Around 400 additional homes could be built at Southwark Grounds on Port Road, lifting total site capacity from 1300 to around 1700 dwellings.

A recently approved code amendment would allow apartment towers of up to 14 storeys in some areas of Renewal SA’s redevelopment of the former West End Brewery.

Renewal SA Acting Chief Executive Shane Wingard said he welcomed the code amendment, with the increase in heights and homes making a positive impact on the supply of high-quality, well-connected housing close to the city.

“By going higher across some parts of Southwark Grounds, we are adding a substantial number of very well-located homes with little impact on project delivery time or planned open space,” Mr Wingard said.

Since the project officially launched in 2025, Mr Wingard said more than 12,000 enquiries had been received about living at Southwark Grounds.

“The very strong early interest we’ve seen since homes were first released in the precinct reinforces our plans to create more housing opportunities,” he said.

The Southwark Grounds code amendment was launched in December last year, with community engagement undertaken over five weeks from January.

It proposed increasing maximum building heights from eight to 14 storeys on the eastern section of Southwark Grounds, and to 12 storeys across the remainder of the site, with minimum building heights ranging from two to four storeys.

The code amendment was implemented through an Early Commencement policy in late January, allowing developers to quickly explore the viability of increased height and housing yield while other planning processes continue.

One of the first developers delivering apartment sites have already finalised redesigns to increase the number of apartments following the code amendment.

Samaras’ development adjacent to the future Colonel Light Park is now planning to deliver 125 apartments across 11 storeys, significantly greater than original plans of around 50 apartments across four storeys.

The developer is also exploring the potential for additional affordable housing outcomes.

Most of the apartments at Southwark Grounds will be delivered within a master-planned precinct on a large parcel of land on the eastern portion of the site, covering around two-thirds of its 8.4 hectares.

Wingard said detailed precinct planning over the coming months may identify further opportunities to increase yield further that could see total apartment numbers at Southwark Grounds, exceed this number.

Affordable homes at Southwark Grounds will also see a net increase, with Renewal SA maintaining its commitment to a minimum of 20 per cent affordable housing across the development.

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

Civil works have begun across the site, with construction under way on the first new roads surrounding a townhouse precinct in the south‑west corner of Southwark Grounds. This includes Renewal SA’s 17 Founder’s Row homes, which are on track for completion by Christmas.

“We expect to have people living at Southwark Grounds by the end of the year, so delivering roads and public spaces for those residents is among our highest priorities.”

Construction of 40 townhouses off Anderson Street, known as West Village and being delivered by Contour, is forecast to begin in mid‑2026. Kolabb’s Anderson Lane development will follow shortly after, delivering a further 26 townhouses.

Southwark Grounds is a state government‑led urban renewal project now set to deliver around 1,700 homes over the next decade.

Homes will be supported by a supermarket, a range of retail and hospitality offerings anchored by a revitalised Walkerville Brew Tower, a childcare centre, car parking and well‑connected public spaces.

Joel Robinson

400 new homes planned for Adelaide's former West End Brewery site

Brisbane developer&nbsp;<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/cavcorp">Cavcorp</a> has lodged plans for a new mixed-use residential development at <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/55-wyandra-street-teneriffe-qld-4005">55 Wyandra Street</a>, Teneriffe, anchored by an 85-metre public laneway designed to reconnect the suburb’s riverfront with the Gasworks precinct.

The buildings, known as Teneriffe House and Teneriffe Lane, would replace the existing Queensland Cotton head office site with a 15-storey residential tower transitioning to eight storeys toward Helen Street. The project has been designed by Plazibat Architects and lodged as a code assessable development application for 93 apartments across a 3,401 sqm mixed-use site within the Newstead and Teneriffe Waterfront neighbourhood plan.

Central to the scheme is the transformation of an existing service easement into a publicly accessible cross-block connection linking Wyandra and Helen Streets. Cavcorp says the new laneway will act as both a pedestrian shortcut and a landscaped civic space between the Teneriffe Riverwalk, ferry terminal, and Gasworks precinct.

<img alt="First Look: Cavcorp unveils Teneriffe House and Teneriffe Lane plans for landmark wellness tower in Teneriffe" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="26e7f058-b065-4de8-b13d-a2b8cb64dfcc" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/bldg.png?VersionId=sELS0ZKYi361oYipUa1BIKfe_.DLZoFV" />

“The revised proposal delivers a legacy public-realm cross-block link, permanently secured for community use, transforming an existing private easement into a safe, high-quality pedestrian connection between the Teneriffe heritage riverwalk and the Gasworks–Long Island precinct,” the planning report states.

The laneway will sit beneath a large subtropical loggia integrated into the podium levels of the development. The design incorporates deep landscaping, water gardens, lobby spaces, business lounges, and ground-floor apartments to create what Cavcorp describes as a climate-responsive “urban verandah.”

