AMENDMENT C172 TO THE STONNINGTON PLANNING SCHEME For Chapel Plaza … · 2015-10-12 · C172 for...

C172 for Chapel Plaza Pty Ltd

MGS Architects

1

INDEPENDENT URBAN DESIGN ADVICE EXPERT WITNESS EVIDENCE

AMENDMENT C172 TO THE STONNINGTON PLANNING SCHEME For Chapel Plaza Pty Ltd

Prepared by

Robert McGauran B. Arch. (Hons. Melb), B.A. (Fine Arts Melb.), P.D.M. (Melb.), LFRAIA, FVEPLA, Architect March 2015 Our ref: 15XXX

McGauran Giannini Soon Pty Ltd ABN 13 006 488 302

10-22 Manton Lane

Melbourne 3000 Australia

Telephone 61 3 9670 1800

Facsimile 61 3 9670 1808

Email: [email protected] www.mgsarchitects.com.au


MGS Architects

2

BACKGROUND

1. In February 2015, I was asked by Norton Rose Fulbright on behalf of Chapel Plaza Pty Ltd to provide a review of the proposed Amendment C172 based on the Chapel reVision Structure Plan review and to provide recommendations for changes to the proposed amendment where they impact on the subject site at 402-416 Chapel Street South Yarra and to establish for them, a series of urban design parameters that I felt were appropriate.

CONTEXT

STRATEGIC METROPOLITAN CONTEXT

2. The subject site is well located relative to employment, services and facilities, in that:

3. It is approximately 4 kilometres south-east of Melbourne’s Central Activities District, which is easily accessible via heavy rail from South Yarra Station, light rail along Chapel Street, Malvern and Toorak Road, as well as a series of immediately adjacent arterial transport corridors.

4. South Yarra Station is a designated Premium Station in the metropolitan rail network and is also proposed to be interconnected with the Melbourne Metro recently confirmed by the new State Government.

5. There are a number of Activity Centres in proximity to the subject site: South Yarra/Prahran/Windsor Principal Activity Centre (the subject site

is located within the Activity Centre). Toorak Village Major Activity Centre (approximately 1.2 kilometres to

the east). Swan Street/Church Street Major Activity Centre (approximately 1.6

kilometres to the north).

In addition, the St Kilda Road Commercial corridor and Alfred Hospital Medical Precinct are both within 1.2km. The subject site is at the interface of the two activity centres of Prahran and South Yarra


MGS Architects

3

6. I note in addition to the proposed C172 Council has also sought to undertake a range of other amendments that are both site specific and regional that cumulatively will impact on where development occurs and the form it takes, namely;

It has recently pursued changes to its residential zones placing significantly greater constraints on development along transit corridors and in many of its residential neighbourhoods capping much of the residential land at 4 storeys or less and limiting subdivision in substantial areas.

Additionally ,Council has sought to cap the capacity of some strategic sites with the previous Victorian Government agreeing to a planning scheme amendment. I understand however that works have been deemed to commence on that project. Not withstanding it is apparent that Council has continued to seek an outcome of substantially diminished capacity for the Orrong Road Armadale development below that agreed and subsequently permitted through an independent review process.

7. These cumulatively, will place further pressure on areas within Activity Centres to take up the demand such as that in which the subject site sits that have been identified as neighbourhoods in which significant change is sought.

8. The Chapel Vision and Forrest Hill Structure Plans, both endorsed by Council, have sought significant intensification in this Activity Centre.

9. The eastern neighbourhood between the Jam Factory and Malvern Road has perhaps more than any other area within Chapel Vision been targeted as an area for transformation. The Jam Factory originally targeted for 30+m development has been agreed as having a preferred height of 31m.

10. The light industrial precinct between Simmons Street and Garden Street to its south was earmarked for transformation into a mixed use medium rise precinct in contrast to the taller high rise precinct of Forrest Hill to the north.

11. In recent years, this this area has experienced unprecedented change in response to market demand for new places for residential occupancy and workplace.

12. In turn, the objectives of the original Chapel Street Structure Plan to drive growth and rejuvenation have been generally successful. Previous barriers to investment have been overcome if measures of new residential occupancy, job creation and retail floor space are to be used as a benchmark. In an area that had been for some years dormant and losing market share, this transformation has been a welcome fillip for the municipality.

13. Parallel to this growth, we have also seen the recent recommitment of the incoming Victorian Government to the Melbourne Metro project, an initiative that will provide more convenient and fast access to the St Kilda Road employment corridor, CBD, and existing and new National employment Clusters at Parkville and Sunshine.

14. Investment in health care infrastructure and research also continues to drive growth with the Alfred Hospital precinct continuing to grow in capacity and expertise.

15. The Office of Housing sites forming the Horace Petty Estate were singled out for their strategic potential to both deliver heightened housing capacity and improved shared public open space and pedestrian connectivity as well as safety through the precinct.

16. The site is located within a network of some of Stonnington’s primary arterial roads corridors with convenient access to Chapel Street, Toorak Road and Malvern Road.

The site has a frontage to Chapel Street.

300 metres to the north of the site, Toorak Road runs in an east-west direction.


MGS Architects

4

300 metres to the south of the site, Malvern/Commercial Road runs in an east-west direction.

The site is large at over 3300 sqm with a frontage of over 75m to Chapel Street and a depth of over 90m to Bray Street.

