I I I I I I I URBAN RENEWAL PROPOSAL I CITY OF COlLINGWOOD I September 1916 I I I I I .I I I ..., \\ 4 0=f14-51 I C.GL'·U URBA N RENEWAL AUTHORITY: 150 Queen Street , Melbourne 3000, 675551 ..

I ; / .. ~ ,.... ~ ERRORS FOU ND IN THIS COPY I

Page Z 0 _, Z 1:ne 12 &partr.1en t s hcu ld rqad a parL:nents -1

Page 20_, line ~9 to be s hould read and were I

Page .3 4 _, Z ine 8 : t h e sub - head1;ng 7 . 2. 7 Conc lusion s ho uld f oZZow Zine 8. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I itOWN AND .COUNTRY lii~iii~~~M0011005 .I PLAN N! .NG' Sf': Ll, P.O j 3038 I LIBRARYuRBAN RENEWAL PROPOSAL ..1 i 5· OCt. 'fS]~ .. , CITY OF COLLINGWOOD Little Charles Street

:I Table of Contents PAGE Figures 1-9 1 il Synopsis Introduction to Renewal · Background. to Renewal in Collingwood 7 'I 10 Nature of Land Use :I 3.1 Planning Scheme Zoning: 10 ~Existing Land Uses 10 ~ 3.3 Public Transport and Traffic Study 12 14 :I ~1 Condition of Land Use ~ Condition of Buildings 14 15 ~I (4~ Private Renovation 1965-75 Cnaracteristics of Occupiers 18 5.1 Nature of Occupancy 18 Characteristics of Residents 20 (~5.3 Characteristics of Non-Residential Uses 23 5.4 Conclusions .24 6. Views, Opinions and Recommendations submitted 25 ·'I to the Authority 6.1 OWners and Occupiers of Property in the Area 25 :I 6.2 Replies to Section 3(2) Notices 27 6.3 National Trust of Australia (Vic.) 28 29 ,I 7. Facilities - Distribution and Adequacy 7.1 Services and Facilities Required 29 7.2 Services and Facilities Available to 32 :I Residents 35 8. Options 1·1 9. Objectives, .. Recommendations ·and Implementation 38 9.1 Objectives 38 I 9.2 Recommendations 38 9.3 Implementation 39

·'J,·

'I'I. j 'I I' I I .PAGE Appendices A Building Inspection Results 42 I B Tabulated Residential Questionnaire Results 68 c Tabulated Non-Residential Questionnaire Results 84 I D Characteristics of Residential Population 94 E Facilities in Collingwood in the Vicinity of the Proposal Area 97 I F Property Values 1972-74, City of Collingwood ·110 G Supplement~ry Figures Gl ~ G8 112 I H Roads to be Closed and Easements to be Extinguished. · 121. I II

I I :. I I I I I I I I I I I.

URBAN RENEWAL PROPO$AL I COLLINGWOOD LITTLE CHARI.,.ES ST.

I $C'AU Of= M~TI!IU. 100 o 100 . 200 300 . 400 soo I I I I I I I I I II I I I I AREA UNDER CONSIDERATION FOR ~~IUWAL I I FIGURE 1 LOCATION :MAP I JANUARY 1171 I URBAN RENEWAL PROPOSAL COLLINGWOOD I LITTLE CHARLES ST. 20 0 20 40 60 80 SCALE OF METRES C::::::::r:=:::c======:::J:::::=====::I:======::::I::===:=::::i I _j ...___I ______JI .___I _ ____; I LANGRIDGE STREET I 59 I I t­ w I w a: ~ 46 I (I) I I I z I 22 0 (I) 20 (I) w 18 ..I I ..I 16 0 a: 1~ J: ( 12 (.) J: I (.) -z I I I VICTORIA STREET I FIGURE 2 AREA UNDER CONSIDERATION il JANUARY 1976 lllo"-) __ _ I URBAN RENEWAL PROPOSAL COLLINGWOOD I LITTLE CHARLES ST.

JO .._ ;t I SCALE OF METRES===-.r:.-:.:- LANGRIDGE STREET LAN[) OWNERSHif- I / 1 42 '""l.tl 43 1 J.C. & N.F. Adams 4 5 6 38 39 41 2 f4o 2 A. & M. Panou h 44 I 3 P. & G. Mavrou! is I 4 G. Andronaco 3 45 s M. t. Ke II y 7 J.C. Sp:rcou ana ~.D. 9 6 8 46 Lazaridou I 7 J. & E. Kou?oun·., s 10 47 8 G. & E. Z;,rifis 9 s. E. c. 11 14 10 C.P.Visi l~u ana V.G. 48 12 Ot 1 i noou 1O'..l I C.f.. ,]IIJ., A.f, R. ~.>en t- 11} 15 L.M. NPi I son .. E. Hislop .. 13 w 49 12 16 w G. Heywoocl 1 3 C. & G. Calfar.t•~ 17 a: 50 .I Jl~ H1..':.J~ing Con~ission 15 J.K. Stalk2:· ~ 16 C.M. Azinas 51 17 P. & F. f'opovski 18 18 Housing Comrris,ion 19 Housing Commission 52 20 M. & S. Rosencwaiu 21 I. L

I LANGRIDGE STREET

~.-.-.-.. -.. ~--· .-. • ~-- =· • •'"'··· I ... ·.. ·.~-.·~-····~· •:· 1- •• ·.1-.•.·.·~· .·.·.·.~ ·.~.·~-····~· ··~-· . ·.~.·.·.·;- .·.·.·.·... ~.~ ·~· ~. • • • • • • • • • • • • • •• Je ~ •~... ••••••. ··t· . •.1- ••• ·• . . . . ·.·.·.~.·.·.· ••,. •••-h· ·-··· I ·•·.·.·.· ·~·.·.~-.·.·~· • 1-.-.r~· •.•.•,.•. •••• •••• • • • • • • • • • • ~.·.·.-.-.-...... ,_• • • • • • • • • • • • .:. :. :. :. :. :· ,.-.-...... _ . • ••••• 0 ••••••••••••••••... . • ••••••••• 0 •••• 0 •••••• • • • • • • • • • • • • 0 •••••••••• I • • • • • . • .• .• .• .• .0 .•••••••••••••••• ...... • • • • • • • • • • • • 0 ••••••••• 1-.·.·.·.·. • ••••• 0 •••••••••••••••• ••••••••• 1-.·.·.·.·. ~·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·. ~ ...... 1- !"'.·.· ••••• t- •••••••••••• t­ I .:.:-:.:. v w•••••••••••• w LEGEND w -- - ~-·-·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·. w • • •- • • w ••••••••••• w a: ·.·• • ..• ·.·.·.• • • • • • ..-L-::,.:-c,.::---::;,.,--,,..--,.=--..1 a: ••••••••••••••••••••••• a: 1- • • • • • • • • • • • • • • t-r.• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • t­ I 1- F~:...::.....:~:-:::.-=~!.....!!.....!!..r'L-J._., Cl) • • • • • • •. • • •.• • • • • • • • • • • (1) CI) V.B...... ,.•.•.•.•.•,.•.•.~·~·~·:• ·-· ~RESIDENTIAL .·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.~. v • • • • • • • • • • • .. COMMERCIAL I -.·.·.·.···· .-.-.-...... -...... ••••••••••••••••••••• ·=· .·.·.·-.·.··n ...... ••••••••••• ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ED LIGHT INDUSTRIAL •••••••••• L-----~ ...... I ...... ~----. • • • Cl) ...... SPECIAL PURPOSES ._.·.·.·.·.· v w ...... D ~-· •••• .·.-. ..I ...... ·.·.·.·.·.-•I--' a: ...... •••••••••••••••••••••• . !-•·-·-·-·=· . V c( ...... ~VACANT BUILDING I . .- .. . - .. . -. -· .• .• ...... ••••••••••••• • ·-·-·-· :::z::: .·.·.·.·.·.·:.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·:.·.·:.·.·: ••••••••a. a. A.A. (J •:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:• ...... ·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·. •••.•.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.· ~VACANT LAND I ~...... ·::::::::. :-:·:· :·:·:· :· :-: ·:·:· :-: ·: ·: ·: ·: -:-: ·:·: ·:·: 2 ...·. . . . . :-:·:·:·:·:·:·: ·:· ·:·:·:·:·: ·:·:·:·: ·:·: ·:·: -: ·: ·:.:. :· :-:·:·:· 0 Cl) .-...... ·•·•·.·.·.·.·.·.· ••••••·•·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.· Cl) w l._...... :· :· :·:· :·:·:·:·: :·:·:·:·:· :·:·:·:·: ·:·:·: ·: ·: ·:·:·: ·: -:-: ·: ·: ...1 I ..I ...... ······················ SOURCE ~·;..~·~·;..·;.~·~· ·-·-·-·-·.•;.- ·~,La,;·::·~·~·::·~·::·::·~· w :·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·: 0 a: ...... :::::::::::~:::: ~ ::::::::::::::::::::::. % ( I• • • • • • • • • • • • :-:-:-:-:-:-:-:· t-- .·.·.·:::::::::::::::::::. (J •• :.• • •• • • • • .. :::::::::::::::: 1- :·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:· I % . ·.·.·.· .·.·.·.·...... U.R.A. QUESTIONNAIRES & (J . . . . - 2 t'l·~.-:·:~.=-·~.• '='.-=-.--~.~·:.. . ..;. •:::. ... -.':::.u . .:.:·.:.::..:· :.::· ::..·:..: ·.:.: ·.:.;:..:· :-!· _. :·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·: ·: ·: ·: ·: ·: ·: ·:·:·:·:·:· BUILDING SURVEYS ...... ·.· ...... · ...... ·...... ·.·...... ·::::::...... :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::...... ::::::::::::::::::::::...... I -::::i-1::: ~: ~: ~: ~: ~: ~: ~: ~: ~: ~: ~: ~: ~: ~: ~ ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::. AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS ::. :.~~: :::::::::::::::-·.·.·.·.·.·.:- ·:::::::::::::: .·.·. ·..... ·.· ...... ••·•·•••·•·•·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·...... I ...... •...... •••...... •.••...•.•...... •••...... •...... I ..·::~.. . .. :·:· ...... ••.••..•••...... I VICTORIA STREET I FIGURE 4 EXISTING LAND USE I JANUARY 1976 I URBAN RENEWAL PROPOSAL COLLINGWOOD I LITTLE CHARLES ST. 20 0 20 40 60 80 I SCALE OF METRES C=:===::i===::C======:t:====::i LANGRIDGE STREET

...... ·:.:.:.: • • • :-: •••••• • ••••••• 0 •••• 0 I ( N.l. ·>> :-:- ·:::::. !}))(] }) /) }}}: )) ::::::: ?:::: \())\ I ::::: ::::: ·:·:·:·:·:·:· -:-:- <<· ·•••••••••• }} :~:: ::: [[(:::~:~:>>>

• 0 •••••• 0 0 ••••••••••••• N.l. • • • • • • • • • • • 0 •••••••••• • ••••••••••••• 0 •••••• 0 • • • • • • • • • • • • 0 •••••• 0 ••• N.l. • •••••••• 0 ••••••••••• 0 • • • • • • • • • • • • 0 •••• 0. 0 ••• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 0 •••••• 0 • N.l. .• .• .• .• .• .0 . •••••. . . .0 . ••••••. . . 0 ••• • . • . • . 0 .0 . •••. . . 0 .0 ...... I .• • • • • • • • 0. • •• •• . • •• . • •••• . •• 0.• 0 ...... • • • 0 ••••••• ...... •• .0 .0 .••••••• ...... • .0 ••••• 0 ••• ...... • .0 .0 .•••••• ...... 0 . • ...... •••••••• 0 0 N.l. I 1- .:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.: v """ 1- w .·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.· W N.l. w LEGEND w :::::::::::::::::::: w~-.-.-,...-.T"1.-rr"IOTTT...... Trll"...... ,.,. w cr::: ...... ·.·.·.·.· . . . . .•••• . . -·-·a:·.·.·.·.·.·~·:·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·...... cr::: I 1- ••••••••••••••• • • I•. • .• .~ ~~:..._ . t-- •• •• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1- POSSIBLY m Cl) ...... ••••...... •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• m ~UNECONOMICAL ...... ~TO RESTORE • • • ••• MAJOR RENOVATIONS I v :·:·~· :· :· :· :· :· :· :· :· :· :· :· :·:·:· :-:·: ·: ·:·: :::::: REQUIRED N.l. F7l MINOR RENOVATIONS I Ld REQUIRED D GOOD CONDITION I ~ NOT INSPECTED I 2 0 m m GJ VACANT LAND I w ..I ..1 0 @] VACANT BUILDING cr::: ::t: ( (.) I ::t (.) -2 I SOURCE I U.RA. BUILDING SURVEY I I VICTORIA STREET I

FIGURE 5 CONDITION OF BUILDINGS I .JANUARY 1976 I URBAN RENEWAL PROPOSAL I COLLINGWOOD - LITTLE CHARLES ST. \ 20 0 20 40 60 80 SCALE OF METRES== = I - LANGRIDGE STREET

I ~· .· ...... ~~· ···~o~ ~. ~. ·: .:.:-:-:- .... ·.. ·.·.· ••··~· ..r", · ~. ~. ·: ... . .·.·.·.~.~.· ·.. ·.·.· .·.·~~ ·. ~. ·: ...... ·.·.·.~.~~· ·.. .·.·~-· .... I '.- ...... ·.·.·..... ·~· :::;.~······ •••••••• ••• ••• ••• .·.·~-~• • • . .. ·:·· ...... ·-·~· . ·~· ·.·.·. • • .· •••••••• ••• •••• ••• ·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·. -..• • -. • •--····· • • • • • • .....~' ...... I .·.·.·-·.·.·...... ·•·•·•·.·. ~.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·...... •• . •• . •• ·-·• • • • •••••••••••••••••••••• I • • • • • • •• • • •• • •• • • • •• • • • •• •• 1- ...... 1- . ·-·-·.· v ...... w LEGEND w ·.·.:·:·:· ...... w w • • • • • • • • • • • I a: • • • •• • • • • • •• • •• • • • • • • • a: 1- • • • • • • • • • • • 1- (1) •• • •• • • •• • • • • • • •• • • •• • (1) .·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·-·...... ~• OWNER OCCUPIER I ...... v ...... E].. TENANT ...... I ·:·::•••.....•... :-::::::: ...... ~ VACANT BUILDING ...... l .•...... • ...... • • • • • • • • .• . .•...... Cl) ••••••••••••••••••••••• • • • •.•.• v w.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·. ~ VACANT LAND I ...... : ...... _.::.:.:.: • ...I v .Ja:··-·.·.· ••••••••••• ••·•·•·•••·• ::::::::::: ...... ~ ...... • • • .-.-• • •••...... • • • • • • • • • • • • ::r::~ ...... •.•••••••••••...... :. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •••••••••••• •••••••••• SOURCE I 0 .·.·.·.·.·.~.~-.·.·.·.·4 .·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.~4 .·.·.·.·.·.~.f-.·.·.·.· .·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.~4 2 ·:::::::::...... ~. (I) .·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.~. 0 CITY OF COLLINGWOOD ...... f-.·.·.·.· ~· (I) I w ...... RATE ROLLS :::::::::::: .·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.~. ..I ..I ...... ·.·.·.·.·•• • • • w~e·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.~. 0 a: .Jfe·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.~. ( ::::::::::::: .·.·.·.·· ::r:: U.R.A. QUESTIONNAIRES I ...... 1-le·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·...... " 0 ::r:: ·.·.·.·.·.·. .·.·.·.· ~~.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·~· ...... ·.·.·.· -~-· ...... ·~· 0 ... ·-· ...... J~·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.~. 2 ...... ::::::::::::::...... ~ . I ...... :·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:· ...... ~· ••••••••••••••• La a a e a a e a e e e ~...... ::::::::::.·.·.·:. ~ ... ·...... ~-...... ~. ·~·:.- :.·::::::::::::: ...... ~. • .... • • • • • • • • • • • • • Ia' ••••••••••.•. I fa··. : ...... ·:. :: :. .. ~-·.·.·.·.·.·.· •• ·.·.~. ~. :~ '. ·: :. ·:.~o·: :. :::. ~ ••••••••••••••••••••• .·::::·.::::·:.:::. ~-·.·.·.·.·.·.· .. ·.·.~. ... : ... :: :: ·:. ·: . ~ ~ ...... I ··:t···. . ·.-. :·:...... :. ·:. ~·.·.·.·.·.·.·...... •• .·.·.~. .. ·-· ·: . ·: ...... ~~·.·.·.~-· ..... ~· I VICTORIA STREET I I FIGURE 6 NATURE OF OCCUPANCY JANUARY 1976 I URBAN RENEWAL PROPOSAL I COLLINGWOOD LITTLE CHARLES ST. 20 0 20 40 60 80 I SCALE Of METRES ==:::::i=:==::i======:=::::, LANGRIDGE STREET I I I

I 1- ... LU w w w a: I ...~ 1- U) U) I I I I 2 0 U) I ..1 0 ::1: I 0 2 I I I I STREET I

FIGURE 7 LAND TO BE REDEVELOPED I .JANUARY 1976 J··- . ·------·- -··· ------··-----··.-----

URBAN RENEWAL PROPOSAL COLLINGWOOD LITTLE CHARLES ST. 20 0 20 40 60 80 SCALE OF METRES

-- JJ

a> "'.l "' ~~ 1~===-1..!, "---+r.-+,...-...... ,...1 I "---L-..L...L...J-' "' (1_ Residents' Car Parking ~ FLATS: 2 81ockof12,2Bedroom (Two floors I . 3 Block of 12. Bed-slttingr'ms ~~~~f '"4. Block of 6, 1 Bedroom ~ I­ 5 Open Space: lawn, trees & paths I:·· w M·IW 'G Rear yards - fenced \1------""==---l i a: ! ...- en1- .f"' Vehicular Access ...... --~ t:. a> • . ,f!• Retail Car Parking I M I :~, Existing Retailing rtQi Walk-through Arcade I .. iii; Traffic Lights I ·'!3:· Hotel (13; S.E.C Sub-station I · '14\ · Ligh.t·.tndustry ! 15 I n f i II H o u s i n g I '16 lnfill Retail

I Existing Trees I

Proposed Tree Planting

II I Buildings

10-16 18 Street Numbers I I 1 r

x Location of Traffic Lights

.,, ~ Access to be negotiated • VICTORIA STREET I ll!F I

I~ FIGURE 8 ILLUSTRATION -subject to negotiation JANUARY 1976 li I !

------/:I I URBAN RENEWAL PROPOSAL COLLINGWOOD I LITTLE CHARLES ST. I f--- 20 o 20 •o so so SCALE Of METRES i:::===:::i:::==:i=:===:!:====:I==~

I - LANGRIDGE STREET I

h II I Lr- I r---I.L...-----1 ~--~ ~------~

1- 1- I w w w w a: II: 1- I 1- RESIDENTIAL B · 1 U) m I (/)

I m LIGHT INDUSTRIAL CLOSE I ~ LOCAL BUSINESS I

(/) I LLI 2 ...I a: 0 ct (/) ::1: 2 ... I 1------4':==~(.) 0 ] :1: ] 0 I -2 I LITTLE I I VICTORIA STREET I I ILLUSTRATION: FIGURE 9 RECOMMENDED PLANNING SCHEME I JANUARY 1976 I SYNOPSIS I The Proposal area in the City of Collingwood, is. bounded by Victoria Street, Charles Street, Langridge Street I and'Nicholson Street.

I Nature of Land Use The proposal area comprises mixed land use with I approximately half the_ area being residential, the remainder comprising light industrial properties, shops and vacant I land. (Figure 4).

Condition of Land Use I Problems in the area included the use of vacant land as a scrap metal yard, access to Little Charles Street, I the lack of parking, and that many of the structures in the proposal area were constructed eighty to one hundred years I ago and are therefore in need of renovations and modern­ isation. I Nature of Occupancy Of the 73 properties in the area just over half I are owner-occupied. These tend to be concentrated in the northern half of the proposal area away from the commercial/ I industrial section.

I Building Survey Fifty four buildings were inspected. The results I of the survey indicate that four buildings need no renov­ ation, two buildings require only a few hundred dollars to bring them to first class standard, twenty require minor I renovations and/nineteen major renovations. Nine buildings were considered to be uneconomical and impracticable to I restore. (Figure 5) •

I Characteristics of owners and Occupiers During the decade 1961-71 there was an overall I decline in total population in the Collectors District of I 1. I I

I which the ~roposal area is part~ The area has also seen changes in age structure and ethnic composition and currently I the proposal area's language groups other than English, comprise approximately 35% Greek, 6% Yugoslav, 4% Turkish, I 2% Italian and 2% Arabic. Employment is predominantly blue collar; home ownership in the proposal area is 51%; and car ownership is low. Residential movement in the area is high, I with 60% moving· into the area since 1966. Long term resi­ dence is associated with home ownership. Those wishing to I move out of the area are generally tenants who have spent less than five years in the area. I The non-residential premises cover a variety of activities and employed over fifty people, not includ1ng I those employed in the retail establishments.