The tower itself has been designed as a slender form with recessed floorplates and curved translucent corners inspired by contemporary Japanese architecture. The building height aligns with the Commercial Road precinct controls, which permit towers up to 15 storeys within proximity to Longland Street.

<img alt="First Look: Cavcorp unveils Teneriffe House and Teneriffe Lane plans for landmark wellness tower in Teneriffe" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="a8a17d40-43b6-4718-b3fd-67676fcbb485" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/pers%202_1.png?VersionId=i3VwDtp5AmL_8InW7w4qRbDFEpb744Jt" />

The project will comprise a mix of larger-format apartments aimed at owner-occupiers, downsizers, and families. The proposed apartment mix includes 11 loggia apartments across the lower levels, 50 four-bedroom Sky-Terrace apartments from levels three to seven, and 32 Sky-Pool Homes occupying the upper tower levels. The Sky-Pool Homes will feature private thermal plunge pools integrated into oversized balconies.

According to the application, the apartments are intended to reinterpret the scale and character of Teneriffe’s woolstore conversions and Queensland homes within a vertical residential format.

“The sky-pool homes build on Cavcorp’s previous projects and introduce a distinct apartment typology to Teneriffe, informed by both local and international precedent and responding to an identified market demand for enhanced safety, space and amenity,” the planning submission notes.

A major focus of the proposal is its five-level wellness and lifestyle offering, extending from the basement through to the rooftop.

Amenities proposed include a rooftop Swim &amp; Racquet Club with a 25-metre Olympic lap pool and tennis court, coworking spaces and libraries, golf simulators, wine storage, concierge facilities, business lounges, pet wash areas, and rooftop longevity-focused wellness spaces with spas, outdoor fitness zones, and landscaped terraces.

<img alt="First Look: Cavcorp unveils Teneriffe House and Teneriffe Lane plans for landmark wellness tower in Teneriffe" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="944b352c-49b9-4247-a4c6-5967b4b69fda" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/amenity.png?VersionId=Ed_qKjAtMwFT.5gfl3jiA9QwdWxSMsaX" />

All parking will be concealed within basement levels accessed from Wyandra and Helen Streets. Cavcorp says the deep-basement engineering approach allows the entire ground plane to prioritise landscaping, pedestrian movement, and active frontage rather than vehicle infrastructure.

The development continues Cavcorp’s concentration in Newstead and Teneriffe, where the Brisbane developer has delivered a number of apartment projects including Lucent, Le Bain, and Luminare, as well as the Long Island Wellness Precinct nearby. Several of those projects have received national design and architecture awards, including recognition under Brisbane’s “Buildings that Breathe” program.

Cavcorp unveils wellness-focused Teneriffe House and Teneriffe Lane apartment buildings

Focus Group Investments has lodged plans for a new apartment development at <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/64-70-hanover-street-fitzroy-vic-3065">64–70 Hanover Street</a> in Fitzroy, seeking to utilise the Victorian Government’s recently introduced Great Design Fast Track pathway to accelerate approvals for the project.

The proposal is among the latest developments to emerge through the state-led initiative, which was established to fast-track well-designed residential projects in activity centres and transport-connected inner-city locations. The pathway allows qualifying developments that meet elevated design and housing benchmarks to bypass traditional council planning timeframes and instead be assessed directly by the Department of Transport and Planning.

Designed by SJB, the development will comprise a mix of apartments above activated lower levels, with a strong focus on architectural articulation, landscaping, and communal amenity. The design response seeks to balance the industrial character of Richmond’s former warehouse precincts with a more contemporary residential form.

<img alt="First look: Focus Group Investments taps Victoria’s Great Design Fast Track for Richmond apartments" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="abea51cc-d85b-479e-9aef-a589f3b37ca7" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/ground.png?VersionId=e1Kf8EyPWwyiVumtqQ4rM5S4GpOR3CCz" />

Proposed are 63 new dwellings, a wide ranging mix of studio, one-, two-, and three-bedroom apartments, and townhouses and duplexes. They will be spread across a part-three, part-eight storey building.

The Planning and Urban Context Report by Tract says the development is of an "exemplary architectural standard" and has been carefully crafted by SJB Architects.

"Dwellings&nbsp;will benefit from excellent access to natural light, cross-ventilation opportunities and extensive communal space," the report noted.

The architectural material highlights the project’s integration of landscaped elements and communal spaces throughout the building. The proposal also incorporates sustainability initiatives aligned with the Victorian Government’s push for higher-performing apartment developments under the fast-track program.

The Great Design Fast Track was unveiled by the Victorian Government in 2024 as part of a broader housing supply strategy aimed at accelerating the delivery of new homes. Projects assessed through the pathway must demonstrate high-quality architecture, sustainability outcomes, and housing diversity while being located close to public transport and existing infrastructure.

