Macaulay’s planning rules need urgent work

Macaulay, one of Melbourne’s urban renewal precincts, was planned to be developed into a mid-rise, walkable neighbourhood. Are loose planning controls putting that at risk?

Interim built form controls in Macaulay were drawn up in 2012, but much of it is managed through discretionary height and setback rules. That, combined with a lack of density controls, has caused problems.

Maximum heights are determined through a discretionary height control. Nine storeys is the “preferred” maximum height and 12 storeys is the “absolute” maximum.

For a development to exceed the preferred maximum height, it is asked to prove “demonstrable benefit to the broader community”, that includes:

• Exceptional design quality
• A positive contribution to the public realm 
• High quality pedestrian links where needed
• Good solar access to the public realm

The controls also include a mandatory street wall: developments must not exceed a height of six storeys at the street frontage, above which discretionary controls manage setbacks.

The City of Melbourne and state government have both found that the interim controls need updating. A council review released in June 2020 identified problems stemming from the interim controls and proposed new controls – but the latter are yet to be finalised.

“Interim built form controls in Macaulay are resulting in developments with high densities. If this trend continues the cumulative effect would lead to a future population that is significantly higher than current population forecasts. This would place additional pressure on existing and proposed infrastructure,” the council report read.

It also found that some of the existing building height and setback controls “fail to respond” to the diversity and character of the area and result in reduced amenity, including lack of daylight, sunlight, outlook and increased overshadowing.

While discussing council endorsement of a new development proposal in December, Cr Rohan Leppert said the controls were threatening to change the nature of the future precinct. 

The Future Melbourne Committee (FMC) meeting on December 1 endorsed plans for a development at 139-149 Boundary St, North Melbourne, which included waiving the discretionary setback control and the preferred maximum height.

“The Arden-Macaulay structure plan did originally intend to give this entire precinct the perception of a mid-rise, particularly a six-storey, feel and character,” Cr Leppert said.

“It’s why we put controls into the design and development overlay which required setbacks above a mandatory street wall height, so that everything did continue to appear like a six-storey neighbourhood.”

Once again here, just like every other site in Macaulay, we immediately find every possible reason under the sun why that discretionary setback control shouldn’t apply even on a large site like this.

The development under consideration was a 12-storey mixed-use proposal by Blue Earth Group, which the council voted unanimously to endorse. The $62 million development will include 273 apartments.

The building’s “u-shape” design provides for a courtyard and two through streets that are considered contributions to the public realm. Affordable housing provisions were included to allow for the preferred height control to be waived.

“I agree the courtyard is nice, I agree that there are many, many good aspects to this application and certainly the community benefit that’s being provided to get from the preferred height to the maximum height through the affordable housing mechanisms is good and I welcome it,” Cr Leppert said.

“But this does once again show that the development envelope in Macaulay is choose-your-own adventure.” 

“Where we envisaged something that appeared like a six- to eight-storey precinct will very much end up like a 12-storey precinct everywhere unless we help do something about that.”

The site considered by council on December 1 is surrounded by a number of other live permits and development applications. There are at least two permits for 12 storey buildings in the immediate vicinity, and five applications at or above 12 storeys.

One of those applications, which will soon go to VCAT, was objected to by the council on February 2. It highlighted some of the issues with the interim controls.

The application was for four buildings – three at 12 storeys and one at nine – at 68-102 and 103 Alfred St and 87-105 Racecourse Rd.

The developer argued in its application that “demonstrable benefit to the broader community” required to allow developments to max out the height limit was provided by allowing “the development potential of this site to be suitably achieved”.

In other words, community benefit required to waive the preferred height could be achieved simply by waiving the preferred height.

The Minister for Planning has authority over the application, and the applicant has taken the Minister to VCAT over delays in a decision. The City of Melbourne will present ground for objection to the development at VCAT •