Views, Opinions and Recommendations submitted to the I Authority via Questionnaires and B:r::·iefs. (a) Residents : There_i~ a high degree of satis­ I faction with' Abbotsford due to the availability of public transport and jobs, and proximity to the City : Many of the I residents have lived for many years in Abbotsford. The type of facilities perceived to be most needed in the area are I more open space with trees and shrubs; increased social services for migrants and youth and a day nursery; more street lighting; and pedestrian traffic lights at Victoria I Street. {b) Non-Residential Occupiers of Property : The I commercial firms located in the area seek improved street conditions, traffic lights at Victoria Street and enlarged I car parking facilities. {c) National Trust (Vic.) : The National Trust has I classified two buildings in the area, 39 and 41 Nicholson Street and considers that 293 Victoria Street (cnr. Charles) I should be recorded or possibly classified. (d) Replies to Section 3(2) Notices : The Country Roads Board would appreciate the Renewal Authority taking I. action to preserve as far as possible the opportunity for I I 2. ~------~ .. I the construction of new and/or improved arterial roads I within the area. The State Electricity Commission suggested that the extent of rearrangement of electricity supply I assets will depend on the urban renewal proposal and that any costs incurred must be borne by the Renewal Authority. The Gas and Fuel Corporation has stated that a gas main is I located in Little Charles Street and their interest is confined to future requirements for this service and mains I in the four perimeter streets.

I Facilities - Distribution and Adequacy Although the proposal area itself lacks community I facilities it contains part of a shopping area and is close to public transport which links it.to a wider range of services. Medical practioners; open space for children and I adults; sporting facilities; child day care facilities; and I migrant services, are seen to be inadequate. Recommendations I Little Charles Street will be reorganized, includ­ ing partial closur~; open ar~as will b~ created in assoc­ I iation with medium density, lower income and elderly person housing; car parking will be provided at the rear of properties fronting Victoria Street and in association with the medium I density housing development; and the Council will place a barrier across Charles Street near Victoria Street. I The Authority will make loans available for the renovation of buildings which warrant repairs and whose I owners have insufficient funds to carry out the necessary repairs themselves. I I I I

I 3. I I

I 1. INTRODUCTION TO URBAN RENEWAL I The speeches on the second reading to the Urban Renewal Bill in late 1970 provide a watershed in the history of inner suburban renewal activity in Victoria. I The Housing Commission's activities under its slum recla- ·mation powers had become the subject of general public I concern. The debates in the Parliament focused on two major aspects of slum clearance : the method of operationi; I and the substance of the results. The Parliament felt it appropriate to recognize I the complexity of urban problems, throughout Victoria, by establishing a new form of intervention which would vary I from the previous approaches : in the method of determining which areas would require treatment; in the consultation, co-ordination and study procedures required in order to I determine the treatment which would be most appropriate to each area; and in the extension of the treatment to include I all land uses, not just housing, which collectively provided the urban fabric in each area. I The Urban Renewal Act 1970 I Renewal is defined· in Section 2 of the Act : "in relation to an area includes the replanning, redevelopment, restoration or preservation of the area and the doing of I any act, matter or thing for the purpose of rehabilitating the area." I The principles of the Act establish urban renewal in terms of substance and method : what should be done; and I how it should be done. The various sections indicate the order of procedure : Section 3 : for the authorisation to I prepare an urban renewal proposal for an area; Section 4 on the preparation of an urban renewal proposal, Section 5: on the promulgation of an _urban renewal proposal, and I appeals and modifications; Section 6 (et seq) : on the implementation of an urban renewal proposal, including the I powers of a renewal authority (s.8), forms of compensation I I 4. I

I (s.9), street closing, extinguishing of easements, andre­ strictive covenants (s.lO), easement creation (s.ll), loans I for renovations (s.l2) and conditions on the sales of land (s.l3); Sections 14 and 15 deal with consultation with authorities and the serving of notices under the Act. I The main provisions of the act require that con­ sultation must occur with Councils, Public Authorities and I Departments on why the Renewal Authority believes a specific area requires renewal, before the Renewal Authority (which I can mean a Council, Public Authority, or the Housing Comm­ ission) can be authorised to prepare a proposal for the I area. A renewal proposal requires an intensive economic, physical and social study of a finite urban area, and must include :the examination of land.use; the nature of any I changes proposed for the area; the facilities and amenities considered necessary to meet any change to population; the I examination of the nature of the planning schemes in exist­ ence in the area; and any details considered appropriate by I the Renewal Authority for treating those matters which formed the 'basis of the initial opinion that the area ,I required renewal. Renewal proposals must be carried out on the basis of full consultation and co-ordination with Councils; Public I Authorities; the National Trust (Vic.); and groups repre­ senting people who own property or reside in the area. I The renewal proposal must be published so that anyone affected can make submissions and objections, before. I the proposal is adopted (incorporating any possible modi­ fications or alterations which have been brought forward). I The proposal can then be submitted to the Minister, and anyone aggrieved by the Renewal Authority's determination I may appeal to the Minister. After objections and submissions have been heard, the Minister may submit the proposal to the Governor in Council with or without modification, who may I then declare the area to be an "urban renewal area". Any necessary changes to any affected planning schemes must then I be made. The formal implementation of the urban renewal I

I 5. I

I proposal can begin only after this process has been completed. The Housing Commission, Victoria as an Urban Renewal Authority. ·I The Commission's renewal operations are based upon the principles of : the maximum participation of the people I of the area; complete consultation with Council at all stages of the procedures; a formal agreement binding ori the I Council and the Renewal Authority as to the area, the general timetable and procedures for renewal; and a clear I understanding that no actions will be pursued except with the agreement of Council. I Renewal procedures are based upon a fundamental requirement to create and maintain an atmosphere within I which participation can readily take place. I I I I I I I \ I I I I I I

I 6. I I 2. BACKGROUND TO RENEWAL IN COLLINGWOOD

I In 1971 the City of Collingwood decided that urban renewal, with its detailed planning of small areas I and rehabilitation of key properties, could help to improve the local environment. I The Council was particularly interested in the area bounded by Victoria, Charles, Langridge and Nicholson Streets. Initially the main problem was considered to be I the redevelopment of an area of vacant land fronting on to

Little Charles Street at that time being used a~ a scrap I metal yard. On the.Sth of November, 1973, the Council requested I that the Commission adopt for renewal purposes ·the area bounded by Victoria, Charles, Langridge and Nicholson I Streets. A Liaison Committee was formed comprising members of Council and members of the Urban Renewal Authority, with the Town Clerk as Secretary and the City Engineer as Chief I Technical .Adviser. After consideration of renewal in terms· of procedures, the Liaison Committee requested Council to I call a public meeting for the purpose of explaining urban renewal principles and procedures to the residents and I property owners. Through a vote taken at the end of the meeting, the people present encouraged the Council to I request the Renewal Authority to institute formal procedures under Section 3 of the Act. A resolution to this effect I was passed by Council on October 11th, 1973. Notification was sent to the Public Authorities referred to under Section 3(2) of the Act on March 18th, I 1974. The Authorities were advised of the Renewal Auth­ ority's intention to recommend to the Minister that it I should be authorised to prepare an urban renewal proposal for the area. I The Governor in Council authorised the Renewal Authority to prepare a proposal for the area on February I 12th, 1975. The basis for this authorisation was the 'opinion' (derived from Section 3(2) of the Urban Renewal I

I 7. I Act) which had been the subject of Liaison Committee consensus; a public meeting which showed support from the I people who owned and occupied property in the area; a Council and Renewal Authority resolution; and no objections I from the Town and Country Planning Board, relevant Public Authorities, Instrumentalities and Departments of State. I The detailed substance of the opinion, therefore, especially as it applies to the reasons for the area requiring renewal I "in whole or in part", provided the basis for the preparation of the renewal proposal. The Urban Renewal Authority's 'opinion' for the I· Little Charles Street, Collingwood area under consideration for renewal stated : i I "The area, in whole or in part, requires renewal: to solve the problems of traffic access along Little Charles Street; to clean up vacant areas and reduce the public I health risks maintained by the present situation; to help in solving car parking problems; to offer loans for the reno­ vation of buildings in the area; and basically to provide I for the preparation and implementation of a detailed and coordinated renewal proposal for the area, which forms an example of the residential, commercial and industrial land use mix comprising the physical framework of the economic I and social life of the City. The problems of this area are not created from forces located entirely within the City, ·nor can their examination and resolution be developed I entirely from within the City. It is appropriate, however, to utilise the procedures and provisions of the Renewal Act to prepare a proposal with the support and participation of I the people of the area and the Council of the City of Collingwood". I The primary purpose of the proposal has been to solve the problems nominated in the opinion. The proposal I is also based on the requirements of the provisions of the Urban Renewal Act which apply to the preparation and im­ plementation of renewal proposals. The two items : the I reasons for requiring renewal, and the powers and require­ ments provided.under the Act, are the basis for this I proposal. Prior to commencement of the preparation of the I proposal, notice was given by the Renewal Authority on February 28th, 19.75, (under Section 4(1) of the Act) to : I every Public Authority and Council affected, or likely to I 8. I I

I be affected; every organization making or supplying gas or electricity within the area; the National Trust, and Advisory I Committee appointed to advise the Renewal Authority; and : "any social ethnic or community group organization or association which in the opinion of the Minister repre­ I sents the interests of persons residing or owning property within the area ..• ". I The Renewal Authority, as required, had regard to any recommendations made by the organizations so notified. I The preparation of the renewal proposal involved an intensive physical, social ·and economic analysis in I consultation with the appropriate agencies and authorities, and with the participation of the people of the area. This participation included a Residents Committee which was .established to represent the interests of the people who owned or resided in properties in the area. The City of Collingwood Urban Renewal Liais·on Committee was responsible for overseeing the proposal for which the Renewal Authority was made functionally respon­ sible under Section 3{5) of the Act. The Authority provided I the specialist personnel ~equired for the investigatiohs incorporated into the proposal. I I I I I I I I I 9. I

I 3. NATURE OF LAND USE

I 3.1 Planning Schem~ Zoning The area under consideration for urban renewal, I bounded by Victoria, Charles, Langridge and Nicholson Streets, falls into three zonings under the Melbourne and Metropolitan Planning Scheme. That part of the area between I Charles Street and Little Charles Street fronting Victoria Street is zoned Commercial Local Business, while land between I Little Charles and Nicholson Streets fronting Victoria Street is zoned Light Industrial. Light Industrial zoning I takes up half of this block. The rest of the land, which accounts for 2/3rd of the total proposal area is zoned I Residential "B" which includes detached and semi-detached houses, apartment and flats subject to certain conditions. In broad terms, the area under consideration is I part of a larger residential area adjacent to the railway line to the west, and a light industrial area which graduates I to general industrial with proximity to the Yarra River on ' the east. Commercial uses extend along both sides of I Victoria Street, ·a·main east/west artery from the Central Business District.

I 3.2 Existing Land Uses Forty seven per cent of the land is used for re­ I sidential purposes, accounting for 50 of the 73 properties in the study area. Residential uses extend almost contin­ I uously along Charles Street (from near the shops in Victoria Street), along Langridge Street and halfway along Nich­ I olson Street. The three intrusions into the residential area, include an S.E.C. sub-station, vacant land that_was once a scrap yard, and a hairdressing supplies wholesaler. I Thirteen commercial properties occupy 36% (1 ha. approx-· imately) of the freehold land, and are found mainly along I Victoria Street. This includes four Light Industrial uses: a hairdressing supplies wholesaler, a lacquer products·factory I in Nicholson Street, a textile dyers factory and I I 10. I a paper merchants factory in Little Charles Street (Figure I 4) • I Table 3.1 Existing Land Use in the Little Charles Street Proposal Area. I ,----- fai1c1 Use Number of Area (ha) % of Freehold I Properties Land ~ I IResi

I ------~~~------~- I Sciurce : Urban Renewal Sur~e~, August, 1975. An indication of any chan0e in land use in the I proposal area can be obtainec: :cron ·the Town Planning Permits issued in respect of properties in the area. Four I planning permits were taken out between 1969 and 1974 (three of which were for properties in Victoria Street) I involving the conversion of a warehouse to a T.A.B. and laundrette, and the conversion of a child minding cen~re I in Nicholson Street to residential use. In the ten years prior to 1969 other changes included a.change from residential to commercial land use I when 42 Charles Street became a scrapyard, from residential to industrial use when a factory was established at 5-13 I Charle$ Street,and a warehouse at 47 Nicholson Street, and from residential to public purposes in respect of an S.E.C. I sub-station built at 57 Little Charles Street. In addit- · I I 11. I ion, several dwellings in Little Charles Street and one in I Charles Street were demolished, in each case the land has been left vacant. I A change in land use from industrial to commercial. resulted when Kevin Dennis Pty. Ltd., bought.the former I C.I.G. factory in Victoria Street, and the building at 15 Little Charles Street.

I 3.3 Public Transport and Traffic Study 3.3.1 Traffic Study Because of the growing conflict between through traffic and the needs of local residents, the Collingwood City Council requested Ashton and Wilson to undertake a traffic study for the City. This report "Traffic Study", I June 1975, summarises the data collected and the results of its analysis in relation to both existing and future I situations. The following E·xtracts from the report provide the basis for the Councils policy in relation to closure of Charles I Street I "5. Johnston Street/Yarra RiVer/Vic·toria Stree·t/Hoddl·e Street This area contains mixed industrial and residential uses. The industrial areas lie generally to the south and east of I the area, whereas the residential areas lie to the west of these industrial areas. There are, however, isolated I pockets of residential areas within the industrial areas. When the Eastern Freeway is opened, there will·be a tendency I for industrial traffic to gain access through the resi­ dential areas to reach the freeway. Consequently this I traffic should be confined to the sub-arterial network.

I The existing grid of sub-arterials is maintained and residential street closures are proposed to protect I unnecessary·usage of these streets. Consequently closures are recommended in Albert, William and Charles Streets •.•.. " I I I 12. I

I "Landsc·ape Trea·tm:ent of Lo·ca·l st·r·eets As mentioned previously, local streets should not be more I than 20 feet wide, as with wider streets the city appears to be one of sub-arterials and is used as such. The follow­ ing are types of treatment that can be undertaken:- I (a) The pavements within a 66 foot right-of-way could be narrowed considerably to approximately 20 feet and they I could curve through the right-of-way. Parking bays set into the nature strips would cater for right angle parking and I the area left which is not roadway could adequately be landscaped and grassed •.•..•..•.. "

I 3.3.2 Public Transport The Little Charles Street area in Collingwood is I well serv~ced by public transport. · Residents have easy access to North Richmond and Collingwood stations on the I Epping and Hurstbridge lines. There is a regular rail service to the City and trains to Epping stop at all stations. I Trains on the Hurstbridge line also stop at all stations. A Tramways Board bus service operates along Hoddle Street near the study area in Collingwood. This service I starts at Elsternwick and terminates at Clifton Hill (Queens Parade) . Tr·amways Board buses also travel along Gipps I Street near the Collingwood railway station. These buses travel to the City from Warrandyte. I Trams operate along Victoria Street connecting the City with Box Hill, and along Church Street from Victoria I Street to Prahran. Another service operates between Richmond and St. Kilda Beach. All of these services are within one kilometre of Little Charles Street.

I I I I 13. I I 4. CONDITION OF LAND USE Many of the buildings in the area were constructed I· eighty to one hundred years ago when this part of Colling­ wood, being located on the Yarra River flats, suffered from I inadequate drainage and flooding~ The houses were small (comp·ared with the houses built further up the hill towards I Fitzroy and Carlton) with few facilities and amenities, as they were built for the lower income earners who worked in the nearby factories. I Although drainage problems have been rectified since the late 1800's and most of the houses have been I improved and have modern facilities, the original problems I are the cause of much pf the existing disrepair and decay. 4.1 Condition of Buildings In July, 1975, the Urban Renewal Authority con­ I ducted a detailed inspection of fifty four buildings (of a total of 73 properties) in the proposal area. Ten build­ I ings, nine of which were residential, were not inspected. The remaining nine properties did not warrant inspection as I there was no major structure on the land. Four buildings required no renovation. An add­ I itional two properties needed renovation estimated at a few hundred dollars to bring them up to first class standard. Twenty properties required minor renovations (i.e. I $5,000 and under) with an average cost of $3,000. There was a·concentration of properties rP.quiring minor renovations at I the Langridge Street end of the proposal area, where there was a large proportion of owner-occupied properties. I Nineteen properties needed major renovations (pver $5,000) at an average cost of $9,000. I One property, could only be partially inspected, and could not be evaluated by the inspector as additional I information was necessary~ Nine properties were possibly uneconomic and I impractical to restore, eight being in the Charles I I 14. I

Street block. Seven of these buildings were residential and I located roughly in the middle.of the block. A factory in Little Charles Street and a retail establishment in Victoria I Street were reported as possibly uneconomical to restore. Apart from inadequate maintenance due to a variety I of econom~c reasons, rising dampness and water below floor level were two of the most prevalent problems causing dis­ I repair to flooring. Another major problem appeared to be the lack of amenities of an adequate standard such as hot water, indoor toilet and so on. Where these domestic I amenities had been provided, some were in a condition which did not meet s.tandard regulations. (See Appendix A and

I ~igures G~2- G-4). Of 39 external toilets, 20 required major repairs. I Approximately 33 properties had inadequate bathroom facil­ ities needing major repairs. Ten kitchens needed major I improvements and tw.o required minor repairs. Many of the terraces situated in Charles Street were affected by the conditions of adjoining terraces, and various problems must I ' be considered for each group. Properties requiring minor renovations.were I clustered at the northern end of Charles, Nicholson, and Langridge Streets. These were mostly owner occupied. I Properties which were possibly uneconomical to restore and those requiring major renovations were in the main, concen­ I trated along Charles Street and Little Charles Street (See Figure 5).

I 4.2 Private Renovations 1965-75 An indication of the nature and frequency of I private renovatio,n in an area can be obtained from the Council Building Permit records. Building permits for the I study area and in respect of properties on the opposite sides of Charles, Langridge and Nicholson Streets were I obtained from the Council for the last ten years. Permits for the southern side of Victoria Street which is in the I municipality of Richmond were hot included in this study.· I I 15. .I Of the seventy one permits that were g·ranted in I the last ten years in the total area, forty four were for the area under consideration for renewal. There has been a I noticeable decline in the number of building permits. granted over this period with approximately four fifths having peen I taken out before 1971. I Table 4.1 Trends in Build;i..ng and Demolition Permits 1965-76 I I I I

T • Totai I 0. : • ~posit.e Urban Renewal Area Dll • Urbar. Renewal Area I The Building permits have been divided into four categories : .new construction, major renovation, minor I renovation and demolition. Of the total number of permits, 26 were for minor renovations (17 in proposal area) 24 for majo~ renovations (15 in proposal area), 6 for new I construction (4 in the proposal area) and 15 for demolition (8 in the proposal area). I The number of permits issued per year for major and minor renovations between 1965 and 1973 was fairly I regular although at a greater frequency in the proposal area. All new construction occured prior to 1971 including I the. construction of a factory in Little Charles Street, two brick veneer dwellings in Charles Street (within the prop..;. osal area) and three blocks of flats in Nicholson Street I (immediately opposite the proposal area). Most·of the demolition permits were grantediri I respect of properties outside the proposal area and in · I 16. I I

·Nicholson Street in particular where several dwellings were I demolished to be replaced by a factory. In the proposal area, five terrace houses in Little Charles Street were I demolished in 1965 to make way for the construction of a factory. Two dwellings in Charles Street were also demo-· I lished in 1965 to make way for a brick veneer house at 48 Charles Street, a brick and timber dwelling-was demolished I at 32 Little Charles Street and part of a factory in Vic­ toria Street was demolished in 1970. I The majority of permits applicable to the proposal area have been for major and minor renovations rather. th~n new construction and demolition : the major renovations ~ave I been mostly to commercial properties in Victoria Street ·and the minor renovations to dwellings, particularly in Charles I . Street (See Figure G-1). As no permits at all have been issued since 1973 · I for either the proposal area or the immediate area, and the number of permits have been declining over the past ten years, it.would seem that the preparation of the p.rciposal I has had little effect on applications for permits for renovation. I Possibly many minor renovations, were carried o~t without a permit. This was· supported by the high num}:)er of ····1- .. building inspections which reported repairs done which did not conform to the regulations. It was possible that some I owners, particularly Greek migrants, were not aware of the necessity to apply for such permits. I I I

~·: ~~...... : ·- 1 I I I· 17. I I 5. CHARACTERISTICS OF OCCUPIERS I. 5.1 Nature of Occupancy Of the seventy-three properties in the area, approximately half were owner/occupied and comprised 60.% I of the total freehold land. Six proper~ies we~e vac~nt Table 5.1 : Nature of Occupancy of Properties in the I Little Charles Street Proposal Area 1 ' ;Nature of Number of Area (ha) % of Freehold I :occupancy Properties Lan

I !Owner/ joccupied 36 1.574 59.5 Tenant 31 0.898 33.9' acant Land I & Buildings .6 0.174 6.6 Total 73 2.646 100 I Source : Urban Renewal Survey August 1975. I From the table there seems to be a slight tendency for dwellings to be owner/occupied and for comrne.rcial I properties to be tenanted. Owner/occupied d~elling~ tend to be concentrated in the north~rn half of the proposal area near Langridge StreE!t and away :from the· I commercial/industrial section. I Table 5.2 : Nature of Occupancy in Relation to Land Use

~and Use I Residential Commercial Light Total ~ature of Industrial I Occupancy Owner/ Occupied 29 5 2 .36 I Tenanted 21 8 2 31 I Vacant Land 6 ;Total 50 13 4 73 I Source Urban Renewal. Survey, August, 1975. I 18. I 5.1.1 Changes in Ownership I Twenty-nine properties experienced change in ownership over the past five years. This amounted to I two fifths of the properties in the proposal area. Seven of these properties were purchased by the Housing Com­ I mission, and were concentrated in the middle of the Little Charles Street/Charles Street block. Six pro­ perties near the Langridge Street end and six properties I behind the shops in Vict'oria Street also changed hands in the past five years. Seven of the ten commerc­ I ial premises in Victoria Street experienced changes in ownership. I 5.1.2 Changes in Occupancy Seventeen of the thirty-four tenanted proper­ I ties had a change of occupancy in the past five years. Eight of these changes in tenancy were accompanied by I .a change in ownership. (Figure G-5). Table 5.3 Current Stability by Occupancy Status I Period.of Residence Status Wish to Move? 60 years Tenant No I 56 years Tenant No 56 years Owner No I 39 years . Tenant No 23 years Owner Like a new house I 23 years Owner .Like a new house 18 years .Owner No 18 years Owner· No I 18 years Owner No 9 years Owner No I 8 years Owner No 8 years Owner No :I 7~ years Owner Yes 6 years Owner May move 11 5 years Owner. No 4 years Owner No 3 years Owner Like a new house I 3 years Tenant Yes I 19. Period of Residence Status Wish to Move?