Figure 1 Context of development

SITE CONTEXT

17. The eastern environs to the north and northeast of the subject site were for a long period associated with industrial uses. Henry Jones IXL to the north being a notable example with the Jam Factory in existence until the 1970’s.


MGS Architects

5

18. However, in the past two decades with rezoning and urban transformation, this adjoining neighbourhood has witnessed a substantial increase in higher density, mixed-use development.

19. This built form approach is widely supported in the Chapel Vision Structure Plan, and the Stonnington Planning Scheme.

20. Since the 1960’s, tall built form has dominated the Eastern aspect from the site and Chapel Street with the Horace Petty Public Housing comprised of towers of up to 17 levels in height in clear view on the skyline.

21. More recent development has seen projects such as Society further to the south on Bray Street, the Vision Australia Site near the corner of High Street and Chapel Street and the recent infill development on the northern side of Commercial Road adjacent to the existing public housing towers adopt robust medium rise development form.

22. The alignment of development on the eastern side of Chapel Street in the Bray St spine has been the major anchor for this heightened development form.

23. At its northern end, this development corridor is anchored by the Jam Factory, itself identified in the Structure Plan as a candidate for significant change and one clearly capable of this.

24. To the immediate north east on smaller and more constrained sites, developments of up to 8 levels have been delivered.

25. On the other side of the rail line alignment within the Toorak Road and Forrest Hill areas even greater scales of development are occurring.

26. Society to the north east corner of the shared Bray Street and Simmons Street, built form rises to 12 levels with little by way of setback to the corner seemingly tipping its lid to the adjacent taller public housing form to the south before stepping down to 9 levels for the bulk of the block with modestly setback but visible 10th and 11th floors up to the north interface with Ellis Street.

27. The 9 level street wall is extended eastwards down Ellis Street and from areas further north along Bray Street the upper 10th to 12 floors are evident.

28. Eastwards down Ellis Street developments of 7 and 8 levels have been completed. 29. Within Garden Street the eastern end is marked by a direct interface between the

former industrial, now mixed-use precinct and the finer grain weatherboard workers cottages of the hinterland areas.

30. At the corner of Palfreyman Street and Garden Street, the transformation is immediate with the single level cottage to the east joined by a new 5 level building opposite with little by way of setback to its interface with the low scale, older neighbourhood.

31. Much of Garden Street to the west of Palfreyman Street is marked to both sides by increased density and zero setback street wall arrangements making pedestrian movement highly constrained.

32. At 47 Garden Street, the Garden Apartments have been completed with a 7 level residential outcome.

33. I understand that a development at the corner of Bray and Garden Street has similarly been approved for 10 level development generally in accordance with the attached visual expression.


MGS Architects

6

Figure 2 Image of recently approved development at the cnr Garden Street & Bray Street

34. New 7 and 8 level development has been developed along Garden Lane to the north east of the subject site.

35. From the south the arrangements are similar with views down Bray Street to the south being towards the Society Building at 10-12 levels with the 13 level Public Housing as a backdrop.

36. Immediately to the north of the Jam Factory and also visible over the Jam Factory is the 13 level R-Corporation developed apartments on the former Council Depot site. This building has immediate interfacing views and closer proximity to the hinterland low rise residential communities within Palermo Street and Surrey Road.

37. To the southern end of the Bray Street vista are a series of 13 to 17 level Public Housing apartments. These buildings provide a clear landmark, high density form in the immediate corridor. The design development overlay and schedule, previously endorsed Chapel Vision structure plan and recent projects within the public housing precinct have cumulatively provided a supportive built form framework for additional buildings of commensurate scale in the future.

38. A similar expectation should both be welcomed and anticipated on the large land holding of the Jam Factory sitting to the north of the subject site, separated by rail from residential hinterland areas to the north west and flanked to its north by the new 13 level apartment building previously noted east of the subject site. Built form in the neighbourhood

39. In this context, it is reasonable to anticipate that built form at the western end of Garden Street should be taller than at the eastern end interface with the residential hinterland and that the emerging character of Bray Street has been one of 10-12 levels.

40. Up until now this has been restricted to the eastern side of Bray Street owing to the relatively small nature of most landholdings in this precinct generally with the notable exception of the Jam Factory and the subject site. The subject site is perhaps the next largest site in the block between the Jam Factory and Rail line and


MGS Architects

7

the Pran Central and Commercial Road transit corridor. Additionally, within the Chapel Vision Structure Plan it is seen as the key interfacing site between the Prahran Market hub to the west and the proposed lineal park network parallel to Chapel Street and to its east lining princess Gardens to the south and the northern former depot site park via the reconfigured Horace Petty Estate..

41. In this case, there should be no question that this context of change supports transformation of the subject site.

42. This is further bolstered by a range of other emerging initiatives. These include: The adoption of a masterplan for the Horace Petty Estate and delivery of

first stage works. This plan has seen further commitment to strengthening the interface responses to the emerging higher density character of Bray Street;

This is further bolstered in this instance by the corner site and scale attributes extending as it does block to bloc and for much of the longitudinal length of the Block between Simmons street to the north and Grey Street to the south;

The emerging higher built form backdrop envisaged and progressively implemented east of Bray Street and proposed for the Jam Factory between the latter and Malvern Road. This emergence of taller built form is progressively populating the skyline backdrop of the eastern side of Chapel Street; and

The absence of any built form of significance on the subject site establishes it as a location where transformation could occur.

43. The outcome of this recent change is also evident within Chapel Street with new built form readily visible in the Chapel Street corridor.

