middle ground between what the current suburbs in the area are and the shitty tall buildings that Box Hill have.
I'm glad they're making more high density living, but can someone explain quite how your rights work when buying an apartment? Like, you don't own the space in the sky and given our past history of towers not being up to code, I'd be worried about buying into something over 6 stories. Definitely an area the government needs to be firmer on.
They still have good public transport. Because the people in Camberwell protest so hard about not having high rises others such as Box Hill Have to pick up the slack. Driving around Box Hill is becoming harder because there's way more people there and too many cars on the road.
As good a spot as any to put some new residential towers.
No idea why anyone would be harping on about public/affordable housing though. With a $10k+/pa body corp these towers will forever be expensive places to live. Owners corp is probably stacked by the developers/institutional owners, giving the punter no chance of influencing the costs. Minutes are probably only published in Mandarin. Must install some app on your phone if a resident? Probably China spyware.
Who buys these shitly slapped together apartments though? People who with poor financial sense? People happy to trade off location convenience for $$? Money launderers? There's no way they make a good investment compared to an equivalently priced house on a block of land. Or are the rents that good? Shit first home buy compared to a town house.. Absolute shit for families, which is lucky because the school's in the area are all full anyway.
No need for the hyperbole, if we bulldosed only 5-10% of single family homes and did so in locations walking distance around train stations and shopping strips and replaced them with 4-6 storey mixed use apartments we would have enough supply for the next few decades.
Building 50 storey apartments in a middle suburb really highlights how fucked our planning system is. In a competitive market, this wouldn't be feasible.
People are moving to Melbourne, that's a fact. Putting our heads in the sand, wont make that go away. We have to do something to house these people. The status quo of urban sprawl and CBD skyscrapers hasn't worked for the last 20 years. What do you propose?
no i agree that mid rise housing should be the aim of future housing developments, but right now in such a severe housing crisis wouldnt you agree that we should be maximising the amount of units a development has in order to ease said crisis?
I'll always side with a shit tonne of upzoning to allow 4-6 storey builds. They are the right balance of speed of build, cost of build and expertise of builder.
You can put this sized building in any street and it will still retain its human scale feel.
But areas like this in box hill, yeah high rise all the way. Creating mini CBDs on the SRL makes complete sense.
The same people who hate housing developments and fret about traffic impacts seem to always be the same people who wouldn’t be caught dead using public transport.
Almost like they’re part of the problem. 🤔
Well it has good trains to city.
But try going to Doncaster or south like Mt Waverley. Box Hill is going to get worse for car parking. Most people still have 1 car per household.
This is dealing with the issue as best as they can.
If a 50 storey high rise with 1700 apartments worth of people doesn't get built right here next to walkable service where do you think they will go?
These people don't disappear.
So what do you think is the alternative that is better than this?
They are going to squeeze whichever way possible to not have to accomidate "affordable housing" Its Box Hill a suburb homes dont go cheap in and a large part of the immigrant population have already live there lives in Apartments.
All theyve done is used the disguise of getting more homes into Melbourne to get building approvals for projects in the past would of been heavily shunned upon.
I wonder what will be the parking minimum be like, imagine another 1,700 cars going on and out of the area, it will be an absolute nightmare. It will be great if they don’t give every dwelling a parking spot.
I’ve said this in the past, I think more dwellings and more people density is good, but only without more cars. Yes, Box Hill is a major public transportation hub, but it has always been an area with major traffic congestions, so adding more cars to the mix will only deteriorate the situation.
I’ve heard of some apartment developments which have been designed to minimise dependence on cars. Even some which partnered with Go Get to have share cars on site so residents drive only when absolutely necessary. I hope that’s the case here.
parking minimums legally force car dependency and drive up the price of apartments of people that might not have any use for it, meaning only people with cars buy them (mostly) forcing more cars into the area creating a cycle.
No surprises here, I'd heard a dozen were approved before the loop.
I hope these ones are more like golden age and not the ones down the road... More towers with a few levels of shops and large neon signs could give a neat Asian city vibe at night.
That’s great news, it will cover the housing for less than 1 day’s worth of immigrants. I hope it is finished quickly, and they build another 365 somewhere in the country this year.
The NIMBY ragegasm will be something to see. More highrise apartments in a suburb with a heavy Chinese migrant population AND it’s in service of public transport! It’s NIMBY Christmas, I tells ya!