<img alt="First look: Focus Group Investments taps Victoria’s Great Design Fast Track for Richmond apartments" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="afdbe834-8dc4-4a77-a943-ba07bc927348" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/site_11.png?VersionId=0J657j.TaChAZfp93wqJYBTqSsnREJx2" />

Focus Group, founder and led by Paul De Lutiis, is increasingly active across Melbourne’s inner suburbs, targeting well-connected urban renewal locations suited to medium and higher-density residential development. The Fitzroy proposal continues that strategy, leveraging the area’s strong transport links, established retail amenity, and proximity to the CBD.

Fitzroy has been one of the most popular spots for developers and buyers in recent years. The likes of PACE Development Group, SMA Projects, Crema Group and Chapter Group, currently selling projects in the suburb.

First look: Focus Group Investments taps Victoria’s Great Design Fast Track for Fitzroy apartments

The Gold Coast Planning Committee has supported the preliminary approval for the Benowa Gardens Urban Village project following an extensive community consultation and assessment process.

The proposal will now proceed to a full council vote on June 2.

The application sought approval for a masterplanned urban village on the existing Benowa Gardens Shopping Centre site, combining new housing, retail, dining, health and lifestyle amenities within a walkable, integrated precinct.&nbsp;

The proposed redevelopment includes around 413 apartments integrated above a revitalised mixed-use centre featuring a full-line supermarket of 4,000 sqm, 6,000 sqm of specialty retail and dining space across around 30 retailers, a 7,000 sqm health and wellness precinct, and roughly 9,630 sqm of office and medical suites.&nbsp;

<img alt="$1b Benowa Gardens Urban Village moves to Full Council following Planning Committee support" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="fb36ae47-80bc-45f0-9914-31b0c7b6007d" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/PR26576%20Ashmore%20Road%20C4%201121%20FI.jpg?VersionId=6mRKk2uU4r67TmTt39DKGUlvFRbTVqWa" />

The broader masterplan also includes very significant traffic and transport improvements, wide pedestrian walkways, upgraded pedestrian and cycle connections, and enhanced public areas designed to create a more connected and walkable community environment.&nbsp;

Centre owner Patrick Lu said the milestone reflected months of detailed planning, technical assessment and ongoing communication with local residents, businesses, schools and stakeholders.

“We appreciate the time, consideration and care Council officers and the Planning Committee have given this proposal throughout the assessment process,” Lu said.

“We also sincerely thank the local community for engaging with us, sharing feedback and participating in the consultation process over many months.

<img alt="$1b Benowa Gardens Urban Village moves to Full Council following Planning Committee support" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="32fd1fc3-d0e6-485f-ac57-9916c9bcb818" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/PR26576%20Ashmore%20Road%20C5%201121%20FI_2.jpg?VersionId=fz8qQKDBLQ7MyFRc856Zccfbh9nFwLOe" />

“We understand projects of this scale bring questions and concerns, which is why we have worked hard to listen carefully, provide information transparently and continue refining elements of the proposal where possible.

“Our vision has always been to create a well-designed, community-focused urban village that responds to the changing needs of the Gold Coast, while delivering improved amenity, housing diversity, healthcare access and local lifestyle benefits.

“This proposal is about creating a genuine live-work-play environment where residents can access everyday services, schools, healthcare, dining, shopping and green space within walking distance, while also supporting local jobs and economic activity.”

<img alt="$1b Benowa Gardens Urban Village moves to Full Council following Planning Committee support" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="50dfbd04-590e-4fc6-983b-766880947867" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Dining%20Day%20Time%20-%20High%20Resolution.jpg?VersionId=BP7ZoKJ0DdL_8iRkkC8VVx99moICV6kg" />

Lu said the proposal had evolved significantly through consultation and technical review, particularly around traffic, pedestrian and student safety and neighbourhood connectivity.&nbsp;

Melissa Griffin, Director at Urbis, said the recommendation recognised the strategic importance of delivering more housing and services within established urban areas already supported by infrastructure.

“This proposal represents the type of thoughtful, integrated growth that planning frameworks across South-East Queensland are encouraging,” Ms Griffin said.

“The project seeks to place housing, retail, healthcare and employment opportunities together in a highly accessible location close to schools, transport and existing services.

“Importantly, the process has involved significant technical assessment and community engagement to ensure local issues and feedback were properly considered throughout the planning pathway.”

$1 billion Benowa Gardens Urban Village heads to council vote following Planning Committee support

Surfers Paradise is officially set for its first new residential development with a 45-storey skybridge connecting the two towers.

John Camilleri’s Celestino Developments has been given the green light by the Gold Coast City Council to develop its major beachfront precinct across its huge 4,000 sqm oceanfront site at <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/63-79-garfield-terrace-surfers-paradise-qld-4217">63–79 Garfield Terrace</a>, just five months after its <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/news/qld/first-look-exclusive-billionaire-winx-breeder-s-bold-two-tower-surfers-paradise-play-with-45th-storey-skybridge">submission in late 2025</a>.

The approved scheme will deliver two towers rising 55 and 48 storeys, connected by a skybridge positioned on level 45 that will house a range of resident-only wellness and entertainment spaces.