Figure 3 Looking eastwards from Grosvenor Street Ref Google Maps


MGS Architects

8

Figure 4 View looking South East towards the subject site with Horace Petty in the background

Figure 5 The view east down Simmons Street similarly reveals the scale of the hinterland taller built form of the flanking towers to either side of the street, an outcome that is likely to be more consistently evident as the Horace Petty Estate and other hinterland and Jam Factory development occurs in the future. This characteristic is similarly the case when looking towards the area from the west and south west.


MGS Architects

9

Figure 6 Looking down Barry Street from the Chapel Street intersection the built form of the Horace Petty tower forms is visibly evident.

Figure 7 View looking towards the East Northeast towards the subject site

Figure 8 View looking to the Northeast on the axis of Grey Street


MGS Architects

10

Figure 9 View from the Elizabeth Street entry, looking towards the subject site from the Western Chapel Street footpath

44. These series of views suggest that the presence of built form of a scale considerably higher than the suggested 5 levels is already a characteristic of the eastern aspect of this central part of Chapel Street and its views when viewed from within the Chapel Street corridor.

45. Further to the south, the street wall typically 8-12m in height contains the views within the corridor with the historic fabric of Chapel Street largely intact between Malvern Road and Grey Street to the east and Elizabeth Street to the west.

46. This intersection marks a transition into a much more fragmented streetscape character with the entire block to Simmons Street on the eastern side of Chapel Street unremarkable one and two level in commercial form. This is in contrast to the western side of the street with the exception of the Westpac Bank on the northwestern corner of Elizabeth Street and Chapel Street, 19th century street wall remains largely intact as a two level edifice on Chapel Street’s western side opposite the subject site.

47. North of the subject site, the historic Temperance Hotel sits isolated on the corner. North of it, the eastern side of Chapel Street continues to be more fragmented in nature up to the anchoring historic form of the Jam Factory.


MGS Architects

11

Figure 10 A view south down Chapel Street north of the subject site Google Maps

August 2014

Figure 11 Looking north up Chapel Street from the Malvern Road intersection Google

Maps August 2014

48. South of the subject site along Chapel Street where an alternative higher built form is sought, street walls of typically 2 levels are also evident save for the taller form of the Big Store.


MGS Architects

12

Figure 12 looking to the northwest towards the corner of Chapel Street and Chatham Street.

49. Although not unfettered, it could reasonably be anticipated to adopt a methodology similar to that of other strip activity centres with similar mixed use hinterland areas.

Figure 13 Further south setback upper level development is already occurring with an 8 level development at the corner of King Street and Chapel Street in the largely intact immediate context near the Town Hall. Strategic planning context

50. The core strategic issues are covered in the town planning report submitted on behalf of Chapel Plaza Pty Ltd but the following are worth noting.


MGS Architects

13

State-wide Guidelines

51. The following state-wide guidelines are also relevant to the proposed development: Design Guidelines for Higher Density Residential Development,

Department of Sustainability and Environment, 2004.

‒ For assessing the design and built form of residential development of four or more storeys.

Activity Centre Design Guidelines, Department of Sustainability and Environment, 2005.

For preparing activity centre structure plans and in assessing the design and built form of new development in activity centres.

Safer Design Guidelines for Victoria, Crime Prevention Victoria and Department of Sustainability and Environment, 2005.

For assessing the design and built form of new development.

Urban Design Charter for Victoria, Department of Planning and Community Development, 2009.

Plan Melbourne, MPA 2013, a plan for future Melbourne that promotes housing opportunities close to employment and multi-modal transport choice.

State Planning Policy Framework 52. Within the Stonnington’s Planning Scheme, a range of relevant State Policy matters

have been identified including:-

53. Clause 15 Built environment and heritage contains a number of relevant sub clauses that should be referred to, such as: Clause 15.01-1 provides clear objectives in regard to the development of "urban

environments" in regard to "urban design" with the principal strategy to "promote good urban design to make the environment more liveable and attractive.

Clause 15.01-2 sets out a series of Urban Design Principles with strategies that are applicable for both non-residential development and residential development not covered by Clauses 54, 55 or 56. The Urban Design Principles ensure strategies are applied to context, the public realm, safety, landmarks, views and vistas, pedestrian spaces, heritage, consolidation, light and shade, energy efficiency, architectural quality and landscape architecture.

Clause 15.01-5 provides policy direction in regard to "cultural identity and neighbourhood character" and the strategies establish that the "existing sense of place" should be reinforced through new development proposals.

Clause 15.02 encourages Sustainable Development through "efficient use of energy".

54. Clause 16 Housing encourages residential development in and around activity centres, with a prioritising of opportunities: Clause 16.01-1 "promote(s) a housing market that meets community needs",

through increased housing supply, support of appropriate development types (scale, quality, quantity), integrated infrastructure and services and energy efficiency.

Clause 16.01-2 reinforces that increased densities in new housing should be located "in or close to Activity Centres... (with) good access to services and transport....".

Clause 16.01-4 promotes "housing diversity" and aligns with the changing demands. The strategies encourage "...well-designed medium-density housing which... respects neighbourhood character, improves housing choice, (and) makes better use of existing infrastructure...".


MGS Architects

14

55. Clause 18 Transport encourages integrated alternative modes of travel, including improved movement networks through sustainable personal travel, cycling and public transport.

