Safe space for dogs

Safe space for dogs

Hi team,

I am writing to you regarding the situation we find ourselves in with such a shameful Melbourne City Council constantly disadvantaging Docklands as beyond reproach – adding another layer between the council and the residents through an appointment of a so-called “neighbourhood partner” has been laughable!

I submitted the following through the City of Melbourne’s website directly:

“I am aghast at the lack of action (more than 12 months) from the council to improve Docklands parks particularly for dogs. Without a fenced area to exercise the large population of dogs in our suburb is deplorable.”

“I also think that the introduction of a ‘neighbourhood partner’ has been an abject failure – always uncontactable, doesn’t follow up and has delivered no improvements through engagement with residents.”

“We have no advocate for Docklands and poor outcomes for community safety which includes the wellbeing of animals. I wish the council would embrace a greater focus on delivery for the community above its focus on matters that have a political focus – that’s what the government is for. The council must be for the residents who pay the rates.”
“I have now witnessed the group of residents that gather with their dogs each day exercising their dogs in the swamp behind the park between Harbour Esplanade and Navigation Drive!”

“Seriously, it’s so poorly maintained by the council, there will be snakes in there during summer! A third of residents have animals in Docklands, there is a large population of dogs, and still nowhere for them to exercise.”

“Even in St Kilda on the iconic foreshore (a tourist destination) they could construct a fence, but not in Docklands! We are instructed to take our dogs off-leash to Lorimer St adjacent to a busy road with trucks and a playground (against their own council rules!).”

“There are nominated off-leash times that are not always suitable to the working residents. The other area nominated for off-leash exercise, also does not align with times for employed residents and booked sporting activities, where sports are prioritised.”

“I am absolutely over it with this shambolic council, honestly, a panel of actual residents similar to a body corporate would do a better job.”

Hope you can help raise awareness.

Kind regards, Lucy


Disappointed in the council

It is absolutely disheartening to read about the inept Melbourne City Council (MCC) doing nothing about making Docklands a special place. They and Development Victoria show a total lack of vision for this beautiful waterway, and I am sick of the puff positives of Sally Capp. In truth, nothing is happening apart from stifling roadblocks.

Brisbane and Sydney are thriving while Melbourne becomes a messy, sad city.

Leaders need to be held to account for their incompetence.  

Please don’t print the “we are doing this that and the other” stuff but demand accountability for this vital part of our city or the sacking of the MCC.

Di Andrews


Short stays ruining Docklands

I’ve lived in Docklands for more than six years. I enjoyed living here because it was relatively quiet city living, close to the CBD without the inner-city live style hustle and bustle.

The short-stay accommodation has destroyed the small slither of a community we have here. People who have lived in the area for a long time have moved out and been replaced by transient students, short-stay vacation seekers, and weekend partygoers. 

Parties occur every weekend, some buildings are worse than others, mostly because of the price of the stay but that’s negated by participants, six people renting a two-bedroom apartment at $300 a night is under $50 each. For reference I’ve seen more than 12 people stay in a two-bedroom apartment on multiple occasions.

Other issues include increased anti-social activity, people whizzing around on scooters shouting in the street on their way to a night out somewhere. I took my dog out at 8pm a couple months ago and found someone smoking a crack pipe in the children’s park. 

So, 7.5 per cent on $300 a night is $22.50. Let’s divide that by a conservative number of three guests which is $7.50 each. You can’t even buy a nice lunch for $7.50; this makes absolutely no difference. A perfect example of a government employee knowing there’s an issue but has no idea about the issue. 

Short-stay operators are running seven-figure, yes, seven-figure businesses here.

Quick maths: one operator here has 64 apartments. Assume 70 per cent occupancy rate at $200 a night – that’s $3.2 million a year. These are large scale commercial enterprises operating in a residential area. I would like it treated as such, I.e., planning permission and rezoning individual apartments as micro hotels which they wouldn’t get approval for thus they should all be shut down. 

Now you might say, “what about people that want to rent their own apartment out for a few weeks during the tennis, for example?” Sure, but there needs to be a limit. I think three months is fair.

Owners should be allowed to do a short stay for three months of the year max. The rest of the time should be for long term renters. This will force the apartments to be either privately owned living in and on occasion shorted stayed or they will be just long-term renters. 

The best way to view this is full time short-stay accommodation is a business. Businesses cannot just set up shop and start serving customers next to your house, but they can here.

It’s not right, it’s not decent and it doesn’t support a cohesive safe and enjoyable community to live in. 


Meet Lucas Guilbert

Meet Lucas Guilbert

May 1st, 2024 - Sean Car
Join Our Facebook Group