Meinhardt

<html><body>
Recognised as the gateway to the eastern suburbs, Box Hill has come a long way from its initial suburban identity. With a number of major urban redevelopment projects underway and many more set to define its skyline, Box Hill has become the fastest growing city centre outside of the Melbourne CBD and is now offering a genuine alternative to the Melbourne CBD for investment, employment, entertainment and a place to stay.

It is somewhat the perfect storm that has been created that makes Box Hill an attractive proposition for a range of key industry players. The town centre is well served in terms of infrastructure. Box hill benefits from a well-located and established activity centre and shopping centre (Box Hill Central) with a diverse range of retail, commercial, food and beverage and entertainment offerings.

The town centre is a major public transport hub, well supported by rail, tram and bus routes with both the Belgrave and Lilydale railway lines converging deep below the shopping centre, with a major tram route located along Whitehorse Road and a regional bus interchange located above the shopping centre.

In terms of employment generation Box Hill also boasts the highest office floor area outside the Melbourne CBD and has been a long time home for some major health (Box Hill Hospital and Epworth Hospital) and education facilities (Box Hill Institute and Box Hill TAFE).

Unlocking the potential in Box Hill has been the strategic work that has been carried out by Whitehorse City Council with support given to this vision by State Government for decentralisation. The Box Hill Transit City Activity Centre Structure Plan was introduced in 2006. The structure plan provides a framework for city development and identifies areas for growth with an emphasis on contribution to employment generation, housing supply and the 24 hour city.

Of note is Precinct F where there are no height limits and higher rise development is encouraged. This area otherwise known as the development ‘’go zone’’ in Box Hill.

Momentum has been gathering since the adoption of the structure plan though it is only been over the last few years that the development industry has sat up, taken notice and tapped into Box Hill’s true potential.

Investment in Box Hill has skyrocketed in the last few years with much of this coming from Asian investors, and more specifically from China. It is worth noting that a significant proportion of the Box Hill population comes from Chinese descent and Box Hill host one of the biggest Chinese New Year’s parties in the country.

There has still been a great deal of interest and investment from local investors too.The potential for uplift in value in properties has been a huge drawcard with single dwelling lots being converted into high rise multi dwelling mixed use developments. The sheer scale of potential development, encouraged in the Box Hill MAC, makes it an attractive prospect.

Another key factor is that property values have grown considerably more in Box Hill than in equivalent suburbs in Melbourne. Property values have increased by a whopping 927% in Box Hill over the last 20 years. The adoption of the Box Hill Transit City Activity Centre Structure Plan all of 10 years ago has been a key catalyst for this.

What has set Box Hill apart from other satellite centres such as Dandenong, Ringwood and Footscray is that the investment to date has largely been pouring in from the private sector. Whereas other centres have relied on State Government funding to a degree to kick start investment interest.

Box Hill is now experiencing a building boom with a series of major projects underway or complete. And with up to 40 major developments with planning approval yet to commence construction and many more currently in the pipeline, at the planning and pre-planning application stage, we will soon be seeing considerably more tower cranes in the Box Hill skyline over the next couple of years.

<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/sky_one_2_0.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Sky One is destined for Box Hill"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="819" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/sky_one_2_0.jpg?itok=koK3U1M6" title="Sky One is destined for Box Hill" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Sky One is destined for Box Hill</figcaption></figure>There will be an unprecedented growth in population and jobs as result of these projects. This though is only the tip of the iceberg with many more redevelopment opportunities still yet to be realised in Box Hill.

Some recent key landmark developments in Box Hill of note are: the Box Hill Hospital redevelopment (completed), the new ATO at 20 storeys with 20,000sqm of leasable floor area (completed and occupied), the Whitehorse Towers at 36 and 26 storeys, which includes 511 apartments and an Art Series Hotel (currently under construction), SkyOne at 36 storeys, which includes 450 apartments and a food and beverage entertainment hub at street level, and the Spotlight development comprising three towers at 37, 30 and 17 storeys with a hotel a 450 apartments (recently approved).

Other key major development projects currently being considered by Whitehorse Council include mixed use and apartment developments at: 820 Whitehorse Road at 30 storeys, 9-11 Prospect Street at 26 storeys and 5-9 Wellington Road at 16 storeys.

The keen interest from prospective buyers is also worthy of note. The Whitehorse Towers development (Asia Pacific) is one example where development interest has been vindicated. It is understood that most of the 511 apartments sold off the plan within 6 weeks.

Apartments have also flown off the plan at Sky One (Golden Age) which will be commencing construction any day now. Success with rapid conversion with these projects has built more confidence in investors and developers and the like.

<h2>Opportunities</h2>

<ul>
<li>Land to be rezoned.</li>
	<li>Mix of uses and new uses.</li>
	<li>Clear strategy and guidelines as to where growth will / will not be supported.</li>
	<li>Rare political appetite supporting growth (unparalleled in Melbourne’s east).</li>
	<li>Opportunity for growth in spite of new height restrictions in the Melbourne CBD and indecision over Melbourne’s major urban renewal projects.</li>
</ul>
Box Hill is well and truly booming and it has all the right ingredients for this to continue for some time. Whether you are coming to invest, work, live or play Box Hill is fast becoming the place to be.