In its notice of approval, the Gold Coast City Council said the&nbsp;proposed overall built form has been designed to complement the scale, intensity and protect the adjacent amenity and surrounding streets through the use of varied setbacks, site cover and architectural elements.

<img alt="First look exclusive: Billionaire Winx breeder’s bold two-tower Surfers Paradise play with 45th-storey skybridge" data-entity-type="" data-entity-uuid="" src="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/f_auto,c_limit,w_1440,q_75/https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/field/image/Screenshot%202025-12-30%20at%209.53.48%E2%80%AFAM.png?VersionId=ADyPJ_TFbJvSU9wZFOiCBnlPtgF7VWqW" />

Designed by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/dbi">DBI</a>, the development will comprise 275 apartments across the two towers, including a mix of two-, three-, and four-bedroom residences, as well as several penthouses. The apartments will sit above a landscaped podium featuring more than 90 metres of beachfront pool frontage, private resident lawns, lounges, and wellness spaces.

DBI said the design draws heavily from the movement and form of the coastal environment, with curving balcony lines and sculpted façades intended to soften the scale of the towers while maximising ocean outlooks and passive shading outcomes.

“The project occupies a rare, uninterrupted oceanfront site and has been shaped by a design philosophy that merges architectural elegance with environmental responsiveness and a carefully curated lifestyle experience,” DBI said in planning documents submitted to the Gold Coast City Council.

The most distinctive element of the approved project is the skybridge linking the two towers at level 45. The elevated communal space is planned to include executive lounges, formal dining areas, wellness facilities, and panoramic ocean-facing outlooks.

“The skybridge enhances the identity of the development, promotes social interaction, and delivers a lifestyle experience not found elsewhere on the Gold Coast,” DBI said.

At podium level, residents will have access to a suite of resort-style amenities, including resident lounges, private dining rooms, a yoga lawn, gymnasium, plunge pools, and treatment spaces. The beachfront pool has been designed with separate lap, lounge, and children’s areas extending across the width of the site.

The project will also introduce new food and beverage offerings along the Enderley Avenue and Oceanway frontages, contributing additional activation to the beachfront precinct.

First look: Winx billionaire’s beachfront Surfers Paradise apartment development greenlit

Development Planning

<html><body>
Satterley Property group’s fight to develop North Stoneville is ongoing as he appeals the Western Australian Planning Commission's decision to reject the hills development.
The decision came as community concerns claimed the area would put 4000 people in the middle of an extreme bushfire zone. 
The Anglican Church, who own the land, engaged property developer Nigel Satterley to create a new townsite to accommodate 4000 residents, which was to include two schools and a local centre. 
Satterley said the decision, which concluded 10 months of rigorous assessment including extensive environmental and land use planning investigation, was “surprising and disappointing.”
"It is unfortunate the opportunity to begin construction of the first masterplanned community in the Perth Hills that will generate more than $550 million in economic activity and hundreds of jobs has been halted," Satterley said.
Satterley, however, has chosen to appeal the decision to the State Administrative Tribunal.
It is uncertain whether or not Planning Minister Rita Saffioti will ‘call-in’ Satterley’s appeal.
</body></html>

j.ballantyne1990-6AQqhLzZaK

Satterley seeks to appeal decision to reject North Stoneville plans

<html><body>
EXPERT OBSERVER
The announcement by the NSW Planning Minister, Rob Stokes, that a number of Priority Precincts will go back to councils is likely to slow down planning. The most significant precinct to go back to a council is the Waterloo Estate (above and below), where the NSW Government owns the land and is responsible for the social housing tenants - yet the project has been given back to the City of Sydney council.
 The NSW Government previously developed a preferred masterplan with 6,800 dwellings, including sufficient market homes, to subsidise the affordable and social housing tenants. 
The City of Sydney Council proposed an alternative approach with only 5,300 dwellings including more affordable housing. 
Clearly there will be a big funding short fall in the council approach, so it seems very strange that the Planning Minister has supported the council scheme which could require over a billion dollars of extra funding, presumably from the NSW Government. While the NSW Government will lead planning in 12 of the 48 precincts, there will be 25 precincts where collaborative or strategic planning will be shared between councils and the state, and a further 11 where councils will take over planning. At the very least, the NSW government must set target dwelling supply numbers in the precincts where they have partially or totally handed planning back to councils. 
We have seen before the confusion when the state starts planning and then hands it back to councils at Parramatta Road where planning outcomes are still very unclear. Another example is the precincts along the Sydenham to Bankstown line, where under pressure from local councils, planning was handed back to the local bodies but to the development industry it is very unclear what the planning rules are. While the Planning Minister’s media release talked about ‘supercharging the delivery of Sydney’s priority precincts’, the Urban Taskforce believes the extent of full or partial delegation to councils is likely to slow down rather than speed up housing supply. New South Wales, and Sydney in particular, needs a real boost to its housing supply following the September 2019 low housing approval numbers announced by the Australian Bureau of Statistics. 
Dwelling approvals have dropped by 46 percent since their high point of July 2016 and now sit at 2013 levels. The CommSec State of the States report recently put NSW below Victoria and Tasmania in economic performance based significantly on falling dwelling commencements. Furthermore, the NSW Government’s own Productivity Commission stated in a recent Discussion Paper that development approvals in NSW were taking twice as long as other states in Australia. There is no doubt that housing supply needs to be supercharged in New South Wales, but having only 12 of the 48 priority precincts being state-led, with the rest partially or totally under council control, is likely to slow down rather than speed up planning. It is interesting to see that the Planning Minister does not seem to have much confidence in his Department of Planning, Industry and Environment when he states that the changes are needed because ‘of planning proposals stuck in the system’, so he proposes to empower councils to have a stronger role. The Urban Taskforce would like to understand more about how this radical shift of responsibilities between state and council planning bodies is going to work at the very time the NSW Government, through its Productivity Commission, is calling for a more productive planning system that takes half the time of the current processes. There will need to be very strict controls on councils in relation to turn around times and clear outcomes in terms of size of development set for precincts.
CHRIS JOHNSON is the CEO of Urban Taskforce
 