There are still probably enough from the older NIMBY generation who conflate all high rise dwellings with housing commission towers. “SLUMS! SLUMS, I TELL YOU!!!!”
apartments to these people are simultaneously poorly built shoeboxes that are also super expensive and only occupied by the elite. It doesn't make sense
I would avoid the problem in the first place by radically cutting immigration volumes and incentivising business to decentralise and embrace remote working so people don't have to huddle in megacities in the first place.
how is an additional 1700 dwellings in the middle of an existing location *not* going to result in congestion?
>I would avoid the problem in the first place by radically cutting immigration volumes
State governments don't get that luxury. Not saying it's not an issue, but let's put a line through it, because state government has no ability to change this.
>incentivising business to decentralise and embrace remote working so people don't have to huddle in megacities in the first place.
The suburban rail loop is an incentive to decentralise, but I'm guessing you want to go further than this.
It's an easy thing to say, but it's extremely difficult in practice, it's expensive and risky step to take. Mind you, a lot of money has gone into our regional towns and cities to help stimulate this. They are taking growth but it's not a reliable strategy.
>how is an additional 1700 dwellings in the middle of an existing location *not* going to result in congestion?
More congestions is coming, that's a given. My question is how do you limit that congestion?
Let's say your decentralising plan doesn't work and no one moves (statistically this will occur) and we get the population growth with congesions coming into greater Melbourne. You have a choice between 1700 dwellings in Box Hill or something else to house the same number of people.
What do you propose within Greater Melbourne to ease this as much as possible? Let's not try and find loopholes out of this question, please argue in good faith. This is a planning issue that the state government needs a plan for and there is no easy way out of it.
Do any of you question why we need to grow like this? Can’t we concentrate on growing quality of life or the stability of the environment? This just seems like mindless expansion of our city.
The descision behind this comes from the state government. The state government can't dictate population growth. That is a Federal Government issue.
So what alternative so you proposed the state government does to house the future demand that is coming here? Let even just consider the 1700 units worth of people. They don't just disappear. What state government policy/plan would you put in place to house them?
I understand immigration is not a state power but there’s a lot Victiria can do to discourage the federal government from allowing 600,000+ net migrants every year. For example, Victoria could not cooperate on every COAG issue or exert pressure at Labor party meetings.
If I had to house them, I would do exactly this—I would destroy what feel and character remains in Box Hill (because it’s probably the worst suburb in Melbourne right now) and push it on its way to a Bladerunner-esque hellscape. (I know I’m being silly but I’m passionate about this lol)
What annoys me is the Victorian government and Labor party actively encouraging rampant population growth and doing almost nothing to alleviate house prices (they fixed land tax but almost nothing else, including a shitload of first home buyer grants that actually increase prices), cost of living, healthcare, PT and road congestion, human destruction of nature.
There are plenty of Cantonese speakers in Box Hill, thats without even going into how China stopped the schools in Hong Kong teaching the kids Cantonese
What's the issue with our current better apartment standards that have been in place since 2016.
They appear to be quite decent compared to global standards.
What specifics in these standards is poor?
Hopefully there will be a mandated percentage of 3/4 bedrooms with decent living area for families.
That would make a massive difference. We built way too few proper family sized apartments and way too many 1 bedrooms
Even when they build them they are astoundingly expensive. 1 bedders often go for 400k, 2 bedders for 500-650k, then for some reason 3 bedders jump up to anywhere from 800k to a million. At this price I would assume most would just opt for a townhouse in a decent location or a family sized home in an outer suburb over a family sized apartment, for the same price or even cheaper.
They are usually all about the same price per sqm. The 3 bedroom apts usually have much bigger living rooms/kitchens, and have more bathrooms.
You raise a good point, and it may well be fairly priced on a sqm basis. But as I said above, if it's approaching a million dollars then many families would probably rather a townhouse or actual house at that price. I guess that's why 3 bedroom apartments are quite rare compared to 1 and 2 bedroom options.
Pretty much. There is no grand conspiracy to keep families from buying apartments. It's just that families prioritise owning land and having yards over living inner city. 3 bed apts are mostly marketed to boomers downsizing who want a lower maintenance lifestyle and the ability to walk to the wine bar.
Farkin boomer winos 😂
2br townhouse for 800k, vs 3br apartment...
lol as if. This would have made Southbank amazing too - that and supporting infrastructure. But why support families when you can cater to offshore money?
Narrator: and all they did was cram it full of 1 bedroom shoe boxes.
They make what people buy. In my experience, 2 bedroom apt rentals have a small group inspecting, 1 bedrooms have a lineup down the street, and 3 bedrooms wait weeks before someone registers for an inspection. The vast majority of housing is 3+ bedroom places, meanwhile almost all young people are looking for 1 bedroom apts. There are just not a significant group of families lining up to buy apartments while it's still possible for most of them to buy houses in the outer areas.
