Better Apartments

<html><body>
In May, Victorian Planning Minister Richard Wynne released the government’s discussion paper entitled <a href="http://delwp.vic.gov.au/planning/policy-and-strategy/better-apartments">Better Apartments</a>. This document is the next stage of the process that began under the previous government looking at how to improve the design quality of Victoria’s apartment dwellings. The Office of the Victorian Government Architect (OVGA) has been concerned for some time about the poor quality of amenity offered in new apartment developments in Victoria.

As identified in the introduction of the discussion paper, “The issue of apartment amenity was also raised by local government, architectural and industry bodies, and the media during consultation on Plan Melbourne.”

This discussion is well overdue with record apartment development in Victoria occurring since 2009. It is clear looking forward that apartments will be a big part of our capital city and increasingly our regional centres. This is undoubtedly a good thing as it is an opportunity for our cities to become less car reliant and more sustainable into the future.

In Sydney, minimum apartment design standards have been in place for quite some time. In 2002 under the leadership of Bob Carr, New South Wales introduced State Environment Planning Policy 65 (SEPP 65). Whilst it is no doubt a controversial debate, it would appear that the reforms have been successful in their purpose of improving the built outcomes of apartments in New South Wales. In this <a href="http://architectureau.com/articles/improving-the-quality-of-housing/">ArchitectureAU article</a> by professors Kerry and Lindsay Clare, they identify that the “Research, feedback and anecdotal evidence all point to the policy’s success”.

<h2>What is Victoria’s Better Apartments Paper About?</h2>

This paper is about seeking feedback from the property development industry and importantly apartment dwellers themselves about what the issues are and what should be done about them. The paper explains the four different mechanisms that the government has to control apartment development. It must be emphasised that the government is not restricted to using just one tool for every issue. Instead it could tailor a combination of control measures specifically to the issues at hand rather than trying a blanket catch everything approach. The tools at hand are as follows:

<ul>
<li>Regulation – Mandated standards via planning schemes or the National Construction Code (NCC).</li>
	<li>Performance based requirements – Objectives, standards and decision guidelines, similar to the way that ResCode works for housing 3 storeys and under.</li>
	<li>Policy – Provision of a guide to good practice referred to in the planning scheme.</li>
	<li>Market based methods – Focus on better educating the buying public.</li>
</ul>
<h2>What are the issues that have been identified?</h2>

<h3>Daylight and sunlight</h3>

The benefits of daylight and sunlight in apartments generally boils down to two aspects. The health and well being of the occupants, and the energy efficiency of the apartment. Apartments which have an overall smaller area of windows will require artificial lighting to be running more often. Apartments without direct sunlight cannot directly use this naturally available resource to help with heating, therefore requiring more energy to artificially heat.

There are currently requirements for day lighting to habitable rooms in apartments from the NCC. There is also an often used work around called ‘borrowed light’. This provision allows for a habitable room to ‘borrow’ the amenity from another room via a large door or glazed panels. This issue currently has substantial planning uncertainty attached to it with it being overlooked in some jurisdictions and close to outlawed in others.

19% of respondents to the <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/news/atelier-red-black-announce-ratemybuildingcomau">Rate My Building</a> apartment survey indicated that they feel their apartment has insufficient windows for light and ventilation (out of 140 responses)

<h3>Space</h3>

One of the primary discussion points around apartment design standards in Victoria is the size of apartments being built. 79% of Victoria’s one bedroom apartments currently marketed or under construction are below the minimum size required in New South Wales under the Sepp 65 laws. There are many issues that reside within this overall discussion point. The dimensions of an apartment can affect the flexibility, adaptability and liveability of that dwelling. The dimension of the ceiling height also has an impact the penetration of daylight into the apartment.

There is also the question about the diversity in types of apartments that are being supplied to the market. This nominally fits into this point although it could easily be its own separate issue.

Minimum sizes will be discussed in further detail in part 2 of this article.

<h3>Outlook</h3>

Whilst one might immediately start imagining apartments with brilliant city views, this point is more about making sure that privacy between apartment buildings is not undermined. There are examples in areas such as Melbourne’s Southbank where large apartment towers have been permitted to be constructed very close together. This places excessive reliance upon internal blinds or an exhibitionist personality.

The other issue with outlook is to enable passive surveillance to the street front. By having apartments at the lower levels with street facing windows, the street can feel significantly at night. This aspect is typically dealt with very effectively at a local council planning level and therefore may not require much in the way of policy or regulatory intervention.

<h3>Natural ventilation</h3>

Ventilation of rooms is critical to providing a sufficient level of internal air quality. In poorly ventilated spaces the air quality can become a health hazard. Giving occupants the ability to open and close windows can reduce the occupant’s reliance upon mechanical ventilation. Ventilation to habitable rooms is dealt with in a similar way to daylight, in that it is controlled in the NCC but with a similar borrowed ventilation clause available to the developer who can get planning approval.

<h3>Noise</h3>

The key issues with excessive noise entering apartments is that of health and wellbeing, sleep disturbance and privacy. When we think of apartments with poor acoustics we often think about the noisy neighbours that can be easily heard through the ‘paper thin’ walls. Australia wide data from 140 Rate My Building survey responses suggest however that noise from the street is just as important an issue as noise from neighbours. Currently controlling noise from neighbouring dwellings in the same building is regulated through the National Construction Code. There are currently no mandatory provisions for street noise insulation in apartments. That being said, some apartment developments are required to achieve a minimum level of acoustic insulation via councils imposing specific planning permit conditions.

<h3>Outdoor space</h3>

Outdoor space is often addressed in apartments via the balcony. Typically the rule of thumb is to have a minimum of 8 square metres with a minimum linear dimension of 1.6 metres. Outdoor space is often used when entertaining guests and is also important for those with children. The provision of outdoor space can become a difficult proposition once an apartment tower gets above a certain height due to excessive wind speeds. This is where well designed communal open space should be utilized to make up the deficit.

