As residents of East Perth, we write to express our deep concern regarding the proposed refurbishment of Fraser’s Suites into high-density social housing exclusively for low-income individuals and families. While we support the urgent need to address housing insecurity, the proposed model - concentrating vulnerable individuals in a single, high-rise complex - runs counter to decades of international research on successful social housing.

Global evidence overwhelmingly shows that socioeconomic segregation, particularly in high-density developments, is a key driver of urban decline, social isolation, and entrenched disadvantage. Studies from the OECD, the Brookings Institution, and the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute (AHURI) consistently find that high concentrations of poverty within one development exacerbate mental health issues, increase crime rates, and reduce employment outcomes for residents. These negative effects ripple outward, impacting broader community safety, social cohesion, and property values.

In contrast, mixed-income housing models have repeatedly been shown to produce far better outcomes. Successful developments in cities such as Vienna, Copenhagen, and Toronto feature a deliberate blend of income levels, creating inclusive communities that support social mobility and reduce stigma. The Grattan Institute has also warned that poorly integrated housing can entrench disadvantage and erode the trust and amenity of surrounding neighbourhoods.

By situating 236 low-income residents in a single high-rise tower, this proposal risks replicating the very failures that international urban planners have worked to avoid for decades. It places vulnerable individuals into a design model that has historically failed, while also placing undue pressure on the surrounding community in the Queens Riverside precinct, which was neither consulted nor included in the planning process.

We are not opposing social housing itself, we are opposing the model. A poorly executed scheme will harm those it aims to help and compromise the safety, liveability, and cohesion of the broader East Perth precinct. We urge the Department to halt the current plan and reconsider it through the lens of evidence-based, community-integrated housing. This means:

·        Pursuing a mixed-income development model,

·        Conducting genuine community consultation,

·        Ensuring adequate support services onsite, AND

·        Preserving the building's amenities and public spaces in a way that promotes dignity, connection, and long-term sustainability.

East Perth deserves a housing solution that is socially responsible, economically sound, and globally informed. Anything less risks repeating the well-documented mistakes of the past.

 

References

·        Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute (AHURI). (2016). Suburbanising disadvantage in Australian cities: Sociospatial change in an era of neoliberalism (Final Report No. 226). By Randolph, B., & Tice, A. https://www.ahuri.edu.au/research/final-reports/226

·        Brookings Institution. (2016). Concentrated poverty in the wake of the Great Recession. By Kneebone, E. https://www.brookings.edu/.../concentrated-poverty-in.../

·        OECD. (2018). Rethinking urban sprawl: Moving towards sustainable cities. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264189881-en

·        City of Vienna. (n.d.). Affordable housing in Vienna: Building for the future. https://www.wien.gv.at/eng.../housing/promotion/housing.html

·        Toronto Community Housing. (n.d.). Regent Park Revitalization. https://www.torontohousing.ca/revitalization/regent-park