Local Planning Policy Framework

56. Relevant elements of policy within the City of Stonnington Municipal Strategic Statement are noted below:

Clause 21.02 Settlement and the environment, ensures that new developments do not negatively impact on the natural environment or urban character.

Clause 21.02-2, Urban environment and character provides strategies to "ensure that the qualities and attributes that define the City's urban environment and character are recognised and enhanced". The key strategies fall under the following areas: urban design, neighbourhood character and height & density. The strategies encourage: maintaining high quality amenities in the public realm, energy efficiency in design that will "...contribute positively to the character of the City as a whole...", "...respect Stonnington's green and garden-like setting", and height and density management.

Additionally the clause 21.02-2 seeks to support development higher than two storeys on land shown on the Strategic Framework Plan, namely:

‒ Land with a frontage to a Road Zone (Category 1); ‒ Principal activity centres; and ‒ Identified gateway localities and large sites.

57. Clause 21.03 Housing contains a number of relevant sub clauses that should be

referred to, such as: Clause 21.03-1 provides clear objectives to "maintain housing diversity and

provide housing choice (that will) meet the needs of Stonnington’s population". The strategies in place to achieve this encourage housing diversity in this location.

Clause 21.03-2 reinforces the need to "maintain the distinctive character of Stonnington's residential areas and ensure that use and development is consistent with the character, scale, appearance and amenity of the area".

Clause 21.03-2, also aims to direct residential development, including medium density housing, to the following locations: ‒ In activity centres as components of new development and shop

tops; ‒ In mixed-use areas as freestanding residential development; ‒ Large redevelopment sites where the infrastructure capacity can be

optimised; and ‒ The site is a consolidated redevelopment site close to an arterial road

an arterial road, and within a context where a high proportion of medium density already exists.

The subject site provides an opportunity to contribute to the continued demand for housing for smaller households; a phenomenon that, whilst not particular to Stonnington, remains the major focus in housing demand in Melbourne for the foreseeable future as household size continues to diminish and our community ages

Self-evidently too, the subject site is conveniently located relative to a range of employment, activity, education, recreation, transport, retail and services


MGS Architects

15

choices; making it a clearly desirable address within the inner Melbourne catchment.

58. Clause 21.05-1 Transport provides strategies for traffic management, integrated transport, car parking and residential amenity.

ZONING 59. The subject site sits within a Commercial 1 Zone.

OVERLAYS 60. The subject site is subject to several Overlays including the :-

Design and Development Overlay Schedule 7 (DDO 7) - Prahran/South Yarra and Windsor Activity Centre

The DDO 7, establishes a number of goals for the activity centre. It locates the subject site within an area earmarked for moderate change in abutment with an area of significant change. The site is identified for development with a preferred height of 18m and street wall maximum of 12m.

Figure 14: Areas identified for change within the Chapel Vision Structure Plan Reference Chapel Vision Structure Plan

CHAPEL REVISION The Junction of 3 Districts 61. The subject site is located in what is described as the ‘Market District’; an area that

extends from the western end of Commercial Road, west of the Sandringham line to the interface with Bray Street on the eastern side of the subject site. Immediately to the north of the subject site and this precinct the area interfaces with the Jam Factory district, whilst to the east of the subject site the area interfaces with what is described as the ‘Princess Gardens District’.

62. In each instance we see a shifting of emphasis to either side of Chapel Street but inclusive of Chapel Street within on study area.

63. The objectives for the Market District are described as follows:


MGS Architects

16

A busy and vibrant marketplace on market days with the Elizabeth Street car park a key attractor for parking.

Nightclubs and nightlife providing an active and busy period at night, particularly on Friday and Saturday nights.

Two large venues with 24 hour liquor licences and 24 hour takeaway venues such as KFC, McDonald’s and Lambs on Chapel attract people through the night, particularly on weekends.

There are strategic opportunities that could be explored as part of future investigation of two large assets held by Council – the Prahran Market and Elizabeth Street car park.

64. As a precinct, it sits within an area described as part of the South Yarra Precinct. 65. Figure 9: Development Framework Plan and the key strategic sites, illustrated in the

Chapel revision amendment, identifies the entire Horace Petty Estate as a key strategic development site to the east of the subject site and the entire Jam Factory at the northern termination of Bray Street as a key strategic development site.

66. Additionally, to the west of the site, the Prahran Market is similarly denoted as a key redevelopment site.

67. The subject site sits at the fulcrum of these three strategic development areas. This characteristic of influence of substantial change at all three abutments is in my assessment the only location within the entire Chapel Vision area where a small group of sites in one block is to be influenced by such a significant level of change in its immediate environs.

68. Figure 9 also indicates a number of further initiatives. On the eastern side of Bray Street proposed laneway widening is suggested in the block between Simmons Street and extending southwards beyond Bray Street. On the western side, including the subject site and extending between Simmons Street and Malvern Road a 2 metre minimum street setback is called for. Strategic Areas

69. Figure 9: Development Framework Plan and the key strategic sites , shows the subject site denoted as a strategic area. It has been given the same strategic notification as the previously mentioned north-eastern former light industrial precinct bounded by Simmons Street to the south, Bray Street to the west and Grattan Street to the north.

