A proposal to replace a double-storey community housing development in Melbourne’s inner east with a six-storey building containing just five car parks has sparked concern among locals over its potential impact on nearby residents.
For decades, the High Street property near Orrong Road in Prahran has been used as community housing for people aged 65 and over. It included 22 homes within multiple two-storey buildings.
With the existing site being bulldozed, there are plans to increase the number of homes to 50 and raise the height of the buildings by four storeys to be 21 metres tall. There are also plans to lower the age of entry for tenants to 55.
However, with development currently restricted to 14.5 metres it would require permission from Planning Minister Sonya Kilkenny.
While the new design includes 20 bike spots and an internal courtyard, just five car spaces and a single elevator are included, despite adding 28 homes to the site.
Vehicles would have to enter via the residential Florence Street at the property’s rear, and occupants would be ineligible for on-street parking permits under Stonnington Council rules.
The property is owned by not-for-profit Housing First, which manages a $750 million community housing portfolio and is moving to sell two apartment blocks in St Kilda. The documents released as part of the planning application reveal the cost of the High Street development is estimated at more than $26 million.
Nadine Parkington is among residents concerned by the proposal. She said locals were extremely supportive of social housing, but were worried about more vehicles on the one-way Florence Street.
“We’re talking about people over 55 – there’s going to be food deliveries, people getting showered, people getting cared for,” she said.
“There’s no thought as to how that’s going to happen, and it’s all sort of going to impose on our tiny little street.”
Hugh Hardy has happily lived next door for more than a decade but is now concerned about a bigger building overshadowing his home, and hopes it will be reduced to four storeys.
He said while the developer could afford to commission hundreds of pages of reports on the site, residents were limited by what evidence they could afford to commission before the minister decides on the planning application.
“We feel it’s a David and Goliath situation here – us versus the state government vis-a-vis Housing First,” he said.
A former resident of the community housing property who spoke to The Age on the condition of anonymity said five car spots for an older group of people who rely on vehicles was “ridiculous” and queried how one lift could service six storeys.
“We can’t wait to move back, but not under the plans that they’ve got,” they said.
Stonnington Council also has serious concerns with the plan and has formally objected to the application, Mayor Melina Sehr said.
She cited the number of car parks, landscaping, impact on neighbours and “poor presentation” along High Street – including a large substation and access ramp dominating the front of the building.
“We do believe that every development, regardless of its purpose, should be designed well, integrate with its neighbourhood, and genuinely serve the people who will live in it,” Sehr said.
Prahran MP Rachel Westaway, who is sponsoring a parliamentary petition launched by Parkington, said the area needed more social housing and claimed locals had been sidelined.
“With only five car parks for 50 apartments and building two-storeys above the mandatory height limit, this project, in its current form, doesn’t make sense,” she said.
A Housing First spokesperson said all design elements – including height, parking and amenity – would be assessed against planning requirements and standards, and that comprehensive traffic and parking assessments had been carried out.
“All necessary planning approvals will be obtained prior to any redevelopment proceeding,” they said.
“We recognise that community members may have questions or concerns, and the planning process provides a formal avenue for submissions to be made and considered.”
Jonathan O’Brien, an organiser for the pro-housing-density advocacy group YIMBY, accused Westaway of being “tone-deaf”, saying the proposal appeared to be compliant, and the apartments would get built.
“Grandstanding against common-sense inner-city housing is just a really embarrassing look in 2026,” he said.
A Victorian government spokesperson said any proposal would be considered on its merits.
As of December 2025, more than 55,000 people had applied for public housing (managed by the state) or community housing (managed by not-for-profit organisations) through the state housing register.
Victorian Council of Social Service chief executive Juanita Pope said Victoria had the smallest proportion of social housing in Australia, and called for the state to commit to a social housing growth target.
“Social housing designed to meet the needs of older Victorians will make life easier for residents who are ageing in place, recognising that for many this will be their final home before moving into aged care,” she said.
Rachael Ward is a journalist in the City team at The Age. Contact her at rachael.ward@theage.com.auConnect via email.