<h3>Adaptability</h3>

Apartment buildings and in particular apartment towers once built will need to last a very long time. Typically these towers are sold to hundreds of different parties each with a very small stake. This makes demolition and rebuilding virtually impossible if requirements change. Therefore we must be extremely careful about how we design these structures so that they can adapt to future needs. Can a basement car park be repurposed for another use? Can walls be removed to join two or three apartments into a single dwelling? Can an apartment adapt to service the needs of a disabled person? These are clearly aspects of apartment design that are not able to be addressed by the free market and need further government guidance.

<h3>Landscape</h3>

The use of landscaping within and around an apartment development has significant benefits to the wider city by reducing the urban heat island effect which occurs during our increasingly intense summer heatwaves. This urban heat island effect might seem like a fluffy term, however it contributes to hundreds of heat related deaths every year in our capital cities.

There is also substantial benefit in improving the vitality of the public realm through well designed vegetated areas.

<h3>Universal design</h3>

Architecture is for everyone, apartments should be for everyone too. There are clear statistics on how many people in our society live with various disabilities. There are also mathematical models which can predict how these numbers will change over time in our aging society. Clearly there is an urgency then to make sure that an equivalent percentage of apartments provided within a development are suitable to be adapted should the need arise. This is currently handled more or less on a council by council basis. A state wide policy would provide certainty to all parties involved and make the inner city a viable choice for those with a disability.

<h3>Energy and resources</h3>

The question raised by this topic is where the bar should be set in terms of energy efficiency. There are already well considered processes within the NCC to mandate a minimum level of energy efficiency. A solution to improve apartments here may be as simple as adjusting the benchmark. An additional consideration may be to mandate renewable energy generation for a substantial portion of the common area energy requirements.

<h3>Waste</h3>

<blockquote>
Apartment developments often have low resource recovery rates compared to single dwellings. This can be due to a lack of access for residents to recycling infrastructure and services
<cite>Better Apartments Discussion paper</cite>
</blockquote>

Waste Management is an area which is also in the better apartments ‘needs improvement’ category. The relevant objective here is to increase the level of recycling by residents. Recycling needs to be made as easy as possible by providing facilities to separate the waste. This might be as simply as putting in separate waste and recycling chutes in towers.

<h3>Car parking</h3>

Car parking is a common area of dispute within the planning system. From a developer’s point of view if they provide too much parking they will be criticised for increasing traffic. However if they provide too little parking they will be criticised for causing a parking problem on the local streets. It would seem the correct approach to car parking may well be to enable a site by site assessment that takes into consideration other transport options such as public transport and car sharing facilities. Local councils are already well placed to make the final decision regarding car parking, although perhaps this could be further enhanced by a state policy aimed at minimizing car reliance where possible.

<h3>Entry and circulation</h3>

The issues around the entry lobby and circulation spaces generally reside around a sense of address, visibility and safety. Amongst the other discussion points, this one would seem less critical than others that are more directly related to human health, environmental health and building performance. It is not necessarily apparent that a corridor that has fewer apartment front doors is necessarily safer than one that has more. Indeed it may be quite possible that the reverse is actually true. There are some energy efficiency bonuses available to naturally ventilate an entry corridor. It is also Clear that hallways which terminate with views to the outside are superior from a user experience point of view, however as such this might be an area suitable for the free market to judge via price.

<a href="https://www.urban.com.au/news/victorias-push-for-better-apartments-part-2">Part 2 of the Red+Black discussion</a> on Victoria’s Push for Better Apartments will look further into the merits of improving apartment design standards.

This article originally appeared on the <a href="https://theredandblackarchitect.wordpress.com/2015/06/22/victorias-push-for-better-apartments-part-1/">Red and Black Architect's blog</a>.
</body></html>

redblackarchitect

Victoria's Push for Better Apartments (Part 1)

<html><body>
<blockquote>
It's a really interesting discussion and I think it really is an ongoing discussion. I know the guys from Assemble Papers are working on something in relation to it which I'm participating in and they're asking some interesting questions; not necessarily about asking people if they want a larger apartment because a lot of people will say yes, but they're asking would you be willing to sacrifice size for design. For instance would you rather a 45sqm well designed apartment over a 50sqm stock standard apartment?
<cite>Michael McCormack, Milieu co-founder and Director</cite>
</blockquote>

Touched on briefly during Urban.com.au's <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/news/an-interview-with-milieus-michael-mccormack">interview with Milieu's Michael McCormack</a>, the above quote relates to the ongoing debate within the industry regarding apartment design standards and how best to tackle the issue.

Our friends at <a href="http://assembleprojects.com.au/">Assemble</a> have taken it upon themselves to go the extra mile and have conceived a highly detailed survey by asking people what their expectations of apartment design are based on their lifestyles, needs and desires. The findings of the survey will form the basis of a report that Assemble will submit to the State Government as part of the consultation process.

Having been invited to review, comment and provide any additional points on the draft format of the design I can honestly say that it is nothing short of comprehensive. We ask you, our readers, on behalf of Assemble to take the time to complete the survey, which provides a great opportunity for everyone to have a say and help inform apartment design in Melbourne.

<h2>Help redefine the great Australian dream</h2>

To understand what makes for great medium and high density living, and to contribute to the <a href="http://assemblepapers.com.au/2014/09/19/the-great-apartment-design-debate/">current debate on apartment design standards</a>, Assemble is reaching out to you to tell them how you live now – and how you’d like to live in the future – via a national small footprint living survey. Once you’ve shared your thoughts and experiences, you can throw your hat in the ring to win a weekend at <a href="http://www.hotel-hotel.com.au/">Hotel Hotel</a> in Canberra. The survey should take no more than 15 to 25 minutes to complete and all responses will be recorded anonymously.