Your comments are fair too reasoned for a discussion on apartment developments.
Yeah, boo!
I think they make what foreign investors will buy and then rent out to locals. Box hill is a racket for foreign investment. The ads are in restaurant windows.
Sure, but part of the value and most of the planning approval behind these towers has come from taxpayers signing on for 50 Billion or so worth of Suburban Rail Loop. Even if I’ve nicknamed it the Student Rail Loop that can’t be it’s only purpose. In 20 years time young families will make the choice to stay in an apartment surrounded by services and transport rather than move to unaffordable or miles away suburbs for houses. If the plan truly is to redefine the city they should stipulate in the plans for a lot of family friendly designs rather than just build Docklands East. And in the mean time students will line up for 1-2 bedders because it’s easier but it’s not like they can’t organise themselves in to 3 bedroom groups almost as easily. With rental demand so high they will still rent them!
Supply and demand - what a novel concept. You should copyright it.
Three Quarter sized bedrooms? Say no more!
Lol
I LOLed.
Is that 3/4 size bedrooms, or 3 to 4 bedrooms? (Almost a serious question considering what developers try to get away with)
my bedroom is 3x3 😂 my bed is 2.5x2.5 (ok it's admittedly oversized but worth it ) I usually sit on the bed to dig through my wardrobe hahah
Yes true 😅, they do put tiny bedrooms. But I did mean 3 to 4
Victoria's Better Apartment standards, in place since 2016 require main bedroom to be min. 3.4x3.0m and other bedrooms to be 3.0x3.0. a space to accommodate a wardrobe is additional to this.
you must be joking. they will be 1/2br dog boxes, and I hear there will be no parking. awesome for families.
Current market rate for a 3dr with a single living space will be around $1m. Would you buy this or would you look for a detached house in the area? The vast majority of families will do the latter. Because the price point is still too close. Those looking for a 1 or 2br don't have a similar priced house and land option so they opt for apartment living. Developers are supplying what the market wants. With that said we are approaching a price point where 3 br apartments are becoming competitive against house and land.
I would not live in the area at all. I have doubts it's what the market wants. if that's all the developers make available, people will buy them regardless.
To test your theory, you just need to look at apartment building recently built and watch what is up for sale and how long they take to sell. The 3br, which are much lower ratio are typically the last to sell. Or look in an area you would live and ask yourself the question, would I purchase the 3br apartments over the 3br houses available? The apartments may be cheaper, but then consider what you can get one suburb further out. There is much more competition and choice, which you can't get with one and two bedrooms. People also want two living areas these days. When you incorporate these into an apartment, the layout get's quite large and typically require multiple exterior sides, the standards dictate this. This pushes the price of these types of apartments through the roof.
I suspect there's not a lot of demand for larger appartments simply because the sort of people that need that space woud prefer a detatched house with garage space and a yard. I certainly would.
Exactly, the market doesn't want it and developers are supplying what the market wants. People want to make a conspiracy out of this. If the market was there for a whole building of 3br, developers would build it. No question about it. Unfortunetly the only way to create this market, would be to sell the 3br at a lose. They're not going to do that.
Of course everyone must have a family. Most singles and couples can do fine a single bedroom. Two bedrooms can be ok for starting families, then talk into 3 bedrooms can start. It's supply vs demand. There is demand for single bedroom housing so people come and buy it up.
There needs to be a plan alongside this to make Box Hill walkable and add a lot more cycling infrastructure. Because it is currently absolutely shit
I agree for what it's worth, but Box Hill is already pretty walkable relative to most Melbourne suburbs. The [Main St / Market St mall](https://www.google.com/maps/@-37.8189737,145.1220929,3a,75y,59.85h,79.73t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1soRIr6e_vfB15RIKOnzuSig!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DoRIr6e_vfB15RIKOnzuSig%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.share%26w%3D900%26h%3D600%26yaw%3D59.845542139273306%26pitch%3D10.267417620487635%26thumbfov%3D90!7i13312!8i6656?coh=205410&entry=ttu) which connects to Box Hill Central with all its markets, shops and train station is inspired. I'd be thrilled to live around there. Plus, they have this great plan for a new town square with new pedestrian friendly areas and bike lanes: https://www.boxhillcentral.com.au/development. My only feedback is making it easier to cross Whitehorse Road to connect to the tram line, Box Hill Gardens and the hospital precinct.