Paul McAleer is a former Planning Manager at the City of Whitehorse where a key focus was guiding major development projects in the Box Hill MAC. Paul has just recently joined Meinhardt as Associate Director – Planning.
</body></html>

Paul McAleer

Box Hill to become Melbourne’s second CBD?

<html><body>
<a href="http://practicalimagination.info/imagin8/">imagin8</a> is Meinhardt’s education seminar series designed to share the latest thinking in the built environment space, as well as provide an informal networking opportunity.

The most recent event was held last month on the topic of: ‘Inner City Chic: Next Generation Boutique Apartments’, with Urban.com.au present during the evening.

<blockquote>
Dubbed as one of the world’s most livable cities time and time again, Melbourne grows at the rate of more than 100,000 people each year. Consequently, demand for residential property is growing exponentially and the dollar value of Melbourne property investments has been more than doubling every ten years.

Tall buildings are getting all the press but they take time to deliver. With more infill sites being unlocked, smaller mixed-use developments are on the rise and the appetite for high quality inner city boutique apartments continues to grow. So what’s next?
</blockquote>

<h2>Stream 1: New Global Trends in Residential Development (Richard Drummond, Knight Frank)</h2>

The first speaker was Richard Drummond who acts as Director of the Knight Frank Project Marketing division in Melbourne. Responsible for campaign development, offshore and local sales and marketing campaigns and operations of the team, Richard has been involved with the sales of more than AUD$5 billion of residential property from Australia to London and New York to Asia.

Richard touched on a number of markets both internationally (namely London and New York) and then focused on the state of the Melbourne market along with the changing needs and desires of prospective buyers. As an example the owner-occupier market has signalled a strong desire for more storage coupled with a particular appetite for larger apartments with generous living spaces.

Looking at the CBD and Docklands, Richard noted that 60-70% of buyers were offshore. As a point of difference Queens Domain has reached 70% sales at the time of the event with 50% considered retail buyers.

<h2>Stream 2: A Planning Formula for Success (Tom Harrington, Meinhardt Planning)</h2>

Next up was Tom Harrington, a qualified Town Planner with considerable understanding and experience in utilising Victoria Planning Provisions. He shared his Planning Formula for Success.

Tom made the point that a successful planning formula was replicable. The three key stages of Planning are as follows:

<ol>
<li>Site Acquisition</li>
	<li>Pre-Application</li>
	<li>Application / Post Application</li>
</ol>
1. When developing boutique apartments it is critical that local nuances are understood - boutique apartments cannot be built anywhere.and that planning input ie. due diligence into site purchase is also critical.

2. During the Pre-Application phase Tom emphasised the importance of:

<ul>
<li>Planning input into concept design development, things like heights, setbacks, parking etc.</li>
	<li>Engaging senior personnel at council for projects of scale</li>
	<li>The planner and architect presenting to council planners together at the pre-app meeting</li>
	<li>Using the meeting as a guide for the key issues council will consider</li>
	<li>Not relying on in-principle approval from the pre-app meeting</li>
	<li>Understanding how to position the application</li>
</ul>
3. During the Application phase it is critical to:

<ul>
<li>Use the planning system to your advantage</li>
	<li>Consider development contributions</li>
	<li>Consider trade-off's such as increased height in return for open space</li>
	<li>Consider the use of roof space</li>
	<li>Ensure if borrowed light is provided to apartments via saddle back/snorkel bedrooms that detailed drawings are provided which demonstrate how the internal wall is designed, the size of the opening/glazing,and the distance from the external light source</li>
</ul>
Current Boutique development Hot Spots identified by Tom included Brunswick, North Melbourne, Collingwood, Doncaster, Richmond, Hawthorn and South Yarra, with the City of Brimbank also offering great scope. Tom also touched on the 5 hot issues surrounding Boutique Apartments:

<ol>
<li>Mandatory Height limits</li>
	<li>Apartment sizes</li>
	<li>Borrowed light</li>
	<li>Street Activation</li>
	<li>New fees and charges</li>
</ol>
<h2>Stream 3: From Structures to Services: Engineering Added Value (Ivano Piubellini)</h2>

Next was Ivano Piubellini - Meinhardt’s new Discipline Leader for Building Services with his session is also straddling building engineering disciplines. He had four new ideas that could help project teams produce better, cost-effective, more saleable apartment solutions.

These initiatives included Green / Blue roofs, Cistern foundations and Geo-exchange systems; each coming with its own associated benefits. For example green roofs result in a reduction in solar load and provision of green space while blue roofs aid in the reclaim of water and stormwater attenuation to the street with a combination of the two resulting in maximum benefits.