Assemble is a Melbourne-based residential property developer focused on small footprint projects. They work with like-minded developers to share and realise their vision for sustainable cities. Assemble’s values and ideas find a voice in <a href="http://assemblepapers.com.au/">Assemble Papers</a> – an online and biannual print journal about the culture of living closer together, across art, design, architecture, urbanism, the environment and financial matters. The three directors of Assemble are Giuseppe Demaio, Joachim Holland and Ben Keck. Between them, they also provide to clients architecture services via <a href="http://www.fieldworkprojects.com.au/">Fieldwork</a> and brand communication services via <a href="http://www.localpeoples.com/">Local Peoples</a>.

<blockquote>
The quarter-acre block we once aspired to is no longer affordable for most Australians, nor does it match up to our 21st century vision for well-connected, culturally diverse, sustainable and smart cities. To live better in cities, we need to live smaller. However, the capacity to do so is necessarily affected by government regulation. The Victorian and NSW governments are currently reviewing policies that will have a significant impact on the way we live in years to come, and we have a chance to be part of the process.
<cite>Ben Keck, Assemble Director</cite>
</blockquote>

Assemble’s Small Footprint Living Survey follows the release of <a href="http://delwp.vic.gov.au/planning/policy-and-strategy/better-apartments">‘Better Apartments, A Discussion Paper’</a> by the Victorian Minister for Planning, Richard Wynne MP, on 14 May 2015 – a fresh start to the discussion following the leak of the proposed Victorian Apartment Design Standards in July last year.

Assemble will prepare a report on the survey findings that will be made publicly available on their website. Assemble will also submit the report to the Victorian Government as part of the consultation period for ‘Better Apartments, A Discussion Paper’ and use it as a conversation-starter to engage with industry stakeholders and policymakers across the country.

<blockquote>
Our hope is not only to influence policymaking, but also to provide a useful resource to assist decision-making by home-buyers, renters, developers, planners, architects and city-lovers alike. This is a vital, complicated and passionate debate for our cities. There don’t appear to be any silver bullet solutions. Close consultation between government and the property, planning and architecture communities will be necessary to strike the delicate balance of encouraging new and affordable apartment supply and a high standard of living for current and future generations.
<cite>Ben Keck</cite>
</blockquote>

<h2>Come stay at Hotel Hotel</h2>

Hotel Hotel is a place of collaborative craftsmanship made by artists, makers, designers and fantasists. It is the brainchild of the Molonglo Group who are also responsible for the NewActon precinct within which Hotel Hotel resides. NewActon is a series of landscaped and edible gardens, commissioned art, cafes, bars and restaurants, residential and commercial spaces, cinemas and ongoing cultural programs designed to make the everyday special.

The final piece of the NewActon precinct is the series of Nishi buildings – conceived and designed by Molonglo Group, working with Fender Katsalidis Architects, Japan’s Suppose Design Office, March Studios, international engineering consultants Arup, and urban and landscape designers Oculus. It is one of the most radically sustainable buildings in Australia – both environmentally and socially. This is where Hotel Hotel lives – a conduit for NewActon’s communal culture and the product of countless collaborations with artists and designers from all over the country. From Perimeter’s books in the library to Kris Coad’s ceramics in the restaurant, every object and experience is curated to create a supremely pleasurable stay.

Assemble have made friends with Hotel Hotel so one of you will get to go on a weekend away – what better way to thank you for your feedback than by giving you the opportunity to experience small footprint living first hand. The prize includes two nights’ accommodation for you and a friend in the month of September, return flights to Canberra from your nearest Australian capital city and some goodies during your stay.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/hotel_hotel_illustration_by_alice_oehr_for_assemble.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Hotel Hotel © Alice Oehr"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="403" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/hotel_hotel_illustration_by_alice_oehr_for_assemble.jpg?itok=5AI_pOHO" title="Hotel Hotel © Alice Oehr" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Hotel Hotel illustration © Alice Oehr</figcaption></figure>http://survey.assembleprojects.com.au/ #smallfootprintlivingsurvey

The The Small Footprint Living Survey will be open for submissions until Monday 20 July, 5.00pm.
</body></html>

Laurence Dragomir

ASSEMBLE Small Footprint Living Survey

<html><body>
At the start of June, I along with another Collie staff member attended a <a href="http://www.vpela.org.au/">VPELA</a> seminar that focused on housing affordability and design. Four guest speakers from a diverse range of professions including Urbanxchange, Elenberg Fraser, Breathe Architecture and the Property Council of Australia shared their thoughts on Melbourne’s current housing supply and the types of housing supply required to meet housing needs for all.

In the seminar there was a particular focus on apartment style development, which is topical given the recent release of the ‘Better Apartments Discussion Paper’ by the State Government.

It was agreed by all speakers that more affordable housing is required to accommodate the thousands of Melburnians who for various reasons are unable to either rent or purchase a house at market price. It was raised by a number of speakers that the State Planning Policy Framework currently lacks direction on this issue and individual Councils often do not moderate expectations on affordable housing with what is feasible from a developer profit perspective.

An example of a good initiative, was in the City of Port Phillip where a developer was granted approval to construct a bonus three levels for providing some affordable housing. This example could be implemented on a more regular basis through incentive based zoning, which has been highly successful in Vancouver in providing community facilities.

In relation to appropriate design, most speakers linked this topic directly to apartments and the possible introduction of an apartment design code following the ‘Better Apartments Discussion Paper’. There was a general consensus, and Collie agrees, that apartment size should not be mandatory as this would stifle apartment design.

Innovative and creative design to use smaller spaces, and in some cases use the same space for multiple purposes, is a way of delivering apartments that provide a high level of amenity. An example of the creative use of space was illustrated in a video where the layout of an apartment of just 8 square metres in Paris could be reconfigured virtually instantly to accommodate a single bed, a table and chairs, a book shelf and additional wardrobe / storage space.