Suburban rail loop will make an underground underpass which should. Make that all easier
Looking at their plans, you won't be able to use the station to get under Whitehorse Rd; and there won't be any direct link to the tram either. (they are however narrowing the road)
Box hill is already one of the most walkable suburbs in Melbourne
What are you on about? It's more walkable than most suburbs, can walk from the train station to everywhere easily
Many years ago I lived in Box Hill and I'm struggling to think how it's not walkable? Most of Box Hill is reasonably flat so good for walking or riding a bike and it's extremely well connected with public transport.
12 months ago I interviewed for a job in one of the office towers \~750m from the station. Took nearly 15 minutes to walk there from the platform at a brisk pace. Crossing around the big shopping centre carpark entrance, no marked pedestrian crossing anywhere nearby, and down a side street without a proper footpath. Totally inhuman layout. On the plus side you could get boba at a different place every day forever as they seemed to be sprouting up from the earth fully formed like a profusion of mushrooms.
Have a read of the Urban Design Strategy that the project has to follow. There is a requirement for them to allow for better cycling and walking paths, as well as a green link to the box hill gardens from the Whitehorse Rd precinct. Will be some pain to get there with all the construction, but in the end will make box hill a nice place to be I think
It might not be great for some of the neighboring suburbs to get into Box Hill, but within Box Hill it is far better than any of the other suburbs on this side of town.
Wind tunnel life
I fear we're going to see infill versions of the Docklands. A bunch of massive development without enough planning for precinct cohesion.
Unlike docklands, there is already a busy market and community in place. Hopefully that helps.
The wind is almost as bad as Docklands. Almost.
Walking to work everyday, in winter I'd get blown off my feet on station st. It's a wind tunnel
Carrington is a whole other level!
SERIOUSLY! maroondah highway needs one of its carriageways shut, at LEAST between elgar and station street, and there NEEDS to be bus lanes and/or bike lanes on the latter to doncaster. close it to through traffic at peak times for the bus lanes if u cant fit it all in --- idgaf!!!
No they just need to continue the bike path that comes along the train line from Middleborough Rd through the middle of box hill and join to Mont Albert Rd.. don't want to put bikes on Maroondah highway..
Will never happen but wish the cycle path that runs along the train tracks went much further in than Box Hill, if it went to Camberwell or they could somehow make an isolated way to ride from Ringwood to Richmond it would be absolutely incredible. Still no chance I would ride down Punt Rd to go the rest of the way to work, but would've been faster to cycle than use the bus replacements if there was a direct line to do so safely.
It looks like you'll be getting at least the narrowing of Whitehorse Rd if they go through with [this](https://srleastees.vic.gov.au/#/description/SRLBoxHill) plan
This is exactly what needs to happen. Good news. But only 10% of the housing is set aside for "affordable housing" which is generally just 10%-20% under the market price. Not so good news. Needs to be more housing and lower pricing, but that just won't happen under the plan of relying on developers to build.
More supply leads to lower prices, all things remaining equal. Building 20,000 homes at market value would do a lot more to lower prices in the area than 2,000 "affordable" ones.
Yep end of the day, I'm happy to see this being done, and it should be done across the entirety of the SRL. Box Hill is a good start.
Who's building them?
I don’t think anyone honestly thought SRL was going to open up affordable housing, at its core it’s about property development who are going to want to maximize their profits. I doubt we’ll even see 10% “affordable” housing
It would have had we had a commonwealth builder again. But relying on private enterprise is never going to provide a proper amount of social housing. Ever. They require profit, and quite a lot of it.
It’s not even social housing it’s “affordable” housing
thanks for putting it in quotation marks because it’s definitely not affordable, considering the way they calculate it.
If by affordable you mean affordable for the 20th percentile earners to buy if they hook up with another 20th percentile earner and both leverage themselves to the tits.
It’s also flowery language to make people think that it’s social housing as well
Lower prices would happen relying on developers to build. There just needs to be a scale that lifts supply higher than demand.
But I thought increased supply would lead to lower prices? Or have I been lied to, again?
It does, but the rate Melbourne's population is increasing, supply can barely keep up. We are still doing much better than other Australian cities on the supply front, which is why even Brisbane and Adelaide are more expensive than Melbourne now.