70. As a comparison, the sites immediately south of Prahran Central fronting Chapel Street have similarly been earmarked with the same strategic designation as have the public housing precincts interfacing with Princess Gardens to the east of Essex Street and south of Princess Close. Public Realm Improvements

71. Figure 9 also suggests footpath widening to the north of the subject site along Bray Street.

72. To its north, the Jam Factory district is identified as a redevelopment focus behind Chapel Street on the former light industrial sites, noting that there is limited opportunity along Chapel Street in that area, for new development, however where ‘any development would be possible it would be required to set back behind a street wall’.

73. In this immediately adjacent precinct an emphasis will be on attracting a street level in side streets, improving street level amenity and achieving a wider mix of uses including employment generating uses in lower levels of development.

74. In the immediately adjacent Princess Gardens Precinct, it notes that the primary land use will be for residential apartments.


MGS Architects

17

75. In the context of the Horace Petty Estate, Figure 9: Development Framework Plan and the key strategic sites notes that it is a strategic development site that provides significant opportunities for change and that other housing sites also provide opportunity for change including street level activation, pedestrian links and open space and a variety of housing stocks.

76. The area north of the subject site spanning from Chapel Street and north of Simmons Street for the entire light industrial area is envisaged as an area for a future streetscape masterplan. A new Public Plaza

77. Figure 7 of the Chapel reVision structure plan, also suggests an opportunity for a new plaza to be incorporated in the interface between Simmons Street and the subject site, with the inclusion of a new lineal park network linking Council’s park assets north of Simmons Street and south of Malvern Road via a new lineal park through the Horace Petty Estate.

78. Elizabeth Street is earmarked as a shared pedestrian-vehicle zone, with a higher quality pedestrian amenity, suggesting a primary linkage through to the Horace Petty Estate will be south of the subject site via Grey Street.

79. That being said, the Grosvenor Street Reserve to the north of the subject site, linking as it does conveniently with Simmons Street, provides a convenient interconnection between major public open space assets via the linkage north of the subject site and connects in Council’s plans, a series of open spaces – namely, the lineal parks east of Chapel Street, Grosvenor Reserve west of Chapel Street and the proposed plaza on Simmons Street.

80. Figure 7 also suggests that future thinking for the Chapel Street Structure Plan area should prioritise in the first instance, pedestrians, then cyclists, then public transport over other transport modes.


MGS Architects

18

Building Heights and Setbacks 81. Figure 5 within Chapel revision, The building heights and setbacks map is an

important one in the context of the precinct and the subject site. Figure 15 Building heights and setbacks Chapel revision Map 5

82. Figure 5 outlines the broader vision. It suggests, as previously noted, that the Jam Factory is a key strategic development site with a preferred height of 31 metres for the area east of and inclusive of Bray Street. Figure 5, suggests that the podium of


MGS Architects

19

both the Jam Factory and other properties with a Chapel Street frontage, extending southwards between Bray Street and Chapel Street to the Malvern Road intersection, should be invested with the proposition for a preferred height of 18 metres and adopts this for the full extent of the subject site.

83. For the subject site, further objectives are sought: Firstly that the Chapel Street interface is invested with a building setback

objective, with a street wall and upper level interface proposed. To the Simmons Street sideage and Bray Street frontage an alternative

sidestreet interface is nominated as the preferred outcome. Diagonally opposite to the corner of Simmons Street, east of Bray Street

and north of Simmons Street the entire area is earmarked with a preferred maximum of 8 storeys or 27 metres.

84. In the context of the review of this broader neighbourhood, we see that the two other most proximate locations identified as strategic areas, that being the former light industrial precinct to the northeast of the subject site and the areas on Chapel Street fronting the Cato Street Car Park and Chapel Street south of Prahran Central have each been given a preferred maximum of 27 metres.

85. In contrast, the subject site has been given a much lower preferred height designation despite its site attributes being equal to or greater than many of the sites along the Chapel Street frontage to the south, and substantially larger than any of the sites within the light industrial precinct to the northeast. This sits at odds with the low scale nature of Chatham Street properties for example in the hinterland areas behind the Chapel Street sites with a frontage to Cato Street.

86. That is not to say its positioning on Chapel Street might not require careful curation of how built form is modelled, but does suggest that the opportunities on subject site are considerably greater than the finer grain opportunities on sites to the north and south and also to many of the others previously noted.

87. Map 4 Land Uses at Street Level Land users of Chapel reVision, suggests that the entire site has main street use as a priority.

88. Interestingly, the entire Jam Factory and the entire Horace Petty Estate are similarly noted.

89. Within this section the objectives of continuing to preserve the centre’s metropolitan significance as a place for retail, entertainment, employment and city living is clear. Underpinning this is an objective to create a wide range of housing and employment choices including high density, affordable, community and mixed use housing. Each of which is relevant to the precinct in which this subject site sits.

90. Sections as currently shown provide an unclear vision of how the main street is to be applied. Within the Horace Petty Estate, where there would be clear synergies between the inclusion of family housing for example at ground level, with what is proposed as a car-free lineal park through the site.

As opposed to the adaptable design levels above ground level where residential is noted as an allowed use, it is unclear what Council’s position is regarding residential at ground level.

Clearly this needs consideration on the context of Council also seeking to support the ongoing retention and expansion of high quality affordable housing in this part of the municipality.

It would be worthwhile considering in more detail the alignment of this document with best practice in urban renewal of major estates for a diverse housing profile.

91. The appendices in Attachment 1 of the Chapel revision document go further to describe the proposed street wall goals for various parts of the municipality.


MGS Architects

20

92. The subject site sits within S4 for the Chapel Street requirements. S4 suggests the following:

In the first instance it suggests a street wall of a preferred scale of 12 metres with setbacks from the street wall for development above to incorporate additional levels.