</body></html>

cjohnson-8xfqfuuCSq

Priority precincts likely to slow down as council roles increase

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
Private enterprise has shaped the skylines of Australia’s cities, and the names of their highest towers reflect this. The towers of Sydney shout finance: Deutsche Bank, MLC, Ernst &amp; Young, ANZ, Suncorp. The tall buildings of Perth read like a mining index: BHP Billiton, Rio Tinto, Woodside. In Melbourne, residential skyscrapers for investors make up the mass of new development, with names like Aurora, Verve, Empire and Vision – names that are timeless (and placeless).
The recent transformation of Australian city centres makes them appear unruly and wild, with their gilded towers, curtain walls compiled from a cladding company catalogue, and hybrid building types. Two-storey Victorian-era fronts abutt six-storey apartment buildings, or are completely engulfed by towers. This bricolage, paired with aspirational branding, creates the impression that property developers and financiers are the main drivers and shapers of this “anything goes” approach to urban development.
This is partly true. Market-driven development has always played a leading role in the urban settlement of Australia. But markets operate within a framework of rules that mitigate the negatives of urban development for the public good.
Governments have a key role in setting policies, rules and regulations that steer those driving urban development through the morass of planning policies, design guidelines and codes for buildings. Within these planning mechanisms, government actions should reflect the standards and expectations of the communities they represent.
So why is there such a gulf between what the centres of Australian cities look like, including their public spaces, and community expectations? Part of the problem is the lack of guidance about quality design during the planning and design phase and the consistent decision-making necessary to achieve it.
Take Melbourne, for example
Nowhere is this more obvious than some of Melbourne’s recently built tall towers.
Over the two decades up to 2015 there was a lack of strong regulation of planning schemes around taller buildings. In 1999 – when the economy was sluggish – the state government removed density controls from the city centre to allow maximum flexibility in property development.
These controls had established a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 12:1. This means that if a site has an area of 1,000 square metres, the construction of 12,000 square metres of floor space is allowed. It might be a building built across the whole site to 12 storeys, or a building on half the site to 24 storeys.
It is only by chance that Melbourne’s height limit was set between 265 metres and 315 metres, so that buildings did not intrude into aircraft flight paths.
The soaring heights of Melbourne’s buildings are not necessarily a major problem. The new residential towers take their share of the 100,000-plus new residents who move to Greater Melbourne each year, and these people are <a href="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/hdp.au.prod.app.com-participate.files/2615/2963/7455/Transport_Strategy_Refresh_-_Background_paper_-_Car_Parking.pdf" target="_blank">more likely to walk than drive</a>. And restricting building heights does not necessarily lead to better buildings and neighbourhoods.
However, setting height limits through density controls – regulating floor areas, and apartments, in a building, block or precinct – is an important lever for achieving better design. It’s a form of regulatory “bargaining power”, permitting a few extra floors in return for better public amenity. Without it, there can be many bad outcomes, particularly at street level, as is obvious in some recently built towers.
The City of Melbourne’s 2018 report, <a href="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/hdp.au.prod.app.com-participate.files/8915/4882/4706/Post_Exhibition_Synthesis_Report_Amendment_C308.PDF" target="_blank">Promoting High Quality Urban Design Outcomes in the Central City and Southbank</a>, notes a “lack of design investment in the lower 20 metres of building facades and in particular in shopfront design” in the past. The problems include allowing parking above ground in podiums, tinted glass that renders active uses (such as common areas or commercial tenancies) invisible, and poor materials and architectural details that undermine the quality of the streetscape. This can contribute to poor visual connections between building occupiers and pedestrians, which reduces surveillance from above that would help make streets safer.
Some developments just look incredibly cheap and bland. There are flat finishes and facades, tinted glass, floor-to-ceiling glazing with repetitious frames and mullions, building services taking up much of the street frontage – despite the luxury apartment taglines used to market these towers.
Tighter controls for better design
Planning controls in the central city and Southbank area of Melbourne have become tighter since <a href="https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/new-cbd-rules-clamp-down-on-excessive-skyscraper-heights-and-densities-20150903-gjersp" target="_blank">interim controls were put in place in 2015</a>. These became permanent in 2016. Most of the podium and infill towers recently springing up in Melbourne received planning permission before then.
The new controls stipulate stronger requirements for minimum street setbacks, overshadowing, wind effects, FAR limits and tower separation. New height limits are based on density controls. However, high-rise apartment towers are still permitted to produce <a href="https://participate.melbourne.vic.gov.au/future/trends/urban-growth-and-density" target="_blank">densities higher than those found in areas of Tokyo or Hong Kong</a>.
These new planning controls have already led to a reduction in above-ground car park podiums, as developers aim to increase their yield in the face of restrictions on floor area ratios.
Despite these new planning provisions promoting quality design, there is still ambiguity around what good design means for Melbourne’s taller building proposals. This becomes an issue when tall buildings are subject to discretionary height limits.
The report <a href="/news">Measurable Criteria to Assess Development Applications Exceeding Preferred Heights: Analysis and Recommendations</a> by MGS Architects observed through several case studies across Melbourne – including in South Yarra and Collingwood – that extra height can be negotiated for projects that demonstrate a “high standard of architectural design”. But good design here may not relate to setbacks, overshadowing, provision of public space, or quality architectural details. It could be because a building is marketed as a “landmark”, “gateway” or “icon”.
But does a building’s height make it a landmark? If so, how high should it be? And should poor public amenity (such as generating traffic or overshadowing) be traded away because a building is “slender” and “sculptural”?
In the case of projects that went to the planning tribunal VCAT, the City of Melbourne report observed: "Where the tribunal was required to make a decision between an acceptable urban design outcome or project viability (such as the ability to achieve a viable tower envelope), viability and consolidation objectives prevailed on balance."
What more needs to be done?
Certainty and consistency are lacking. MGS Architects <a href="/news">writes</a> that this “undermines the public perception of a fair and orderly process for development approvals”.
All property developers, architects and planners desire consistency and clarity in urban planning, design and policy in order to deliver their projects – as do local communities. And despite moves in the right direction in Melbourne, there still is room to improve regulation. This includes introducing clearer density controls in relation to quality architectural design, a design review process in which designers lead decision-making and design-led envelope controls (where quantitative rules about where development is permitted are matched by qualitative rules that focus on how the building interfaces with the public realm).
However, to encourage innovation the regulations should still allow for flexibility.
The growth in Melbourne’s residential towers reinforces to the inhabitants of Australian cities the need to regulate for quality design outcomes. It acts as a warning for strategic town centres in Melbourne, and across Australia, that lack adequate quality control of their taller buildings.
Height restrictions were eased in part of Adelaide’s city centre this decade with the <a href="/news">Capital City Development Plan Amendment</a>. This led to a slew of new commercial, <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-07-27/is-it-time-to-implement-postcode-5000-in-adelaide/10039102" target="_blank">residential and hotel buildings over 100 metres</a> proposed or under construction. Let’s hope that, with strong design guidelines, Adelaide avoids the mistakes of some of Melbourne’s recent additions.
Timothy Moore, PhD Candidate, Melbourne School of Design, Monash University
This article is republished from <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/taming-wild-cities-the-tall-buildings-of-australia-show-why-we-need-strong-design-guidelines-116735" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