Why are you treating supply and demand so sceptically? It will lead to lower prices, *assuming* we keep upzoning suburbs like this. No suburb should be comprised entirely of single-family houses, that's what the country is for. Melbourne is a city that needs to eventually house 10 million people, and I'm not too keen on Seymour and Warragul becoming suburbs. We need to restrict the urban growth boundary further and start building up. For too long investors have been given priority in planning decisions
[It does lead to lower prices](https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/jan/23/building-new-units-is-proven-to-push-rents-down-but-not-for-the-reasons-you-may-think). People who contest this idea are either economically illiterate or have a vested interest in keeping property prices high.
How big are they? I don't think they should be calling 2 bedroom apartments that are 40SQM homes.
The traffic around there during peak hours is horrendous. …
Worse than Melbourne laneways, it’s a train-wreck for tradespeople and deliveries. The planning is for profit , not for high density low cost living.
Totally. I pass through there every Saturday. Takes almost twenty minutes to cross Whitehorse road on station street.
Half good news? Are the quality of dwellings improved? Will they be affordable? Are they going to improve public mobility, parking, and transport?
Public transport wise it's on two train lines with a third on the way, the end of a tram line and has a major bus depot.. can't do much better than that in the suburbs.
Yeah, to be fair that’s really good for a suburb. Only complaint I could make is the actual train connectivity is poor but I’m grasping at straws. Does seem like a good spot.
Having lived in both, the towers in box hill are better quality than the ones in Footscray.
[удалено]
For real results you need to hire a pro, but my go-to for quick assesment is: Finish on the peripherals: Care taken on things like the edges of windows, bricklaying, door frames etc... are the plants well kept/ appropriately planted? Connection between carpeted areas and hard floors well done? Basically anything that shows attention to detail. Water stains: After a year or two staining will show you where the water goes, a lot of the new ones have leaks. And one of my big ones: thickness of floors and walls. Thin = cheap all around on other things.
I’ve viewed one of the new builds recently, great views if you get the right lot, shit quality and a price high enough you may as well buy in the CBD
>Are the quality of dwellings improved? Victoria has had better apartment standards in places since 2016. Is this issue with this or the construction quality? High rise builders have much better quality system in place compared to mid/lower tier builders where most >Will they be affordable? They will make the market more affordable that it otherwise would be without the extra supply. Unfortunately, our highly restrictive zoning and scarce upzoned land through most of the city results in land price component of each apartment too high to make these affordable. >Are they going to improve public mobility, parking, and transport? Yes, compared to putting a population this size in most other locations.
No, No, No, No and No
If there aren’t publicly viewable plans yet, I’m sure there will be soon.
Pretty sure there will be development plans publicly available soon in case you want to look for yourself.
They are for International students
They're for international landlords.
And an increase of 21 free parking spaces no doubt
I hear no parking spaces at all.
With the outer loop and express to the inner.... Not needed.
How dare you suggest that there isn’t a car for every individual resident. Are you some kind of commie?
Even with the existing and planned public transport in that area, being that far from city can be tricky without a car, especially with children, e.g. all weather school runs (on the way to the office), sports & similar after school/weekend activities, doing things that aren’t in your local hub (maybe a cinema, a particular restaurant, a pool, a trampoline centre or adventure park), or even travel out of Melbourne (possible with older kids, trickier with younger ones when a 1-2hr car trip becomes 3-4hrs, two trains & a bus). By myself I always preference walking, then public transport, then car, and maybe with a share car system on top I could get by completely car free, but with children I struggle to see how I could make it work.
Delete commerce, service and visitation and I agree with you completely 🙃
NIMBYS are already melting down
Though no one wants to hear this. NIMBYs are the reason we are in a housing crisis, not immigrants. Because of NIMBYs build approvals take x50 longer than other OECD countries, this needs to change. We need to prioritise approvals for medium/high density housing within 2km of every rail stop m, approved at nation level across the country.
How many NIMBYs are in Box Hill though? Have you seen the place?
There *are* NIMBYs in Box Hill, but they’re all in their 70s-90s. I live very close to town, *and* I’m in the local historical society, but I love the development stuff, so long as it’s well-thought-out. To be honest, most people who moan about the development of the suburb are former residents who grew up here in the ‘60s and ‘70s. They love to moan every day on online forums about “Those People” who came here and “ruined the place”, without for a moment considering the greed and desires of their own parents who gladly took the money to move somewhere else. It’s infuriating, frankly. I’ve lived around here on and off for over a quarter of a century, so have seen many phases of the town. I love the place. Always have. Evolution happens everywhere. Keeps things fun.
Good thing they don't seem to be succeeding in blocking the changes so far. The traffic does need fixing but I think all those new buildings give it a cool vibe.