Whilst 8 square metres is generally considered to be an unacceptable size for a dwelling, the video illustrated how creative design in small spaces can achieve liveable and functional space. We acknowledge however, that such innovative / good examples are the exceptions that are more difficult to write into planning controls.

In addition, use of the same space by many residents is more efficient and can foster a sense of community in situations where it may not normally occur. An example was given in which a high rise apartment building contained several shared facilities such as a gym, pool, library, lounge or dining room.

Apartment design also tied into with the affordability issue where for example, forgoing a larger apartment with a dining room for a smaller apartment that relies on using a shared dining room can increase affordability for the purchaser.

Examples of creative and innovative design were also highlighted by Breathe Architecture, the architects who designed the Commons apartment development adjacent to Anstey train station and the Upfield bike path in Brunswick. In an effort to reduce costs, many elements were removed in the construction and marketing of this development that many other developers would consider to be essential, such as car parking, air conditioning, individual laundries, a real estate agent and a marketing team.

The development was able to compensate for the loss of some of these elements through the provision of green and solar roofing with a communal laundry, a dedicated car share service and bicycle parking. Exposed concrete ceilings and not tiling the bathrooms were further examples of savings in the cost of construction, which allowed Breathe Architecture to deliver a more affordable housing product.

Collie is in the process of making a submission in response to the Better Apartments Discussion Paper which will be made available on our web site in due course.

This article appeared on <a href="http://www.colliepl.com/news_and_projects/2015/06/vpela-seminar-melbournes-housing-equation/">Collie's website</a> on June 5th. Michael Collie is Director at <a href="http://www.colliepl.com/">Collie Pty Ltd</a>, a multi-disciplinary Southbank-based firm with interests in strategic planning, development planning, urban design and landscape architecture.
</body></html>

Michael Collie

VPELA seminar on Melbourne's Housing Equation

<html><body>
The proposed implementation of standards across Melbourne apartments is strongly supported by ClarkeHopkinsClarke, a Melbourne architecture firm committed to the creation and support of vibrant communities.

Contrary to recent media arguing the proposed standards in the Victorian Government’s ‘Better Apartments’ discussion paper will only lead to increased housing prices, we believe the implementation of standards has the potential to encourage greater innovation, particularly if the standards are based on performance.

Currently much debate is focused on the introduction of a minimum standard for room and apartment sizes. While the size of apartments is one aspect to consider, we believe the standards would be more beneficial if based on performance, whereby each situation is accessed on its merits.

The problem with regulating based on size is that a well-planned small apartment of 45 square metres can often have better natural light penetration, to be more spacious and more functional than a poorly planned 50 square metre apartment with unnecessary corridors and few windows. It's all about efficient design, maximising light, space and storage.

One of our recent projects, Parkside Apartments, Essendon, offered 50 square metre apartments with a flexible plan. A large sliding panel adjacent the living area transformed the internal area to create either or larger living area or a second bedroom or study. 50 per cent of the one-bedroom apartments feature this flexible floor plan concept.

The flexi-apartments mean residents can choose between a larger living space or a second bedroom, dining room or study. Whilst these apartments subscribe to the proposed minimum for a one-bedroom apartment, not a two bedroom, they offer choice and flexibility for buyers. Instead of making assumptions about how people want to live, we have provided them with the flexibility to choose for themselves.

The conundrum faced by builders and developers under the proposed standards will be to minimise their construction costs, while providing larger apartments, and maintaining a level of finish that the market has come to expect.

Performance based standards would promote clever and flexible apartment design as builders and developers strive to provide a point of difference in the crowded marketplace.

The City of Moreland’s ‘Moreland Apartment Design Code’ is a great example of performance based planning tool that helps to better inform the needs of residents.

This code dictates a streamlined assessment of development proposals with a set of objectives, guidelines and standards for assessing any development of five or more storeys throughout Moreland. We believe the resource benefits all stakeholders, providing clarity to the council, residents, developers and architects, while also emphasising the importance of site responsive design.

The implementation of the new apartment standards hosts great potential for Melbourne if rolled out effectively. With architects and developers each working towards the similar specifications, we can expect a more competitive marketplace that will fuel innovative solutions, improvements and efficiencies, and provide stakeholders with greater certainty and more measurable outcomes.

The standards also have the potential to ensure better amenity for public and communal spaces, serving to increase the appeal of apartment living overall.

Toby Lauchlan is Partner at Collingwood-based architecture practice <a href="http://www.chc.com.au/">ClarkeHopkinsClarke</a>.
</body></html>

Toby Lauchlan

Apartment standards should be based on performance

<html><body>
Walking around some of Melbourne’s best-designed apartments recently, I was struck by how much design could make a small space feel like a home.

I was on the Robin Boyd Foundation’s exemplary apartment tour, showing off the best in Melbourne apartments.

In Victoria, there are some exceptional examples of how clever spaces, light and ventilation can add to liveability, and how apartments built some decades ago still hold their own today.

Victoria’s property industry is brimming with experts in clever design, the very people I’m appealing to contribute to the draft apartment guidelines our government is working on.

In May, I launched a discussion paper, <a href="http://delwp.vic.gov.au/planning/policy-and-strategy/better-apartments">Better Apartments</a>, at the Planning Institute of Australia’s national conference.

The discussion paper was chosen as the best way to kick-start consultation. Rather than beginning with draft guidelines, I want the people who deliver apartments and the people who live in them to have their say from the start.

Developers are lured to Melbourne for its liveability and investment potential.

Record-low interest rates and a thriving property market have encouraged property investors and owner-occupiers to buy. These are some of the factors pushing up apartment approvals in the past few years.

While that is great news for the state’s economy and for our property industry, we need to make sure planning policy keeps pace with the surge in apartment living.

The rise in apartments has thrown up a red flag from local government, architectural and industry bodies around the standards of some apartments in Victoria.