The tall buildings of Australia show why we need strong design guidelines

<html><body>
EXPERT OBSERVATION
The approval by the NSW Government of a new tower over the future Martin Place metro station is a good balanced solution.
It is important that the NSW Government works with the private sector in rolling out new metro rail lines and stations and the proposal for the Martin Place station is an excellent example of this.
The final setback above a podium of 8 metres maintains the character of Martin Place while allowing a commercial tower to be built over the podium but set back by 8 metres.
The City of Sydney have raised concerns that a set-back of 25 metres would have been preferable but their comments do not take into account that the adjacent MLC Centre tower is set back far more than this.
The proposed tower is well away from the Cenotaph down the far end of Martin Place and is more contextually related to the Reserve Bank building at the top of Martin Place.
As Sydney evolves into a global city with a population of 8 million people there will need to be a balance between maintaining the built form of the past and shaping the city of the future.
It is good that robust discussion occurs as new proposals are made but ultimately the city must change and evolve.
The government’s decision on the unsolicited proposal for Martin Place Station and related new buildings represents a good balance between the past and the future.
The use of the NSW Government Architect Peter Poulet, who strongly supported the 8 metre setback, in achieving this balance is also a good process to ensure quality change occurs in the city.
CHRIS JOHNSON is chief executive officer of property development industry group Urban Taskforce and can be contacted <a href="https://www.urbantaskforce.com.au/index.php?option=com_content&amp;view=article&amp;id=97&amp;Itemid=126#.Vdaart55dFI" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Martin Place tower a good balanced solution for Sydney: Urban Taskforce