Curiously, it also suggests lower street walls on the west side of the street than on the east side of the street.

Developments to the south of Malvern Road on the west side of Chapel Street south of Pran Central are designated in the S3. Upper level development provides for 8 levels in this area in contrast to 5 levels north of Malvern Road on the subject site.

North of Malvern Road on non-heritage sites preferred street walls are nominated at 12 metres with setbacks of 4 metres to upper level development. Heights above street walls are indicated as having a preferred scale of 5 levels and to areas with heritage overlays a similar maximum height is supported, with minimum setbacks of 5 metres from heritage facades with the application of C1 as a goal for determining appropriate levels of setback.

Figure 15 Proposed setback criteria for development on the subject site suggested in Chapel reVision

93. What is clear in these arrangements is that it is envisaged that a height and level of built form will be evident in the contexts.

94. The subject site as a site without any relevant heritage on the site clearly needs to be assessed and informed by these two diagrams in my view.

95. The side street interfaces nominated in the context of the subject site suggest that a more robust built form is anticipated, with modest expression of podiums above which through rebates or similar with the height of buildings extending almost an equivalent above the primary street wall before setting back 4 metres for upper levels.


MGS Architects

21

96. What is clear in the amendment is that Council considers that the Simmons Street and Bray Street treatments will be characterised by more substantial urban form in its interface with the street frontage. I am in agreement with this thinking, as it would appear to be consistent with the approach that has been taken to the masterplanning goals for the Horace Petty Estate and the recently completed Society apartments diagonally opposite the subject site, where built form to these interfaces is evident. It is similarly consistent with the recent approval for the Garden and Bray Street corner earlier illustrated.

97. Retention of amenity for adjacent development along sideages is sought through offsets from boundaries above podium levels. These preferred setbacks above podium level of 4.5m accord with benchmarks I have recommended in other contexts. Overshadowing Guidelines

98. Interestingly, the Amendment C172 also seeks to incorporate overshadowing guidelines in 4.3 of Schedule 1. These seek to ‘ensure new development should minimise overshadowing of major pedestrian routes, parks and other public spaces.’ Podium level scale

99. Amendment C172 seeks higher floor to floor heights at podium levels to provide adaptability for either commercial or residential uses in these levels. As noted earlier, I support this approach as a logical and pragmatic approach to building future flexibility into the precinct. Open Space requirements

100. The open space requirements in Amendments C172 seek either prescribed balcony or open space areas for each dwelling. I think the reasoning is sound. The benefits of the inclusion of lower level and podium level shared communal areas either operated for the exclusive use of residents or sometimes as commercially operated shared zones, can deliver substantially enhanced socialising and specified spaces and places. Within the Chapel Street area, there are examples of both of these models working very well.

101. Hence, I would typically suggest the following:- That either 8 sqm of balcony space is provided (in accordance with the

prescribed characteristics laid out in the amendment) or equivalent cumulatively aggregated high quality shared zones designed for passive and active recreation opportunities as applicable, and

Roof level high quality carefully curated shared amenity zones be encouraged and that,

Opportunities for shared podium level and below commercially operated activities relevant to the community including meeting spaces, child care, professional services, recreation and health services and retail services encouraged.

102. In contrast to the prescriptions north of Malvern Road, areas to its south suggest that a greater extent of built form presence both behind heritage form and in new development is desirable.


MGS Architects

22

Overview 103. The subject site and locale is one where high density development is sought in

both Local and State Policy, as seen through recent development.

104. Generally, Amendment C172 is supportive of this direction although its aspirations for the site appear at odds with its designation as a key change investigation area. One of only a small number across the entire study area.

105. The site’s location in proximity to a premium station and within Activity Centre further underpins this strategic support.

106. The subject site’s large setback from established eastern residential low rise areas of over 200 metres and over 100 metres to areas north and west across major transport and commercial areas has ensured that offsite amenity impacts arising from overshadowing and overlooking is not a substantive issue to these interfaces.

107. The subject site as an unusually large site in excess of 3000 sqm provides an opportunity for a placemaking built form and public realm solution that successfully bridges between the hinterland abutting and flanking Jam Factory Precinct and Horace Petty Estate each of which have been identified with preferred scale of 25m+.

108. The subject site’s main street to rear street dimension in excess of 90m allow this transition between the street wall of Chapel Street and these adjacent rapidly changing hinterland growth areas to occur within the subject site rather than on the eastern side of Bray Street.

109. That this can be achieved in similar contexts is evidence by examples such as the Bridge Road west of Church Street and Swan Street corridors in Richmond, Bay Street Port Melbourne west of Graham Street and Smith Street Collingwood on sites such as the Banco Site currently under construction on the former Coles site.

In each case, sites of comparable depth have been able to accommodate generous setbacks for taller built form from a lower two to four story high street wall that maintains a clearly legible heritage corridor to the Main Street interface and a recessive taller development form of typically 7-12 levels depending on the example viewed.

In this context, it seems to me that the proposed preferred heights for the subject site are somewhat undercooked. In my view, the subject site warrants a preferred designation of 27m similar to that of the adjoining Light industrial area of the Jam Factory precinct and the southern Chapel Street sites given similar designation as Investigation areas in Chapel ReVision.