I 2~ years Owner No

2~ years· Tenant Yes I 2 years Tenant No 1~ years Owner Yes I 1~ years. Tenant No 1~ years Tenant No 9 months Tenant Yes I 8 months Tenant Yes 7 months Tenant Yes I 6 months Tenant Yes 4 months Tenant No I 3 months Tenant Yes Source : Residential Questionnaires, August~ 1975. I (See Appendix B) . 5.2 Characteristics of Residents I 5.2.1 Population During the decade 1961-1971 the total population I of the Cepsus Collector's District 07, in which the pro­ posal area is located, declined from 721 to 588. The I overall decline could be due to a number of external reasons such as the extension of factories and road schemes. The Melbourne Transportation Study (1969) I predicted a decline. I However, the decreases were marked in particular age groups : The over 70 age group declined 6% in 1961 to 3% in 1971. Between 1961 and 1966 Aust­ I ralian born families with teenage children moved away from the area to be replaced by immigrant families.with I children under 10 and parents aged 20-34 years. This trend continued in the 1971 Census figures. (Appendix D). I 5.2.2 Ethnic Characteristics Collingwood has seen several changes in ethnic I composition over the years. In 1954 Greeks and Italians together accounted for 8% of Collingwood's total I population. Aithough Collingwood's population fell I I 20. I 12% between 1961 and 1966, the Australian born component I fell by 24% and the number of overseas born rose by 13%. During the 1960's many British and Italian born migrants I moved away but there was an increase in Yugoslav and parti­ cularly Greek born residents. By 1971, figures showed a I slight decrease in the number of Greek-s but an increase in Lebanese and Turks. These changes in ethnic composition were also confirmed by analysis of figures for religious I affiliation in the CD07 from 1961 to 1966 and 1971 : the Roman Catholic and Church of England population fell by I half during the decade 1961-71, whilst the Greek Orthodox percentage increased from 14% to 50%, Non-Christian I religions increased from 0.7 to 4.6%. The current trend appears to be a decrease in I the numbers of new migrants entering the area due partly to the cutback in migrant intake and the current economic I climate. This trend is also reflected in the decrease in I enrolments to the various schools in the Collingwood area. One school with a ratio of 65 Greek to 18 Australian I children has had only two new migrant enrolments in the last two years; the larqest influx of Greeks beinq at the end of 1972. Information obtained from the Victoria Park I School was that Greek and Lebanese children were leaving at the rate of 2-3 children per month, for suburbs I such as Thomastown and Keilor.

I Although no current official figures were obtain­ able on the various ethnic groups in the proposal area, I from the 49 residential questionnaires distributed, 25 (51%) were in the English language and the following 24 I Were distributed in the following languages : Greek 17 (35%); -Yugoslav 3 (6%); Turkish 2 (4%); Italian 1 (2%); I and Arabic 1 (2%) . It is estimated that approximately 49% of the pop­ I ulation:in the proposal area was born overseas compared with

I 21. I I

I 57% in the CD and 45% in Collingwood (Appendix D). Thu~, the proposal area and its immediate neighboring area possess a concentration of the overseas born living in Collingwood, I some of whom do not speak English, and perhaps are in need I of special facilities or services. 5.2.3 Socio-Economic Status I Socio-economic status can be measured by a variety of indicators such as income and education. Although no specific questions were asked in the questionnaires to I determine the general socio-economic status of the population of the proposal area, a general assessment can I be made on the basis of Census information for the Collec­ tor's District, based on occupations, education, and level I of home ownership, as well as information from the 'Report on Child Care Needs for Collingwood'. I The adult population had a significantly lower level of education than the average for the Melbourne I Statistic~l Division : three times as many Collingwood residents had only attended primary school or not attended I· school at all. More than half the Collingwood residents were I in the workforce, a level 8% higher than for the M.S.D. This difference was mainly due to the number of working migrant wives. Employment was predominantly blue collar, I and many residents work in and around Abbotsford. Gross family incomes in Collingwood were under $6,000 p.a. for I 76% of families and less than $4,000 p.a. for 43% of families. ('Report on Child Care Needs for Collingwood' I 19 7 4) • Home ownership was lower in the proposal area I (51%) than for the CD-07 (61%). Car ownership was low in the proposal area - only 27%, and in the CD-07 approx­ I imately half the occupants had a car. The generally low socio-economic level of the I majority of re~idents in the proposal area indicated that home owners possibly could not affort extensive I

I 22. I renovations and many of the tenants were I vulnerable to the vagaries of the rented housing market. I 5.2.4 Residential Mobility Whilst 40% of'the residents in the Collector's I District -07 lived in their present home in 1966, approximately 60% of the population moved into the area I during this period : nearly half from elsewhere in Melbourne and 30% probably from overseas. I From the results of the questionnaires, stability in terms of long term residence appears to be a reflect­ I ion of home ownership. Of the 15 residents who have lived for more than 5 years in the'·•area, only 3 were tenants (Australian}, and the majority were owner-occu- · I piers. Conversely, most of the residents living less than 5 years in their present house were tenants (11 I out of 15}. Of the four owner-occupiers, three were Greek. (Table 5.3 and Figure G-5}.

I In terms of future movement, those who expressed a wish to move were mainly the residents who .had spent I less than five years in the area in rent·ed accommodation. However, one long term owner-occupier also wished to I move to a new house, but still in the same area. Of the six owner-occupiers resident between 5-10 years, one expressed a wish to move and one indicated that he might I move if he could obtain the right pri6e for his house. I 5.3 Characteristics of Non-Residential uses The various non-residential premises located in I the area under consideration for urban renewal around Little Charles Street, Collingwood, covered a wide range I of activities (Appendix C). There wa·s a textile dying firm employing four I people and a paint manufacturer employing nine people located in the proposal area. I Two wholesaling establishments were located within the proposal area. The paper merchant and importer I I 23. I I employed twelve people, and the hairdressing supplier, employed twenty people. There.were two retail activities within the I proposal area : a household electrical appliance store in Victoria Street operated from three properties in the I area and employed 73 people. Since the research study was completed, the motor vehicle service and spares business has I vacated its premises, which have been sold. Recreational and entertainment services were I provided withiri the area by one hotel, a restaurant, and a cof~ee lounge. Three premises supplied "Personal S~rvices" I a women's hairdressing salon, a photographic studio and a coin operated laundrette. Under the A.S.I.C. Classification "Sport and Recreation" there was a Totalizator Agency Board I office in Victoria Street. The trade union organisation has I recently vacated its premises. 5.4 Conclusions The proposal area had a 'socially mixed' and I balanced population in terms of age groups, household structure, home ownership and ethnic groups. However, it I was fairly homogenous .in socio-economic status being mainly composed of blue collar workers. There were faint indi­ I cations that the same pressures and processes of 'gentri­ fication' which have occurred in other inner city areas I are beginning to occur in Collingwood, although it may not proceed to the same extent. II The traditional low income, low rental area has played a valuable role as a 'first stage' area of resi­ ·dence for new migrants. It is doubtful that this will I continue to the same extent in the future, as the flow of I immigrants has slowed down. I I I I 24. I 6. VIEWS, OPINIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS SUBMITTED I .TO THE AUTHORITY 6.1 OWners and Occupiers of Property in the Area I 6.1.1 Attachment to the Area To establish the extent of residents' attachment I to the area, respondents were asked to nominate which aspects of Abbotsford they particularly liked (Appendix B). I Residents particularly liked Abbotsford because of the availability of public.transport and proximity to the

City and work. The availability of ~ublic transport was an I important factor when only 27% of households in the proposal area possessed a car. The availability of a house was also I a major attraction of the area, with economic reasons, proximity to work, and proximity to friends/relatives being I nominated equally. Nine respondents liked Abbotsford for various reasons - four just generally liked the area, one I pensioner liked the hospital nearby, one liked his part­ icular house and one liked his garden. Many of the resi­ I dents have lived in the ·same area, although sometimes in a different house, for many years, and many morehave come from nearby Richmond. As mentioned in Section 5.2.4 Residential I Movement, those who did express a wish to move, generally wanted to stay in the same area or possibly Richmond, and I were mainly tenants who had spent less than 5 years in the area. I 6.1.2 Perceived Adequacy - Services and Facilities Residents found Hospital and Medical, and Schools I as the most adequate services in the area. The most inade­ quate facilities were perceived to be Parks and Gardens, Kindergartens, Day Nurseries, and Migrant Services. Many, I however, were not sure about some services, especialiy for Elderly People, Family Advice and Youth. I 6.1.3 Perceived Adequacy - Traffic Circulation and Parking In the commercial questionnaires returned from the I Little Charles Street area there was a striking consensus on the need for improvements in the area (Appendix C). I

I 25. I Of the fourteen commercial interests in the area twelve returned questionnaires, of which ten were completed. In the commercial sector various types of bus­ inesses provided employment for over 100 people. However, the majority did not live in or near the area and many drove to work. Consequently, eight firms stated a need for more parking facilities, although almost half were satisfied. Six firms suggested either the need for a pedes­ trian crossing in'Victoria Street, between Charles and Nich­ olson Streets, or traffic lights at either of these inter­ sections. Four firms stressed the need for road improve­ ments, in the proposal area. More regular rubbish collection

was ~lso desired. The number of responses in the residential ques­ tionnaires to the question on traffic and parking in the

proposal area was low (~ppendix B Questions 20~30). The questionnaire returns revealed that only eight households, ·had a car, and of these, one was usually parked in a car port, and seven in the street. The provision of traffic lights or a pedestrian crossing at Victoria Street was suggested. Only two people mentioned a need for improved parking facilities. Of sixteen recommendations for general improve­ ments to the area, only one mentioned day time parking, and one better roads. 6.1.4 Respondents• Perceived Needs in the Area There was a general consensus on the types of improvements and needs in the area (Appendix B) . The most important areas of perceived need were:

a) More open space with - for children's play are~s trees and shrubs and adults to relax b) Social Services - Migrants, Youths, Day Nursery

c) Traffic - Pedestrian crossing/lights at Nicholson and Victoria Streets d) Street Lighting

26. I

These needs perceived by residents in the proposal I areawere similar to those found by Des Storer in his study, 'Perceptions Feelings and Attitudes of Residents in Colling­ I wood'·~ 6.2 'Replies to Sectio~. 3(2) Notices I .Under the provisions of Section 3(2) of the Urban Renewal Act, 1970, the Authority notified the relevant public I authorities on the 22nd February, 1974, of its intention to recommend to the Minister of Housing that it should be authorised to prepare an urban renewal proposal for the I defined area. There were no objections from : The Public Works I Department; State Rivers and Water Supply Commission; Depart­ ment of Crown Lands and Survey; Victorian Railways Board; I Department of State Development; Melbourne & Metropolitan Board of Works; Town and Country Plann.ing Board; Ministry I of Transport; Department of Local Government. The following are extracts from the replies· I received from the Authorities:

'··. Country.Roads Board . I " •.• and would appreciate the Commission taking action to preserve as far as possible the opportunity for I the construction of new and/or improved arterial roads within the area ••• "

I State Electricity Commission " •.• This Commission has reticulation and other I assets for.the distribution of electricity to customers in the respective areas and these assets also serve I customers in adjoining areas. The extent of rearra~gement of eiectricity supply assets naturally will depend on the I renewal proposals adopted for each area ... In accordance with the normal procedures applying to redevelopment schemes, we would expect that the Renewal I Authority would bear the cost of any alterations to the I Commission's ·assets·arising from the renewal proposals •.• " I I 27. I

I Gas & Fuel Corporation : " ••. a gas main is located in Little Charles Street : I so interest is confined to future requirements for this. service and mains in the four perimeter str~ets ••. "

I 6.3 National Trust The following extract is from a submission made by I the Natiorial Trust of Australia (Vic.) under Section 4(1) of the Urban Renewal Act, 1970: I . " .•. The·only buildings classified in the block are 39-41 Nicholson Street, a pair of brick and stone, two­ storey Gothic houses, on 40-45 ft. frontage, both largely I unspoiled and clearly in good hands, with interesting barge­ boards. I In my opinion only one other building in the block should be recorded or possibly classified; a typical, I handsome; substantial, two-storeyed brick building (of a bank type), about 60' x 85', with arched.windows on front and side and three draped female figures as decoration, I # • • • • built up to the corner of 293 Victoria and Charles

Streets ••• K I I I I I I I I

I 28. I I 7. FACILITIES - DISTRIBUTION AND ADEQUACY 7.1 Services and Facilities Required (With reference to reports :- 'Elderly Needs in the Collingwood Municipality' and 'Child Care Needs for· I Collingwood' and the Urban Renewal Authority questionnaire survey responses). The conditions and needs of a physical environment I change in time, as do the needs of people. Any change, for example, physical or social, is a continuing process which I will affect people in different ways. Therefore, an urban renewal programme should enable the environment to be more I flexible and responsive to future trends. Urban renewal itself can be a catalyst for certain trends; therefore, ·to I provide adequate services and facilities for present and future residents, a rationale of the kind of area envisaged I should be made explicit so that adequate provisions can be made. This study iooked at the needs of the proposal I area from the point of view of the different sub-groups in the area : i.e. Pre-school Q-4 years; Children 5-15 years; I 16-24; 25-59; and 60 and over age groups; migrants; home owners on low incomes; tenants; and commercial interests.

I 7.1.1 Pre-School Children Of the 89 respondents in the proposal area the age I group 0-4 years formed over 12% of the population which was slightly lower than that for the CD* (13.7%). Both percentages I were higher than for Collingwood City (11%). There was no doctor, infant welfare centre, child day care centre~ or I parks and gardens within ~ kilometre radius; however, there was an infant welfare centre and a small park located within I one kilometre. A survey into child care needs revealed only one day care centre in Collingwood which took 45 children of I various ages and which had a long waiting list. This was located in Keele Street, more than one kilometr·e from the I proposal area. As migrant women tend to work for economic

I * Census Collectors District

I 29. I I 7. FACILITIES - DISTRIBUTION AND ADEQUACY 7.1 Services and Facilities Required I (With reference to reports :- 'Elderly Needs in the Collingwood Municipality' and 'Child Care Needs for I Collingwood' and the Urban Renewal Authority questionnaire survey responses). The conditions and needs of a physical environment I change in time, as do the needs of people. Any change, for example, physical or social, is a continuing process which I will affect people in different ways. Therefore, an urban renewal programme should enable the environment to be more I flexible and responsive to future trends. Urban renewal itself.can be a catalyst for certain trends; therefore, to I provide adequate services and facilities for present and future residents, a rationale of the kind of area envisaged should be made explicit so that adequate provisions can·be I made. This study looked at the needs of the proposal I area from the point of view of the different sub-groups in

the area : i.e. Pr~-school 0-4 years; Children 5-15 years; I 16-24; 25-59; and 60 and over age gx:oups; migrants; home owners on low incomes; tenants; and commercial interests~

I 7.1.1 Pre-School Children Of the 89 respondents in the proposal area the age I group 0-4 years formed over 12% of the population which was slightly lower than that for the CD* (13.7%). Both percentages I were higher than for Collingwood City (11%). There was no doctor, infant welfare centre, child day care centre, or I parks and gardens within ~ kilometre radius; however, there was an infant welfare centre and a small park located within one kilometre. I A survey into child care needs revealed only one day care centre in Collingwood which took 45 children of I various ages and which had a long waiting list. This was located in Keele Street, more than one kilometre from the I proposal area. .As migrant women tend to work for economic

I * Census Collectors District

I 29. I reasons, the provision of adequate child day care centres I would provide not ~nly a controlled and educational environ­ ment for the child, but also for relief from worry for the I working mother. The proposal area appeared to be in a location suitable for a day nursery, being near public transport and I part of the tollector's District which had a high proportion of children under five years. I Pre-school children also require safe play areas and the need for such space was expressed in both D. Storer's I Study of Collingwood ("Perceptions Feelings and Attitudes of Residents in Collingwood") and in questionnaire responses.

I 7 •. 1.2 Age Group 5-15 The proposal area had a larger proportion of I children of school age (20%) than the CD (15%) or Colling­ wood (17%). This is an energetic age group requiring I playing space and facilities for recreation, which were lacking. The need for open space or an adventure playground I area was acute, especially as most of the houses had small .yards and the area had.heavy through traffic~

I 7.1.3 Age Groups 16-24 This age group was not particularly significant I and the t·rend, pointed out earlier between 1961-66, of parents with teenage children moving out, may continue. I Young single people or married couples found the area conven­ ient to social and recreational facilities.

I 7.1.4 Age Group 25-59 This, the largest age group, comprised mainly I parents of young children. Most of their needs were connec­ ted with satisfying the needs of their children. However, I many migrants and working wives had special needs. Fac~lities such as parks and gardens, a cultural/ community/migrant resource/information and language centre I may be needed. I I' 30. I Improvements to relieve stress from an 'unsafe' I environment were also mentioned by residents, for example reduced traffic, noise and congestion, and more street I lig~ting. I 7.1.5 Age Group 60 and over The 60 years and over age group fo~med 12% of the population in the proposal area which is similar to Colling­ I wooq City but a higher proportion than for the Collectors District (9.9). Many of the elderly were tenants and most I had been in the area for over 20 years. As the "Report on Elderly Needs in the Collingwood I Municipality" pointed out, some of the needs of this group were physical· security such as health, housing and food, I economic security and a familiar environment. Collingwood already pr~vided an extensive range of services for the elderly. It would seem appropriate therefore, to ensure I security of residence in a familiar environment for this age . group, some of whom were foreign born and relied on families I for various services. As some members of this group were ·tenants,· their long term residential. tenure was perhaps .·. I insecure. 7.1.6 Commercial Sector I The needs of the commercial sector revolved around adequate access to their premises, parking and traffic I improvements, pedestrian lights and more frequent street cleaning. A children's playground was also seen to be I needed in the area (Appendix C). 7.1.7 Property OWners I Of the sixteen property owners not residing in the proposal area, five returned completed questionnaires I covering one commercial property and six residential proper­ ties. Three properties have been owned for more than ten I years and three for three years or less. None expected to sell and all except one had purchased for income purposes. The owner who intends to reside there at a later date, was I the only owner to suggest improvements to the area such as I. play ·space for children, squash and gymnasium facilities. I 31. I

7.2 Services and Facilities Available to Residents I Investigations were carried out to determine the adequacy of the provision of facilities which could be I req~ired by residents of the proposal area. Adequacy was considered in terms of whether or not a facility was pro­ I vided in Collingwood or the surrounding suburbs, its loca­ tion, distance from the proposal area, and ability to cater I for the demand generated in the proposal area. Included in this investigation were facilities which, although outside the Little Charles Street study. I area, are accessible due to their central location or proximity to public transport. It is recognised however, I that some facilities need to be closer to a person's residence than others as people will travel only a certain distance I for particular goods and services. More frequently used facilities or those involving children should be much closer I than services or facilities needed only occasionally or in crisis situations. The renewal proposal area contains no social I facilities, although it is close to an extensive public transport network which links the area to the central bus­ I iness district, Richmond and some outer. northern and eastern

areas of Melbourne. (See Appe~dix E and Figures G-7 and I G-8).