While I’ve seen some great apartments, I have also seen some dogboxes - poorly designed with little access to natural light, airflow and storage.

The Better Apartments discussion paper raises those concerns and weighs up housing needs, market demands and building standards with the aim of improving liveability and affordability.

The government’s goal is to deliver sustainable housing outcomes, deliver on affordability, respond to the desire to live near jobs and services while also supporting investment.

The discussion paper’s focus is on internal amenity, as well as outlook and privacy.

While apartment sizes are a hot talking point, we must keep in mind that good design is the key. There are some fantastic small apartments offering good amenity, natural light and are affordable, just as there are plenty of poorly-designed large apartments.

We are working towards guidelines that give certainty but still allow for innovation and new ideas.

As well as Better Apartments, work has begun on a refreshed Plan Melbourne strategy and we have begun detailed work to plan the country’s biggest infill opportunity, <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/news/fishermans-bend-proposals-an-overview">Fishermans Bend</a>.

We aren’t starting from scratch. Rather, major issues left out of Plan Melbourne and Fishermans Bend plans to date, such as energy efficiency, housing affordability and climate change, will be included.

Future planning work will also factor in the major infrastrcuture projects the Andrews Labor Government has committed to, such as the Melbourne Metro Rail project.

I look forward to hearing your thoughts on how we can deliver innovative, robust, world leading policy in apartment design. We will be holding stakeholder forums and already, online submissons and survey responses are rolling in.

We will strive to deliver apartments to balance affordability and liveability, in buildings which enhance the city skyline and the streetscape.

Melbourne leads the world in liveability, let’s see that reflected in our aspirations for apartment living.

http://delwp.vic.gov.au/better-apartments

The Hon Richard Wynne is the member for Richmond and the Minister for Planning. <a href="https://twitter.com/rwynnemp">Follow the Planning Minister on Twitter</a>.
</body></html>

rwynne

The Planning Minister Richard Wynne on Better Apartments

<html><body>
Internal amenity is delicate, multifaceted and, most of all, subjective.

The uncertainly and often changing goal posts as to what is an ‘appropriate level of internal amenity’ have long created frustration within the development community. Perhaps as a response to this or, despite all of this, the recent proposition by the new State Government for <a href="http://delwp.vic.gov.au/planning/policy-and-strategy/better-apartments">apartment standards</a> has prompted a lot of new debate and opinion on all things ‘internal amenity’.

<a href="https://www.urban.com.au/news/better-apartments-should-be-retitled-more-expensive-apartments">Craig Yelland’s article</a> demonstrates there is some heavy opposition to a new apartment code by well-respected and highly capable architects that continue to deliver a highly desirable product across the market. There are also whispers of support, particularly from decision makers who want a transparent process and some defined ‘standards’ for applications to be assessed against.

As a former local government planner and appeals advocate, I have sat on both sides of the fence. There is no doubt that internal amenity has been high on the agenda for local and state government planners and VCAT over the past few years. The uncertainty and inconsistencies between the different decision makers often forces applications into VCAT, creating unnecessary time delays and costs onto developers.

Perhaps this is the latest Government’s answer to the questions the decision makers have been asking for some time. What IS an appropriate level of internal amenity? Do smaller apartments automatically equate to having lesser amenity? The release of the better apartments discussion paper is at least a start to addressing the ambiguity.

The benefit of a code with performance measures is that it provides guidance for decision makers and greater certainty for developers and architects. The expectations of decision makers will become more aligned, which will in turn reduce timeframes for planning applications that get caught up in the system due to subjective and overzealous concerns raised by individual planners or urban designers. A reduced timeframe for decision making is urgently needed.

However, a balance should be struck between common sense, which allows for innovation and appropriate design responses, and prescriptive planning policy, which provides certainty. If policy is too restrictive, innovative architecture, affordable options and public benefit often achieved through ‘pushing the boundaries’ will be compromised. Flexibility and reasonableness must still be exercised.

Internal amenity is ultimately translated into the comfort and experience of the occupant, and to a certain extent what may be preferential to one person may not be to another. We can often trust the good architects to get the balance right and ensure that each apartment is afforded good internal amenity, but for others, the fundamentals of designing a dwelling are often overlooked. This raises the question: ‘what is the minimum comfort level?’ Does a code ensure that this minimum level is provided or does it thwart innovative design and ability for occupants to exercise their personal preference?

This brings me to the often blanket approach to no borrowed light. Borrowed light doesn’t mean poor design or amenity. It provides an option. In a one bedroom apartment, for example, an occupant type would consist of one or two persons, none of which require privacy. The bedroom is for sleeping in; most people desire to sleep in the dark. If the owner / occupant market wants borrowed light, build it when appropriate. There are so many successful examples.

Generally speaking Melbourne’s apartment market is a mature one. Buildings should be designed to offer a diverse range of dwellings to suit the needs of different people and price points. If all one bedroom apartments are 50sqm, does it provide housing diversity? Does a code need to specify that a diversity of apartments should be provided in each development i.e. percentage of one, two and three bedroom apartments. The market will be guided by profitability and demand may not always be met.

During a recent visit to Havana, Cuba I became very philosophical about our planning regulations and way of life in Melbourne. In Havana (and obviously many other parts of the world), dwellings are small, comprise small or no balconies, and living areas are orientated to the street (not to the rear with a back yard). Residents leave their windows and doors open inviting interaction with the outside world; life, music, love, laughter, all the ingredients of a high quality way of life. It reminded me that small places to live can prompt activity and eyes on the street, creating safe and vibrant places.

Do we need a heavily prescriptive code or should it ask questions? Meeting the ResCode standard doesn’t always result in a good amenity or a site responsive outcome given it applies Melbourne wide, but it does provide guidance. Merits based assessment is how planning operates in Victoria and it is successful in the hands of a good decision maker.