110. Additionally, in the other examples I have mentioned above, larger sites have allowed a more diversified but nevertheless contextually responsive street wall responses to the primary main street corridor with taller built form setback from the


MGS Architects

23

street interface. Design solutions have frequently included taller abutments higher density streetscape character within the hinterland laneway and street areas.

111. The large scale residential developments to the eastern Horace Petty Estate along with the rapidly developing scale of the former light industrial neighbourhood, together establish a tall interfacing neighbourhood character that is of a scale and importance that warrants identification at its gateways with a more highly curated resolution at both the Jam Factory northern anchor, the eastern and southern Horace Petty Anchor and this western gateway linking this group of neighbourhoods with the Market Precinct to the west.

112. This taller background character and flanking street and view corridors of Simmons and Grey Street identify this subject site as part of this emerging precinct and not simply part of the Chapel Street corridor.

113. In my view the site has a more explicitly transitioning role than has been identified in the Chapel reVision document.

114. It is framed to the north east and east by new and existing development of 10-12 levels along Bray Street that positions the subject site at this interface in direct relationship with this new taller built form within a supportive emerging neighbourhood character context.

115. The subject site is not constrained by abutments with heritage buildings sitting as it does across wide streets from any heritage buildings.

116. The development provides through its 3 street frontages primary access to street frontages land uses.

117. The completion of the place inclusive of street treatment upgrades to the northern, eastern and western kerb alignments achieves a high quality gateway to the Bray Street and hinterland Lineal Park Precincts and a potential enhancement of the Chapel Street corridor if developed in conjunction with further enhancements to the Chapel Street corridor.

118. There is Council support for increasing the footpath zone to Bray St and Simmons St. I would agree with this assessment that in this location this is an appropriate place making response that will support activity and enhance amenity as the population and foot-traffic in this precinct increases.

119. The earmarking of the lower three levels of development for flexibility in use is also appropriate.

120. The location is supportive of transit oriented development and State Policy emphasis on intensification of development around train stations, rather than the previously more dispersed train and tram networks.

121. There is in summary a strong case for alternative design morphologies proposing of greater scale for this corner site. Alternative approaches could celebrate and mark the corner rather than stepping back. Similarly, an alternative approach better aligned with broader policy goals would in my view invest the rear half of the subject site with a built form of greater ambition than the 5 levels envisaged in Amendment C172.

122. Such an approach has been supported for the Society apartments on the corner of Simmons St and Bray St where the taller built form has been brought the corner to create an entry marker.

123. In the context of the subject site, it would seem in my view, that with its adjoining neighbours to the south, it forms an island site of a non-contributory heritage nature with tremendous capacity to make a meaningful contribution to both placemaking and keying together of the taller neighbourhoods to the east with the mixed but generally lower street-wall scale of Chapel Street.


MGS Architects

24

124. It sits in a context where the adjacent main street experience is one in which this adjacent emerging and older tall built form is clearly evident from the Chapel Street corridor and in which taller built form can be accommodated over and above the 18m envisaged.

125. It is not clear to me why in this context and also given the highly visible nature and presence of the Jam Factory, a building of similar presence to development sought south of Prahran Central is not sought as a preferred scale in this context.

126. Why instead a differing and lower aspiration has been sought in this instance is not in my view supported by an assessment of the context.

127. In my view this is a missed opportunity in the proposed “reVisioning” and also missed in the earlier Chapel Vision document when the adjacent neighbourhood areas were yet to be redeveloped.

128. Similarly, it has been acknowledged in the earlier approval by Council of development on the corner of Bray and Garden Street and also in their approval of the Society apartments, that on larger sites with a place-making role, some flexibility should exist for development over preferred height to mark these locations.

129. The Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal, has also made comment on a number of occasions that the preferred heights in Chapel Vision should not be seen as a definitive maximum but a guide to be assessed on a case by case basis.

130. In this instance, an obvious benchmark development goal for intensification has been in my view undercooked and the preferred heights should hence be amended on a site with demonstrably significant capacity to manage offsite impacts of intensification and a key role in knotting together neighbourhoods.

131. Similarly for sites with large frontages and corner locations consideration of the role of the site and its character role in the precinct should be considered in determining an appropriate streetscape outcome that might provide a more diversified silhouette street wall rhythm.

Recommendations

132. Amend the preferred maximum height for the site to a preferred height of 27m from the 18m currently nominated acknowledging that subject to design excellence modestly taller development might be able to be accommodated.

133. Amend the proposals for the south side of Simmons Street to include footpath widening works including kerb outstands in Simmons Street such as proposed in the earlier Chapel Vision document to enhance the scale of the public open space and assist to deliver the suggested enhancement of public space sought in the proposed amendment.


MGS Architects

25

Figure 17 Proposed kerb outstand taken from Chapel Vision structure plan

134. Encourage setbacks at ground level of tenancies along the Simmons Street frontage of the subject site by 1.5m similar to that proposed for Bray Street to enhance the pedestrian connection role of Simmons Street to the lineal park and warehouse precinct hinterland areas.

135. Provide some flexibility for taller corner form to the Chapel Street and Simmons Street interface to mark the gateway to the hinterland precinct and definition of the proposed public realm improvements.

136. Reconsider the sectional aspirations for the Horace Petty Estate and other public housing with direct interfaces to lineal park networks noting that a key goal should be to provide housing diversity which may include family housing and disability housing with direct ground level interfaces to public open space networks and surrounding interfacing residential street abutments.