7.2.1 Welfare Services I A wide range of general welfare services is·located within two kilometres of the proposal area. There are a I variety of services for migrants, but these are approx­ imately four kilometres away. It is possible that migrant I services, especially those connected with language learning and general cultural and social facilities may be required I closer·to the renewal proposal area. 7.2.2 Education I The nearest and only day nursery is in Keele Street, nearly two kilometres from the proposal area. I Another is being planned for the corner of Gold and Keele I 32 •. I I Streets, which will serve, in the main, the northern part I of Collingwood. Child Day Care facilities are needed in the south­ I ern part of Collingwood. The proposal area needs such a faciiity and is convenient for those outside the area due to its proximity to various public transport links. The ·I proposal area is within one kilometre of two kindergartens. The area appears well served with State and Roman I Catholic Schools from primary to secondary level. .As space in the Collingwood area is at a premium and schools I represent a major community resource, it is likely that educational facilities will be utilized more and more for I after-schopl recreation programmes and for other social needs in the community. I 7.2.3 Health The proposal area is well served with public and I private hospitals approximately two kilometres away. How­ ever, the number of doctors appears· inadequate to serve the population o£ Collingwood,apart from the Clifton Hill area. I Although there are many doctors in Victoria Parade, East Melbourne, and Erin Street, Richmond, many of these I are specialists and consultants.

7.2.4 Cultural/Recreational I The proposal area has comparatively easy access to a range of clubs and cultural facilities. The provi­ I· sions of multi-lingual library books could perhaps be extended to Collingwood which has a large proportion of I non-English speaking people. 7.2.5 Parks and Recreation Reserve I Although there is very little open space for either passive or active recreation in the study area, some I of Melbourne's largest parks and gardens, and the recreation areas along the Yarra River, are only 2 kilometres away. The size of most of the private yards necessitates public I open space being made available for both children and adults. I I I 33. ·I 7.2.6 Sporting Facilities I. Although the area lacks sporting facilities, some sports such as swimming are catered for in the adjacent I municipalities of Fitzroy or Richmond. As almost half the . population is from overseas, where sport is not of such cultural importance, it may be that other types of recreation I facilities are required. This can only be ascertained by further research. I The proposal area lacks proximity to.some facili­ I ties and other facilities are inadequate. The various areas of need include migrants' needs; I medical - in terms of number of general practitioners; open space for both children and adults; sporting facilities and I child day care facilities. I I I I I I I II I I I 34. I I I 8. OPTIONS The results of the Urban Renewal Authority's investigations in the Little Charles Street Proposal area I indicated several suitable renewal options. The renewal

proposal does not include ~11 the items indicated, as it I appeared that a combination of several options presented an optimum solution to the problems of the area as stated in I the renewal "Opinion" for the area.

8.1 Renovation of Buildings I The Little Charles Street area contains residen­ tial buildings of a mixed construction and quality. A I particular problem highlighted by the Housing Survey was the inadequacy of domestic facilities. The survey determined I that certain buildings had inadequate kitchen and/or laundry facilities, some had no hot wat:.er service while oth.ers had I only a bath heater type hot water service. A further problem revealed by the building surveyors was rising dampness. · I A minimum standard of housing should be.deterrnined by the Council and Authority as the basis·of a programme to I provide the expertise and finance to enable owners in.the I are~ to renovate th~ir buildings. 8.2 Traffic and Parking Little Charles Street is subject to heavy commerc­ I ial traffic servicing the businesses at the Victoria Street end. A plan to remove traffic from the residential area to I provide easier access and parking for the commercial areas, would involve closing Little Charles Street where it enters I Victoria Street and providing access from Charles Street, in the vicinity-of the rear of the properties fronting Victoria I Street. The Victoria Street end of Little Charles Street could also be closed to commercial traffic with access being I provided to Victoria Street. Parking could be improved if a parking area was developed along the access route between Little Charles Street and Charles Street immediately behind I the commercial properties in Victoria Street. Charles I 35. I Street could be closed in mid block, creating two cul-de­ I sacs. This is particularly useful for lo~g blocks where the . . end of the street is possibly out of view from the inter- I sections at each end of the block. Pavements within a 66 feet right of way could be I narrowed to approximately 20 feet to curve through the right of way~ Parking bays set into the nature strips would provide right angle parking. The remaining area which is I not roadway could be landscaped. Parking could be provided at right angles in the centre of the road with a narrow I carriageway on either side of this central parking strip. Breaks in the parking median could be made.and planted with I trees.

8.3 Lower Income Housing I The continuing need for lower income housing in the inner Melbourne area supports the development of a lower I income housing project in the area of Little Charles Street. The Housing. Commission, Victoria, presently owns land in the I centre of the proposa+ area fronting Little Charles Street. With the purchase of several other properties being nego­ I tiated, this central area would form an excellent site for medium density housing. The closure of Little Charles Street.wbuld provide extra area for the surrounds to such I housing and access could be gained to the development through land also owned by the Commission at No. 42 Charles I Street. The housing should be designed to incorporate I landscaped areas. 8.4 Elderly Person Housing The proximity to the commercial area in Victoria I Street, to public transport to the city, and to medical and hospital facilities makes the Little Charles Street area I attractive for elderly person housing. The central area, part owned by the Housing Commission, Victoria could be developed for elderly person housing. Alternatively, elderly person housing could be provided as part of a Lone Person · Low Rental development.

36 . .I

. j ·I

8 • 5 Open Areas I One of the needs determined in the Urban Renewal study has been the provision of open areas and trees in the I area. Respondents indicated that some form of passive ·recreation area was desirable. A "pocket handkerchief" open I area could be designed around a medium density housing project. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 37. I

,j I 9. OBJECTIVES, RECOMMENDATIONS AND IMPLEMENTATION I 9.1 Objectives The objectives for renewal in this area are based on countering and removing the effects of urban problems I through the improvement_ of traffic access along Little Charles Street, the provision of car parking, the cleaning I up of vacant areas and reduction ·of the public health risks maintained by the present situation and the provision of I renovation loans for homes in the area. The implementation of the renewal proposal will aid in the achievement of the I potential of the area, which is an example of the residential, commercial and industrial land use mix comprising the physical I· framework of economic and social life in the City of Colling­ wood.

I· 9.2 Recommendations 9.2.1 Lower Income, Elderly Person Housing I The area fronting Little Charles Street, with access to Charles Street (see Figure 8), will be developed I for medium density housing for lower income earners and elderly persons. The scale of this development will comple­ I ment the existing buildings in the area. 9.2.2 Open Space Open areas will be provided in conjunction with I the medium density housing development (Figure 8). 9.2.3 Traffic Circulation and Parking I (a) Road Closures : (i) Little Charles Street will be closed at the I entrance to Victoria Street and north of the Davis Lacquer Co. property to the vicinity of the SEC sub-station (Figure I 8) 0 (ii) Charles Street will be closed with a barrier, 44 metres n,orth of Victoria Street (Figure 8) by the Council I under the provisions of the Local Government Act, 1958. (b) Road Re-organization : I (i) Little Charles Street will be reorganized to provide access to Charles Street at the rear of the commer- ~I

I 38. I I cial properties fronting Victoria Street, and access to I Nicholson Street through 31 Nicholson Street. (ii) Charles Street will be reorganized north of the barrier to Langridge Street in line with the City's I programme (for illustration see Figure 8). (c) Parking : Provision for car parking will be I made in Charles Street from Victoria Street to the barrier, along the access route between Little Charles Street and I Charles Street and in conjunction with the medium density housing development (Figure 8). I (d) Pedestrian Crossing : The Council and the Road Safety and Traffic Authority will be approached to provide a pedestrian crossing on Victoria Street between I Charles and Nicholson Streets. 9.2.4 Building Renovations I The Authority will make loans for renovation purposes under Section 12 of the Act to owners of buildings I which warrant repairs and who have insufficient funds to carry out the necessary repairs themselves. The details I of these loans will be negotiated between the Authority and individual .owners at the time. of implementation ·Of the proposal. The loans will be offered at less than bank I interest and with a repayment period of up to 45 years. 9.2.5 Development Control I The control of development in the area will be through an amendment to the Melbourne Metropolitan Planning I Scheme 1968 (Figure 9). I 9.3 Impiementation 9.3.1 The proposal is as accurate and comprehensive as the Authority's resources and the nature of the subject permit. I Significant constraints of change and time are expected to have an effect on renewal implementation. Just as the I preparation of the proposal has been a creature of the time since the authorisation of its preparation by the Governor I in Council, in February, 1975, so will the implementation be arranged consistent with the realities of the resources I available. I 39. I j I

I 9.3.2 Powers Available Powers available to the Authority under the Urban I Renewal Act, 1970, for the implementation of this proposal .will include Section 8, {land purchase, compulsory acqui­ sition, resubdivision of land,. grant leases, sell land, I servicing of land), Section 9 {compensation), Section 10 {road closure, extinguishing of easements), Section 12 I {renovation loans), and Section 6 of the Urban Renewal Act, 1970 together with Part III, Town and Country Planning Act, I 1961, which provides for the preparation of Planning Scheme amendments. The details of implementation of the ideas I presented in this proposal will be worked out through nego­ tiations with the owners and occupiers of property in the area during the .renewal implementation stage. I 9.3.3 Land Purchase The properties required for the redevelopment of I the central area and reorganization of the traffic circu­ lation system, should be purchased immediately following the . . I . gazettal of the Urban Renewal Area. This will be carried out through negotiation with the individual owners concerned. I No coercion will be used in the purchase of any dwellings. 9.3.4. Provision for Persons Displaced During Implementation of the Proposal I Under Section 4{3) {d) of the Urban Renewal Act, 1970, provision will be made for the accommodation within I the area or its immediate vicinity of persons who will be displaced by the implementation of the proposal and who I desire to continue to reside in the area. 9.3.5 Renovation Loans I· The Authority will be involved in the provision of renovation finance of between approximately $135,000 and I $220~000. The details of finance and terms available will be worked out between the Authority and individual owners of property in the area at the time of implementation of the I proposal. I

I 40. ' I I l

I 9.3.6 Provision and Relocation of Services No significant interference is anticipated to I major community services. Services in the closed portions

of Little Cha~les Street will be protected, as will ease­ ,I ments where other right of way closures and reorganization are to be arranged. I 9.3.7 Construction Medium Density Housing The area. fronting Charles and Little Charles I Street will be made available for the construction of lower income and elderly person medium density accommodation subject to consultation with Council on design and construct­ I ion details. 9.3.8 Phasing I The specific order in which the implementation of the proposal will be arranged will depend upon the oppor­ I tunities which are anticipated to present themselves during the negotiations. The general order from the final public­ I ation of the Renewal Proposal will comprise : September, 1976, Display of the Proposal, as required by the provisions of 55(1) and (2) of the Urban Renewal Act, 1970; January, I the hearing of objections and submissions under 55(3) and

(4) of th~ Act; February, (tentative), the adoption of the I proposal by the Renewal Authority, 55(5) and meeting with the City on capital budgeting for the development; March, I notification of affected authorities and individuals on the Authority's adoption of the Proposal, 55(6) and (7); April, I submission to the Minister and Appeals under 55(9), (10), (11) and (13) of the Act; May, (tentative) declaration of area 55(12); June, lodging of Proposal, 55(15) and planning I scheme amendments under 56 of the Act. If this schedule is

achieved, implementation can begin in July 1977 when reno~ I vation loans will be considered and land purchase negotiat­ I ions will start. I I I 41. I I APPENDIX A I BUILDING INSPECTION RESULTS Fifty-four properties in the Renewal Area were in­ I spected between July and September, 1974, by a team of trained housing inspectors from the Victorian Housing Commission. During this period, questionnaires were I delivered to each property to ascertain residents' views on various aspects relating to themselves and the future I of the area. Below are the general comments on the building I survey report for each property inspected, together with some details of the occupant derived from the questionnaire I returns (if available). Charles Street Properties I Property Number 1 No questionnaire returned. I These premises are kept in a very clean and tidy condition, but all floors require reblocking with possible I replacement of sub-floor timbers • .. The existing laundry is beyond repair, necessitating I a completely new structure or the necessary facilities incorporated internally. The kitchen is far too small,

requiring renova~ions to expand the working area, also I roof drainage is inadequate.

An estimated cost to carry out all necessary repairs I would be in the region of $7,000.00.

I. However, if it was considered ample to renovate these premises to a weatherproof and sanitary condition only, dis­ regarding reblocking and replacement of sub-floor timbers,

I the ~urn of $4,750.00 could be considered as adequate. I Property Number 2 This house has been tenanted for the past 4 months by I 2 young adults (16-24 years), who previously lived in Moonee I I 42. I I Ponds. They find the house satisfactory, although cold and damp at certain times of the year. Improvements I they suggest are central heating and an indoor toilet; they have no plans to move. (The present owner bought I the property one month ago). There is obvious buckling to the northern boundary I brick wall which at the moment is held with two tie bolts. The roof is in very poor condition requiring re­ I slating or resheeting. Whilst it would be necessary to completely reblock the premises, not allowing for the I restoration of the northern boundary wall, a sum of $5,500.00 would have to be considered for the remaining I outstanding w~rks. However, to restore the northern boundary wall,a closer and more detailed inspection would be necessary; but at this juncture the additional sum of I $1,550.00 would be a reasonable estimate to correct same. I Property Number 3 No questionnaire returned by tenant. The owner acquired the property three years ago, and says it is I tenanted by 1 Greek person and·2 Australians. I This dwelling is one of a terrace of four, and owing to the extensive repairs carried out over the years which all· a+e of a very poor standard, future renovations and I repairs will be costly .

For any future renovations allow the sum of $5,000.00, .I which would incorporate the carrying of all party walls to .I roof height. However, to carry out repairs only, to put the premises in a sanitary and waterproof condition, the sum of $1,750.00 should be ample.

I Property Number 4

No questionnaire returned by tenant. The owner I bought the property, along with 18 Charles Street, three years ago. He has 1 Greek tenant.

I These premises are one of a terrace of four. The I majority of walls show some evidence of movement necessi-

I 43. I I tating underpinning in at least two areas whilst all floor I areas ~equire reblocking. Minor repairs are required to some windows, w.c. I structure and internal plastering, at a cost of approxi­ mately $3,700.00. However, if it was considered suffi­ I cient to renovate these premises to a weatherproof and sanitary condition, disregarding reblocking_and the replacement of sub-floor timbers, the sum of $1,250.00 I could be considered adequate. I Property Number 5 No questionnaire returned. I This timber dwelling is of such an age where any major reconstruction would not be a proposition. The I floors are sunken and require reblocking. Subsidence is evident to the majority of walls, whilst the sewerage has been altered extensively without the proper Authority's I permission over the years. Approximately $4,000.00 would ·be a reasonable estimate,excluding the sewer, to make this I dwelling and bungalow weatherproof, comply with all re­ ievant regulations and in a sanitary condition.

I Property Number 6 I No questionnaire returned. ·These premises are in a neat and tidy condition with maintenance kept to a.minimum. The external toilet­ I laundry-bathroom block still requires some work to be carried out to make-it satisfactory. The floors are also in I need of a total reblock, whilst to retain the premises as two flats, a fire rated party wall would be ·necessary.

I For the above outstanding items, a sum of $5,000.00 would have to be allowed. However, to carry out I repairs only,, so as the premises remain in a sanitary and waterproof condition, the sum of $1,750.00 should be I ample. Property Number 7 I No questionnaire returned. I I 44. I This dwellirig is a five roomed double fronted weather~ ,. I board with an iron roof which is corroded and ill fitting. The plumbing is sub-standard,most of which is hidden from I view. Weatherboards are decayed and split. Walls are at ground level and have insufficient sub-floor ventilation. I To convert these premises to a standard satisfying all requirements, a sum of $2,700.00 would have to be allowed, I but to carry out repairs to a lesser degree whereby the premises remain in a waterproof and sanitary condition, I allow the sum Of $1,250.00. Property Number 8 I This house has been occupied. by a single elderly German for 23 years. He finds the house satisfactory but I would like to exchange his present house for a new one, or preferably have a new house built on the same block of I land (he likes the location as it is close to the city). If a new house was available he would like to move immed- iately. I The general condition of this dwelling is dilapidated. There are two bedrooms at the rear·of the premises which I would be classed as poor even if they were only used as sheds. It is felt that effective repairs would be unreason­ I able in terms of price and eventual value. Property Number 9·

I The house is·tenanted by 1 female adult and 1 male child under· 5 years of age. They moved here from 40 I Charles Street, eight months ago, and find the house satis­ factory. They have no plans to move, but would be inter­ I ested in renting a Housing Commission house in the country. These premises are generally in a very poor condition I with rising dampness in all walls. Floors in part are at ground level and the majority of rooms require attention ,. at sub-floor level. Painting is of a very poor st~ndard. An estimate of $7,500.00 would be a reasonable amount to bring these premises to a presentable standard. However, I ·to carry out repairs only, so as the premises remain in a sanitary and weatherproof condition, the sum of $3,500.00 I would be sufficient. I 45. I Property Number 10 I The house is tenanted by an elderly rady and her adult son. They moved from two doors away and find the I house satisfactory, but would be interested in a Commiss­ ion flat in Collingwood. I The house is one of a brick pair built about ninety years ago. There is no clearance under the floors; and I the walls show rising dampness and fracturing; with white ant damage in the dado, now sheeted over with ply (which has buckled from dampness in ·the party wall). Some I .structural movement and failure is evident in the party wall. Although no leaks are evident, the roof is in poor I condition. The tenants have kept the unit in a spot­ lessly clean and dry condition but the extent of deterio­ I ration is such that restoration would probably be poth uneconomic and impractical.

I Prope~ty Number 11 The tenants of this house are 2 adult males, and I 1 friend who lives with them. They moved here from .North Richmond 39 years ago, and find the house satis­ I factory, although they would like to see improvements to the spouting, floors and water pip~s. They have no plaris to move, but would be interested in a Housing Commission I hopse· in Abbotsford. I This unit is one of a brick pair erected approxi­ mately ninety years ago. Conditions are generally poor and sub-standard throughout with floors sunken and holed. I Brickwork is sunken in part and showing signs of rising dampness. In view of the submitted report, it is con­ I sidered that restoration would be most uneconomical and impracticable.

I Property Number 12 I No questionnaire returned. This unit is in the vicinity of eighty years old ~ and has been practically stripped of all linings, floor- I ing, roofing, fitments, etc. The remaining brick walls I 46. I I

ar~ structurally sound and could very well be restored I to a habitable condition, but it would be difficult to place an estimate in its present state without some form I of ~ubmitted proposal. Property Number 13

I The tenants of this house are 1 adult male and 1 adult female who moved from Richmond 6 years ago. They I find the house satisfactory but would like a new clothes line. They have no plans to move. I This unit would appear to be 80-100 years old and has been added to on numerous occasions over the years. I The rear verandah section houses the kitchen, bathroom and laundry which are all of a sub-standard nature. Floors I throughout are defective and need reblocking. Rising dampness is prevalent. I Due to the age of the property and the need to pro­ vide completely new facilities, costs to restore these premises to a reasonable standard could be as high as I $8,000.00.' However, to carry out repairs to ensure the premises remain in a sanitary and weatherproof cond~tion, I the sum of $3,750.00 should be adequate. I Property Number 14 ·No questionnaire returned. I This brick veneer dwelling is 7 years old and struct­ urally sound in all respects. It is well maintained, and all facilities are provided and operative. Only minor I works would be required to bring these premises to a top standard, and an allowance of $200.00 would be sufficient.

I Property Number 15 I The owner of this 80 year old house is a male pensioner over 60 years of age who has lived here for 50 years, finds I' the house satisfactory and has no plans to move. It is practically impossible for him to maintain the I premises in any form of repair or tidiness. There is evidence I I 47. I of foundation failure, rising dampness and the bathroom, I laundry and w.c. structures are all in a state of disrepair.

I To restore these premises to a satisfactory standard,

the sum of $1,250.00 should be more ~han adequate.