A new standard for apartments should be developed in consultation with the industry, including developers, real estate agents and architects who have a here and now understanding of the market demands and development costs. An apartment is a home, it shouldn’t just be an organisation of its parts.

Jo Harrison is Associate - Planning at Meinhardt, bringing 10 years of experience in statutory planning and appeals advocacy for local government in metropolitan Melbourne. Connect with Jo on LinkedIn or email <a href="mailto:jo.harrison@meinhardtgroup.com">jo.harrison@meinhardtgroup.com</a>
</body></html>

jo_harrison

Internal Amenity, one for all and all for one?

<html><body>
The planning industry has been waiting for some time for the release of guidelines on the development of high rise apartments in Victoria. This is largely a result of the uncertainty, at both local government and VCAT, regarding acceptable levels of internal amenity and also the hot issue of ‘equitable development potential’.

Some decision makers will not accept south facing apartments but others will, some will accept studio style dwellings for less than 20% of the overall mix yet others form the view if it is good enough for one then it is good enough for all. Some decision makers will allow saddle back apartments and others won’t. Increasingly nine metres is deemed an acceptable separation to achieve ‘equitable development’ but in some instances this may or may not be appropriate for primary outlooks compared with secondary outlooks. In some areas such as Fishermans Bend the preferred setback between buildings is 20 metres.

The increased emphasis on providing new housing in the form of high rise apartment buildings in recent years and now further emphasised through the new Residential Zone regime, has placed considerable pressure on all parties. Clear guidance on what constitutes reasonable outcomes is necessary and I think developers, architects and planners alike would embrace such a document providing that it allows for innovation, flexibility and performance based outcomes.

I couldn’t agree more with <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/news/better-apartments-should-be-retitled-more-expensive-apartments">Craig Yelland and his concern</a> that the implementation of guidelines based on SEPP 65 in New South Wales will result in a rise in property prices and a furthering of the gap in affordable housing in Victoria. Given the challenge Melburnians face entering the property market, maintaining a supply of affordable housing must be a high priority.

There is a clear opportunity for guidelines to be introduced that will address a range of important issues without having a significant impact on affordability, including:

<ul>
<li>Providing for performance based criteria (can I say the word ‘decision guidelines’?) on apartment sizes, noting the impact that storage, layout and width of rooms has on amenity and liveability. I have seen small apartments done well with integrated cabinetry, clever furniture design and innovation with layout and adaptability. Such small apartments done well should not be negatively perceived.</li>
	<li>Recognising the role of sunlight in providing quality housing but recognising that there can be other trade-offs, such as views, daylight access and access to entertainment precincts and the like.</li>
	<li>Recognising that daylight is important for the liveability of dwellings but that the level of daylight required for a bedroom is reasonably less than that required for a living area. Apartments need to reflect that different people will live in different ways and, for example, creating apartments with small kitchens can be seen as an appropriate reflection of societal changes in eating out not in poor housing provision.</li>
	<li>Providing certainty regarding building separation as this is a key factor in creating a reasonable outlook in high rise precincts and reducing the need for screening between buildings. It would seem sensible the taller the building the greater the separation required and, as an example, setting a 12 metres separation between buildings would provide light, aspect, outlook and negate the need for overlooking measures.</li>
</ul>
The key is that these guidelines must be performance based. They must establish decision guidelines that steer thinking on various issues to ensure that the best outcomes are found. Using a format, such as that found in ResCode could provide for such certainty, with flexibility for different design outcomes. An approach, consistent with the Tribunal’s interpretation of ResCode, where meeting the Standard automatically is deemed as meeting the objective, would also provide certainty. Importantly, the structure would provide for flexibility to make a case for variations, taking into consideration the decision guidelines.

While I am not a believer in the setting of mandatory minimum sizes for dwellings, to start a rational debate, I would suggest the following as an example of how the Guidelines could be written in a manner that provides greater certainty but allow for innovation in design and taking into consideration affordability.

<h2>Dwelling Size Objective</h2>

To ensure that the size of dwellings meet the likely needs of future occupants.

<h2>Standard</h2>

<ol>
<li>Studio style apartments should not be less than 37sqm.</li>
	<li>Single bedroom apartments should not be less than 45sqm.</li>
	<li>Two bedroom apartments should not be less than 60sqm.</li>
	<li>Three bedroom apartments should not be less than 85sqm.</li>
</ol>
<h2>Decision Guidelines</h2>

Before deciding whether a dwelling is suitably sized, the responsible authority must consider the following:

<ul>
<li>The likely future occupants of the dwelling and their needs.</li>
	<li>The provision of internal storage, such a wardrobes, linen press, utility cupboard and cupboards in the kitchen.</li>
	<li>The size of the bedroom/s and the capacity to place bed/s within the rooms appropriate to the likely future occupants.</li>
	<li>The dimension of the living area and the capacity to place furniture, such as a couch, table and chairs, to meet the needs of likely future occupants.</li>
	<li>The integration of cabinetry and other devices to increase the effectiveness of the space.</li>
	<li>The capacity to integrate balcony areas into the liveable space, such as the use of wintergardens.</li>
	<li>Access to daylight for living areas, kitchens and bedrooms (in that order).</li>
	<li>The overall amenity of the dwelling.</li>
</ul>
The preparation of the guidelines must be done as a priority and provide for flexibility and innovation in design while not having the effect of increasing the already high price of housing in Victoria. The input from a wide range of architects and other associated professionals, including lighting engineers can significantly inform the debate and I encourage them to be heard and make a submission.

Colleen Peterson is the managing director at Ratio Consultants. <a href="https://twitter.com/colleenpeterson">Follow Colleen on Twitter</a>.
</body></html>

colleenp

Better Apartments: Yes, but not at the expense of innovation

<html><body>
On the surface, the Victorian Government’s <a href="http://delwp.vic.gov.au/planning/policy-and-strategy/better-apartments">“Better Apartments” discussion paper</a> seeks to confirm what every apartment occupier would want to hear: mandating bigger, brighter, cross-ventilated apartments with great outlooks. What it fails to address is that this comes at significant cost.