2. STATEMENT OF EXPERIENCE

1. My name is Robert Alan McGauran. I have been a director of McGauran Giannini Soon Pty Ltd Architects, Urban Planners and Interior Designers since 1985 and practice at 10-22 Manton Lane Melbourne.

2. Qualifications: I have an Honours degree in Architecture from the University of

Melbourne, a Bachelor of Arts majoring in Architectural History from the University of Melbourne and a Postgraduate Diploma in Business Management from the University of Melbourne Business School.

3. Professional Roles Architecture: Within the architectural profession, I have held a range of senior roles arising from peer nomination including:

Chairperson of the Architects Registration Board of Victoria. Vice-President of the Royal Australian Institute of Architects. Chapter and National Councillor of the Royal Australian Institute of

Architects. Leadership and membership of accreditation panels for the Architectural

programs at RMIT, UOM, UOQ and Deakin University. Jury membership and leadership of Awards Panels for the RAIA


MGS Architects

26

Victorian Convenor of the Residential Working Group for the RAIA. Awarded a Life Fellowship to the RAIA in 1999 for contributions to the

Profession. 4. My areas of expertise are in Architecture and Urban Planning: 5. I have been director in charge of a number of projects that have won professional

design, development and industry awards including luxury residential, heritage, education, affordable housing, and environmental design, commercial, retail and industrial developments.

6. Professional Affiliations – Education, Urban Design and Planning: I am a member of the PIA (Urban Design). I was awarded Fellowship of VPELA in 2010. In 2010 I was appointed the University Architect for Monash University. From 2003-2010, I sat on the Building and Estates for the University of

Melbourne. I have been a Board member of Melbourne Affordable Housing and

then Housing Choices Australia. In Urban design, I have held positions on the Priority Development

Panel for the Minister of Planning. I was formerly Head the Sullivan’s Cove Design Panel for the State

Government of Tasmania. Member of the Standing Advisory Committee on Local Variations to the

Good Design Guide (most recently reviewing density, car parking, visual bulk, overshadowing and overlooking techniques).

Sessional panel member for Planning Panels Victoria reviewing amongst other projects the C11 Urban Villages and C14 Phoenix Precinct in Glen Eira.

Ministerial Advisory Panel appointed by the Minister for the Commonwealth Games to review the proposed Pedestrian Bridge Link to the MCG.

Commencing this year with the University of Melbourne, Monash University, DPCD, the City of Moreland and the City of Darebin, I am participating an Australian Research Council funded research project into transit oriented development intensification of Melbourne’s transport corridors.

I have assisted in the evaluation of potential for the Arden Metro Precinct for DPCD and the City of Melbourne.

In 2010 I was invited to represent the design professions in the DAVOS summit in the theme area – Inclusive Cities, led by the Prime Minister.

7. I have prepared Urban Design Frameworks and Structure Plans for key precincts including the Cremorne precinct and the Victoria Gardens precinct in the City of Yarra, the Toorak Village and Chapel Vision Structure Plans in the City of Stonnington, the Megamile Structure Plan and Tally Ho Structure Plan in Whitehorse, the a Structure Plan and built form guidelines for the Ivanhoe Activity Centre, City of Banyule and built form guidelines for the Sunshine Town Centre for the City of Brimbank.

8. I have undertaken large scale masterplan projects as lead consultant and project director including masterplans for:

Major university campuses including Monash campuses at Clayton inclusive of a residential masterplan for 3500 dwellings, Caulfield, Berwick and Gippsland and plans for campuses for the University of Melbourne, RMIT, UTAS and La Trobe.


MGS Architects

27

Major urban renewal sites including The Alphington Mills, Bradmills, Mildura Waterfront, Pentridge and Delgany Portsea.

9. Additionally, I have undertaken current masterplans for precincts including: Glen Waverley Town Centre Mt Buffalo inclusive of the Chalet Josephs Road Precinct, Footscray Epping Plaza Shopping Centre retail and entertainment precinct Lilydale Quarry West Heidelberg.

10. I have also been on the DPCD Expert Panel for Activity Centres and acted as consultant on urban design matters and in particular major projects to Local Councils including City of Port Phillip, Hobsons Bay City Council, City of Banyule, City of Whitehorse, City of Kingston, City of Moonee Valley and the City of Yarra.

11. Within the City of Stonnington, I have: Been lead consultant and project director for the Structure Plan for

Chapel Vision and the Toorak Village and provided advice on a number of projects both for the council and private development.

12. I have also undertaken a range of residential and educational projects including: Masterplan Architect for Loreto Mandeville Hall 2010- Project Urban Designer with CBD architects for 85 High Street Prahran, a

six level development for 100 units approved in 2010. Project architect for numerous residential projects including the historic

Edzell House Toorak, Clendon Road Flats, and a residence in Orrong Road Toorak.

13. I have visited the site and am familiar with the area. I have made all the inquiries that I believe are desirable and appropriate and that no matters of significance which I regard as relevant have to my knowledge been withheld from the Tribunal.

Prepared By Robert McGauran B. Arch. (Hons. Melb), B.A. (Fine Arts Melb.), P.D.M. (Melb.), LFRAIA, Architect Dated 5 March 2015

AMENDMENT C172 TO THE STONNINGTON PLANNING SCHEME For Chapel Plaza … · 2015-10-12 · C172 for...

Documents

Transcript of AMENDMENT C172 TO THE STONNINGTON PLANNING SCHEME For Chapel Plaza … · 2015-10-12 · C172 for...