I Property Number 16

There are 2 adult males and 1 adult female tenanting I this house. They moved from Stafford.Street, Abbotsford, two and a half years ago and find the house satisfactory I but say it needs painting. They have plans to move within the next five years to the Elwood - Pt. Ormond area, I and would be interested in a Housing Commission house in Elwood. I This is a two s·torey brick structure in a sound and solid condition. Other than minor maintenance I problems such as corroded spouting in part and external ~ainting being sadly neglected, the premises are sound. To bring these flats back to a suitable standard, a sum I of $2,ooo:oo would have to be allowed. I Property Number 17 The house is owned.by a Greek family, 1 adult male, I 1 adult female, 1 male child under 5, and 1 female child under·s years. The family has lived here for five years, before which they lived at 160 Charles Street. They find I this house satisfactory, but say they have plans to move at sometime in the future. This unit which is approxi- I mately seven years Qld is a single storey brick veneer in a sound and solid condition. Maintenance has been kept I down to a minimum and there are no outstanding items requiring attention. I Property Number 18 The Greek owners of this house are 1 adult male, 1 I adult female, and two school age children, 1 male, 1 female. The family came from 103 Charles Street two and I a half years ago, and finds the house satisfactory al­ though they would like it to be brick veneered. They I I 48. I like the area, and have no plans to move.

I This dwelling has had a substantial amount of re­ pairs carried out over a period of time with all internal I lathe and plaster stripped and replaced with fibrous plaster sheet. New internal flush panel door~. The roof has I been completely renovated. New iron and spouting. Certain items still require attention, i.e. reblock kitchen-dining I room areas. Exterior painting. Demolition of rear verandah and other minor repairs. For these items a I suggested sum of $2,200.00 would cover all costs incurred. Property Number 19 I The present tenants (a Lebanese family of six - 2 adult~, 3 young adults 16-24 years, and 1 school aged child) have lived in the house for 3 years, and find I it satisfactory, but hope to move within twelve· months. They would like to purchase a Commission house in Abbots­

I ford, Essendon or Fairfield. The house has been o~fered for sale to the Renewal Authority.

I Movement has occurred in the brickwork, but being

close to the adjoining property, a good inspection ~as I difficult, and an exact survey of the external walls impossible. The usual defects are evident, such I as internal painting applied without good preparation and finish with uneven surfaces in the plaster. Some of the I floors are poor. To make the dwelling comply to a minimum housing standard (without extending the work to bring to I a first class standard) would cost about $6,000. Property Number 20 I The tenants are a young married Australian couple, with one pre school child, who have lived in the house since leaving. Richmond 6 months ago.· They say the house I is unsatisfactory- "too damp •.. there is moss everywhere •.• on the walls", and hope to move in the next twelve months I to purchase a Commission house in Richmond.

The house is on the end of a terrace of four. I Attempts have been made to keep the property well maintained I I 49. I but the plumbing is faulty; the laundry and bathroom I attached at the rear is very small and needs rebuilding; several windows need replacing; the floors require re­ I blocking; no proper party wall is provided; internal mouldings are poorly fitted; boards have been fixed horizontally as external cladding; one boundary brick I wall has moved and could be sinking; the front verandah wing wall has rolled outward; the yard has been paved I to internal floor level with a pond effect forming under the house; rising damp could spread further. It would I cost about $5,500 for minimum repairs. Little Charles Street Properties

I Property Number 1 I No questionnaire returned. This factory is single storey with a galvanised iron I roof, timber truss, gable roof, and brick external walls. Due to its age and mode of business (cloth dyers) , contin­

~al dampness and water penetration is prevalent causing · I severe structural movement in roof and wall members. Con­ sequently the external brick walls are in a severely I fractured condition. It would be impossible to reinstate these premises to any form of standard, demolition being I the only solution. Property Number 2 I The owner of these premises operates the main office of a warehouse and has been there for 9 years after I moving from Flinders Lane, Melbourne. There are no improvements they would like to make but expect to need I between 6,000 and 8,000 sq. feet extra space in the fore­ seeabl~ future. I This factory consisting of a corrugated fibro cement clad gable roof with brick external walls, was possibly built within the last ten years, and is therefore still in I a condition where it would require little money spent to I bring it back to its original condition. I I 50. I For the sum of $2,500.00 all brick walls fractured I by lorries to front elevation could be repaired. Ex­ ternal painting to.windows could be carried out and the I toilet block maintained and upgraded, bringing it all back to a first class condition. I Property Number 3 No questionnaire returned. I This factory which is used solely for pre-delivery check up and touch up of used and new cars, is in Al I condition. If it were to be converted for use other than that mentioned above, toilet blocks, office space, I partitioning and possibly some form of mechanical venti­ lation would be required. For these works alone, a fig.ure of $12,000.00 would have to be contemplated bear­ I ing in mind the uncertainty of the Statutory Authorities' demands.

I Property Number 4

The tenant of the house came here from Erin Street, I Richmond, eighteen months ago. The tenant has no plans to move, but desires to stay in Abbotsford, and would be I interested in renting a Housing Commission house in Abbotsford.

I This dwelling is a solid brick semi-detached unit with a galvanised iron roof. The plumbing in general I requires immediate attention, with the existing laundry in a dilapidated and ruinous condition and the roofing I iron corroded and defective. Internally the ceilings are fractured and drummy with the painting defectively I applied. These two uni,ts are tied together at the rear with brick tie bolts which would infer that the brick­ I work is suspect and possibly fractured. To restore this dwelling so as to comply with re­ levant regulations, the sum of $5,500.00 would have to I be allowed for. However, to carry out repairs so that the premises remain in a sanitary and weatherproof I condition, the sum of $2,500.00 should mor·e than cover the I necessary costs. I 51. I Property Number S· I No questionnaire returned. This dwelling is a solid brick semi-detached unit I with a galvanised iron roof. It is approximately ninety years old, and in a dilapidated and ruinous condition. I Brickwork to the boundary wall has subsided. Floors have sunken and the roof structural members are out of I level. The roof~ng iron and flashings are badly co­ rroded and loose in part leaving the entire roof in a dilapidated and ruinous condition. It is therefore I submitted that it would be both uneconomic and impracti­ cal to bring this structure· into a full state of. com­ I pliance with the relevant regulations. I Property Number 6 The owners of the house are a Yugoslavian family comprising 1 adult male, 1 adult female and 2 school age I children, 1- male, 1 female. They have a friend living ·with them; and have been there for seven and a half years. I They find.the house satisfactory but would prefer a new house as one of the adults _is an invalid pensioner. If I a new house is not possible somewhere else, then they would like a new house on their present site, and are I _interested in a Commission house. This very old brick dwelling is now the remaining I one of a former terrace (since demolished). The exposed party wall shows extensive structural subsidence and movement taking the return walls (including front) with I it in various parts. The internal surfaces have been patched and restored over the years and generally now I present a habitable condition. The rear skillions and enclosure of later-addition are structurally defective I in many respects. Plumbing and facilities are not to relevant regulations. No laundry structure is provided I and washing facilities are crudely installed in open ·sideway area. The structure faces a fourteen foot wide

str~et. It is therefore considered that restoration I ·would be most impractical.· I 52 . .I I Langridge Street Properties

I Property Number 1 I No questionna.ire returned. This single fronted unit is one of a brick pair possibly fifty years old. Roof tiles are broken, dis­ I placed and patched in numerous places and require urgent attention. Even though extensive renovations have been I carried out over the years, the kitchen wall surfaces are uneven and laundry and toilet outbuildings have yet I to be completed. The structure warrants restoration to full compliance at an estimated cost of $1,700.00.

I P~operty Number 2 The owner/occupiers are an elderly pensioner couple I who came to this house, from Italy, eighteen years ago. They find it satisfactory, and have no required improve­ I ments or any plans to move. The structure is sound, the walls and floors are I solid with the exception of minor fractures to the lathe and plaster partition walls (the use of lining paper over I these surfaces would suffice for now) . The external water. closet and at.tached shed are of poor construction with cladding material (T. & G. 6" flooring boards) which I will soon lead to decay and diSrepair. Repairs, to a reasonable standard, would include; further subfloor and I room outlet ventilation $200.00; replace front entrance path and steps $370.00; repainting to verge tiles and I chimney flue (bricks loose) $50.00; bring plumbing in line with existing regulations $250.00; build new I laundry with W.C. adjacent to, or incorporated and using existing roof $1600.00; broken cords - paper­ I ing walls $250; check wiring $100.00; total $2820.00. Property Number 3 I The owners of the house have been there for twenty three years and have no plans to move. I These premises have been allowed to slowly deterior- I I 53. I ate over the years and are now in need of extensive re­ I pairs. Roof cladding is a mixture of tiles, slates and roofing iron, and the obvious solution would be to com­ I pletely strip and reclad. Lathe and plaster ceilings throughout the premises are fractured. The bathroom I and kitchen areas are both of a sub-standard nature and a complete redesign and rebuild would seem necessary. I ·With other minor items in need of urgent attention, an outlay· of $11,000.00 would appear necessary to bring I these premises to a habitable standard. But if it was considered worthwhile to carry out repairs to place the premises in a neat and tidy condition of a more temporary I nature, $4,500.00 would be adequate. I Property Number 4 The owners of this house are a Greek family com­ I prising 1 adult male, 1 adult female, 1 male of school age, and 1 female unde~ 5 years, and they have lived here for six years before coming from Richmond, Collingwood. They

I find the ho~se satisfactory ahd have no plans to move.

·These premises are kept in a clean and tidy condition, I and other than the lathe and plaster ceilings which are sagging and fractured, and roof cladding requiring exten­ I sive maintenance, there would appear very little to do. For an outlay of $3,700.00, it is considered that I these premises could be restored to an acceptable standard. But to carry out repairs to bring the premises to a com­ I fortable and habitable condition, the sum of $1,500.00 would be adequate. I Property Number 5 A Greek family ·comprising 1 adult male, 1 adult I female, 1 male 16-24 years, and 1 male of school age are the owners of this house. They came here from Sydney I eighteen months ago and find the house satisfactory because of its close proximity to. the City. They have plans to I move in the next twelve months, and would like to go back to Sydney because of the climate. I I 54. I This dwelling is one of a brick and timber pair I approximately·eighty years old, with a galvanised iron roof sadly in need of repair. The laundry and bathroom I areas are in such a condition that demolition would appear to-be the only solution. This would also apply to the I rear skillion section. Considering the size and age of the building, any form of restoration would appear to I be unwarranted. If consideration was given to restore this dwelling to a habitable standard, the sum of $8,000.00 would have I to be allowed for. But to carry out repairs of a lesser nature to bring the premises to a habitable condition, I the amount of $3,500.00 would be adequate. I Property Number 6 A middle aged widow has owned this house for eight years and finds it satisfactory, with no suggested im­ I provements required. She would like to buy a house in New South Wales within twelve months and has offered her I current home for sale to the Renewal Authority.

Considerable renovation work has been carried out I to this structure. The whole floor· area has been stripped of original timber and replaced with concrete; I new fibrous plaster ceilings have been installed; some ·partition walls. have been resheeted with fibrous plaster; I and a new brick fence has been built at the front. Sig­ nificant fracturing is evident on the west side of the I passage. The kitchen and bathroom plumbing and the electrical wiring from the dwellingto the external water closet does not comply to the Board of Works' regulations. I An estimate of repairs has been made involving : under­ pin section of passage wall $400.00; relocate Gully - I D.T. and back vent to rear wall $760; check throughout electrical wiring and make good rear section $250; bring I skillion roof section into general line $800.00; paint iron roof and timber areas at rear $300; repair fractured I parapet wing wall - front verandah west side (caused by adjoining property's porch) $100.00; repair rear shed I door and provide spouting and downpipes to shed and water I 55. I

I ·closet $250.00; ·provide vented .skylights to bathroom, third and fourth bedrooms $720.00; provide proper laundry I $1200.00; make good rising dampness with adequate damp course and render $1500; make good internal paint work I- $300.00; total $6580.00. Property Number 7 I The.owners of this house, 1 female over 60 and 1 female 16-24 years, have lived here for one year, pre­ viously living at 243 Langridge Street. They find the I house satisfactory, but would like a new dividing back fence between 241-243, and also their second bedroom I which is partly renovated to be finished. They have no plans to move. The unit is one of a brick pair I erected about eighty years ago. The rear skillion structure has been remodelled throughout. Extensive I repairs are still in the process of being carried out internally, and would appear to be 90% complete. The main structural defects consist of partial collapse of I the veranaah wing walls and heavily weathered parapets. TJ:le ki tchenet.te area is . to .be completely remodelled to I comply with relevant standards. Estimate cost to. full restoration $3,400.00.

I .Property Number 8

The present tenants, an adult female, a school I age female and 1 male under 5 years of age, have lived in the house for two years and have no plans to move. I They previously lived in East Hawthorn and find their present home satisfactory for the rent paid, although I some improvements are suggested, i.e. bathroom and toilet to be made accessible from inside, resurfacing· I of back yard and renewed fences. This dwelling is one of a pair with apparent I fractures and movement to a majority of brick walls. Reblocking is necessary in certain areas,whilst the I kitchen-skillion areas do not comply with relevant regulations. The kitchen should be relocated in its I original location. The bathroom, laundry and W.C.

I 56. I I -areas are all of a sub-standard nature, and with a number of other minor items, it would be necessary to consider the sum of $14,000.00 to bring these premises to a stand­ I ·ard which would comply with all relevant regulations. However, to carry out repairs to make the premises com­ I fortable and ~abitable, the amount of $6,500.00 would be adequate.

I Nich6lson Str~et Properties Property Number 1

I No questionnaire returned. I This dwelling is a single storey brick home with the kitchen-bathroom areas inadequate in size and of a sub­ standard nature. Plumbing fittings in most part have been I built over with the external toilet in a ruinous condition.

Because of the congested atmosphere involved in these I premises, the sum of $10,000.00 would have to be allowed to bring these premisesto.a suitable standard, however, I this may not be an economical proposition. But if it was considered worthwhile to carry out repairs to place the I premises in ·a neat and tidy condition of a more temporary nature, $5,500.00 would be considered an adequate sum. I Property Number 2 The present tenants came here from Richmond three I months ago. The family, comprising 2 adults and 3 child­ ren do not find the house satisfactory and have plans to I move within the next twelve months. Because their newly born son is very ill and they find the house is too old I for them they would like a Housing Commission flat in Richmond. I This report only covers one half of Property Number 2 known as Flat 2. Access could not be gained to Flat 1 which, from external appearances, could easily be I divided into three flats and not one. It appears that the shower recess to Flat 2 is used for all purposes with I the external bathroom-laundry in disrepair and apparently I not used at any time. It is very difficult to estimate I 57. I ~he amount of rodney necessary to bring these premises I to a habitable standard.until access is gained into Flat 1 which comprises the major portion of these I premises. (Since the survey was done this property has been vacated and sold). Property Number 3 I Davis Lacquer Products have owned these premises since 1933, dealing in lacquers, enamels, paints, etc. I Their business was previously located in Punt Road, Richmond, and they find the present site suitable to ,. them because it is centrally located. They have no plans to move but would like the premises updated. I This factory is in a dilapidated and generally run down condition with all provided amenities of a sub­ I standard nature. Having been a paint factory for the past forty years, a build up of residue has resulted creating unfavourable working conditions. Both male I and female toilets are of a sub-standard nature and most electrical fittings are completely outdated and do not I comply with relevant regulations. For the sum of $15,000.00, a completely new male and I female amenities block could be built to serve the small staff employed with some allowance for general maintenance. I This would then bring these premises back into a workable condition. However, if by any chance these premises I should change ownership, the demands of the Statutory Authorities would have to be seriously considered before I any final estimate could be arrived at. Property Number 4 I No questionnaire returned. This dwelling is a double-fronted solid brick five I roomed horne with a slate and iron roof which, due to age and neglect, is in an advanced state of disrepair. The VI verandah structure is in a state of collapse. The toilet is in a ruinous condition. It is considered that effect­ I ive repairs to this structu~e would be neither possible oi practical.;.. I I 58. I I Property Number 5 The owners of this house, an adult and 2 school age children came from Kew nine years ago. They find the I house satisfactory arid have no plans to move.

This two storey bluestone structure has a major I problem with rising dampness which has penetrated approximately 50% of walls both internal and external I with frac·tures to the northern wall. The original timber floors have been replaced with concrete to the ground floor I area, and in most cases are below natural ground level. The first floor structural timbers are springy and defective •

.I In light of the above comments, it would appear futile to spend any large amount of money on these premises, I but for the sum of $6,500.00 the premises could be brought to a reasonable standard eliminating the majority of pro­ I blems. Property Number 6 I No.questionnaire returned. Before considering renovating this once attractive I home, the extent of work entailed should be studied extensively.

I There is evidence of ris.ing dampness in 50% of all the bluestone walls, a problem not easily rectified in I a building of thi~ nature. Walis are fractured, and the . ground and first floors are out of level and defective. I Concrete slab to all ground floor areas would be the obvious solution. The slate roof requires a complete overhaul. Extensive repairs to all door jambs, doors, I windows and internal linings. Painting has deteriorated I. to the extent that all surfaces inside and out need sanding righ~ back to natural surfaces. The light area to staircase should be demolished and rebuilt if permitted I by Council. Site grading inadequate. If the above works were carried out in con­ I junction with minor items such as electrical, plumbing, I I 59. I

joinery~and upgrading, t,he ~urn of $9,000.00 to $10,500.00 I would have to be considered.· But to carry out repairs to bring .the premises to a comfortable habitable I condition, $4,000.00 would be adequate. I Property Number 7 Sullivan's Hairdressing Supplies Pty Ltd have leased this property for the past seven years and operate the I main office and store of their wholesale supplying business. They were previously located at 206 Church Street, Richmond, I and have no plans to move from Nicholson Street as they are quite satisfied with the property.

I This factory and upstairs showroom has been complete­

ly modernised, possibly in the past ten years, and i~ I still in a very presentable condition.. To bring these premises back to first class condition some doors would I require easing, and some minor plumbing and painting would be necessary. $2,000.00 would sufficiently cover these I items. Property Number 8 I The Yugoslavian questionnaire was completed by the owners, a family comprising 2 adults, 1 young adult, and. I 2 children. They previously lived in East Melbourne and have been in this house for eighteen years. They find the house satisfactory and would only consider moving to I a house the same size in East Melbourne, Hawthorn, Toorak or South Yarra.

I This dwelling, approximately eighty years old, is a detached, double-fronted bluestone and brick I structure with a slate and iron roof.

The flooring has been renewed, in part, but with no I thought to repairing the defective sub-floor timbers. It would also appear that underpinning is most necessary due I to extensive wall fractures. There has been no provision made for outlet ventilation throughout the premises, I I I 60. .I I and cooking facilities have been defectively installed. To bring this dwelling to a standard whereby reason­ I able living conditions would be assured, a sum of $2,000- $2,500 ~hould be considered. I Property Number 9 This house has been tenanted for the past seven months .I by a Greek family with two children. Prior to this they had been living at a different address in Abbotsford. The I. house is considered to be satisfactory, but a hot water system is required. They have no plans to move but would be interested in a Commission flat to rent in Abbotsford.

I The house is a single-fronted, detached weatherboard with one 9" solid brick parapet wall on the south side. I It has been maintained in good condition and is struct­ urally sound. The only significant expenditure would I involve the relocation and replacement, in part, of.waste ·pipes which do not conform to the Board of Works regu..­ I lations (approximately. $400 would be sufficient).· Property Number 10 I This house is owned by a young Greek family, with two school age children, who have lived here for the last three I years after moving from Hawthorn. They like the house. The owner does not want any improvements: 11 anything that· I is needed I do it myself. The reason is that my wife is sick and one of my children also is sick and I cannot afford a lot of expense." He plans to move within twelve I months, preferably to change with another house in the same area, or would be interested in purchasing a Commission I house in Abbotsford.

The worst features of the house are the decay evident I in the timber (south) wall, and poor quality of domestic facilities. The wall should be rebuilt; I the cooking facilities require upgrading; and the entire kitchen requires relining; with the provision I of an instantaneous type gas hot water service, which I I 61. .I :would improve living comfort considerably. The estimate I of cost is $1476.00, which does not include the updating

of cooking facilit~es, painting the new work, or the pro­ I vision of a gas hot water service. Property Number 11

I N6 questionnaire returned.

This single storey, semi-detached brick home is I approximately seventy.years old, and is generally in a poor and run-down condition. Complete reblocking is required. I Plumbing generally is of a very poor standard with waste. pipes defective and the water service corroded and leaking. I Externally the weatherboards require burning off and re­ painting and all outbuildings are in a ruinous condition. I An estimated cost to bring these premises to· a re­ spectable standard would be $3,500.00. I Property Number 12 No questionnaire returned. . I . This dwelling is a single-fronted, detached, four I roomed, weatherboard home with a galvanised iron roof ... Structurally, the premises are sound and kept in a clean and satisfactory.condition. The outbuildings which .I house the bathroom, laundry and W.C. are all dilapidated. The majority of plumbing fitments are substandard and need I to be replaced. Downpipes ar~ not connected to stormwater drains. Roofing iron is corroded and all wastes are I submerged below ground level. It is considered that the sum of $4,000.00 would be I necessary to bring outbuildings and all their fitments back to a condition suitable to conform to relevant re- I . gulations. Property Number 13 I No questionnaire returned. This is a double fronted single storied detached I brick structure at least 60 years old. I I 62. .I I The roof iron is in poor condition, sanitary plumbing· has been built over, bricks ha~e been rendered and render I is flaking off through rising damp. The whole building is in a very bad state of disrepair .I and as bricks appear to be the early hand made type it is considered that restoration would be impractical~ I Victoria Street Properties Property Number 1 I S.E.C. Branch Municipal Offiders Association have owned the premises for the past three years. Their I business is a Trade Union which was previously located in Flinders Street. Although they find the site suitable, I their plans are to move within the next twelve months. These premises have been converted into modern busi­ I ness offices and are completely air conditioned. Con­ siderable expen~e has been involved in attaining the present high standard of ·alterations, renovations and I . general decor.

