<html><body>
The recent baby boom in the City of Melbourne has meant existing community facilities are unable to cope with demand.
Interestingly, the boom is largely attributed to the CBD. If there was ever proof of the shift towards urbanised living: this has to be it.
New facilities are being planned to cater for the unexpected number of new babies in the municipality, covering the CBD and a number of Melbourne's inner suburbs. The facilities will provide postnatal care, and venues forparent programs and play groups.
It is well documented that a concentration of student populations can act as a precursor for urban renewal, which in turn provides the catalyst for others, such as single professionals and young urbanites to follow. The recent baby boom shows that new families are the next wave of central city apartment dwellers.
Whilst raising a family in the suburbs may be less expensive, for many this scenario is no longer the preferred option. With congestion bearing heavily on liveability and making for expensive and time-consuming car usage, the better option is to reside closer to the CBD.
As a result, diverse medium and high-rise apartment developments should be a focus, particularly in Sydney and Melbourne, to manage both an increase in population and changes in housing preferences.
The future of housing architecture will need to be configured for a diverse range of households and consider demographic aspects such as age and culture. If we also believe affordability – in terms of both purchase price and ongoing cost of running – is a long-term consideration for a family, then we will require more from less as the size of dwellings reduces.
Future housing demand will necessitate greater flexibility in the design of small apartments, at a workable cost level, appealing to diverse household types. A pre-industrial era village or traditional old-fashioned neighbourhood offers each of its residents a chance to develop the network of bonds amongst each other that underpins a healthy community. In this setting, residents can work from home (65% of new businesses start in the home), study, raise a family, house extended families, retire or just hang out.
We will see vertical neighbourhoods consisting of a range of apartments attractive to a range of occupants. There may be roof top gardens for growing food or practicing tai-chi and book clubs or dining clubs can form, catering for the traditional community feel of earlier low rise developments.
While apartments as small as 25 to 30 square metres provide an entry point for home ownership and can accommodate an elderly relative, adolescent or adult child, apartments of 55 square metres can be configured to accommodate a living area, kitchen, bathroom and two other flexible spaces – one being a bedroom and the other possibly being a nursery enabling the families looking to live inner-city.
What this suggests is that the planning policies for our cities must have an inherent ability to dissect and discern direction and flexibly respond to challenges of social change and increasing diversity.
We as a society are changing too rapidly to recycle or rebrand conventional solutions or resort to stereotype prejudices about what constitutes appropriate housing standards, particularly when it comes to apartments and flats.
New development stemming from population growth requires an open mind by governments and planners. Higher density developments are one basic solution to restrict the waste of arable land, reliance on cars as primary transport and provide better-networked communities.
Other forms of inner city and central apartments have been generally accepted and are very much a part of the increasingly diverse society we now have. The fear of density remains palpable in determining planning policy.
Whilst it has been widely accepted that traditional two parent households will be marginally less over the next two decades compared with the number of single households, predicted to soar by 63.7%, little has been forecast in Australia of apartments being a desired family home.
Architects, developers and planners need to recognise this as an emerging residential typology. The apartment-as-family-home is part of Melbourne’s future housing mix.
Rob Stent is a director Melbourne-based architecture, interior and urban design practice Hayball and is a past president of the Victorian chapter of the Australian Institute of Architects. Among the buildings he has designed is Lend Lease’s completed Serrata apartment building in Docklands, one of Melbourne's first apartment buildings to achieve a four-star Green Star rating.
</body></html>