Cistern foundations are modular precast concrete cell systems normally employed under car parks / roads /pathways that can be utilised to form a waffle pod type foundation suitable for a typical 4-storey apartment building. The benefits associated with its use include:

<ul>
<li>Stormwater attenuation of flow to street drain</li>
	<li>Rainwater collection and re-use</li>
	<li>Fire service water storage</li>
	<li>All located under the building and forming a secondary purpose.</li>
	<li>Frees up the roof to provide more tenant amenity</li>
</ul>
And lastly Geo-exchange systems which allow for the elimination of unsightly air conditioning condensers and require lower energy use compared to air cooled systems. They can also be combined with building piling / micro piles.

<h2>Stream 4: Liveability and Amenity: Return on Green Space (Jon Shinkfield, REALMstudios)</h2>

Last but certainly not least was Jon Shinkfield,founding director of REALMStudios which is one of the nation’s leading urban design and landscape architecture practices. Jon’s portfolio of urban projects is framed by his interest in the relationship between water, people and place, including considerations of productivity, land use and modal transport. He is also President of the Australian Institute of Landscape Architects Victorian Chapter.

<blockquote>
In the context of an increasingly urbanized and dense city model the need for available open space and occupiable streetscapes is central to our health and wellbeing. In providing for and servicing the needs of a growing population we are asking questions about spatial distribution, space typology, connectivity and function, public versus private.

Our private green places are diminishing, yet the deeply embedded Australianism of the backyard in the city is still alive and well!..a romantic view of freedom, play, growth and experimentation. But where is the new ‘backyard’ and what are its values? Are these the common or shared places in the densified city?
<cite>Jon Shinkfield</cite>
</blockquote>

These new places are both public and private and out of necessity express multiple values and generate multiple returns:

<ul>
<li>Multifunction</li>
	<li>Resilience</li>
	<li>Productivity</li>
	<li>Memory</li>
</ul>
They deliver:

<ul>
<li>Thermal comfort - heat and cool</li>
	<li>Social cohesion – interaction, engagement, wellbeing</li>
	<li>Productive place – producing energy, food and water</li>
	<li>Biodiversity – nature and exchange.</li>
</ul>
And that wraps up another imagin8 seminar.
</body></html>

Laurence Dragomir

Meinhardt Imagin8 Seminar - Inner-city Chic: Next Generation Boutique 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>
Planning ideologies are slowly changing. The recently released Metropolitan Planning Strategy, Plan Melbourne, advocates densified residential and commercial buildings at increased heights, particularly within the CBD and urban renewal areas – both of which are strategically located near jobs, transport and existing infrastructure. Despite these positive steps, the Minister for Planning, Matthew Guy, has been widely criticised for what many view as his tall tower ‘approvals binge’, leading to him being dubbed “Mr Skyscraper”.

There are currently approximately 30,000 apartments within Melbourne City Council's boundaries, with over 100+ tall towers approved for construction in Central Melbourne. An estimated 15,000 more apartments housed within tall buildings are planned over the next five years.

In August 2013, Professor Rob Adams, Melbourne City Council's Director of City Design, questioned this growing trend towards tall buildings and higher plot ratios and warned that the city centre could become '”Hong Kong but without the spectacular setting” if planning rules were left unchecked.

Melburnians’ earnest engagement over the future of their city skyline exemplifies a community pride that has grown since the rejuvenation of the city centre in the 1980s, prior to which the Age newspaper’s architecture critic Norman Day described the bleak CBD in 1978 as “an empty, useless city centre”. Professor Adams’ comments thus embody a long-standing narrative of Melbourne’s developers and decision makers wrestling with community groups over the height of their projects. But are the claims that tall buildings are “soulless towers” destined to become “slums of the future” justified? What, if anything, is wrong with height and how do tall structures detract from Melbourne as the “world’s most liveable city”?

<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/melbourne_growth_timeline1.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="A Melbourne growth timeline"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="787" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/melbourne_growth_timeline1.jpg?itok=QqnrOJJg" title="A Melbourne growth timeline" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>A Melbourne growth timeline</figcaption></figure>Apart from densification enhancing Melbourne’s prime “liveability” status by containing urban sprawl, tall buildings can elevate cities by redefining their local and regional environment, creating jobs and opportunities, and becoming the iconic structures of re-imagined city centres.

Melbourne’s flat topography allows appropriately positioned tall buildings to define and articulate the city structure, visually reinforcing areas of significance or noteworthy localities within the city area. The combination of appropriate site location and a considered architectural response enable tall buildings to become important city landmarks.

Tall buildings should therefore be appropriately located if they are to enhance and complement the city structure and protect the amenity of sensitive areas. A poorly located, poorly designed tall structure can physically and visually overwhelm adjacent streets and neighbourhoods, overshadow nearby open space, create unnecessary traffic congestion, and produce uncomfortable wind conditions.

Tall buildings thus have a responsibility to respect the surrounding environment. It is the opinion of this writer that Melbourne appropriately balances this obligation – take the Swanston Street city core as an example. The ‘heart’ of the CBD preserves its rich historic architecture and character by avoiding tall buildings and ensuring a thoughtfully blended contemporary design aesthetic. The majority of current tall building approvals are on the west and north-western edge of the Hoddle Grid, Southbank, or, more recently, Fishermans Bend.

