Vandalised social housing empty for months after sudden relocations

When Jack Retjman first came across a viral TikTok filmed inside a derelict housing complex in January, he quickly recognised the badly vandalised homes the video captured.

Doors had been forced open, bicycles disassembled and dumped across the site and patches of walling ripped away.

On a kitchen counter, drug paraphernalia and a champagne bottle sat beside a sea of spray paint cans used to cover the walls in graffiti.

This wasn’t a long-abandoned building site, but the remains of a social housing community Mr Rejtman lived next door to until it was cleared out about a year ago.

Residents in the complex — in Balaclava in Melbourne’s south-east — were first told they would need to move out so the homes could be knocked down and rebuilt in November 2023. 

“The redevelopment will provide 68 new architect-designed, environmentally sustainable homes with modern amenity and beautiful shared spaces for all to enjoy,” a letter from provider HousingFirst said.

“To accommodate the changes, you will need to move out of your current home into alternative accommodation that will be arranged by HousingFirst for the period of construction.

“However, you will have first right of return to the new developed homes once the new homes are complete, and we’re confident the enhanced amenity will be worth the inconvenience.”

However, delays obtaining planning approvals and relocating tenants went on to extend both the period the empty homes sat intact and the time before residents can return.

The ABC has not been able to reach former tenants, which HousingFirst says were mostly relocated nearby after close consultation.

But about half a dozen neighbours strongly criticised the handling of the project, saying it raised serious questions about state government plans to increase Melbourne’s housing stock.   

“The video captured the consequences of the poor approach for this project,” Mr Rejtman said.

“It increased crime in the area. It created all kinds of problems — again, a symptom of a badly managed project.”

Homes only a few decades old

According to promotional material from HousingFirst seen by the ABC, tenants were offered $1,000 to assist with relocation costs shortly after the project was announced.

A company timeline anticipated tenants moving out by April 2024 ahead of demolition the following month and the return of residents about two years later, in May 2026.

HousingFirst said giving residents the time they needed to relocate then pushed this schedule back. It said the last tenant left in July last year.

But neighbours grew concerned as the site remained intact for months afterwards.

In place of a reportedly cohesive community with many long-term tenants, some said they began to see unfamiliar people coming and going from the abandoned site.

Photos sent to the ABC show fencing erected around the building bent to provide entry points.

“We started to see people going in there, the lights on, music being played, doors being opened,” Jonathan Cosgrove, who lives close to the development, said.

“I ended up calling the police a fair few times, as did, I think, a few neighbours, about the squatters.

“They would often just come in and kick them out.”

Mr Cosgrove was among residents who questioned the need to redevelop the homes, which were only about 30 years old.

But HousingFirst, a major community housing provider whose stock has nearly doubled over the past eight years, said the project was necessary to maximise land use and improve energy efficiency.

“These 20 properties were becoming increasingly costly to maintain, and they were also expensive for residents to heat and cool,” a spokesperson said.

“This was a well-located sizeable site with the opportunity to more than triple the number of social housing dwellings, there was access to government funding, and we had a recently completed nearby property that we could relocate the residents to.

“We saw this as too good an opportunity to pass over.”

Completion expected in about two years

Planning documents suggest an application for the $36.5 million project was lodged in March 2024, after the development was announced.

The application was filed under a fast-tracked pathway that gives the planning minister decision-making control over social housing projects — and exempts projects from VCAT appeals — rather than the local council.

It’s understood state government funding was secured in the middle of 2024.

Nearly 60 residents had made objections about issues like overdevelopment and car parking by the end of September.

The local council didn’t object to the project but raised concerns about design detail, vehicle access and apartment layout. 

But residents, including a local architect who provided detailed feedback, felt their concerns were brushed aside when the project was approved in the middle of October.

HousingFirst said the project encountered “statutory planning delays”, but it’s unclear what caused them.

But Mr Rejtman said the lack of resident input had compromised the project.

“There are much more creative and much more productive ways of doing it, but because they’re not consulting with neighbours, they actually have no idea what those ways are,” he said.

The state government has recently unveiled significant changes to planning law — including taking decision-making control from councils and removing appeal rights in certain circumstances — as it tries to unlock space for 2.24 million homes by 2051.

Separately, the government has embarked on a significant project to redevelop Melbourne’s 44 public housing towers. But in that case, some of the towers are six decades old.

Opposition MP David Southwick, who brought a petition from his Balaclava constituents to state parliament, questioned whether the right systems were in place to support significant housing growth.

“We’ve got a government that talks a big game on providing more housing but, practically, doesn’t have the processes in place in terms of how they manage things,” he said.

“What we’re seeing is many of those people that need the housing not being provided it or even worse being booted out of the homes that they have because the government really doesn’t know what they’re doing.”

Demolition of the Balaclava site began in early February. 

The project is expected to be complete at the end of 2026 at the earliest, at least eight months later residents were initially advised.