For an outlay of $4;500.00 all· wall fractures, a I ·paint touch up and general maintenance could be carried out to bring these offices to a first class condition.

I Property Number 2

A hairdressing salon, ha~ leased these premises I for five years. They find the site suitable and have I no plans to move. To make these premises habitable the bathroom/laundry areas should be demolished and a completely new structure I built.

First floor structural members are all in a defective I and suspect condition, necessitating replacement including .. ground floor ceilings and trims. The sum of $11,000.00 I would have to be allowed for any guarantee of success. However owing to the fact that the first floor rooms are I not used extensively, the repairs could be reduced by leaving the first floor structure as it is and so·reducing I the cost of repairs by $5,000.00. I 63. I I Property'Number 3 The owners of the premises operate a retailing I business, and have been situated there for six years. They find this site suitable and have no plans to move. I This double storey showroom has obviously been altered on numerous occasions over the years and is I presently being used for furniture display. The build­ ing is structurally sound and well kept. The rear section I . ground floor area is used as a Sunday School with the State Health Department's approval~ but the building is I not registered as a public building. No cost estimate has been submitted because of the complexities involved I with local business - private dwelling - public buildings, etc. I Property Number 4 No questionnaire returned. I This structure is a double storey brick shop and dwelling in a run down and dilapidated condition. The I dwelling is unoccupied and the shop is the only area used. The remainder of the premises are allowed to remain in a I filthy condition with animals free to roam throughout all dwelling areas and no attempt is made by the tenant to keep. I . these areas tidy or clean. Any attempt to make these premises habitable would be uneconomic·~

(To be read in conjunction with Victoria Street I Property Number 5). I Property Number 5 No questionnaire returned. il (Comments to be read in conjunction with Victoria Street Property Number 4). I This structure is a double storey brick shop and dwelling in a run down and dilapidated condition. The I roof area in general is corroded and ruinous and all ex­ ternal outbuildings are dilapidated and untidy. All plumb~ I ing is defective and if the dwelling was ever to be occupied, a major overhaul of all components would be necessary as I 64. ( I

I. it appears that neither toilet nor laund~y services have been used for some years. To make these premises habi­ table would be an uneconomical proposition.

I Property Number 6 I This building, leased by Abbotsford Photographics, is their main office. Previously .. located in South Melbourne they have been at 307 Victoria Street for seven months. As I the site is suitable there are no plans to move.

This is a double storey, brick shop and dwelling, I structurally sound in ground floor area. The first floor joists are defective and structurally unsound, necessitating I complete replacement including ceilings of ground floor areas.

Generally the plumbing requires a major overhaul as I 'the laundry facilities have been converted to a dark room and the roofing in part requires renewal. To bring these I premises to a more presentable and habitable condition the sum of $14,000.00 would be needed. However, to carry out ·' I repairs to bring the premises to a comfortable and habitable condition, $5,500.06 would be considered adequate. I Property Number 7 No questionnaire returned.

I ·This structure is a two storey brick shop and dwelling currently being used as a restaurant. The present occupier I has spent $5,000.00 on kitchen equipment and generally the premises are neat and tidy. Externally the roof requires I upgrading as roof sheeting is corroded and lifting in part. Plumbing fitments have been altered over the years I without M.M.B.W. approval and would require extensive modifications to :bring them to relevant standards. To make I these premises more pleasing and habitable $11,000.00 would have ·to be allowed. However, to restore these premises to a presentable condition without any major reconstruction, I a sum of $3,500.00_- 4,000.00 would make 'the premises operational providing the mode of business remained in I the same category. I I 65. ' I I Property Number 8 A 1 Hour Dry Cleaners and Coin Laundry have leased I these premises for the past five years. They were pre­ viously located in Welst Melbourne, and although they have I no plans to move, they would like a new front and a new roof. I This old double storey brick shop and dwelling, has been rebuilt and added to on numerous occasions leaving the existing rear structure in a state of disrepair. To I bring this area back to a presentable. standard, extensive .repairs and alterations would be necessary, i.e. painting I the entire retail area, complete renovation of the rear of the shop, and the stripping and replacement of internal I linings. For these works a sum of $11,000.00 should be I considered unless of course a general face lift would be

sufficient in the circumstances, in which case $4 1 000.00 I would be ample. The residential section of these premises had been completely isolated from the retail area by the I removal of the internal ·staircase. Property Number 9

I The TAB Agency has been at this address since moving from 227 Victoria Street four and a half years ago. I The site is suitable to them and there are no plans to move. These premises are a two storey brick shop and dwell­ I ing with the dwelling portion completely isolated from the

T.A.B~ by the removal of the internal staircase.

I It is only recently that these premises have been brought to their present condition to conform to standards I required by the T.A.B., and therefore, as the premises stand, little money need be spent to bring them to a I higher standard unless the occupancy should change. I. Property Number 10 · The owners of this property, run a motor vehicle

service ~nd spares business which was previously located at I 313 Bridge Road, Richmond. I 66. I

These premises consist of a series of two storey I saw tooth brick and concrete bays fitted out for the servicing of new and used cars. The building is ideally I suited and laid out for the present tenant's business activities. It has been kept in a.first class condition I and would require very little money spent on it to bring it to a higher standard. This could be achieved for $5,000. I If the premises were to be occupied other than by a new or used car business, the sum previously mentioned would I have to be reconsidered. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 67. I I APPENDIX B TABULATED RESIDENTIAL QUESTIONNAIRE RETURNS

Source of Information: U.R.A. Questionnaire Returns, I August, 1975.

Residential Questionnaires distributed - 49 I Residential Questionnaires returned (+ 1 blank) - 31 Response Rate 63% I .(Greek response 41%) I QUESTIONS 1 - 3 Need for Community Facilities QUESTIONS 1 and 2 I How many males and females in the age groups: ·(No. of responses : 30) MALES FEMALES TOTAL 0-4 5 6 11 5-15 10 8 18 I 16-24 4 7 11 25-59 21 17 38 I Over 60 6 5 11

I Total 46 43 89 I QUESTION 3 : Any other persons, living in your house? I (No. of responses : 4) No. of Respondents I Mother-in-law 1 Relative - male 1 Male 1 I Friend 1

I Total 4 I I I I 68. I

-I QUESTIONS 4 - 11 Need for Residential Facilities and Renovation Loans.

QUESTION 4: I No. of Respondents Are you the OWner or Tenant? I (No. of responses : 31) I CMner 16 Tenant 15

I Total 31 I QUESTION 5 :. No. of Replies I How long have you lived in this house? (No. of responses : 30) I Less than 1 yeaL' 6 1 - 4 years 10 I 5 - 9 years 7 . 10 - 19 years 2 I 20+ years 5 I Not stated 1 Total 31 I

QUESTION 6 : I Where did you live before moving here? I (No. of responses : 29) INNER SUBURBS: Abbotsford (Different Address) 9 I Collingwood 2 Richmond 7 I East Melbourne 1 Prahran 1 Hawthorn 2 I Kew 1 I Moonee Ponds 1 I 69. .I QUESTION 6 (Cont.) No. of Replies

I OTHER STATES : Sydney 1

I OI'HER COONTRIES: Germany 1 I .Italy 1 Yugoslavia 1 I Lebanon 1 Not stated 2

I Total 31 I Question 7 Is this house satisfactory? (No. of responses : 30 I Yes . 26. No 4 Not stated 1

Total 31

CCMMENTS : (No. of r·esponses : 16) I Somewhat cold and damp this time of the year l Would like to exchange my present house for a new one 2 I Because I have lived here for a long time 1 Very expensive and badly ventilated 1 Because my newly born son is ill we would like I a Housing Commission flat 1 It is up to councillors to repair Little Charles I Street as was promised 1 Is close to the City, and is handy to everything 1 Whatever you have and is yours is good, besides I is near to everything and practical 1 Is very close to the City 1 I House satisfactory for the rent paid but I would like to improve the facilities 1 On the whole it is O.K. but it could do with I bigger windows, more power points etc. 1 Too damp-there is moss everywhere-etc. on the walls 1 I Nil 3 Not stated 15 I Total 31

I 70. I I QUESTION 8: No. of Replies What improvements would you like (if any) to make to this house? I (No~ of responses : 27)

Central Heating; indoor toilet ·1 I Exchange for a new house or have a new house built on the same land as it is locat~d close to the city 2 I Spouting, floors and water pipes ... 1 . New line 1 I The house is too old 1 To repair walls 1 I Hot water system .1 None-anything that is needed I do it myself. The reason is that my wife is sick and one I of my children also is sick and I cannot afford a lot of expenses 1 I cannot make any improvements because I am I sick and out of work, only my wife works. At this stage none, otherwise minor ones A new dividing back fence between 241 & I 243 Langridge Street, also a second bedroom which is partly renovated to.be finished I for my daughter 1 Indoor bathroom and toilet, new fences and resurface backyard 1 I Crossing at Charles Street, grocer shop on Charles Street, side of Victoria Street. 1 More natural lighting - skylights in rooms I with small windows 1 Roof made leakproof and cracks in walls fixed 1 I Paint work 1 Demolish building opposite and build kinder­ garten for 150 children I Brick-veneer house - nothing inside 1 Nil/None 8 I Not stated 4 I Total 30 I I 71. I I I QUESTION 9 No. of Rep"li,es Have you any plans to move from this house? I (No. of responses : 30) Yes 10 I No 20 Not stated 1

I Total 31

I When? Within the next 12 months 9

I Within the next 5 years ~ COMMENTS (No. of responses : 13)

I Only if I get a house with same number of rooms; same sized garden, in East Melbourne or Hawthorn .1 Change house in same area 1 For the time being, I don't want to move. If I get a good price perhaps I will consider it further 1

I would like to go back to Sydney, if I get ... the right price, because of the climate 1 .. ·.. ·. ~ . Desire to stay in Abbotsford 2 Director, Mr. H. Parsons and City Council have already taken steps to assist me as I I am an invalid pensioner and my situation is well known to them 1 I I am going to rent a house in Essendon 1 Would like to move immediately if a new house is available under the above mentioned terms 1 I We don't know if we will move in 5 years 1 I like this area 2 I Because the house is old 1 I I I I I 72. I

I QUESTION 10 No. of Replies Where would you like to move? I (No. of responses : 10) Same area 2· I Richmond· 3 . . '. Essendon 1 I Elwood/Pt. Ormond area .1 Sydney 1 I New South Wales 1 No preference - wherever possible 1 I Total 10 I QUESTION 11: I Would you be interested in a Housing Commission: Flat or House? (No. of responses : 12) I Flat 4. · House 8 I TOTAL 12 Rent 6 Buy 4 Not indicated 2 . I 'l'OTAL 12

Where? I Abbotsford 6 Richmond 3 I Elwood 1 Anywhere 1• Not stated. :L

Total 12 I I I 73. I I QUESTION 12-19 Need for Community Facilities QUESTION 12 No. of Replies I What do you like most about living in Abbotsford? I (No. of responses : 30) ],. .Availability of a house 18 2. Economic reasons 17 I 3. Close to work 17 4. Public transport 19 I 5 .. Close to relations/friends 17 I 6. Other *(see below) 7 * Our house (1) Our garden (1) I Like the area (2) Many reasons (2) I Hospital is near and I am a pensioner (1) I

QUESTION 13 ·· .. · . .';'. I ··. ,· .. Does anyone in your family belong to I (No. of responses 16) 1. Sports Clubs .. 2 .·· I 2 . Social Clubs 2. 3. Church groups .2 I 4. Trade Unions 6 5. Special interest groups 3 6. Other 2 I No 4 I Not stated 15 I I I 74. I I

QUESTIOO 14: No. of ReJ?l~es

I Where do you shop? I (No. of responses : 23) Abbotsford - Victoria Street 12 I Collingwood - Johnston Street 2 Collingwood - Smith Street 3 Richmond 10 I City 3 Victoria Market 4 I Carlton 1 North Helbourne 1 I Anywhere 1 ·*-. 37' Of the 23 responses : I Use of 1 shopping centre only 11 Use of 2 shopping centres only 9 I Use of more than 2 shopping centres 2 Anywhere ~.1 I Total 23 . ' .. ______.:__ __ -'-___;_-..,--_;_---.;.._:_.;.: .• !:.• ·.,. ' .

* 11 used more than one shopping centre I .QUESTION 15: How do you shop? I (No. of responses 30) By car 7 I *Walk 23 Other Tram (5) 9 I Taxi (1) Train (2) Bus (1) I Not stated .1

I Total . 40

* The majority walked, but many also used other I means of transport I I 75. I I QUESTION 16 : No. of Replies Where do the children go to school? I (No. of responses : 12) 1. Abbotsford - Lithgow Street 9 I 2. Collingwood Primary 1 3.. Kew 1 4. Richmond 1 I Not applicable 19

I Total 31

I QUESTION 17: Who looks after pre-school children in the day-time? I (No. of responses 10)

1. Wife 6 I 2. Relations* 3 3. Day Nursery 1 I 4 . Kindergarten

5. Other . ,·· ._ ... : .,, ·- . I Not applicable .21 I Total 31 * The 3 relations looking after pre-school children were I an aunt (1) and two grandmothers (2). QUESTION 18 I Are services and facilities adequate in the Abbotsford area for (No. of responses : 30) I Yes No Not sure Total Responses Elderly people 9 5 12 26 I Family Advice Services 4 5 13 22 Hospital and Medical 13 7 6 26 I_ Kindergartens & Day Nurseries 5 9 8 22 Migrant Services 4 8 9 21 I Parks and Gardens 7 13 5 25 Schools 13 4 6 23 Youth Services 4 5 11 20 I Several people did not complete 1 answer for each service or facility but left the boxes blank

I 76. I QUESTION 19 No. of Replies

I What kind of facilities would you like to see in the area? i (No~ of responses : 19) I Migrant Services Interpreting Service 1 Turkish classes 1 I Migrant services 1 I Environment - Open Spa·ce Open space, parks, trees 5 I Trees in streets 1 Removal of the factories '1 Social Services I Social services, institutes etc. 2· More Govt. housing for poor and a reduction I in privately owned rented accommodation 1 Shops I A Govt. controlled shop 1 More pubs 1 .. ,. I· More shops 1 A supermarket in Victoria Street 1 Sports I Athletic fields 2 Central sports facilities, e.g. swimming I pool, gym. 1 Traffic and Roads I Pedestrian lights 1 Improvement of roads and clean up streets 1 Children and Youth I Youth services 2 Kindergartens & Day Nurseries 1 I After school programmes for children 1 Children's play area 3 I Not stated 12

I Total *41 * Several people mentioned more than 1 facility. 1 person wanted to. se'e all the facilities mentioned under. Question I 18. I 77. I I No. of Responses QUESTIONS 20-30 Need fo·r Parking Facilities

I QUESTION 20:

Do you have a car? I (No. of responses : 29) Yes 8 I· No 2], Not stated 2 I Total 31. I I QUESTION 21 Do you have a motor bike? I (No. of responses : 26) Yes I No 26 5. I Not stated Total 31. I QUESTION 22: I Where do you park the car at night? (No. of responses : 8)

I In front of house (street) 5 At the house 2 I Car port 1 I Not applicable· 23·. Total 31 I I I I 78.

------~..:______:___:____:______I ·I QUESTION 23: No. of Response$ Where do you park the car during the day? I (No. of responses : 7)

OUtside at work 6. I Brewery car park 1 Not.stated 1 I Not applicable 23

I Total ll

I QUESTION 24: I Where do you park the car at the weekend? (No. of responses : 8)

I Street (front of house) 7 Car port 1 I Not applicable .23

I Total 31

I QUESTION 25: I Do you use the car for (No. of responses : 8)

I 1. Travelling to work 8 2. Visiting friends and relatives 8 I 3. Everyday ..1 8 4 . Mainly at weekends I I I I I 79. I

I No. of Responses I QUESTION 26: Where do the family members who work full I time outside the home work? (No. of responses : 18)

I Abbotsford 6 Richmond 1 I East Melbourne 2 City 1 I Yarraville 1 Anywhere (carpenter) 1 I Spinning Mills 1 Factory 1 G.M.H. 1 I Freez Bros. 1 Clark Shoes 1 I R.M.I.T. ·(student) 1 Pensioners 2 ·,·,. I Not working 2

I Total 22 ..

I Some respondents made more than one reply to Question 26. I I I I I I I 80. .- I QUESTION 27: No. of Responses

I What improvements to traffic and parking would you like to see in the Renewal Area? I (No. of responses : 16) Traffic lights and/or Pedestrian crossing I at Nicholson and Victoria Streets 5 Safety zone 1 Stop signs 1 I Give way to right at Charles and Victoria Streets in peak hours 1 I Parking facilities 1 Parking permits only in streets where people live (Others Council controlled) · . 1 I Cleaner roads 1 Ban trucks and heavy vehicles 3 I Reduce through traffic in Little Charles Street 1 Closure of Little Charles Street at Langridge STreet 1. I · Widen Little Charles Street 1 Repair lane for cars to drive up .1. I Increase bicycle transport facilities :l Kevin Dennis stopped from speeding in area ·.·.·; .1·· .· I Not stated 15

I Total . 35 I * Several respondents gave more than 1 reply I I I I I

I 81. I I No. of Replies I QUESTIONS 28-30 Improvements in area I QUESTION 28: What other improvements, alterations or additions would you like to see in the I Renewal Area? I (No. of responses : 16) Trees and shrubs to make area more pleasant and appealing 1 I Better residential and industrial facilities, more hospital and school improvements 1 Playing area for children (in Little Charles I Street) 5 More garages and parking area, improvements I to roads and houses 1 Better roads 1 Council to take more interest in area 1 I Whole area needs to be rebuilt - idea.l area for poor 1 I Social Services, Parks, Kindergartens etc. 1 More open spaces- gardens in centre of housing groups (Houses - not flats, especially I high-rise ones). 2 Migrant Services, Youth Services, Kinder­ gartens & Day Nurseries 1 I Remove factories from area and establish clubs or institutes 1 Daytime parking for visitors (Street is filled I all day with cars belonging to people working locally). 1 I Not stated 15

I Total 32 I * Several respondents made more than 1 reply. I I I 82. I I I QUESTIONS 29: No. of replies Are there any comments or suggestions to I help in the renewal study? (No. of responses : 6)

I If possible could we please negotiate terms and conditions for a new house 1 Please help us move into a housing I commission flat for we are worried about our baby's life and welfare

Would like to see rebuilding where n~cessary I as it is an ideal place for the poor Need for a community education programme. I about litter (in different languages) coupled with the provision of l~tter bins in strategic spots. 1 Keep older style houses in area by renovating I them instead of demolishing. If new buildings are to be built they should be I of similar style or design :L We are waiting 1 I Not stated 25 I Total I QUESTION 30: May we call on you again? I (No. of responses : 10) Yes 7 I No 3 Not stated 21 I Total 31 I I I I 83. I I APPENDIX C I TABULATED NON-RESIDENTIAL QUESTIONNAIRE RETURNS Source : U.R.A. Questionnaire Survey, August, 1975;·

I No. of Questionnaires delivered 14 I No. of Questionnaires returned 12 2 said they would post them but have not been received. I 1 was returned incomplete (missing 1st page). I 1. No. of Buildings: I Leased 5 OWned 6 I Not stated I 2. Type of Business Manufacturing 2· I Retail 6 Warehouse/Wholesaling ·;... :. 4. : :·. ·. : . ~· .. ' . Office . ·l. I Motor Repairs/Spare Parts 1· I Total 12'

. . ·: ·. I 3. Length of time business conducted at present address (No. of responses : 11) I Over 40 years 10-14 years I 5-10 years 5 3-4 years 2

2-3 years ;~.,· I Less than 1 year 1. Not stated 1:

I Total 11. I I 84. I I 4. Location of Business Prior to Renewal Area

Collingwood ~ Victoria Street I (different no.) 1 City - Flinders Lane 2 I Richmond - Church Street 1 Punt Road 1" Bridge Road 1 I South Melbourne 1 West Melbourne 1 I No reply/business did not exist 4 I Totai 12

I 5. Whether a main office/shop/factory or a branch Main office/Shop 8 I Branch (Kevin Dennis & T.A.B.) ·;2 . Not applicable i I Not known ·1 I Total 12 & 6. Need £or Tncreased Space 7 .. ... I No .10 Yes . (6-8000 sq. feet) 1 . I Not known 1 I Total 12 The only one requiring more space is Venus Hartung - a packaging warehouse

I 8. Improvements Needed

None or not answered 9 I Yes - in need of improvement 2 I Not known 1 Total 12.