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
The package of reforms passed by the NSW Parliament are a step forward for the planning system in NSW but the detail resolution of the reforms could lead to some elements slowing planning applications down.
The big picture reforms that have gone through the NSW Parliament sound like progressive moves to lift strategic planning and get communities on board with planning decisions, but the detail could create more red tape rather that a more efficient system.
A focus on strategic planning is good but to require yet another planning document in the form of a 'local strategic planning statement’ could add significant time and could lead to different interpretations with Local Environmental Plans. By adding another layer we are concerned that this may make planning slower and more complicated.
The requirement that ‘Community Participation Plans’ are produced by each council sounds reasonable but the Urban Taskforce is concerned that these plans could lead to further delays for individual projects or they could encourage greater negativity to development.
We are concerned that there seems to be little guidance to councils on just what a ‘Community Participation Plan’ should include. There must be an acceptance of State Government housing targets, State Government infrastructure investment, Federal Government Immigration policies and the impact of these areas on the need to accommodate growth. There must also be a requirement that participation involves all of the community not just individual action groups and that participation is handled in a timely manner.
The regulations that support the new legislation must control all of these issues.
The inclusion of design quality as an objective in the act is a good move particularly as greater densities are likely and communities will be more supportive of well-designed environments. The roll of the NSW Government Architect in giving guidance on design quality is a good use of this position that has been an input to the built environment in NSW over 200 years.
The rationalisation of Development Control Plans (DCPs) into a standard format is a positive move that should be replicated with Community Participation Plans and Local Strategic Planning Statements. To allow each council to develop very different formats and requirements will only lead to a slower and more complicated planning system. The Urban Taskforce is seeing a lack of discipline in policy terms with housing affordability with multiple government agencies and multiple councils all having very different policies that are leading to a well-meaning but ultimately unsustainable planning system.
The reforms in the area of building certification will give greater community confidence in this process but we are concerned that certifiers are under so much scrutiny and must certify every step in the planning and building process that the practitioners in this area are finding the future of certifiers is limited.
The NSW Government must support this industry rather than continually add so many conditions that the industry is marginalised.
Another recent reform to the planning system in NSW has been the proposal to amend the definition of ‘bulky goods premises’ to make this definition less restrictive. This is a simple amendment which reflects the changing nature of retail in Australia. This kind of adaptiveness and flexibility should be adopted to other areas of the planning system
The Urban Taskforce supports reforms of the NSW planning system that simplify the process as this will reduce the cost of housing. Our concern is that a number of the recent reforms, while being popular with communities worried about future growth, will add more layers and red tape to the planning system which will end up lifting the cost of housing in NSW. We are keen to work with the NSW Government in ensuring that the detail of the planning reforms included in regulations do not turn well-meaning policies into excessive red tape. 
Chris Johnson is the Urban Taskforce CEO.
</body></html>