robstent-hjZyKHkPah

New high-rise apartment projects part of Melbourne's residential mix: Rob Stent

<html><body>
What governments do and don’t do can affect the quality of our lives in terms of where we live and the type of housing we live in. 
We are increasingly turning away from the conventional form of the detached housing, demonstrated by 2011 Census figure that show a 66.7% increase in flat or apartment living from 2001 to 2011.
It is important that governments understand the change in our increasingly diverse society and its housing demands.
No doubt market driven supply and demand are drivers of much of the housing stock on offer, but what is less acknowledged is the impact of intervention of governments through regulation.
There are differences between Victoria and NSW that have influenced housing choices.  These differences will become less pronounced if each government borrows from the other’s housing policies for multi-unit development.
Melbourne’s apartment boom has been part population growth and changing demographics and part aided by a regulatory framework that has been relatively unrestrictive in determining the size and configuration of apartments.
The lengthy boom followed a hiatus of twenty years from 1971 when the Victorian Government introduced a major overhaul of residential controls in the Melbourne Planning Scheme, which effectively eliminated medium and higher density housing from being developed in Melbourne.
For twenty years, only 15% of new housing starts were in the form of multi residential housing until a rare Federal Government initiative called the Better Cities Program, together with a reviews of the residential planning rules by the Victorian Governments (alternating Labor and Liberal), provided the current regulatory framework. As a result, they played a significant part in making Melbourne a far more diverse and culturally rich city to what it was prior.
A prescriptive regulatory framework in Sydney
By and large, in Melbourne this framework is performance based. A more prescriptive framework operates in Sydney.
Whilst Sydney has a long history of multi-unit development, there has been only modest comparable multi-unit housing developed in the last few years.  Its long awaited upturn is encouraged by the proposed changes to the planning controls for multi-unit housing encouraging greater flexibility whist maintaining amenity standards.
Melbourne has typically been able to offer up more affordable apartments than Sydney, however Sydney’s apartments are often larger and have better amenity.  
In Victoria, multi-unit development controls allow greater flexibility and scope when determining the number and size of apartments.  Height controls are generally not mandatory and setbacks to streets and boundaries rely on little other than what is required for small-scale suburban development.
Design of privacy for multi-residential housing is managed by a minimum required distance between dwellings that was originally devised for single suburban housing scenarios.  Internal amenity controls are also limited, being largely governed by building regulations for single housing.  These stipulate required levels of ventilation and light as a percentage of the room area, irrespective of how deep the apartment is or whether its rooms receive adequate natural light levels, actual moments of sun penetration or natural ventilation.
 
<hr class="system-pagebreak">
In NSW on the other hand, sites have to be carefully master planned and buildings carefully configured to reach the government mandated targets of SEPP 65.
In 2002, in response to the then NSW Premier, Bob Carr’s perception of poor design standards of multi-unit housing development throughout Sydney, the NSW government introduced the State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 – Design Quality of Residential of Residential Flat Development (SEPP 65).
It was followed with the Residential Flat Design Code (RFDC), a design guideline that provided discussion, analysis, examples and principles, primarily structured as a design tool for architects and assessing council officers.  It is a mix of ‘rules of thumb’ on issues such as cross ventilation and solar access.  These and other design objectives were quickly adopted as minimum standards for development.
The NSW planning policy also stipulates, through the Development Control Plans (DCPs) of Local Councils, both height and floor-to-site area ratios (FSR) along with type and mix of apartments (studios, 1BRs, 2BRs, etc).
SEPP 65 has improved the quality of multi-unit residential buildings in NSW. This planning policy has had a genuine impact on the quality of the built environment and residents living in these apartments appreciate their amenity. It has created awareness in architects and developers alike for the imperative for a rigorous design process that is not always found in the lower end product of its southern counterpart.  It has however, arguably resulted in more expensive apartments compared to what has been available in Melbourne.
Land costs are also higher in Sydney, resulting in a land cost of up to $100,000 per inner-city apartment, compared to around $50,000  per apartment in Melbourne. This higher land cost is exacerbated by fewer dwellings due to FSR caps, mandatory heights and required levels of apartment diversity. It is worth noting however that construction costs in Melbourne are 20% higher than Sydney for comparable projects.
Australia’s two biggest cities, Sydney and Melbourne, appear to be poised at opposite ends of their respective residential development cycles. Melbourne is expected to slow after experiencing a long boom – providing a valuable opportunity to review what is designed and offered to the market and look at what it can do better<ins datetime="2013-05-02T10:07" cite="mailto:Genevieve">. </ins>In doing so, I believe Victoria will adopt much of the NSW framework to raise standards for resident amenity, including access to light and sun, outdoor space and privacy.
Sydney is poised after years of quiet activity to gather momentum.  Important to this occurring will be the final revisions to SEPP 65 which<ins datetime="2013-05-02T10:08" cite="mailto:Genevieve">,</ins> yet to be finalised, are expected to borrow from the Victoria’s experience in providing scope for more flexibility and in turn, scope for greater affordability.
Small apartments should not be sacrificed in the process. Small apartments can provide affordable entry to housing for many people, particularly single households, who are the fastest growing household in Australia.
The small apartment should be considered as mainstream housing.  Governments, together with architects, councils, planners and developers should allow for innovative design solutions as ways to realise high amenity levels in ways not yet considered.
For small apartments to be successful homes, design levels have to be raised to accommodate adaptable layouts that allow residents to use them as they like, when they like. If a development consists mainly of small apartments, why not augment amenity beyond the apartment door with communal gardens or lounges and kitchens? Why not look to network amenity resources between precinct developments, with cross-pollinating facilities such as pools or playgrounds to encourage development of neighbourhood?<ins datetime="2013-05-13T14:57" cite="mailto:Sarah%20Buckeridge"> </ins> 
Taking care of the amenity and quality of what we live in and preserving what is of high architectural, cultural and social value is vitally important.  Taking care also of the broader community aspirations regarding diversity and demographic mix, equity and access to affordable and diverse housing is equally important.
The balance between prescriptive and performance standards is always difficult, with the desire to prevent the worst whilst potentially blocking the best. Governments need to arrive at a balance of the flexible and prescriptive and be open to the opportunity for innovation and affordability, or we will all be short changed.
Rob Stent is a director Melbourne-based architecture, interior and urban design practice Hayball and is a past president of the Victorian chapter of the Australian Institute of Architects. Among the buildings he has designed is Lend Lease’s completed Serrata apartment building in Docklands, one of Melbourne's first apartment buildings to achieve a four-star Green Star rating.
 