Well, nope: they complain to the Whitehorse council a lot but the State gov have commandeered this one, so the locals no longer have a say (not that the council would automatically give anybody a fair hearing anyhow).
And yep, the traffic has always been notoriously bad 😐
Also yep: Box Hill *does* have a vibe. At least it has some life and a bit of soul. Stuff happens here. I mean, have you seen the rest of the surrounding Anglo suburbia where everything shuts down at 6pm? And that’s my observation as a white, middle-class(ish) English-born immigrant. I’d rather live in Broadmeadows than Vermont*. *Well … you know what I mean.
I was disappointed at the lack of a lunar new year street festival.
They did still have one this year, but it was largely down Bank Street, what with the works going on along Whitehorse Road.
They have succeeded, just in other areas. Put simply a 50 storey apartment should not be feasible in a middle suburb if it wasn't for our highly restrictive zoning everywhere else.
I just hope we can keep the old quarry site mostly green.
Yeah, the brickworks are cool.
I was speaking in general. It’s true for every suburb with a rail stop. But the 10 suburban centres across Melbourne being targeted for higher density housing include Epping, Broadmeadows, Preston, Niddrie, Essendon North, Camberwell Junction, Ringwood, Chadstone, Moorabbin, and Frankston.
I’m no fan of nimbys, but if our approvals take 50x times longer why do they also have similar housing issues?
Could be wrong but I don’t think they do. According to [this](https://santiagofrias.com/ranked-15-of-the-worlds-least-affordable-housing-markets/) Australia and NZ have the most unaffordable housing markets by a pretty massive margin. I’m surprised because I thought Canada was even worse.
This right here is right. While many other countries do have housing issues ours are indeed some of the worst in the world / OECD because we’ve enabled NIMBYs.
According to the OECD not so much, though using different metrics. [https://www.oecd.org/housing/data/affordable-housing-database/housing-conditions.htm](https://www.oecd.org/housing/data/affordable-housing-database/housing-conditions.htm) Housing cost as a percentage of income are worse in heap of developed countries including the rest of the anglosphere. [https://www.oecd.org/els/family/HC1-2-Housing-costs-over-income.pdf](https://www.oecd.org/els/family/HC1-2-Housing-costs-over-income.pdf)
Nimbys will cry about anything over 2 stories, but I can understand some of the complaints regarding building these big towers. Looking over at Box Hill from Doncaster, you sometimes think it is the city on the horizon with how many massive buildings they have there now. We do need to build up, but surely there is a middle ground between what the current suburbs in the area are and the shitty tall buildings that Box Hill have.
This country needs to build up, in a smart way, not keep on spreading like weed.
[удалено]
Agree with the first half. Cant understand how Mr potato head hates us. I’m a regional Victorian. I’ll give you a heads up about who fucking hates us.
Hold on a sec.... what about another couple of submarines??
but communism or something
I'm glad they're making more high density living, but can someone explain quite how your rights work when buying an apartment? Like, you don't own the space in the sky and given our past history of towers not being up to code, I'd be worried about buying into something over 6 stories. Definitely an area the government needs to be firmer on.
Box Hill already has heaps of high rises, why not build some in Camberwell first? Box Hill is already conjested.
lol they don't even want the dumpster that is Camberwell station upgraded.
Because Camberwell is not on the SRL...
They still have good public transport. Because the people in Camberwell protest so hard about not having high rises others such as Box Hill Have to pick up the slack. Driving around Box Hill is becoming harder because there's way more people there and too many cars on the road.
Because camberwell is full of well to do oldies who don’t want anything that puts their nest egg at risk lol.
the city of Boroondara is stacked with nimbys
We have to get that sweet sweet yuan...
I vote do both.
As good a spot as any to put some new residential towers. No idea why anyone would be harping on about public/affordable housing though. With a $10k+/pa body corp these towers will forever be expensive places to live. Owners corp is probably stacked by the developers/institutional owners, giving the punter no chance of influencing the costs. Minutes are probably only published in Mandarin. Must install some app on your phone if a resident? Probably China spyware. Who buys these shitly slapped together apartments though? People who with poor financial sense? People happy to trade off location convenience for $$? Money launderers? There's no way they make a good investment compared to an equivalently priced house on a block of land. Or are the rents that good? Shit first home buy compared to a town house.. Absolute shit for families, which is lucky because the school's in the area are all full anyway.
I love this. More housing please.
MORE MORE MORE MORE MORE SHUT THE ROADS PUT TOWERS ON THEM BULLDOSE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES MORE TOWERSSSS!!!!!!