I The two requiring improvements were

1 hr. Dry Cleaners & Coin Laundry - New Front I - New Roof I Davis Lacquer Products - UpDate I as. I

I 9. Whether Present Site Consider·ed Suitable Yes 11 I Not known 1 Total 12 Comments Like proximity to city I Centrally located I 10 Which Location Would be More Suitable

I No reply to this as answers to Q9 were all in the affirmative. I

11 Any Plans to Move from Present Location I &12. Yes 1 I No 10 Not known l I Total .l2

The 1 business intending to move is the S.E.C~ I Branch of the Municipal Officers' Association within 12 months. I

I 13. Times the Building is in Use

Week days 3 I Weekdays/evenings/weekends * 6 Weekdays/evenings 3 I Total 12 *Weekends normally refer to Saturday morning only.

However 9 out of 12 businesses were open for more than I the 5 day week, but only one was a factory, and one the packaging warehouse, the rest were retail ~nd .· I service shops. I I 86. I I 14. Number of Staff Employed

I Males Females Total

Textile Dyers 2 2 4 I Packaging Warehouse 9 3 12 Hairdressing supplies 16 4 20 I Lacquers, enamels, paints 6 3 g. Trade Union 4 1 5 ' I Ladies Hairdressers 2 2 Electrical retail 1 1 2 I Photographers 1 1 T.A.B. 6 6 Dry Cleaners & Laundrette 2 ·.· .. 2 I Motor vehicle service and spares 60 13 73 I Hotel 6 2 8 Total 107 37 144 .. I I 15. Distance of Employees' Home from Work Place Within a 1 mile radius 8 I Within a 3 mile radius . ··.' 3 ;·· ..· Within a 5 mile radius 2. .. . . Over 5 miles 57. I Kevin Dennis Employees come from all 4 categories and do not specify how many from each distance 73 . ·. .I Not stated 1 I Total 144 . I 16. Suburbs in which most Employees I.ive. Times Mentioned· 1. Abbots fo,rd 2 2. Richmond 3 I 3. Thornbury 1 4. Coburg 1 I 5. East Brunswick 1 6. Fairfield 1 I 7. South & South Eastern Suburbs t 8. Scatte·red tnetropoli tan 2 I Not answered or not known 3 I 87. I I 17. Type of Transpo·rt Used by Most Employees to Reach Work

No. of businesses whose employees travel I mainly by : Public Transport 3 I Private Car 4 Co. Vehicle & Private car 2 Company vehicle only 1 I Public transport/private car l Not answered 1 I Total 12 (Pressure on Car Parking) I esp. as 17 in 2 businesses come mostly by private car 20 in 1 business come mostly by company car I Total 126 in 7 businesses coMe mostly by car It is not known exactly how many come by car, but in firms employing the above workers, most apparently come I by some kind of private or company motor vehicle. I 18. Whether Clients live in Immediate Vicinity of .Premises . ·.

I Yes 5 No 7 I Total 12

I 19. Adequacy of Car Parking Facilities Yes No Total I Adequate for customers 6 6 12 Adequate for employees 7 4 11 I (+ 1 not stated) I I I

I 88. I I

Adequa·te for Cus·tomers No·t Adequate. for Customers ' I Textile Dyers Packaging warehouse Hairdressing supplies Lacquer products I Trade Union Hairdressers Photographer Electrical retail I T.A.B. Dry cleaners Kevin Dennis

I Adequate for Employees Not Adequate for Employees Textile Dyers Hairdressing supplies I Paper Merchants Lacquer products Trade Union Hairdresse;r-s I Electrical retail Dry cleaners T.A.B. I Kevin Dennis Hotel I 20. Type of Improvements suggested for Traffic" and Parking in the Area I Times .Mentioned No parking in Little Charles Street 1 Car parking in Little Charles Street I would be of benefit l Unrestricted public parking 1 I Car park established l Parking facilities 2 I More off street parking 2 Car parking facilities 6 I Pedestrian crossings 4 Stop lights 2 I No reply or Not sure 4 I 21. Generation of Vehicular Traffic Heavy 3 Light 6 I Medium None 2 I No answer l Total 12 I I 89. I

& 22. Whether Access is Cbtain·able· ·to p·r·etriises from Little I 23. Charles Str·eet and ·a'lter·native

Yes 7 I No 5 I Total 12 Those with Access to Little Charles Street Alternative Available I Venus Hartung - paper merchants No Newsome Textile Dyers Yes I Sullivans Hairdressing Supplies Yes Davis Lacquer Products Yes I Abbotsford Photographics Yes Dry Cleaners No I Kevin Dennis Yes I 24. Satisfaction with loadin·g/unloading of vehicles· Satisfied 8 Not satisfied 3 I No answer 1 The 3 not satisfied with access for loading and ,). . .· .: _:·. I unloading of vehicles were - Davis Lacquer Products I Many Anne Coiffure Dry Cleaners I 25. Type of Improvements, alterations or additions needed in Area I Times Mention.ed Car parking facilities 1 Less through traffic 1 I Little Charles Street reconstructed 1 Pedestrian crossing in Victoria Street I near Charles Street 2 More shops 1 I More traffic lights 1 Better Roads 1 Litter Bins 1 I More frequent street cleaning 1 I No reply 5 I 90. I

26. Satisfaction with Services and Facilities in I Collingwood I Yes No Not sure 1. Elderly people 1 8 2. Family Advice Services 2 3 7 I 3. Hospitals. 1 3 5 4. Kindergartens & day nurseries 2 7 I 5. Medical care 1 1 7 6. Migrant Services 9 I 7. Parks and gardens 1 4 4 8. Public transport 4 1 .4 I 9. Schools 1 1 •7 10. Shopping 2 3 3 I 11. Youth 1 7 2 respondents did not reply to this question 1 stating that it was not applicable, a further I 2 marked all facilities 'unsure'.

I 27. Kind of facilities wanted in the area Tirtte.s. ·Mentioned I Off Street Parking ·. 2"· Car parking for shoppers .l. Childrens playground .1 I Traffic crossings or lights 2 . Toilets 1 I 6 respondents did not complete this question, 1 stated that it was 'not applicable' I 27. Any other comments

I 1. - Do away with 2 footpaths in Little Cha+les Street. 2. - Sanitary co~diti6ns of gutters is unsati~factory: I accumulated rubbish stays indefinitely. · 3. - Traffic lights installed at Nicholson and Victoria Street intersection .. I 4. - There aren't enough facilities for youths such as dances, halls, libraries I 8 respondents did not reply to this question~ I I 91. I 29. Satisfactory to c·all back on re·spondent if necessary

I Yes 4 No 8 I Total 12 The 4 who agreed to be contacted again if necessary I were :- Newsome Textile Dyers Davis Lacquer Porducts I Abbotsford Photographics Kevin Dennis Motors - 313 Victoria Street I Summary I The commercial sector is varied in type of business and I provides employment for over 100 people. The majority of employees do not appear to live in or near the area and ma~y I drive in private cars to work. This could be a reason. for the oftern repeated need for more parking facilities .. Assoc- I iated problems of traffic seem to be a problem and the installaion ·Of traffic lights, especially for pedestrians,:

I may alleviate one soure of stress.

I The commercial businesses seem fairly content .with their premises, both location-wise and for access. Only one

I business,· the trade union office, expects to move out. Only I one firm· wanted to expand. Car parking was a problem for · half the firms, the other half seemed to be satisfied.

'I The questions relating to social facilities and improve- I ments to the area were not well answered, and as the employees· do not live in the area they are not aware of the lack of, or I provision of services or facilities, apart from those used by employees, such as shops, parks and gardens.and I I 92. I I public transport. Most improvements perceived by the com­

I mercial sector were related to traffic, apart from suggest~. I ions for a children's playground and cleaner streets. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 93. ·I APPENDIX D

I CHARACTERISTICS OF RESIDENTIAL POPULATION

Sources: Australian Bureau of Census and Statistics (1971) I U.R.A. Questionnaire Survey, August, 1975. I TABLE 1: Age Distribution of Population Study Area CCD-07 Collingwood City

I 0 - 4 11 12.4% 81 13.7% 2,312 11% 5 - 14 18 20.2% 89 15.1% 3,633 17.3% I 15 - 24 11 12.4% 71 12.1% 3,153 15% 25 - 59 38 42.7% 295 50.2% 9,280 44~1% .. I Over 60 11 12.4% 52 '8.8% 2,644 12.6% I Total 89 588 21,022 I This table shows the age distribution of the population at the June 1971 census for the City of Collingwoo~ ana.·. census collector's district 07. This reveals that foi I census collector's district 07 there are higb percent~ge~ of the population in the age group 0-4 (11.66%). and in' I the age group 25-59 (11.2%). This is higher than the I corresponding percentages for Collingwood City _(8.6%). TABLE 2 . Sex Distribution of Population

I Age Study Area CD-07 Collingwood City M F M F M F I 0-4 5 6 37 40 1164 1148 5-15 10 8 47 42 1805 1828 I 16-24 4 7 29 46 1469 1684 25-59 21 17 160 135 4796 4484 I Over 60 6 5 24 28 1026 264.4 I Total 46 43 297 291 10,260 10, 762.' I I 94. I I I 'I'ABLE 2: This table shows the age distribution for males and females in Collingwood City and the study area CC0-07~

. \ . . ~ .. . .. : . . I A lower proportion of both males and fema:ies· aged 25-29, 30-34 and 35-39 is evident in the study area I than in the City of Collingwood as a whole. There are proportionately higher numbers of I elderly females in the area than in Collingwood. TABLE 3: Proportion of Overseas Born

:I Study Area CD-07 Collingwood I 48.9% 56.5% 45.1% To determine the ethnic groups in the area we I used as an index the number who took questionnaires in • their own language. I These were:- Greek (17) 34.7% I Yugoslav ( 3) 6.1% Turkish ( 2) 4.1% Italian ( 1) 2% I Arabic ( 1) 2%

24 48.9%

This table shows the proportion of overseas born persons in the populations of Collingwood City and the census collector's district 07 at the 1971

~ensus. I Census collector's district 07 has consistently had a higher percentage of its population born overseas. I The percentage in both areas has increased steadily. I Of the foreign born population in the City of Collingwood 68% were born in Southern European countries I as at the June 1971 Census. I I 95. I ·TABLE 4: Household Comp9sition I No. of Households· 2 Adults + Children (including 1 with I mother-in-law). 14 1 Adult + Children 3 2-3 Adults (25-59 years) 5 I 1 Adult (25-59 years) 1 2 Adults (Over 60) 2 I 1 Adult (Over 60) 3 2 Adults (25-59 and over 60) 1 I 3 Adults (2) 25-59 and 1 over 60 1 17 households include children I 13 households are withou~ children This table is an analysis of results from the I residential questionnaire: of 30 households, 17 have children and 13 do not. The total shows the diversity I of household composition and age groups in the st:udy areg.. I I .·. ~ ... I I I I I I I I 96. I I APPENDIX E I FACILITIES IN COLLINGWOOD IN THE VICINITY OF THE PROPOSAL AREA Sources: Melways Street Directory I Resources in the Community (Good Neighbour Council of Vic.) Help (Committee on Social Welfare - Collingwood I Council) Telephone Directory: B & C Volumes I Reports : Elderly Needs in the Collingwood Municipality I Child Care Needs for Collingwood The People's Yelo Pages - a resource guide to living in Melbourne

I INDEX J;>AG.E .

WELFARE 99 I General 9.9 Migrants 99 I Aged 100

Women 101 ...... I EDUCATION 101 Day Nurseries ... ·. ·ro·t•· I Kindergartens ··101 Primary Schools . 102 I Secondary .102 Special Services •103 I HEALTH . 103 Hospitals and Clinics 103 I Doctors 104 Dentists . 104 Ambulance 104 I Baby Health Centres ],04 Home Help 104 I Home Nursing 104

CULTURAL/RECREATIONAL 105 I Libraries 105 Art Galleries 105 I Cinemas/Theatres 105 I 97. I I · PAGE I CULTURAL/RECREATIONAL (Cont'd) Clubs/Societies 105 I Parks and Recreation Reserves 106 Sporting Facilities 106 I RELIGIOUS 107 I TRANSPORT 109 Trains 109 Trams 109 I Buses .·lo9. ·

I SHOPPING 109 I I II ! I I I I I I I I I I 98. I

WELFARE (Melways) I Map 44 Distance .Code I General Social Worker-Collingwood Town Hall ~ - 1 .km DS I Community Welfare Foundation - 18 Islington Street, Collingwood 1 km . D6 I Victorian Council of Social Service, Wellington Street, Collingwood 1 - 2 ~m C4

Victorian Aboriginal· Cooperative - I Smith Street, Collingwood · 1~ km. B6

Brotherhood of St. Laurence - 67 I Brunswick Street, Fitzroy 1~ - 2 km A6

Society of St. Vincent de Paul 1~ 2 km ElO

I Catholic Family Welfare Bureau -Albert Street, East Melbourne 1 - 2 km Ds·

I Social Welfare Department, Swanston Street, City 4 km H9-M(43) I Department of Social Security, C'wealth Centre, Cnr. Spring & LaTrobe Streets, City . 4 km. · J6-M(43)

I Migrants II Commonwealth Immigration Department, Cnr. Spring & LaTrobe Streets (Inter- preter Service/Counselling) 4 km J6-M(43) I Australian-Greek Welfare Association, 168-170 Lonsdale Street, Melbourne 4 km J7-M(43)

Migrant Advisory Services (Various I City Banks)

United Kingdom Settlers Association, I 36 Brunswick Street, Fitzroy 1 - 2 .krn A6 Ecumenical Migration Centre, I Church Street, Richmond 1 - 2 km F9

Italian As~istance Association, 304 I Drummond Street, Carlton 2 krn+ J4 The Good Neighbour Council of I Victoria, .575 Elizabeth Street, City 4 km+ HS I I go. I I Distance Code Migrant Classes in English

I HCV Elizabeth St. Estate, Richmond ~ km F7 I RMIT laTrobe Street, City 2 - 4 km H6-M(43) ~hurch of All Nations, Palmerston 4 km K3. Street, Carlton

I Multi-lingual library - Fitzroy . 2 km+ AS Public Library I

Singleton Medical Welfare Centre, " •' I Wellington Street, Collingwood 1 - 1~ km es Singleton Lodge, 18 Isl~ngton I Street, Collingwood 1 km D6 Elderly Citizens' Club, Hoddle I Street, .Collingwood ~ - 1 km DS •Meals on Wheels, Hoddle Street, Collingwood (Town Hall) ~ - 1 km. 05

I Hoddle Day Hospital, Vere Street,

Collingwood 1 ·- 1~ km .C4 ··-: . .. .·. ·... ·.. .. -... ., ... ' •. I Firewood & Blankets, Town Hall, Collingwood ~ - 1 km D5 I· Old People's Home, Spenseley Street, I Clifton Hill 2 km Fl Old People's Home, McGrath Crt., I Richmond 1~ - 2 ·km Fll Richmond Dispensary & Outpatients Clinic, Church Street 1~ - 2 km ElO

I Combined Pensioners' Association of Victoria, Church Street, Richmond 1~ - 2 km ElO

I Home Nursing Service (St. Vincents 3 km K6-M (43) Hospital) I I I 100. I I

I Distance .Code

Women

I Women's Health Collective, Johnston Street, Collin9wood 1 - 1~ krn D4

I Rape Crisis Service, Johnston Street, Collingwood 1 - 1~ krn D4 I Women's Free Legal Service, Johnston Street, Collingwood 1 - 1~ km D4

Family Planning Association, Church I Street, Richmond 1 - 1~ km FB ·.

Family Planning Clinic - Brotherhood I of St. Laurence, Brunswick Street, Fitzroy 1~ - 2 km · A6 I EDUCATION I Day Nurseries Collingwood Day Nursery, Keele St., I Collingwood 1~ 2 km C3 Family Centre, (Melb. City Mission) 1 .· ··{)5· I 253 Hoddle St., Abbotsford l.~kin· ' Genie Child Care Centre, Heidelberg Road, Clifton Hill 3 krn El

I Croation Catholic Centre, Hodgkinson Street, Clifton Hill 3 km C2 I Debbies Day Nursery, Vesper Street, Richmond 1~ ... 2 km JJ.,O ·I Richmond Day Nursery, Abinger Street, Richmond 1~ - 2 km FlO

Fitzroy Creche & Day Nursery, I Napier & Condell Streets, Fitzroy 1~ - 2 km B5

Ethel Nilsen Day Nursery, 275 J7-M(43) I Exhibition Street, City 4 km Kindergartens

I Methodist- Rupert St., Collingwood ~ - 1 km D6

John Barnaby - Otter & Wellington I Streets, Collingwood 1 - l~km B4 I I 101. I I Distance ·Code· Kindergartens (Cont.)

I Rita Harris - Keele St. Collingwood 1~ - 2 km C3 St. Phillips- Hoddle St., Abbotsford ~ - 1 krn D6. I St. Ignatius Free - Church Street, Richmond 2 k!!t Ell I Dame Nellie Melba Free - Goodwood Street, Richmond 2 krn ·. ElO

I Primary Schools I Lithgow Street, Abbotsford ~ kin f7 Euphrasias, St. Helier Street, I Abbotsford (R.C.) 1 - 1~ km G5 Cambridge Street, Collingwood 1 - 1~ krn B6 I Vere Street, Collingwood 2 krn D5 Richmond North State School - I Buckingham Street. 2 krn HB St. Johns - Victoria Parade, .. b7:·:...... I East Melbourne (R.C.) ·~ -. 1 ·kin' St. James- North Richmond (R.C.) 2 km H8

I Richmond West - Lennox Street ~ 1 km EB St. Ignatius -Richmond (R.C.) 2 krn Ell I Secondary I St. Josephs Technical College, Nicholson Street, Collingwood ~ km E6

Collingwood Education Centre, Vere I Street, Collingwood 1 - 1~ km D4

Collingwood Technical School, I Johnston Street, Collingwood 1 - 1~ km C4

Richmond Technical School, Church St. 1 - 1~ km F9

I Richmond High School

C.B.C. Cathedral College (Boys R.C.) I Clifton Hill ~ - 1~ km B7. I 102. I I Secondary (Cont.) Distance .code-- F.J.C. Convent (Girls) Vaucluse, I Darlington Parade, Richmond 1~ - 2 km .· ElO Gleadell Street, Girls Sec. I School, Richmond 3 km · .F9 Special I Fitzroy Vocational & Educational Centre 3 km .A4· Royal Melbourne Institute of I Technology, LaTrobe Street, Melbourne 4 km H 6-M ( 4 3 ) HEALTH I Hospitals Singleton Medical Welfare Centre, I Wellington Street, Collingwood 1 - 1~ km cs After Care, Victoria Parade, Collingwood 1 - 1~ ··km B6 I Berry Street Babies Home & Hospital Berry Street, East Melbourne .1~ - 2 kit) ¢9 I Dental Hospital, Elizabeth Street & Flemington Road, ~arkville 5 km F4-M (43) I St. Vincents, Victoria Parade, Fitzroy 4 km+· K6-M(43)

Eye & Ear Hospital, 126 Victoria •.· I Parade, East Melbourne 2 km 'A7 Psychiatric Hospital, Royal Park, Parkville 7 km Bl0.... M(29) I Women's Hospital, 720 Swanston Street, Carlton 3 km .H4-M(43) I Freemasons Hospital, Clarendon Street 1 - 1~ km B7 Mercy Hospital, Clarendon Street 1 - 1~ km B8

I Bethe$da, Erin Street, Richmond 1 - 1~ km D9. I Epworth, Erin Street, Richmond 1 - 1~ km· E9 V.D. Clinic - Department of Health, Gertrude Street, Fitzroy 2 km . B6

I Alexander Parade Clinic (for drugs and alcohol treatment)6 Alexander Parade, I Fitzroy 1~ - 2 km F9 Smith Street Detoxification Centre, I 5-7 Smith Street, .Fitzroy ~ - 1~ km C7 (VATMI) Victoria Aid to the Mentally I Ill, Workshop, Rupert Street, Collingwood 1~ km C6 103. I I Doctors Distance Code

184 Gipps Street, Abbotsford ~ - 1 km D6

111 Johnston Street, Collingwood 1 - 1~ km. · D4 I Queens Parade - Clifton Hill Medical) 4 km El Group, Grant Street, Clifton Hill ) 2 km+ I South Terrace, Clifton Hill 02 Doctors l.n Erin Street, Richmond 1 - 1~ km DE9 I Doctors in Victoria Parade, East Melbourne 1~ - 2 ·km BC6 Dentists

I Dr. Hartley, 169 Queens Parade, Clifton Hill 2 km+ Dl. I Amos, 6SO Bridge Road, Richmond :4 km+ JlO I Barlow, 247 Gertrude Street, Fitzroy 1~ - 2 k~ B6 ·. Colman, 24 Moor Street, Fitzroy 2 km+, AS I Ellinson, 24 Moor Street, Fitzroy 2 km+ AS I Levant, B.A. 206 Albert Street, East Melbourne 1 - l!.i km .·a7·

I Smith, G.l48 Hotham Street, East Melbourne 1 - 1~ km ·C8 I Ambulance Victoria Civil Ambulance Service 64 LaTrobe Street, Melbourne 2 km+ J6 ... M"(4~)

I Baby Health Centres I Collingwood - Gahan Reserve ~ - 1 km E5 Clifton Hill, Darling Gardens 2 km+ 02 I Home Help

Collingwood Town Hall ~ - 1 km DS

I Home Nursing I St. Vincent's Hospital Home Care Ext. Service 2 km+ K6-M(43l I I 104. I I I CULTURAL/RECREATIONAL Distance· Code Libraries I Collingwood Free Library, Town Hall ~ - 1 km DS Melbourne Public Library - East I Melbourne Branch, George Street 1 - 1~ km C8 Richmond Public Library, Church St. 1~ kci Fll

Fitzroy Public Library (multi­ I .. lingual books) 2 km+ AS

I Art Galleries

Australian Gallery, Darby Street, I Collingwood 1 B6 I Pinacothera, Waltham Pl., Fitzroy 1~ km · FlO Cinemas/Theatres

I National - Richmond I Victoria - Richmond Pumpkin Theatre - Richmond ··:··.