Urban renewal precincts such as Fishermans Bend are strategically located near jobs, transport and existing infrastructure. By creating efficient and sustainable tall buildings within and near the central city, the need for transportation and land are economised, resulting in increased social equity, shared resources, energy savings, and a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions per person. Unfortunately, these powerful ecological, social and economic arguments appear to have become too passé for those Melburnians agitating against the aesthetic of their evolving city skyline.

<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/image56.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Melbourne tall buildings growth prediction"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="279" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/image56.jpg?itok=kESAW9kz" title="Melbourne tall buildings growth prediction" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Melbourne tall buildings growth prediction</figcaption></figure>Apart from the lifestyle benefits of proximity and connectivity to city amenity (not to mention the spectacular views), tall buildings are economically sound propositions. Taller buildings cost less per square metre to build. The rising land values in Melbourne’s central city have increased pressure to densify and achieve greater dividends for prime-location sites, which in turn allows high-risk investors the lure of recouping their outlays, thereby stimulating economic growth.

The increasing focus on developer contributions in the form of public open space is also encouraging. Not only do these areas enhance the sustainability of the city by securing land for public use and enjoyment, they also enhance the streetscape by ensuring a pleasant public realm and community asset. It is here, at the street interface and lower levels of tall buildings, where attention should be focussed – and this is where the concern surrounding some tall building approvals is justified.

The public domains of commercial buildings have generally been self-fulfilling because profits are maximised by creating generous retail space and public plazas that are as inviting as possible for business tenants. Residential buildings have caught up in recent years with an acknowledgement that the profit derived from the number of units needs to be balanced against an attractive public domain and activated retail frontage as investors have become increasingly ‘lifestyle’ savvy.

Melbourne does have poor examples of taller development (mainly approved in the 20 years between 1980 and 2000) with podium levels facing away from the street employing high, blank, unactivated walls, which force socioeconomic activities inside rather than out. Such internalisation of uses results in the isolation of retail and social activities from the collective city community and the ‘buzz’ of city life.

Simple landscaping elements such as tree canopies and streetscape designs incorporating awnings and retail frontages effectively mitigate internalisation of uses and solve the human-scale problem by creating a micro-environment for pedestrians.

To conclude, well-designed tall buildings do not detract from Melbourne as the “world’s most liveable city” because:

<ul>
<li>The combination of appropriate site location and a considered architectural response enable tall buildings to become important city landmarks.</li>
	<li>Tall buildings within and near the central city are sustainable – an argument that needs to be cogently reiterated.</li>
	<li>Appropriate street treatments can solve the human-scale problem by creating a micro-environment for pedestrians.</li>
</ul>
The article was produced by Tim Retrot as Senior Consultant at Meinhardt &amp; Jon Brock, National Director - Land Development at Meinhardt. The latest Meinhardt magazine <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/http://viewer.zmags.com/publication/30b87167#/30b87167/1">Shaping</a> is available and features further articles and discussion on tall building trends.
</body></html>

Tim Retrot

Tall Building Criticism a Tall Tale

<html><body>
<blockquote>
We get really obsessed with height - we can have great towers and bad towers, we need to shift the discussion more toward the quality of development.
<cite>Leanne Hodyl, <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/news/public-forum-city-in-crisis">IMPA's 'City in Crisis?' forum</a></cite>
</blockquote>

This interesting quote appeared in <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/expert-insights/buying/25000sqm-threshold-yes-it-is-time-to-review-it">Alastair's article</a> on Monday, which delved into who should maintain planning authority over Melbourne. The notion of shifting focus more toward quality of development rather than height is a noble one, but it's simply not that straight forward.

A counter argument could be found in comments made during the recent Meinhardt tall towers seminar in which Meinhardt's Jon Brock essentially stated that people don't really care how tall a tower is beyond a certain point, tall is tall but what matters most is what occurs at street level. A vibrant, user friendly, interesting and varied street frontage is in fact the key to a development's quality.

A prime example of this has surfaced with PDS Group recently releasing a handful of high resolution images for 380 Lonsdale Street for which they will act as Project Manager and Superintendent.

<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/229.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Artist's perspective from Lonsdale Street. Image courtesy PDS Group"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="909" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/229.jpg?itok=hCsmuD6b" title="Artist's perspective from Lonsdale Street. Image courtesy PDS Group" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Artist's perspective from Lonsdale Street. Image courtesy PDS Group</figcaption></figure>So which is it? Height or quality? 380 Lonsdale Street proves in its most recent version you can have both. The Elenberg Fraser-designed tower may well stand at 217 metres when realised which is approximately 55 metres higher than the initial Spowers design.

Below is a comparison between the two designs highlighting the all-important ground level which shows the current Elenberg Fraser design to hold a higher level of interest, activity and greenery. Active glass frontages and green planters seek to replace uniform composite panels; both shroud above ground car parking yet one does so in a more aesthetically pleasing fashion.