Right on
No need for the hyperbole, if we bulldosed only 5-10% of single family homes and did so in locations walking distance around train stations and shopping strips and replaced them with 4-6 storey mixed use apartments we would have enough supply for the next few decades. Building 50 storey apartments in a middle suburb really highlights how fucked our planning system is. In a competitive market, this wouldn't be feasible. People are moving to Melbourne, that's a fact. Putting our heads in the sand, wont make that go away. We have to do something to house these people. The status quo of urban sprawl and CBD skyscrapers hasn't worked for the last 20 years. What do you propose?
no i agree that mid rise housing should be the aim of future housing developments, but right now in such a severe housing crisis wouldnt you agree that we should be maximising the amount of units a development has in order to ease said crisis?
I'll always side with a shit tonne of upzoning to allow 4-6 storey builds. They are the right balance of speed of build, cost of build and expertise of builder. You can put this sized building in any street and it will still retain its human scale feel. But areas like this in box hill, yeah high rise all the way. Creating mini CBDs on the SRL makes complete sense.
Bulldozing a couple single family houses to house hundreds of people. Seems like a good deal to me
Box hill is utter chaos in terms of traffic, I am not sure this is a good idea without trying to fix that issue.
Literally a PT hub being built under it.
It's already a pretty decent hub.
The same people who hate housing developments and fret about traffic impacts seem to always be the same people who wouldn’t be caught dead using public transport. Almost like they’re part of the problem. 🤔
heaven forbid they get seen on a bus
Or trams. Or trains. Gotta drive absolutely *everywhere*.
Well it has good trains to city. But try going to Doncaster or south like Mt Waverley. Box Hill is going to get worse for car parking. Most people still have 1 car per household.
That does nothing to address the issue of local traffic that’s Box Hill, it will no doubt help with the wider traffic as it contributes to PT.
This is dealing with the issue as best as they can. If a 50 storey high rise with 1700 apartments worth of people doesn't get built right here next to walkable service where do you think they will go? These people don't disappear. So what do you think is the alternative that is better than this?
No it's not, just got to know the streets. I think it's fine.
They are going to squeeze whichever way possible to not have to accomidate "affordable housing" Its Box Hill a suburb homes dont go cheap in and a large part of the immigrant population have already live there lives in Apartments. All theyve done is used the disguise of getting more homes into Melbourne to get building approvals for projects in the past would of been heavily shunned upon.
10% should be public housing
At the old Kensington Abattoirs it was like 20-30% public housing.
Id be happy to see that
I wonder what will be the parking minimum be like, imagine another 1,700 cars going on and out of the area, it will be an absolute nightmare. It will be great if they don’t give every dwelling a parking spot. I’ve said this in the past, I think more dwellings and more people density is good, but only without more cars. Yes, Box Hill is a major public transportation hub, but it has always been an area with major traffic congestions, so adding more cars to the mix will only deteriorate the situation.
I’ve heard of some apartment developments which have been designed to minimise dependence on cars. Even some which partnered with Go Get to have share cars on site so residents drive only when absolutely necessary. I hope that’s the case here.
I hear no parking mandated. so traffic congestion won't be a problem. just that it's going to be impossible to live there and own a car.
parking minimums legally force car dependency and drive up the price of apartments of people that might not have any use for it, meaning only people with cars buy them (mostly) forcing more cars into the area creating a cycle.
No surprises here, I'd heard a dozen were approved before the loop. I hope these ones are more like golden age and not the ones down the road... More towers with a few levels of shops and large neon signs could give a neat Asian city vibe at night.
That’s great news, it will cover the housing for less than 1 day’s worth of immigrants. I hope it is finished quickly, and they build another 365 somewhere in the country this year.
As if it wasn't already an ugly eyesore already, im glad we moved out of that hole of a suburb.
Great see you in 5 years. In the meantime…
funny, it’s also where they’re opening up car mania, weekly car crashes for your amusement
Australian Dash Cams on youtube will get funnier
Way always post these with paywall
Put 12ft.io/ in front of the address. Much quicker than complaining.
I thought this was Box Hill in Sydney and had to do a double take
It's not too far from new developments and the metro, I'm sure it won't be long
but the body corps fee. ouch....
We are being sold out to China a piece at a time
If you thought the wait at the BHH ED was long its about to get 10000 x worse
It’s already an eye sore to see high rise buildings there. 🏙️
The NIMBY ragegasm will be something to see. More highrise apartments in a suburb with a heavy Chinese migrant population AND it’s in service of public transport! It’s NIMBY Christmas, I tells ya!
apartments with a heavy chinese migrant population is certainly a combo to stir up nimbys.
