New Zones Update: Implementation Underway (Glen Eira)

Last month Glen Eira was the first of Victoria's local governments to implement the new zones, and two weeks ago, transitional arrangement were detailed. Earlier posts have looked at what the new zones will involve, but really, it all comes down to how the zones are implemented - of particular interest are the residential zones (summarised below):

Neighbourhood Residential Zone (NRZ): Overall mandatory building height reduced from 9m to 8m and no more than 2 dwellings allowed on a lot (unless specified in the schedule).

General Residential Zone (GRZ): Includes a default discretionary height limit of 9m (equivalent to three storeys) which can be increased or decreased to a mandatory height limit by each Council.

Residential Growth Zone (RGZ): Includes a discretionary default height of 13.5m (equivalent to four storeys) which can be increased to a mandatory height limit by each Council.  ResCode standards will apply to four storey development.

The GRZ was intended as the 'default' zone, whereas NRZ was intended to protect areas of special, valued character, and RGZ for residential areas on main roads, close to activity centres where more intensive built form could be contemplated.

However, Glen Eira's implementation of the new zones has placed 78% of the municipality in the NRZ zone, limiting these areas to no more than 2 dwellings on a lot, and an 8m height limit.  The implementation was based on Glen Eira's change areas and diversity areas from strategic work undertaken almost a decade ago - you can see the map of the new zones in Glen Eira here.

There have been a number of discussions going around debating the implications of this - some have criticised the Council for adding to sprawl, particularly if other municipalities follow suit.  I think this is debatable.  It raises questions about how this fits with the Metro Planning Strategy discussion paper, which highlights the need to realise the potential of middle ring suburbs to provide more housing and employment opportunities.

Another consideration is that this manner of implementation could limit diversity of the municipality outside of activity centres.  Opportunities for low rise multi-dwelling development in residential areas that exist currently thanks to being well located to shops and services (and in keeping with the existing character) could be lost.  For instance, there are areas in Glen Eira such as along Alma Road, that have an existing character including multi-dwelling development (low rise apartment blocks), and this is the form of development that will suffer.  Under the new zones, remember only 2 dwellings are permitted on a lot, so no more low-rise multi-dwelling development in residential areas like this.  It also shows that the point of the NRZ (to protect character) is not truly being achieved, because it prohibits what exists in the character of the area it seeks to protect.  Important point here: low change does not always equal detached housing.

Aside from considering impacts on housing diversity, character and integration with the Metro Planning Strategy, concerns could also be raised about consultation and State government 'checks and balances' to ensure that Council's have the whole state's best interests at heart - not just their own residents.

Read the media release from Glen Eira here, check out a related Age article here or view Glen Eira's map of the new zones here.

Melbourne, New York or Hong Kong?

Tuesday's Age Newspaper  published an article criticizing several Melbourne developers 'delusion' with attempting to recreate a 'fantasy' of Manhattan in Melbourne.

"As a one-time resident of the Big Apple, and a frequent visitor, it's both hilarious and disheartening that the elements that make New York City such an amazing place are being bastardised to sell a pup to locals."

The author (Daniel Ziffer of ABC radio) points out that the developers are marketing a 'Manhattan' lifestyle, although he states that the dominant built form in New York is lower rise.  Instead, the author likens the recently approved or constructed tower developments in Melbourne to Hong Kong.

"That city [Hong Kong] is vibrant and exciting in parts, but has many dense and grim neighbourhoods where skyscrapers block light and life from the streets."

Ziffer also refers to recent plans to expand residential development to the north and west of the CBD as 'Caroline Springs in the sky'.

Well it's up to you if you buy the 'New York' marketing of apartments in Melbourne.  The 'Sex and the City' lifestyle is appealing for many so I can see why they would want to make that link (though I think it's not so convincing myself).

As for likening Melbourne to the urban form of Hong Kong - um, no.  Even if we get quite a few more tall buildings, Melbourne will not resemble Hong Kong (for better or worse).  I certainly don't see the link between a few new developments and transformation into Hong Kong style urbanism. Alan Davies' blog The Urbanist also tears this analogy to shreds:

"I think Mr Ziffer has made a fundamental mistake here. He’s comparing the entirety of Manhattan and Hong Kong with just a small part of Melbourne’s CBD... In the order of 76 sq kms of Hong Kong is developed for housing use. That’s only a small part of the island but it’s an order of magnitude larger than the relatively tiny precincts in and around Melbourne’s CBD that’re slated for high rise housing."

Davies goes on to mention the benefits of more housing in the CBD, which will enable more people to access amenities, improve access to affordable housing, result in greater sustainability and enhance the vibrancy and street life of the area.

This said, I also think that you don't necessarily have to have mega-towers to achieve these benefits.  The character and amenity of Melbourne is important - and this must also be taken into consideration.

Read on here. Thanks to Matt Sacco (City of Greater Dandenong) for sending this newspaper article on to me.

Read Alan Davies post on the article at The Urbanist.