There's no intended slight against Spowers, their version after all gained approval via the State Government, but there's little doubt that Elenberg Fraser's provides a heightened quality to the public domain.

<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/image4380.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Images courtesy PDS Group and spowers"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="590" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/image4380.jpg?itok=HdyQcqKp" title="Images courtesy PDS Group and spowers" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Images courtesy PDS Group and Spowers</figcaption></figure>380 Lonsdale Street in its current form goes to show that the questions of height and quality aren't bound together in an inverse relationship. They are separate issues and should be treated as such.

Railing against buildings purely for their height serves no purpose to my way of thinking. Asking for alterations and/or rejecting planning applications based more so upon what they deliver or fail to deliver to the streetscape, or indeed what they replace is of more relevance than any question over height.
</body></html>

silvermb

Quality development begins at street level

<html><body>
With highly prized land parcels in Melbourne's CBD becoming smaller and scarcer, how do you maximise their development values and are skyscrapers viable on these compact sites? As well as sites getting smaller, so are apartments. But do they need to? How do we maximise floorspace to improve returns without compromising design and comfort?

Incredible shifts are happening in technology and building practices; we have a new generation of technology pushing the limits of concrete and steel like never before. But for engineers to continue to lead, they must provide compelling answers to the question: ‘Can we take what you want, and give you more?’

For developers, it’s more sellable area. For architects, it’s more space with less structure. For builders, it’s increased speed of construction, while at the same time ensuring health and safety.

At their very core, structural solutions for skyscrapers have to be simple, innovative and cost competitive. Melbourne is in the midst of a skyscraper construction explosion with three of the five tallest under construction benefiting from Meinhardt's expertise. They are the 72-storey Prima Pearl on the South Bank, the 68-storey 568 Collins Street; and the 58-storey Abode 318 on Russell Street.

Abode 318 and 568 Collins Street both sit on compact sites.

<h2>Abode 318</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/c8d4f3d67f050b21b492e71d270434cb.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Abode 318's unique facade. Image © Ryan Seychell"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="387" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/c8d4f3d67f050b21b492e71d270434cb.jpg?itok=MiL-VG2g" title="Abode 318's unique facade. Image © Ryan Seychell" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Abode 318's unique facade. Image courtesy Ryan Seychell</figcaption></figure>With a height to depth ratio of 9:1, Abode 318 on Russell Street in Melbourne’s CBD, could almost be classified as super skinny or pencil thin skyscraper (this is usually defined at a ratio of 11:1)

To achieve the requirements for 58-storeys on such a small site, optimising the building’s stability solution was critical. Wind tunnel testing and Finite Element Analysis were therefore conducted early in the project. This early analysis highlighted the challenges associated with wind acceleration and revealed an overall building natural frequency on the borderline for occupancy comfort.

<blockquote>
We incorporated provision for a tuned mass damper to be located at the top of the building, while at the same time optimising all of the building’s primary elements and lateral mechanisms, including car park ramps, lift cores and shear walls, in a computer model. When the structure was 80% complete the actual building frequency was measured using a ‘drop test’. One of the building cranes safely swung a weight above the structure and the building response was measured.

It was also important to not underestimate the importance of floor systems. When you have literally acres of the same footprint, it’s a significant cost to the overall project.
<cite>Vincent Amato, Senior Structural Engineer, Meinhardt</cite>
</blockquote>

This test revealed the dynamic response of the building to be acceptable without the need of the costly tuned mass damper, which could have cost the client $100k-$150k. The horizontal and vertical wave form of the Abode façade meant that every floor had a different geometry to the floor below and the floor above.

An economic floor plate design was achieved by seeking order in the waves and adopting a 10 floor repetition of the floor plate with the majority of the floor plate remaining consistent and variation being limited to the edge. This allowed the contractor to achieve economies of repetitive design with a bespoke outcome.

<h2>568 Collins Street</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/img_1290.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="568 Collins Street. Image courtesy Mark Baljak"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="870" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/img_1290.jpg?itok=tXoMtYrl" title="568 Collins Street. Image courtesy Mark Baljak" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>568 Collins Street. Image courtesy Mark Baljak</figcaption></figure>The 68-storey, mixed-use tower at 568 Collins Street meanwhile is set on a plan dimension of only 30m x 40m, which is very small for a building of this height. Traditionally in the Melbourne market high rise towers get their lateral stability solely by the central service core.

On this site, however with the limited space the client wished to maximise the sellable floor space while not impeding the views with bulky structure. By working closely with the architects and client in the early stages of the project a transfer-free structure has been created. This is rarely achieved in a mixed-use tower due to the floor plates requiring different functional grids for various uses.

<blockquote>
We were able to achieve this feat by use of advanced long term shortening and shrinkage modelling to predict and compensate for an uneven loading pattern to the structure. We called on our experience in the Middle East and Asia and adopted an outrigger system, which alleviated the core of all the work and kept the façade free of bulky structure.