Clubs/Societies I Youth: Opportunity Youth Club, Collingwood After School Club St. Georges Church I Wellington Street, Collingwood Collingwood Community Centrei after school programme ·

I Fitzroy Community Youth Centre, Cnr. I Napier & Gore Street, Fitzroy National I Austrian Club - Fitzroy Greek Macedonian Club - Fitzroy

I Pan Macedonian Assoc. of Australia I The Cretan Brotherhood of Melbourne - Richmond Kiwanis Club of Melbourne - Abbotsford I 105 ·. I I I Distance .Code General I R.S.L. - Collingwood

I Australian Labor Party I Victorian Amateur Cine Society - Fitzroy Parks and Recreation Re·s·erves

I Gahan Reserve, Park Street, Abbotsford ~ - 1 ·km · ·ES

I Browns Reserve, Nicholson Street, Abbotsford ~ - 1 km ·E5 I Mayors Park 4 km El * Ramsden Street Reserve 4 km+ . G2 I * Hall Reserve 5. km Hl.:·· I Darling Gardens, Clifton Hill 2 km+ D2 City Reserve, Church Street, I ·Richmond · 1 1~ km Dights Falls . 2 km .F3 I. * Dickinson Reserve, Kew 1~ - 2 kni H6 Yarra Park, East Melbourne 1~ - 2 km C9

I Treasury Gardens, East Melbourne 1~ - 2 km BB I Carlton Gardens 3 km K6. Fitzroy Gardens, East Melbourne 3 km B7

I Sporting Facilities: I Swimming: Fitzroy Public Baths 4 km B3 I Richmond Public Baths Gleadell Street 1~ - 2 km F9

I * On Yarra River Banks

I 106. I I Distance ·.·Code I Tennis : Clifton Hill 2 km+ · El

I East Melbourne, Albert Street 1 km C7

I 'Golf: Yarra Bend - Fairfield Public Course

I Yarra Bend - Kew Public Course 2 km. H6 I Richmond 9 hole Public Course 6 km Kl2 I Bowling: Richmond I Fitzroy Melbourne I football: I Victoria Park, Collingwood 1~ km E4· . . . . I Melbourne Cricket Ground 1 . km. •• 'B9 RELIGIOUS I Assembly of God, 343, Bridge Road, . F9 Richmond 1 - 1~ km.. I Baptist, 98 Hoddle Street, Abbotsford ~ km 06

Slavic Baptist, 55 Stanley Street, I Richmond 2 km+ Ell

Rumanian Baptist, Harmsworth Street, I Collingwood ~ - 1 km OS Christian Open Assembly, 10 Mater I Street, Collingwood 1~ - 2 km C3 Church of Christ, Stanton Street, I Collingwood ~ - 1 krn . · DS Church of England, St. Phillips, I Hoddle Street, Collingwood ~ - 1 kin DS

I 107. I I I Distance Code Religioua (Cont.) ..... Church of England, St. Stephens, I Church Street, Richmond 1~ - 2 km FlO

Congregational, Cnr. K~nt and I Burnley Street 1 - 1~ km H8 Greek Orthodox, Holy Trinity, 319 I Burnley Street, Richmond 2 krn Hll Greek Orthodox, 186 Victoria Parade, I East Melbourne ~ km A7 Lutheran, St. Marks (Estorian & I Hungarian) East Melbourne 2 km 08 Methodist, Church Street, Richmond ~ krn F7 Presbyterian, St. Georges, Cnr. I Wellington & Otter Streets, Collingwood 1 - 1~ km C4

I Roman Catholic~ St. Josephs, 46 Otter Street, Collingwood 1 - 1~ km. I Roman Catholic, St. James, 179 Somerset Street, Richmond 1 - 1~ km I Roman Catholic, St. Ignatius, Richmond 4 km Croatian Catholic - Clifton Hill 3 km · C2 I Salvation Army, Mater Street, Collingwood 1~ - 2 krn .CJ I Salvation Army, Lennox Street, Richmond ~ krn E7. I Christian Revival Crusade, 128 Lennox Street, Richmond ~ - 1 krn E8 Macedonian Orthodox, 52 Young I Street, Fitzroy 1~ - 2 km A6 Pentecostal Church, 339-343 Bridge I Road, Richmond 3 km F9 Russian Orthodox, 6 Oxford Street, I Collingwood 1 - 1~ km 136 · Syrian Orthodox, Simpson Street I and Victoria Parade, East Melbourne ~ - 1 km D7 Melbourne Unitarian Peace Memorial . C7 I Church, 110 Grey Street, E. Melbourne 1 - 1~ km 108, I .. ·.'. ·.. ·

TRANSPORT

I Train Service North Richmond (nearest to. proposal arear. I Collingwooci

I Trams E - w along Victoria Parade I N - s Church Street to Richmond/Prahran N - s along Smith Street, Collingwood • N - s along Brunswick Street I N - s along Nicholson Street

I Bus Services No. 246 Elsternwick - Clifton Hill via· Collingwoo·d I No. 546 Heidelberg - Collingwood (Victoria: Parade) No. 294 Donvale - City via Collingwood I No. 403 Bulleen - City via Collingwood No. 607 Abbotsford -· Toorak Station

I SHOPPING ... Victoria Street, Abbotsford ·.·.. · ., ·. I Smith Street, Collingwood Johnston Street, Collingwood I Church Street, Richmond Bridge Road, Richmond I Victoria Market, City Melbourne City I I I I il I 109. I I APPENDIX F I PROPERTY VALUES 1972-74 I CITY OF COLLINGWOOD Source: "Property S~les Statistics" -Valuer G~neral's I Department Over the period 1972-1974 there has been a I marked increase in the amounts involved in transactions for properties of all types. A price index, based on, 1970,. I has been used to facilitate comparison and to.off-set the exaggerating influence of the general inflation in_piices throughout the economy. The mean price per sale has been I used to calculate the price index for dwellings ~hil~ f6r vacant blocks the mean price per square metre has beep I used. The following table analyses property sales for the City of Collingwood over the years, 1972, l973 and I 1974. I Table F-1 Property Sales, City of Collingwood, 1972-74 Land·use No. of Total Mean Price Mean Mean .. Residential Sales Price Price Index Price.... 2..· ·.·. ·Blo.ck· of all per base perM .. S.:i,.·ze I Sales Sale 1970 ha. $ $ $

I 1972 Dwellings 453 5_492,589 12 '124 110.8 49.1. •. 0.0243

I Vacant Blks 16 8~735 5,233 137.1 2 2 • 7 . 1 ~ 02 3 8

1973 I Dwellings 675 10.416.029 15,431 141.0 59.2 0.0256 Vacant Blks 27 522.695 19,359 374.4 62.2 0.-0260

I 1974 Dwellings 302 6048120 20,027 183.0 90.1' 0.0220 I ' I Vacant Blks 11 12~400 11,036 155.7 25.8 0~0428.

I Source Property Sales Statistics, Valuer-General's office I

I I

110. I I A vacant residential site for these purposes is 2 defined as having an area less than 2000 m • Observation I on these figures must be prefaced by the remark that the number of properties are rather small and therefore subject I to variation due to the different characteristics of each property transacted.

I Looking firstly at dwellings we see that over the three year period there has been a fluctuation in the I number of properties transacted. The peak of 675 dwell­ ings in 1973 may correspond to the real estate boom and I subsequent fall- significantly, the number of dwelling~.· sold in 1974, a year of tight credit, was thirty thre~ I per cent lower than the number sold in 1972. While the number fluctuated over the period the price has escalated. The mean price per sale in 1972, $12,124, increased by I 27.2% to $15,431 in 1973 and by a further 29.8% in 1974

to reach $20,027. Properties within the proposal ~rea I have also been subject to price increase. Improvement~ and repairs may also have been carried out whi6h wouid ex~ I plain some of the price rise. To take an illustratio~ :· a house in Charles Street between Victoria and Langridge I Streets was .sold in 1970 for $10,250. Two years later the same property sold for $17,000 with a furthe~ $500 for chattels included with the property. Another house •·. · I in Nicholson Street was purchased in April, 1970, for $5,650 and sold five months later for $9,650.

I Vacant building blocks are a rare commodity in Collingwood and other inner suburban areas. As with home· I sales, a boom in the number of transactions appeared in 1973. Even more noticeable is the high mean price per I sale in that year. It increased 370% from the previous year and fell 57.6% in 1974. Caution should be taken I with these figures as only fifty four blocks were trans­ acted over the three year period. Location and zoning would affect the price of the properties sold and, as I can be seen from the table, the mean block size over I the period has Vqried considerably.

I 111. I I .I I I I I I

I APPENDIX - G I SUPPLEMENTARY FIGURES I . ·:-.: I :· .. I I I I I

I I I I 112. I I URBAN RENEWAL PROPOSAL COLLINGWOOD I LITTLE CHARLES ST. 20 0 20 40 60 80 SCALE Of METRES i::::=::::x==i::::==:i::==:=:i::==:==-=:i::==:=:::::J

I LANGRIDGE STREET I I • I t

I LEGEND· I ~ MAJOR. RENOVATION. I ~ MINOR RENOVATiON· ~ NEW CONSTRUCTION . • I I Ulliilll DEMOL,iTION I

I Z SOURCE 0 en I ...•·IAI ... a: 0 CITY OF COLLINGWOOD ( J: I % CJ CJ -z I I I I VICTORIA STREET

I BUILDING & DEMOLITION FIGURE G•1 PERMITS 1965-75 I .JANUARY 1976 I URBAN RENEWAL PROPOSAL COLLINGWOOD I LITTLE .CHARLES ST. 20 0 20 40 60 80 I SCALE Of METRESC=~==~======c======I=====~======~ LANGRIDGE STREET .•, I / ~.·.·. • It'" • .-... ~-~·.·. • ~-· .• .• • ·-·~· • ~~·.·. • ~· ~~· 1.·.·.·.· ~-~·.·. • ;· ~~· .·.·i."!.~. ~.·.·. • ;• ~-· ~· ... I •••• • • • ;~ ~~~ I .-.-.-.-... I u.•.·.·.·.·•• • • • • • • • • t LE~END ...... •.•.• .. •.•~ ,..__.•.-·-·-·=--·,..· .....,r-11 ..... -t:~;;;; .;.'W' ...... •••••••••• -. ·•:. I ...... •.... ~ ,._ ...... -.-.-.-.:. ~ MAJOR REPAIRS Jii ~ REQUIRED. ~.·• •••• • • -.-• ••••• • • • •·=· • I It' •••• ·-·-· ••• :· .-.-.-.-.-, ~ ·• ...... ·-· ~·~·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.~. ·.·.·.·~~n ...... ·-·.·.·.·. ~ . ~...... ·-·. I ~ ••••-. lA ·.·.·.·.·.·-·-·-·-·-· It:••••••••••· • • • • • IWu ~~·-· .. ~------~ I ~·-·.·.·.·.·~. II: • ·-·-· ·~· l,;jf ~~--.·.·.· ········-~ SOURCE ~~···········.. .---.'W'.~.--.IIi ~.·.·.·.·.·.· I ~·.·.·.·.·.· z U.R.A. BUILDING SURVEY • • • • • • 0 en U) IU .... I .... lw ~: ·-·-·-·-· 0 ~ ,. .... % c ... ·.•·•·•·· ~ u I % ...... ·.·.·.·- ~ u ~~~···-·~··L··~···~··~·~·~:L_ ____ ~:i z- I ..-~~.,., . [•[•"•t- ... •. .. •• ~· I -~~·~-· ·.. .~·~-· ·.. ·• ~·~-· ··~~· I •. ~·~-~ -' • ·•.II... I VICTORIA STREET

FIGURE G-2 INADEQUATE BATHROOM FACILITIES I JANUARY 1976 I URBAN RENEWAL PROPOSAL COLLINGWOOD I LITTLE CHARLES ST. 20 o 20 40 so eo SCALE Of' Mf TRES C:===i::::====i:::::=:=:i:::=====i==::=J

I LANGRIDGE STREET I I I ...... I w W LEGEND w w a: ...a: I ... ~ ~INADEQUATE OR ~ ~ NON· EXISTENT ~COMBINED . ~LAUNDRY BATHROOM I SATISFACTORY . . I ~OUTSIDE. I

I Z SOURCE 0 ~ ~ I w -' U.R.A. BUILDING SURVEY ..I 0 a: ::t ( u I :::s:: u -z I I I I VICTORIA STREET I FIGURE G-3 LAUNDRY _FACILITIES I JANUARY 1976 I ' URBAN RENEWAL PROPOSAL

COLLINGWOO.D . ~' I LITTLE CHARLES ST. 20 0 10 40 60 80 . SCALE Of METRESi:::•===• ====r.: ... =·.·.=.::::.::=.:...:::r:=-::..= I LANGRIDGE STREET I I I

~ I W LEGEND· w a: ~ I en Vh'lfl1 MAJOR REPAIRS t.~~:~LL£.~ REQUIRED

~ MINOR REPAIRS I ~REQUIRED I I SOURCE I z U.R.A. BUILDING SURVEY 0 en en I w ..I ..I 0 a: l: ( u I l: u z- I I I I VICTORIA STREET I FIGURE G•4 KITCHEN FACILITIES I .JANUARY 1976 I URBAN RENEWAL PROPOSAL COLLINGWOOD I LITTLE CHARLES ST. 10 U lv 4U 6L' Hl SCALE Of MET .. ES=,-:.r::·_ .... T -~:-: -:;-: _ .. : ...r._: . ..:.:.:=::=J

I LANGRIDGE STREET I I I ...... I w w LEGEND w w ...m: ...m: I (I) (I) CHANGE IN D OWNERSHIP I I I SOURCE U.R.A. QUESTIONNAIRES

I z CITY OF COLLINGWOOD 0 RATE ROLLS en (I) w ..1 ..1 VALUER GENERAL I 0 PROPERTY SALES m: l: c( (J I l: (J -z I I I STREET I VICTORIA I FIGURE G-5 CHANGES IN TENURE 1971-75 I .JANUARY 1976 I URBAN RENEWAL PROPOSAL COLLINGWOOD I LITTLE CHARLES ST. 20 0 20 o40 60 80 - SCALE OF METRES I :::_:·~ .••• ·.~ ...•.. ~-~ ..... :·: •.... ·~. ·:-.. ,. .ll.:..,."'=n:J __:_:_ o·~·- · · · · · · - · · · · · ' · f · · · · · · .-. · · · · · · ·;: -rf1: I .1-v------~ ------7 1· I - ·~;--o / ·~ANG~IDG-~ 'h~~: - S;R;;;- ~ ]j~ I I. I I" I I ' · I ·· 0. I : ~ IJiil~: ]1.- k :. I -· ~ =~~I I 1: I I 1.. ~ I' I o ll•' ~ ~~I ~111 ~11.1 I1: · 1~:I STORMWATER DRAIN I : ~ I c ~ ct ... I . 1- . I :: 1- 1- I: I • • " _, fn I SEWER :~ 1: 22smm dian•. I GAS ~ ·~ j if !~: ...... I~ • I ELECTRICITY I I • 1: 1' I Underground Lines :: : I~ ~ I --o o--o- . 1 I~ 1~. I: Overhead Lines ~ : I~= 1: ·.i. I I : ~~·... ~-··-i Sub Station·· I: • u I" C 11: 1° II' I. 41( ·'. I· I o- I ' o~ I ~ %U I : I : I: . • !:: I· · I· I · WATER ~~ • I• I II ~ ...... I. I · lo P.M.G CABLES I I I' I I I: I I Z I: I I ~I~ 0 I· I: U) 1: I _. I· o Exact location of services o~ I to be determined on site I ::1: I· U I' I. Z:1: I: Source: · . I H.C.V. Chief Engineers I I 10 Branch u..:. "'-t . II I: 2251 I . I IS~ --, I : Jllb::~: :: ~ :o:

i_ ~ :~ :~ N ~ I - 1- - 6 ... 0 ...... =o ... .;:.:..: lj ~ L..-...- •.• b •.. ·~· ..••...•... 0 •••••••••••••• ·__;.~~. -~ VICTORIA STREET · I ===15==-=-o --o o =o= - -o- O- .L =-o-- ·I FIGURE G-6 ENGINEERING SERVICES I JANUARY '976 ~ I J URBAN RENEWAL PROPOSAL I COLLINGWOOD LITTLE CHARLES ST. I SCALE OF METRES 100~~0==~100==~~~0==~30==0=.4~00==~500- I I. I I I I I I I I I I I 1 Doctors SCHOOLS ~ ~RKSIRESERVES 2 Day Nursery I A Collin. wood F Gahan Reserve 3 Kindergarten Education Centre G Browns Reserve 4 Fire· Station B ST. Joeepha Tech. Col .... H PicniC Area 6 Post· Office c AW.Otaford State School I Yarra Bend Park 6 Police Station .._t Rk.hmond J D ..rllng Gardena - Railway Line D Primary Scho.ol K Pow lett Reserve -----Tram Line E ST. Johns R.C. School I a Church FIGURE G•7 FACILITIES MAP I JANUARY 1976

"- URBAN RENEWAL PROPOSAL COLLINGWOOD LITTLE CHARLES ST.

I 100 0 100 200 300 400 syo I I I I I I I I I I I I I AREA UNDER CONSIDERATION I RAILWAY LINE: CITY -HURSTBRIDGE. CITY- EPPING TRAM LINE: CITY- DONCASTER TRAM LINE: BALACLAVA- NTH. RICHMOND I BUS ROUTE: CITY- WARRANDYTE ...... BUS ROUTE: ELSTERNWICK- CLIFTON HILL I Source. Mln1atry of Tr•naport m•p 197& FIGURE G•B TRANSPORT FACILITIES I JANUARY 1971 APPENDIX H ROADS TO BE CLOSED AND EASEMENTS TO BE EXTINGUISHED

Under Section 4{3) {b) {iv) of the Urban Renewal Act, 1970, it is proposed that the following roads, carriageway easements and restrictive covenants in the Collingwood Little Charles Street renewal proposal area {part of Crown Portion 57 Parish of Jika Jika, County of Bourke) be extinguished : 1. rhose portions of a reserved road known as Little Charles Street as are described below {a) From the northern alignment of Victoria Street, extending north the entire width

for ~ distance of 34m. {b) Commencing from a line drawn from a point on the western alignment of Little Charles Street 138 m. north of Victoria Street north-east to a point on the east­ ern alignment of Little Charles Street and then extending north to an easterly line drawn from the south-east .corner of a brick S.E.C. sub-station south of Langridge Street. 2. A carriageway easement 3.05m wide extending west from Little Charles Street and then south. Commencing 40.93m. south of Langridge Street, west for 26.39 m. and then south for 37.18 m. 3. A carriageway easement reserved by Benjamin Bell in the original subdivision, extending west from Little Charles Street and then north-south. Commencing 123.9m. south of Langridge Street 3.66m. wide for 21m. and then north south 3.05m. wide for 27m. 4. Two carriageway easements 1.22m. wide forming one right of way, extending west from Little Charles Street and then north and south. Commencing 71.04m. north of Victoria 1.22m. wide for 19.8lm. and then south for 20.32m. The other easement commencing 72.14m. north of Victoria Street 1.22m. wide for 23.05m. and then north for 18.95m.

121. ·f

I" i

I' I I I ------____...,., __ I

·~ .. I· I I I I I I I I I· I I I.

I i · f IJ~

.~i J -- J~