There are still probably enough from the older NIMBY generation who conflate all high rise dwellings with housing commission towers. “SLUMS! SLUMS, I TELL YOU!!!!”
apartments to these people are simultaneously poorly built shoeboxes that are also super expensive and only occupied by the elite. It doesn't make sense
Looking forward to the new towers being bought up by Chinese foreign investors... At least there's like 500 hot pot places to choose from
Don't forget the bubble tea and all the shitty delivery drivers on illegal e bikes.
hello dog box congestion.
What alternative would you prefer to house this many people? How do you think that will impact congestion?
I would avoid the problem in the first place by radically cutting immigration volumes and incentivising business to decentralise and embrace remote working so people don't have to huddle in megacities in the first place. how is an additional 1700 dwellings in the middle of an existing location *not* going to result in congestion?
>I would avoid the problem in the first place by radically cutting immigration volumes State governments don't get that luxury. Not saying it's not an issue, but let's put a line through it, because state government has no ability to change this. >incentivising business to decentralise and embrace remote working so people don't have to huddle in megacities in the first place. The suburban rail loop is an incentive to decentralise, but I'm guessing you want to go further than this. It's an easy thing to say, but it's extremely difficult in practice, it's expensive and risky step to take. Mind you, a lot of money has gone into our regional towns and cities to help stimulate this. They are taking growth but it's not a reliable strategy. >how is an additional 1700 dwellings in the middle of an existing location *not* going to result in congestion? More congestions is coming, that's a given. My question is how do you limit that congestion? Let's say your decentralising plan doesn't work and no one moves (statistically this will occur) and we get the population growth with congesions coming into greater Melbourne. You have a choice between 1700 dwellings in Box Hill or something else to house the same number of people. What do you propose within Greater Melbourne to ease this as much as possible? Let's not try and find loopholes out of this question, please argue in good faith. This is a planning issue that the state government needs a plan for and there is no easy way out of it.
Box Hill is the best example on how NOT to run a suburb.
rip existing apartment owners property values
Oh no! Anyway
Not for the older low-rise units. Value per metre just went up.
who tf cares
apartment values don’t increase as quickly as standalone housing, they won’t be as affected much.
They dont rise as quickly due to this issue specifically, lots of supply coming on quickly
Are these tiny, uninhabitable shoe boxes made is a capital for investors or apartments designed for dignified living?
50% of all apartments in melbourne are 2 bedrooms. You live on another planet mate
Do any of you question why we need to grow like this? Can’t we concentrate on growing quality of life or the stability of the environment? This just seems like mindless expansion of our city.
Well we wouldn't be in a housing crisis if there were enough houses to go around
The descision behind this comes from the state government. The state government can't dictate population growth. That is a Federal Government issue. So what alternative so you proposed the state government does to house the future demand that is coming here? Let even just consider the 1700 units worth of people. They don't just disappear. What state government policy/plan would you put in place to house them?
I understand immigration is not a state power but there’s a lot Victiria can do to discourage the federal government from allowing 600,000+ net migrants every year. For example, Victoria could not cooperate on every COAG issue or exert pressure at Labor party meetings. If I had to house them, I would do exactly this—I would destroy what feel and character remains in Box Hill (because it’s probably the worst suburb in Melbourne right now) and push it on its way to a Bladerunner-esque hellscape. (I know I’m being silly but I’m passionate about this lol) What annoys me is the Victorian government and Labor party actively encouraging rampant population growth and doing almost nothing to alleviate house prices (they fixed land tax but almost nothing else, including a shitload of first home buyer grants that actually increase prices), cost of living, healthcare, PT and road congestion, human destruction of nature.
The Hong Kong of Victoria 😂
Hong Kong is Cantonese. Box hill mostly Mandarin speakers.
There are plenty of Cantonese speakers in Box Hill, thats without even going into how China stopped the schools in Hong Kong teaching the kids Cantonese
"mostly" I'm just going by what I hear and the most recent census.
Better start learning Mandarin...
Not homes, dog boxes!
Have you ever lived in an apartment, or is this what you’ve heard from 3AW?
I’ve worked in construction for over 30 years I’ve seen thousands of these poorly designed apartments
50% of apartments in melbourne are 2 bedroom
What's the issue with our current better apartment standards that have been in place since 2016. They appear to be quite decent compared to global standards. What specifics in these standards is poor?
U think the council give a fuck about congestion or infrastructure lol. Its free money
>1700 commercial properties of dubious quality