With an outrigger system in two locations (top and bottom), we were able to shrink the core and give more sellable space back to the client. In addition, a retention system without temporary ground anchors accelerated construction and avoided potential damage to surrounding services.
<cite>Vincent Amato, Senior Structural Engineer, Meinhardt</cite>
</blockquote>

The whole approach also reduced the building’s overall height while keeping the desired number of floors and reduced the cost to the developer.

<h2>Prima Pearl Tower</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/rb9ci5.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="The sky high Prima Pearl. Image courtesy Paul D"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="393" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/rb9ci5.jpg?itok=VnGMK4K5" title="The sky high Prima Pearl. Image courtesy Paul D" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>The sky high Prima Pearl. Image courtesy Paul D</figcaption></figure>Located opposite Crown Casino, the prestigious 72-storey Prima Pearl apartment tower is nearing completion. The mixed-use building includes an indoor swimming pool, sauna, spa and gymnasium, private cinema, lounge and library, 8 –level podium car park, virtual golf driving range and level-67 sky lounge.

Unlike 568 Collins Street, this tower has the core doing all the work. Nevertheless, there are still opportunities to optimise space.

<blockquote>
We considered the impact of small internal core walls on the overall building stiffness. Despite receiving calls from the contractor’s steel scheduler to check what we had submitted was correct, we were able to reduce the required reinforcement and wall thickness of the main external core walls.

We have changed the shape of the floor plates above level 30 from concave to convex, which has created larger floor plates for the premium apartments. This structural floor plate design, which we developed, easily accommodated the changing building footprint without compromising a typical design philosophy for fast construction.
<cite>Vincent Amato, Senior Structural Engineer, Meinhardt</cite>
</blockquote>

This is clearly where the benefit to the project translates to added value back to the client.

It is literally possible to grab real estate out of the sky.
</body></html>

vincentamato

Skyscraper trends: Optimising sites and maximising floor plates

<html><body>
Last week Meinhardt Australia held their <a href="http://practicalimagination.info/imagin8/skyscraper-trends-in-melbourne-from-super-skinny-to-prefabulous/">Skyscraper Trends In Melbourne: From Super Skinny To ‘Prefabulous’</a> seminar which brought together a select group of Melbourne's development industry elite to consider the influences shaping the future direction of Melbourne's built form. The latest in a string of successful seminars held under the <a href="http://practicalimagination.info/">Practical Imagination - imagin8</a> banner, Urban.com.au was present to cover the informal yet highly relevant gathering.

Speakers included three Meinhardt representatives with National Director - Land Development Jon Brock commencing proceedings, Managing Director of CBRE Residential Projects Andrew Leoncelli and Hickory Group Joint Managing Director George Argyrou. All presentations gave a synopsis of the current Melbourne market from their respective positions and explored likely future trends and innovations.

Followed by a lengthy open forum discussing all matters relevant, the evening provided great insight into Melbourne's trend of building taller buildings, and the fundamentals/technologies that underpin it. While further in depth articles will appear on Urban.com.au in coming weeks, the most pertinent information for Urban.com.au's readers were within the presentations of Jon Brock and George Argyrou; summaries of both are found below.

<h2>Jon Brock: the Victorian town planning context</h2>

Leading off Jon Brock spoke of the context in which Melbourne's tall towers have been allowed to flourish, alluding to strong population growth and Plan Melbourne's focus upon urban renewal. Also sighted within the presentation was the Metropolitan Planning Authority (MPA) whose role was effectively described as Melbourne's "Tall tower decider."

Given Menhardt's extensive catalogue of projects, urban renewal areas such as Fishermans Bend and Arden-Macaulay were discussed at length with Jon Brock citing <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/projects/60-82-johnson-street-south-melbourne">60-82 Johnson Street, South Melbourne</a> and 114-116 Haines Street, North Melbourne (seen below) as prime examples where negotiations with the relevant planning body let to agreed upon development outcomes that benefited all parties.

Paraphrasing Jon Brock in relation to 60-82 Johnson Street, no one particularly cared that an additional four levels were added to the tower, of primary concern is podium interaction and increased public space. Also discussed was Arden-Macaulay where higher density is envisaged, and likely to be implemented via the <a href="http://www.melbourne.vic.gov.au/BuildingandPlanning/Planning/planningschemeamendments/Pages/AmendmentC190.aspx">C190 amanedment</a> which has been delayed to a degree due to East West Link.

<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/image137_1.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Images taken from Jon Brock's presentation"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="317" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/image137_1.jpg?itok=lKHDbQy0" title="Images taken from Jon Brock's presentation" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Images taken from Jon Brock's presentation</figcaption></figure>Melbourne's new residential zones were also discussed, along with potential implications for existing high density areas due to tracts of land being locked away from redevelopment. Tips and pitfalls for successfully gaining project approval were also discussed in what was a comprehensive talk delivering a lot of otherwise unattainable information to the assembled audience.