The Government is using this discussion paper as a pre-emptive move to bring Sydney’s SEPP 65 strict planning rules to Melbourne. If this transpires, the industry will be faced with:

<ul>
<li>Massive job losses in the construction industry.</li>
	<li>The cost per apartment will immediately increase by upwards of $150,000.</li>
	<li>Rent will increase 10 percent per apartment.</li>
	<li>The ability for inner-city sites to house our population growth will be reduced by 45% percent.</li>
	<li>Development will be pushed to the fringe where infrastructure costs are greater.</li>
	<li>A lack of new development due to diminished feasibility; a typical two-storey office building in an activity centre will be worth more than the site as an apartment development. Therefore it will not be developed.</li>
</ul>
In essence, supply of dwellings will drop dramatically, and we will be faced with a host of irreversible changes that will affect the industry and the end-user alike.

However, this situation is not a new one…Sydney’s apartment market stopped dead in its tracks for ten years after SEPP 65 was introduced. The market is only just starting to recover now, not because of any reversal of the planning regulations, but because the lack of supply has driven property prices so high that large one-bedroom apartments are fetching upwards of $700,000.

These inflated prices are the only reason why developers can now afford to develop projects which are in line with Sydney’s stringent rules and still offer viable financial returns. Basically, this means that without the inflated prices, developers could simply not afford to develop apartment projects under the planning laws, which has only further perpetuated the cycle of undersupply and market inflation.

Make no mistake – the implementation of design guidelines will remove your right to an affordable apartment in the area you want to live.

Some simple questions the paper fails to address:

Who is complaining that their rent is too low?

Who is asking for apartments to be more expensive?

We need to give apartment buyers a choice. If purchasers want a large one-bedroom apartment there are certainly plenty available. But if purchasers don't have the funds to afford a large apartment, by all means allow them the opportunity to purchase a home; don’t price them out of the market because they can’t afford what the Government is suggesting to mandate. At the end of the day, let the market determine what is desirable and what is a fair price for that dwelling.

In 2014, ‘<a href="https://www.urban.com.au/news/is-this-melbournes-best-new-residential-development">The Commons</a>’ apartment building in Melbourne was awarded by the National Architecture Awards as the “exemplar of apartment living”.

This project is a fabulous building, where 50 per cent of the apartments are south facing. If south facing apartments are deemed to be so undesirable, why did the project win the industry’s highest architectural award?

Without south facing apartments, anyone who wishes to live north of the city and desires a city-facing view, will simply not be provided the opportunity to do so.

And too bad if you want a view of our stunning bay - it is positioned to the south. If you purchase in a new development, you simply won’t be allowed to face it.

The last government turned off supply of medium density housing in our suburbs, leaving us with a deficit of 6000 much-needed new dwellings per year. If this government brings in minimum design standards they will all but shut down the apartment market in our regeneration and inner-urban areas. And with the projected population estimated to grow to 7.7 million by 2051, supply needs to increase, not diminish, in order to keep up with demand.

The new guidelines want to make you pay $10,000 more so your walk to the lift is 10m shorter.

Let’s not forget, this discussion paper has been drafted in a way that poses a series of loaded questions. Simply asking people if they would prefer a larger kitchen, or more internal space in their living room, is an irresponsible approach by the Government as it fails to address that these lifestyle choices come at a cost.

Larger apartments cost more money to build and they also decrease a project’s overall yield meaning these costs will all be passed on to the end user. Why don’t we ask legitimate questions that will force purchasers to think about their circumstances – questions such as ‘would you be prepared to pay $100 more in rent per week for a larger living room?’ is likely to illicit a more accurate response than simply ‘would you like to live in a larger apartment?’

The existing planning scheme in Melbourne rewards good design through discretionary height controls. It is a great system that has produced some fabulous buildings: ranging from high-end penthouses to affordable compact apartments.

On the other hand, Sydney’s planning scheme is overly prescriptive and complicated. The outcome has delivered large apartments, yes, but you need to be a millionaire to afford one. There is no such thing as an affordable apartment in Sydney.

The beauty of Melbourne’s market is the availability of choice, and the ability to allow most, if not all, professionals earning a modest wage, to one day own their own home. Let’s not take that opportunity away from Victorians just in the pursuit of short-sighted guidelines that will create more problems than it will fix.

Craig Yelland is a Director of Plus Architecture - an Urban.com.au Industry Hub member. With offices in Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane and Christchurch, Plus Architecture is considered one of the leading architectural firms in multi-unit residential development. He lives in a south facing apartment with his wife and two children.
</body></html>

cyelland

"Better Apartments" should be retitled "More Expensive Apartments"

<html><body>
The recent release of the State Government's discussion paper has provoked a strong response from the industry and here on Urban.com.au. Rather than focusing on a general overview of the <a href="http://delwp.vic.gov.au/planning/policy-and-strategy/better-apartments">Better Apartments discussion paper</a> and the questions it raises, I have instead decided to focus on one particular aspect of the debate: apartment sizes.

There would appear to be a number of negative connotations generally associated with smaller apartments being built all over Melbourne at present, stemming largely as the result of poor design and build quality, thus impacting the quality of living of the resident. Speaking broadly, the worst of these apartments suffer from a lack of quality outlook, extending to poor natural light and ventilation due to bedrooms requiring borrowed light from other rooms or in some instances narrow light-wells, low ceiling heights and bulkheads, lack of storage space, etc.

Now these are all factors that aren't necessarily limited to small apartments and clever design can overcome them. It could be argued that well-designed smaller apartments are the missing piece of the housing diversity puzzle in Melbourne. Areas that are well serviced by public transport, retail, community and recreational facilities (and other necessary services) in close proximity of the city would be ideal for such housing stock, and would present an easier entry into home ownership for those in their 20s.