 
 
</body></html>

Sydney developers must not abandon small apartments as momentum builds: Rob Stent

<html><body>
The nature of residential development today is fast moving and complex. It has resulted in change, and with change comes fear, along with a heady mix of media commentary and vocal opinion.
Much of this is simply because apartments have never been embraced in our traditional national image of rural and suburban landscapes. 
The place of apartments in our cities has been a subject of continual debate – held up as examples of developer excess on the one hand and almost alien examples of cosmopolitan living on the other and for some commentators regarded as ‘the slums of the future’. 
Apartments represent big city life and the tangible reality of rapid metropolitan growth and densification, however a myriad of niche drivers are working to shape our housing.
Australia is now a very diverse society.
Statistical data and crystal ball forecasting reveals that more Australians are living in and will increasingly move towards apartments. The National Housing Supply Council has estimated that seven out of ten households can now be termed ‘non-traditional’. 
Whilst traditional two-parent households will increase by 20% over the next two decades, the number of couples will rise by 36.7% and the number of single households will soar by 63.7%, with the 65+ age group being the fastest growing in Australia.
Of these, one in five will be single when they retire, and they will be mainly woman. We are also becoming increasingly Asian in our population makeup, with our stable political system and relatively clean physical environment being a desirable destination for migrants.
Our changing city economies based on professional and financial services and education has also played a role. The post-manufacturing-era economy has seen the advent of education as one of our biggest economies, with international students clustering around our universities in new apartment projects.  
Meanwhile the so-called ‘creative hipster’ set have assisted the revitalisation process of our urban areas, attracting cashed-up boomers and pushing up housing prices in the inner and middle suburbs, and in some instances, beyond.  Our cities are now a series of villages of unique character and culture.
 