A comprehensive overview of Jon Brock's presentation can be viewed online via the <a href="http://practicalimagination.info/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/imagin8_presentation-Tall-Buildings-3.pdf">practical imagination</a> website.

<h2>George Argyrou: Hickory Group leads the industry with HBS</h2>

Co-founder of Hickory Group and Managing Director George Argyrou was on hand to explain how Hickory has strived to make itself the industry leader in terms of pioneering new construction technologies. Providing a timeline of company achievements which includes the widespread use of Unitised Building, George Argyrou went on to speak of the unbridled success of Sync bathroom pods which now holds Australian orders in the thousands.

<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/image134_0.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="The Hickory Building Sytstem module. Image courtesy Hickory"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="338" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/image134_0.jpg?itok=ZWMW-VcY" title="The Hickory Building Sytstem module. Image courtesy Hickory" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>The Hickory Building Sytstem module. Image courtesy Hickory</figcaption></figure>While the Sync bathroom system goes from strength to strength, Hickory have devised a new unitised construction technique aimed purely at high-rise structures which they believe has the best tolerances and quality control of any construction method currently employed worldwide. Constructed offsite, the new <a href="http://www.hickory.com.au/what-we-do/our-systems/hickory-building-systems/">Hickory Building System</a> begins with an engineered concrete floor requiring no human intervention.

Load bearing columns, fully fitted wet areas and a building facade are subsequently applied in what resembles a manufacturing production line process. Trucked to site, the integrated system locks together and provides exceptional structural stability and enabling fit-out to quickly progress due to the pre-attached facade; a traditional poured lift well is a thing of the past.

As George Argyrou stated, "We've taken existing technology and turned it into the best in the world." Hickory have been designing schemes and validating engineering for high-rise towers in Melbourne with the expectation it will make its debut shortly.

<h2>Next imagin8 seminar</h2>

While further articles for Skyscraper Trends In Melbourne: From Super Skinny To ‘Prefabulous’ will appear shortly, Future imagin8 seminars will consider trends in the Higher Education and Retail sectors.

You can register your interest to receive information on these by emailing <a href="mailto:Emily.lau@meinhardtgroup.com?subject=upcoming%20imagin8%20seminar">Emily.lau@meinhardtgroup.com</a>.
</body></html>

Meinhardt's 'Skyscraper Trends in Melbourne' seminar reviewed

<html><body>
The love affair with tall buildings is undeniable. Initially very much a western society symbol of power and progress that started in the late 19th century, the tall building love affair has well and truly infected developing nations throughout Asia and the Middle East, for many of the same reasons. Keen to be seen as the new power-houses of the world, these nations are falling over themselves to build the biggest and greatest symbols of their city's and creator's success. However, do tall buildings actually make these cities better places?

I will leave it to the architects out there to debate the merits and attributes of the tower design itself. A tall building is very hard to hide, so the importance of getting it right and designing an object of beauty is paramount.

A common concern with tall buildings is the way the building relates to the street or ground level. Can you remember the last time a tall building was promoted by its relationship to the street? The promotional visualisations always focus on the impact on the city skyline or the bird's eye view of the tower. Too often the designers are so absorbed in the iconic form of the tower structure that the lower levels are designed as an afterthought.

Typically the ground level is dominated by blank walls, security grilles, service and plant rooms, and car park access ramps. Token provision of retail or commercial outlets to activate the street often fail due to poor siting, economic feasibility and microclimatic conditions on the ground caused by the building itself.

It''s not just the ground floor that is of concern. The lower levels of the building also have a vital role to play in activating the street. Studies have shown that beyond a four to five storey height the occupants of the building lose their connection and interaction with the street. When these lower levels consist of car parking podium levels, the effect is obviously detrimental.

In relation to the Australia 108 tower, Melbourne Mayor Robert Doyle said: "We've got to keep an eye on where we want area like Southbank going. We don't want a canyon of enormous buildings with no life at street level."

Common problems with the public realm around tall buildings include:

<ul>
<li>Restricted sunlight</li>
	<li>Exacerbated wind conditions</li>
	<li>Lack of activation at ground lower levels resulting in poor safety and surveillance</li>
	<li>Poor contextual response</li>
</ul>
But these can be tackled with good landscape and urban design.

<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/image12mei.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Principles of landscape and urban design "><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="375" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/image12mei.jpg?itok=AOBlpptO" title="Principles of landscape and urban design " width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Principles of landscape and urban design</figcaption></figure><h2>Wind Conditions</h2>

Tall buildings are known to exacerbate wind conditions at street level, often causing very unpleasant and potentially dangerous micro-climatic conditions. Early engagement with wind modeling specialists is vital before the building design has gone too far. The modernist box may need to be relaxed if we wish to create a public realm that people can enjoy without the buffeting effects of the wind. It is about being contextually appropriate to the conditions and location of the proposed tower. Strategic planning should also look to address wind issues and determine what the collective result of many tall towers in a precinct may be.