A smaller well designed, flexible and affordable apartment would definitely be an appealing prospect for me: I'm 28, single, work four days a week in a city office, and one day at home in Richmond. I otherwise spend very little time at home and the greatest amount is spent sleeping. I can cook and cook regularly, but also like to eat out (due to the convenience of having so many options in the area) and get out of the house.

Now, not everyone shares the same circumstances as me, but I'd hazard a guess that I'm not alone. So who's to tell me I couldn't live quite comfortably in an apartment less than 30sqm in size? Which brings us to…

<h2>Micro Apartments</h2>

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/8404837889_d7921f5bb9_h.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="New York Micro apartment. © Business Insider"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="222" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/8404837889_d7921f5bb9_h.jpg?itok=N_Pp_tdO" title="New York Micro apartment. © Business Insider" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>New York Micro apartment. © Business Insider</figcaption></figure>In 2013, a project called My Micro NY won a design competition for New York’s first “micro apartments”, an initiative for the development of affordable housing for singles in New York City, by way of small prefabricated units. The city’s first “micro” building will have 55 rental apartments ranging in size from approximately 25sqm up to 34sqm with quality natural light and ventilation, adequate storage space, and Juliet balconies.

The greatest appeal of these micro apartments is in their flexibility with elements that fold away when not required. Additionally, because the architects believed amenities were important to residents, the building will have a public meeting space, café, common rooftop garden for residents, as well as a laundry room, residential storage space, a bike room, and fitness space. The project is due for completion this year.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/micro_apt_kit_of_parts.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="New York Micro apartment: kit of parts diagram. © Business Insider"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="456" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/micro_apt_kit_of_parts.jpg?itok=G3tRk_tJ" title="New York Micro apartment: kit of parts diagram. © Business Insider" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>New York Micro apartment: kit of parts diagram. © Business Insider</figcaption></figure>There are great examples of that locally, most notably Cairo flats in Fitzroy. Located on Nicholson Street, the U-shaped building built in 1938 and designed by Best Overend features 28 'bachelor flats' and is widely considered an icon of early Melbourne modernism.

<blockquote>
The flats sought a distinctive type of accommodation, the custom designed bachelor flat, providing maximum amenity in minimum space for minimum rent. The minimal units were supported by a communal dining room, an in-house meal and laundry service, communal flat to roof space and lockable garages. Cairo established a major break with earlier types of flats in Australia and is significant for introducing the flat to the modernist programme in Australia and for its acknowledgement of the existence of a new, modern way of living.
<cite>National Trust Register</cite>
</blockquote>

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/cairo4.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Cairo Flats Fitzroy. © Assemble Papers"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="366" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/cairo4.jpg?itok=u7mdA4cp" title="Cairo Flats Fitzroy. © Assemble Papers" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Cairo Flats Fitzroy. © Assemble Papers</figcaption></figure>More recently, Melbourne firm Architecture Architecture have completed a fit-out of one of the studio apartments within Cairo (24sqm!) for director Michael Roper. The project has received a number of architectural award commendations for "making more with less."

<blockquote>
Embracing the philosophy of making more with less, Architecture Architecture have created a simple space with maximum flexibility to address contemporary living needs within a minimum floor area.

In an era when people are increasingly opting to live in cities and our urban fringes are forever expanding outwards, Architecture Architecture understand the imperative to make more with less, opting for high quality flexible space rather than inflexible specialised spaces – quality over quantity.
<cite><a href="http://architecturearchitecture.com.au/blog/index.php/2012/11/14/cairo-apartment-fitout/">Architecture Architecture: The Purple Rose of Cairo</a></cite>
</blockquote>

When I was at <a href="http://www.kerstinthompson.com/">KTA</a> and we were working on the <a href="http://churchonnapier.com/">Church on Napier</a> project at 124 Napier Street, Fitzroy, we looked at a number of ways of providing a decent setback from Napier street to the new three-level apartment building while maintaining the same yield of residences. One option that we conceived was three bachelor flats of around 28sqm + a 4sqm balcony based on the NY model of micro apartments and these were well received by the agents providing feedback.

The apartments featured flexible living areas that could be adjusted to suit the needs of the resident. These apartments would have benefited from being a part of a larger residential complex and community within the site that also featured a large communal outdoor garden. This would have added greater housing diversity within the area that was relatively affordable in comparison to much larger apartments in Fitzroy. Additionally, the location meant that they were only a two minute walk to Gertrude Street and a five minute walk in either direction to Brunswick and Smith Streets.

With careful consideration given to outlook, amenity, privacy, storage and flexibility, with generous floor to ceiling heights I'm of the opinion that well designed smaller or 'micro' apartments do have a place in Melbourne and while the minimum apartment size guidelines may have the best interest of residents at heart ultimately the market will dictate and prove whether or not there is demand for them.

If the apartment ticks all the right boxes in terms of natural light and ventilation and adequate storage among a raft of other criteria, the minimum size of the apartment should be a secondary consideration not the driving factor in the design.

As <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/news/better-apartments-yes-but-not-at-the-expense-of-innovation">Colleen Peterson wrote in her piece yesterday</a>, any guidelines should not impede design innovation nor should it drive up housing affordability. If done right any potential design guidelines for apartments should create opportunities rather than place unnecessary and stifling constraints.

Lead image credit: The Purple Rose of Cairo, Architecture Architecture. Image: Tom Ross of Brilliant Creek.
</body></html>

Better Apartments

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

The latest real estate & off the plan properties & news, delivered to your inbox.

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

The latest real estate & off the plan properties & news, delivered to your inbox.

Better Apartments

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

The latest real estate & off the plan properties & news, delivered to your inbox.

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

The latest real estate & off the plan properties & news, delivered to your inbox.