frequently asked question

Why does YIMBY Melbourne have such a problem with heritage overlays?

Heritage overlays—as currently applied in Melbourne—are incredibly expansive and heavily limit new housing in much of the inner city.

The Centre for Urban Research’s report “2015 Melbourne at 8 million” modelled the maximum dwelling yield for the 3,291 lots over 2,000 sqm along tram lines under then-current zoning allocations. 

The maximum yield for these lots, without heritage considerations, was 81,895 dwellings. With heritage factored in, this yield was reduced by more than 63 per cent, to a total yield of 29,822 dwellings. Of this reduction, 36,230 sites (44 per cent) were excluded due to an explicit heritage overlay, and 15,843 (19 per cent) were excluded due to being built before 1945.

But it’s easier to see the sprawl of heritage overlays for yourself:

Image sourced from VicPlan

Everything shaded pink is covered by heritage overlays where changes are heavily restricted—unfortunately, it mostly covers the inner-city suburbs with the best access to public transport and the city. 

The consequence of trying to keep so many of our most desirable areas locked in amber means that we are heavily restricted from being able to build more homes where people want to live. We are restricting Melbourne as a city only built for the past rather than the future. 

Make no mistake, heritage is a vital part of our cities, but with overlays being increasingly weaponised to block housing, bad faith actors have begun reshaping heritage overlays into a tool to lock people out of the most amenity-rich areas, while keeping it increasingly exclusive to the wealthy established residents. There is a better balance that can easily be struck. 

Furthermore, heritage overlays further skew towards homeownership within their areas predominantly to the wealthy via higher ongoing housing costs. This is due to a variety of factors from higher insurance premiums, the need for specialist contractors to maintain facades, the need to engage with heritage consultants, etc. 

So, given the number of negative externalities of heritage overlays, what metrics do the council hired heritage consultants use to evaluate what is or isn’t heritage? 

It seems that it is fundamentally built around one thing only: age! From brutalist multi-level carparks in Carlton to fourteen disused substations are all preserved via heritage overlays. The latter example directly stopped a development for 333 apartments until the minister intervened—approving a far more limited 168-dwelling development due to the prioritisation of preserving the substation over housing. Recent examples have highlighted that consultants are moving towards classifying seemingly anything built pre-1970s as heritage-worthy.

The consultants and ‘experts’ recommending these overlays to councils directly benefit from providing their services in assisting overlay-beleaguered owners navigate the difficult approvals system for modifying their property—the current system is little more than a rort for heritage consultants, and a scarily effective means of closing off communities in the most amenity-rich areas of Melbourne, where housing is most needed.

Sourced from economist Matt Cowgill.

YIMBY Melbourne does not advocate the abolition of heritage protection altogether, simply reforming it to a far more reasonable level, with an emphasis on preserving individual buildings of genuinely significant worth, instead of the huge indiscriminate swathes of land currently favoured, which have a far higher—and unacceptable—cost.

Your hottest YIMBY Queries, Answered

Frequently Asked Questions

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Are YIMBYs aligned with any political parties?
Aren't Melbourne apartments low-quality? Why do you want more of them?
Aren't tax concessions the biggest cause of the housing crisis? Why focus on zoning and planning?
Can't we just keep building greenfield/outer suburban developments?
Can't we just stop foreign investment to combat the housing crisis?
Can't we just stop immigration to solve the housing crisis?
Do you support stronger renter protections?
Doesn't new development just push poor people out of the city?
Don't high permit approval rates show that planning isn't the issue?
How does market-rate housing supply benefit those most in need?
Isn't zoning and planning reform just a giveaway to developers?
Local councillors are democratically elected representatives. What’s wrong with them having final decision-making powers over planning matters?
Loosening planning controls may result in more ugly modern buildings. Shouldn't new buildings be beautiful?
Shouldn't the local community get the final say on what happens in their "backyard"?
There are already so many apartments. Do we need more?
What about parking? Won't new developments create massive congestion in our cities?
What about those one million vacant homes?
What can we do about land banking?
What if I don’t want to live in an apartment?
What's the problem with building setbacks?
Why build denser cities? Isn't it better to decentralise?
Why can't the government just build public housing for all?
Why did rental prices go up during COVID?
Why do you hold councils accountable for housing supply delivery?
Why does YIMBY Melbourne have such a problem with heritage overlays?
Why doesn't YIMBY Melbourne endorse mandatory inclusionary zoning?