VLEPA

<html><body>
Last week Collie staff members attended a VPELA seminar that focused on the Better Apartments Draft Design Standards that were released recently by the Minister for Planning. Four guest speakers with different areas of expertise and from a range of companies including David Lock Associates, Ark Resources, MAA Architects and Grocon shared their thoughts on the draft design standards.

In relation to side and rear setbacks, a standard requires staggered setbacks for apartment buildings above four storeys in height with these setbacks increasing for taller buildings. Mark Sheppard from David Lock Associates pointed out that under this standard, a developer would require a lot width of at least 39 metres to construct a building above eight storeys in height.

If implemented, this standard would limit the height of buildings on narrower lots and is likely to encourage the amalgamation of sites to achieve higher built form. As the building setbacks only apply to balconies and habitable room windows, Mark mentioned that this could result in high ‘blank’ walls being constructed on the boundary, which would not be a great urban design outcome.

Jan Talacko from Ark Resources focused on the standards that relate to daylight. Jan was of the view that the maximum room depth requirement will generally ensure that adequate daylight is provided to a habitable room however, the standard is unclear on whether deeper rooms can be provided where there is more than one aspect.

Similarly, unlike other environmental assessment tools where living rooms require a higher level of daylight, this standard does not differentiate between living rooms and bedrooms. Another standard queried by Jan is that requiring a minimum size for light wells, which take up a considerable area, but surprisingly may not result in the lower levels receiving adequate daylight.

This raises the question should a room at a lower level be allowed to rely on a light well as a source of daylight?

Comment was made by a number of the guest speakers on the standard requiring a habitable room to have a window in an external wall that is visible from any point in the room, with this standard effectively prohibiting a ‘saddleback’ arrangement. In many cases a saddleback arrangement provides a poor level of amenity however, examples were given that illustrate that in some cases a saddleback room when designed properly, can provide more than adequate daylight.

Karen Alcock from MAA Architects used this example and stressed it is important that the standards should not be used to discourage innovative design solutions.

All speakers were supportive of the introduction of apartment standards aimed at improving the quality of apartments. While the introduction will increase the cost of apartments, the general view was that many apartments that have been built could be deemed to be unliveable.

This article appeared on <a href="http://www.colliepl.com/2016/09/vpela-seminar-better-apartment-better-cant-afford/">Collie's website</a> on September 9, 2016. Michael Collie is Director at Collie Pty Ltd, a multi-disciplinary Southbank-based firm with interests in strategic planning, development planning, urban design and landscape architecture.
</body></html>

Michael Collie

VPELA seminar – is a better apartment better if you can’t afford it?

<html><body>
Last Wednesday I attended a VPELA seminar on transport and infrastructure.  The guest speakers included Adam Fennessy from the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (also on the board of Infrastructure Victoria), Henry Turnbull from Traffix Group and Sallyanne Everett from Clayton Utz.

With the delivery of transport and infrastructure always a topical issue, the event proved interesting with a range of views from the speakers, followed up by pertinent questions.

Some interesting information from the evening: since 1955 car ownership has quadrupled and public transport patronage continued to decline, only recently returning to 1950 levels; in this period there has been a strong emphasis on investment in road infrastructure; as generally well known, with the exception of the city loop, the railway network has not changed significantly since 1940 and as Henry Turnbull stated, it was the borrowing of 100 million pounds from the Bank of England that largely funded the construction of the early railway network.

It was pointed out that the existing road network is at capacity and while road infrastructure projects such as completing the missing links in our freeway network remain important, investment in public transport infrastructure is the main way to accommodate mobility needs of population growth.  Clearly, there needs to be a balance between investment in public transport and road infrastructure. 

Given the bulk of investment has been in road infrastructure for the last 50 years or more, it is obvious that the focus needs to shift to upgrading our public transport network in order to redress the balance.

As a way of funding the delivery of public transport, it was suggested that a petrol tax be imposed of about 5 cents per litre.  This would have the added benefit of encouraging greener cars. 

While for various reasons the proposal was not well received by many in the room, it was pointed out if communicated clearly with the public at the outset, in terms of the objective and where the revenue was to be spent, from the outset this would increase the chances of implementation (sounds very like ideas from a certain new political leader).

The view was put that the Victorian government should increase its debt levels by borrowing money to fund public transport infrastructure.  The problem with increasing government debt is its politicisation and the off-put negative that increasing debt is bad for the economy. 

But if public debt is increased in a responsible way to invest in public transport infrastructure, surely such investment will generate jobs and eventually revenue which will stimulate the economy. 

Conversely, relying on a public transport system (which ironically was largely funded by debt!) that is already showing signs of being outdated, will be a cost to our economy in terms of higher and higher maintenance requirements, growing congestion of our roads and revenue lost from lesser patronage.

As with investment in any public area, the problem with government investment in transport and infrastructure is that it can be constrained by the election cycle.  For this reason, we welcome the principle of the establishment of Infrastructure Victoria, an independent body, whose role is to advise the State and Federal Government on infrastructure projects. 

Adam Fennessy advised that Infrastructure Victoria has recently released a discussion paper on a 30-year plan for Victoria’s infrastructure needs.  We welcome the release of this discussion paper and hope that the development of a long term plan for Victoria’s infrastructure will shift the focus for government away from the election cycle and toward delivering projects that are important to Victoria.

All in all, it was an interesting seminar that repeated the message that the time to invest in public transport is now.  As we are well aware, we are still benefitting from the money that was borrowed to complete our railway network in 1940. 

Hopefully we can learn lessons from the past and make a bold move again based on what Victoria really needs.

This article appeared on Collie's website. 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.

Lead image courtesy SMH
</body></html>

VLEPA

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

VLEPA

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News