Apart from the form, orientation and permeability of the building itself, the public realm can be designed to further ameliorate wind conditions at the street level. Canopies of trees or structures around the base of the building can help disperse winds; pathways can be directed away from specific spots that modelling suggests will be highly wind prone, shrubs and screens can create protected areas.

<h2>Active Edges</h2>

The most successful public realms and streets in our cities are those with mid-rise buildings providing a near continuous building frontage that supports an active street life.

In contrast, tall buildings that sit as freestanding objects in a plaza (think Le Corbusier) seek to remove themselves from city and street life with the result being soulless spaces that no one spends time in. Developing cities in the Middle East and Asia continue along this disastrous path.

<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/661_chapel_street.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Meinhardt acted as landscape architect for 661 Chapel Street, South Yarra"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="281" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/661_chapel_street.jpg?itok=yqz0zXhQ" title="Meinhardt acted as landscape architect for 661 Chapel Street, South Yarra" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Meinhardt acted as landscape architect for 661 Chapel Street, South Yarra</figcaption></figure>The failure of the freestanding object in a space is obvious when one considers that buildings need to have areas for services, car park access, and other non-active uses. A building in a plaza has nowhere to hide or ability to place these out of view.

A hybrid solution exists whereby the tower is placed on a podium which creates built form at the street level of a human scale and form. The podium however must contain active uses ands access for the public, not simply at ground level of retail with levels of car parking above. This solution still allows the tower component to be a creative and unique design. If the tower is setback from the podium, the podium can also assist with wind amelioration. Service areas should be located on side or rear lanes.

<h2>Restricted Sunlight</h2>

Very simple and effective tools now exist to measure the effects of shadow caused by tall buildings. Using these tools early on in the design process is of great benefit. Towers should be slender and aligned to allow light into public gathering areas. The number of tall towers in an area should be carefully monitored so that the collective result is not detrimental. Strategic Plans should be prepared for precinct undergoing this type of development pressure so that this impact can be understood.

Undoubtedly, increased shadowing will be an inevitable result of tall building. Public realm design must respond to this and consider such things as plant and tree selection for these conditions, creation of public space where it can be modeled that sunlight will be captured, especially during peak times (ie lunch breaks), use of lighter coloured materials and potentially artificial lighting.

Understanding where areas will be heavily shaded should also determine the location of active ground level uses. Retail outlets typically prefer a sunny outlook. Don't waste sunny aspects on car park ramps, service areas and blank walls.

In very hot climates, the reverse situation to the above might be true. Public realm design in some Middle Eastern cities seeks to take advantage of the self shading caused by buildings to ameliorate the temperature and provide for more pleasant pedestrian conditions.

<h2>Contextual Response</h2>

Neighbourhood character is a dirty term where tall buildings are concerned, specially when proposed in areas previously devoid of such structures. How for example, does an area like Fishermans Bend in Melbourne successfully transform from a low-rise industrial area to a suburb of tall residential towers? Within the central CBD's of most cities it is a different story, where the tall tower is the accepted form.

For places like Fishermans Bend, a structure plan is essential that sets out the scale, form and uses of future development. Allowing open slather could result in 50 storey or greater towers across the entire area creating many of the problems outlined earlier in this article. Design and planning principles must be established such as ensuring towers are placed on or behind human scaled podiums, that building frontages have active edges including doors and windows, that floor levels respond to the public realm, that service areas are placed away from the prominent street frontages and many of the other suggestions already outlines in this article.

<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/image10mei.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="A Meinhardt project: 60-82 Johnson Street, South Melbourne located within Fishermans Bend"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="249" src="/sites/urbanmelbourne.info/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/image10mei.jpg?itok=odzDrdy-" title="A Meinhardt project: 60-82 Johnson Street, South Melbourne located within Fishermans Bend" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>A Meinhardt project: 60-82 Johnson Street, South Melbourne located within Fishermans Bend</figcaption></figure>However, even these aideas may still result in a development that is largely out of context with its surrounds. We can either accept that this is an inevitable outcome of urban development or perhaps take a more radical (perhaps more conservative) approach that seeks to adjust the character of an area more slowly over time.

The first few tall buildings in an area like Fishermans Bend will vastly alter the area's character. What if instead, the first number of buildings are only allowed to be say, 20 storeys and then gradually over time as more and more is developed, this height limit be increased. This is really not so different from how the Melbourne CBD has evolved and allows the city and its inhabitants to embrace this change with less angst.

The unifying element in all this is the public realm, which fills in all the spaces between and around these tall buildings. Melbourne is much more defined by its great streets and lanes than by its tall buildings. If we want these streets and lanes to remain as a defining element of a livable city, then we must be very careful that our love affair with the tall building does not destroy them.

Jon Brock is National Director of Land Development at <a href="http://www.meinhardt.com.au/" target="_blank">Meinhardt</a>, a multi-disciplinary engineering and professional technical services consulting firm with a strong presence in the Melbourne and Australian market.
</body></html>

Meinhardt

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Meinhardt

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News