<hr class="system-pagebreak">
Proximity to jobs, education, entertainment and good coffee has been a major target of younger apartment renters, with investor-landlords doing well. Their attitude to the traditional urban fringe is now less attractive due to long commute times, the lack of jobs, infrastructure and services.  
This has been highlighted by the Grattan Institute in its report “Getting the Housing We Want” that Australians do not all want to live in detached housing, with many preferring a much more varied mix of residential options. The downturn of project house-and-land packages on the fringe, along with an increasing shortfall in the supply of terrace housing, townhouses and apartments in established areas, are evidence of this shift.
The ability to deliver good quality commercial residential architecture within a tight financial framework is one of architecture’s greatest challenges.
Commercial apartment construction costs range from $2,500 to $3,000 per square metre and are increasing, compared to a cost of around $900 to $ 1,000 per square metre for detached housing in the fringe.
The typical Melbourne apartment now needs to sell for $8,000 to $10,000 per square metre to cover the cost of development, land and to provide a return commensurate with the risk of development. On this basis a small one-bedroom apartment can cost as much if not more than a new house and land package in an outer suburb. 
As a consequence, apartments are increasingly being downsized to meet entry-level price points and budgets, with some projects offering micro apartments of 35 square metres.
But how much smaller can they go?
The crucial ingredients in residential architecture are unchanged.  It is empathy for the occupants who are seeking a home that balances function and amenity, aspiration and budget.  Getting this right is the basis of good housing to meet the needs of a very diverse and changing society.
Where and what we choose to live in and the financial options to develop, construct, own or rent will have a significant impact to the housing sector.
As architects, we are faced with doing things differently, driven by changing consumer preferences and desires, skyrocketing building costs and skill shortages mirroring today's more diverse, chaotic, networked society.
Innovation in prefabricated manufactured systems will assist reduce construction costs.  Smaller apartments can be adaptable with flexible plan configurations, and beyond the front door, the provision of communal and shared spaces such as lounges and rooftop gardens provide different forms of residential amenity.
There will be no silver bullet, but many varied solutions required to deliver the type and quality of housing we want.
Rob Stent is a director Melbourne-based architecture, interior and urban design practice Hayball and is a past president of the Victorian chapter of the Australian Institute of Architects. Among the buildings he has designed is Lend Lease’s completed Serrata apartment building in Docklands, one of Melbourne's first apartment buildings to achieve a four-star Green Star rating.
 
 
</body></html>

Diversity holds the key to density

<html><body>
Australians have long been predominantly urban dwellers.
Despite over 80% of us now living in cities, our self-image remains of a sunburnt country girt by sea – when in reality it should be of a frazzled city girt by sprawl.
The stress of living in our capital cities is well known: our crowded roads, poor and ageing infrastructure, and a lack of public transport.
Yet while Australia’s economic wealth is driven from the major cities, the federal government is almost completely absent from the contemporary discussion about the future urban environment and housing in Australia.
The true costs associated with poor urban environments are rarely part of the economic debate.
Our cities are largely left to the under-resourced state and local governments to devise and administer planning systems in the hope of shaping our urban environment.
Planning systems revel in written policy full of ‘government-speak’ for best practice or driven by nullifying empirical process and regulation.
Our market-driven development sector is unchanged since white settlement – consisting of appropriating land, cutting it up, building on it, selling it off and moving onto to the next deal ASAP before the market turns.
Very few of our urban population living in the traditional single house would have any direct relationship with architecture.
Our traditional housing construction industry comprises of independent craft-based subcontractors putting together 'stick build' detached houses for project-home developers large and small, having procured basic plans that meet ‘tick-the-box’ planning and building regulations.
This has long been our traditional way of providing housing and forming our suburban fabric, resulting in the ever-expanding concentric growth of our cities with all the associated shortcomings.
However, a tipping point in this traditional order may have been reached, causing change to occur in a number of connected ways.
For the first time, the value of a block of land on the fringe is now more expensive than the house that will go in it.
The size of the average block has been decreasing to the point that the narrow side gaps between houses cannot be justified.
Housing is becoming joined and connected and as a consequence is having to be delivered in groups and clusters. 
Resolution of the relationships between landscape, sense of address and amenity for sunlight and privacy between dwellings, requires embodied architectural knowledge.
The change of demographics is also driving change. Architects are now designing higher density housing on the fringe with townhouses and apartments meeting the housing demands for a rapid increase in different household configurations.
That too requires an increased level of research and application of design rigor not found with ‘off the shelf’ pro-forma plans that characterise the ad-hoc fashion of the traditional housing development industry.
Architects have, in the past, been at the forefront of change and innovation in housing environments.
The design of the garden-city suburb and projects such as the cluster housing at Winter Park in Melbourne’s eastern suburbs are such examples.
They again have an opportunity to contribute in determining contemporary solutions to the challenges beyond the 'tram lines'.
Rob Stent is a director Melbourne-based architecture, interior and urban design practice Hayball and is a past president of the Victorian chapter of the Australian Institute of Architects. Among the buildings he has designed is Lend Lease’s completed Serrata apartment building in Docklands, one of Melbourne's first apartment buildings to achieve a four-star Green Star rating.
</body></html>

Rob Stent

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News