What's in a Name? The Stories Behind Melbourne's Street Names

I'm sure many of us Melburnians are familiar with one or two clusters of themed street names - did noticing them make you smile? What do street names say about a city?

This is the theme of a current exhibition held at the Melbourne Town Hall.  The Exhibition (supported by City of Melbourne) features local designer and font expert extraordinaire Stephen Banham and historian Graeme Davison.

"The practice of giving a cluster of streets a single theme is suburban branding at its most fundamental and indelible. Real estate marketing, capitalising on the values and aspirations of the day, creates a new cultural landscape with nothing more than a handful of nouns on a pole. As one developer put it: ‘The names weren’t about what was already there. They were about what we were going to create.’ Thus in Elwood, a literary cluster replaced a swamp."

So what are some of the street-name clusters around town?  There are sooo many, but here's a few:

• A 'Camelot' theme running across 38 streets in Glen Waverley
• 'Beatles' themed streets in Narre Warren South (keep an eye out for Strawberry Fields)
• An 'aviation' theme in Burwood (Boeing Crt, Dehavilland Ave, Ansett Cres etc)
• Golf course-themed Kingsbury (Bunker Ave, Driver St, Wedge St, Flag St, Green Ave, The Fairway, Tee St)
• Famous writers in Elwood and Lynbrook
• the Ancient Greek zone of Doncaster (Andromeda Way, Artemis Crt, Olympus Drv, Antigone Crt etc)

But there are so many more.  When you go to the exhibition, you can contribute to a map of Melbourne's clusters by highlighting ones you know!

This is one of my favourites:

"In Avondale Heights the Hundred Years’ War between France and England is playfully re-enacted with 24 French streets facing off against 23 English streets"

Cheeky! But what's in a name anyway? And do clusters matter to our cities?

According to Banham, residents believe that street names (clusters) add to a sense of community.  Some say that the streets take on the persona of their namesake, for example, take this resident's thoughts "When we first moved in, it was quiet so the (literary) theme suited. It was more of an artsy area then with interesting characters so it was a good fit".

According to Banham:

"Naming is the basis of clusters. This makes them well suited to current and future ways of looking at our cities. The immediate method of locating anything – a place, a person, a restaurant menu, medical conditions – is by its name. It is the language of the online search engine, ensuring connections are made (or not) ... All of this has made the ownership of names highly commodified."

"Rather than just walking us through the narrative footprints of history, street name clusters gesture to future readings of our cities – an individualised experience made up of endless connections and patterns of information, all located by name and viewed from the god-like perspective of the satellite. In an age where people are intrigued by sharing and visualising information, the reading of clusters offers something particularly valuable – a whole new way of seeing what we thought was familiar."

Banham claims that now more than ever is a great time to reflect on street names, thanks to technology; 'the silent connections and stories that underly clusters are now more apparent than ever to the viewer'.  Certainly for those keen enough to look.

Read more from Stephen Banham here. Find details on the exhibition here.

Victoria's New Zones: An Update

Early last month, the Minster for Planning released an update to Victoria's reformed planning zones that were originally put forward in July 2012 (see Plantastic's earlier post here).  The updates to the zones occur following a 'detailed' consultation process, and recommendations from the Ministerial Advisory Council (a Coalition Government body).  These new zones are to be brought in on July 1 this year, and local governments will have a year to implement them.

I've already described each of the residential zones in the earlier post, so check back there for a description. Changes between the July version and the final March version for residential zones are summarised below:

Neighbourhood Residential Zone

• Overall mandatory building height reduced from 9m to 8m or as specified in the schedule.
• Stricter conditions for medical centres.
• Neighbourhood character of single and double storey residential development is emphasised as a stated purpose of the zone.

General Residential Zone

• Increased minimum lot size for as-of-right development of one dwelling from 200 to 300sqm.
• Stricter conditions for as-of-right medical centres, though still permitted in the zone.
• Neighbourhood character emphasised as a stated purpose of the zone.

Residential Growth Zone

• Height increased from 12.5m to 13.5m or as specified in the schedule to the zone.
• Increased minimum lot size for as-of-right development of one dwelling on a lot from 80 to 300sqm.
• Small shops and food and drink premises allowed, but must be within 100m of a commercial zone or mixed use zone.
• Offices of less than 250 sqm will be allowed where located within 100m of a commercial zone, though will require a permit.
• Emphasises housing diversity, and provides for housing at increased densities of up to and including 4 storeys.

Changes are also proposed to the existing Mixed Use Zone, Township Zone and Low Density Residential Zone to align with the features of the new residential zones.

Another interesting change on the table summarising each zone (see page 3) is that the previous version required ResCode to apply for buildings up to 3 storeys in the Mixed Use and Residential Growth zones.  In the new version, this applies up to 4 storeys.

Some further detail is provided regarding implementation.  Draft criteria are proposed for testing where and why each zone should be applied, which includes things like neighbourhood character, housing strategies, land use, employment opportunities and access to services.

Read on for more about each zone, see the Miniter's response to the advisory committee report, and check out the committee report.