NSW planning reforms could slow applications: Chris Johnson

<html><body>
New Planning Panels headed by District Commissioners will streamline regionally significant planning across Sydney, according to the Greater Sydney Commission. 
The independent panels will start operating on 21 November 2016 and will replace the existing Sydney East Joint Regional Planning Panel and the Sydney West Joint Regional Planning Panel. 
Greater Sydney Commission CEO Sarah Hill said the District Commissioners are already listening to stakeholders and residents to shape the future vision for their districts. 
“District Commissioners, who understand the strategic vision for their respective districts, will chair the new panels,” she said. 
“We have been talking to stakeholders from day one and are about to launch an unprecedented level of community engagement.” 
“This means when the District Commissioners start chairing the panels in November they will know their area, the people and the over-arching vision for that district.” 
She said the panels aimed to improve decision making time frames for assessing regionally significant planning applications. 
“We are also aiming to reduce pre-gateway or rezoning review timeframes to less than 90 days for 85 percent of requests,” she said. 
The Sydney Planning Panels will take on responsibility for a number of key planning approval activities including determining regionally significant development applications (generally development with a capital investment value of more than $20M) and considering pre-gateway (rezoning) reviews, allowing requests for reviews of council decisions or lack of decisions within 90 days. 
Six Sydney Planning Panels will be established, with one panel for each District 
Each will be led by a District Commissioner and have four expert members with strategic and statutory planning expertise. Two representatives will be appointed by the Council and two will be Government appointments.
Frequently Asked Questions
This FAQ answers questions regarding the commencement of the Greater Sydney Commission’s Sydney Planning Panels and the process of transition from the existing Joint Regional Planning Panels by 21 November 2016.
What are the Sydney Planning Panels, what is their geographic remit and function?
The Greater Sydney Commission Act 2015 (the GSC Act) commenced on 27 January 2016. The GSC Act enables the Minister for Planning to create Sydney Planning Panels. A Sydney Planning Panel is taken to be a Joint Regional Planning Panel (JRPP) under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 (the EP&amp;A Act).
Sydney Planning Panels will be established to replace the existing Sydney East JRPP and the Sydney West JRPP.
The Sydney Planning Panels will determine regionally significant development applications (generally development with a capital investment value of more than $20M) within the Greater Sydney Region (as defined in the GSC Act); and consider pre-Gateway (rezoning) reviews, through which proponents can request a review if a council decides not to support a rezoning request or doesn’t make a determination within 90 days.
These are the same functions as the current Joint Regional Planning Panels.
The City of Sydney will continue to be excluded from the operation of the Sydney Planning Panels for the consideration of development matters. The Central Sydney Planning Committee will continue to operate as normal. Pre-gateway (rezoning) reviews for the City of Sydney will continue to be undertaken by the Planning and Assessment Commission.
When will the Sydney Planning Panels commence?
The Sydney Planning Panels will commence on Monday 21 November 2016. Until then the existing Sydney East JRPP and the Sydney West JRPP will continue to operate.
Starting the Sydney Planning Panels in November 2016 will allow the Commission and specifically the Commissioners, to focus initially on the important strategic work of developing the draft District Plans for exhibition. It allows time for a smooth transition with minimal disruption to operations and decisions.
Who will be the members of the Sydney Planning Panels?
The Sydney Planning Panels will comprise of five members:
A Greater Sydney Commission District Commissioner – the Chair
Two state appointed representatives
Two council appointed representatives
How many Sydney Planning Panels will there be?
Six Sydney Planning Panels will be established, one for each district in Greater Sydney.
The boundaries for the Sydney Planning Panels will reflect the district boundaries declared under the EP&amp;A Act.
The relevant District Commissioner will chair the Sydney Planning Panel for their district. As with the JRPPs the council appointed representatives for the relevant local government area will sit on the relevant Sydney Planning Panel when considering matters in their local government area.
The new members of the Sydney Planning Panels will be announced by the end of June 2016.
Why have more than two Sydney Planning Panels?
A key outcome of establishment of Sydney Planning Panels is to improve the timeframes for the determination of development applications and pre-gateway (rezoning) reviews. Creating six panels evens the workload across Sydney allowing for faster decisions.
District Commissioners will continue to build relationships with the councils within their District and build strong ties that will help councils to assess development matters in a more effective and efficient manner.
What role will the draft District Plans play in consideration of local plans by the Sydney Planning Panels?
The draft District Plans are currently being developed and will be exhibited by no later than January 2017.
The draft District Plans will be a matter the Sydney Planning Panels must take into consideration when reviewing local environmental plans and considering pre- Gateway (rezoning) review requests, as part of the strategic basis for future land use outcomes.
What happens if I have a matter with the Joint Regional Planning Panel and it has not been finalised?
Any development application or pre-Gateway (rezoning) review that was lodged but has not been determined by 21 November 2016 will be determined by the relevant Sydney Planning Panel.
If a JRPP has been appointed as the relevant planning authority for a rezoning prior to 21 November 2016 that function will transition to the relevant Sydney Planning Panel.
What is the role of the Department of Planning and Environment (Department) with the Sydney Planning Panels and planning proposals?
The Department will continue to provide the same level of secretariat support for the new Sydney Planning Panels.
The Department will continue to review planning proposals, issue Gateway determinations and make LEPs as a delegate of the Greater Sydney Commission until advised otherwise.
The existing plan making delegations to local government remain in place.
How will the Sydney Planning Panels improve procedures and outcomes?
The new approach of six Sydney Planning Panels will aim to improve determination time frames by at least 10% within 12 months of establishing the Sydney Planning Panels, and reduce pre-gateway (rezoning) review timeframes to less than 90 days for 85% of requests.
The Greater Sydney Commission will monitor the functions of the Department of Planning and Environment as their delegate and will review the efficiency of process and effectiveness of outcomes regularly.
The Government is committed to the smooth transition from the JRPPs to the Sydney Planning Panels and the new Panels will be supported throughout their establishment and during the transition to minimise any disruption to important development and rezoning decisions.
When will the review of the pre-Gateway (rezoning) review process be finalised?
The Department of Planning and Environment has recently undertaken a review of the pre-Gateway (rezoning) review process to ensure it is achieving its objectives and operating in the most transparent and efficient manner. The outcomes of this review are proposed to be finalised and implemented by June 2016.
Where do I get further information?
If you require further information about the operation of Sydney Planning Panels please contact the Joint Regional Planning Secretariat on 02 9228 2060 or at <a href="mailto:jrppenquiry@jrpp.nsw.gov.au">jrppenquiry@jrpp.nsw.gov.au</a>
If you require further information about the role and functions of the Sydney Planning Panels, please contact the Greater Sydney Commission on 02 8289 6200 or at <a href="mailto:info@gsc.nsw.gov.au">info@gsc.nsw.gov.au</a> 
</body></html>

Development Planning

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Development Planning

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News