Five storeys, zero car parks: VCAT gives green light to contentious building
m.theage.com.au/victoria/five-storeys-zero-ca...
theage.com.auPosted Jan 17, 2016, 8:43 PM UTC
4777
theage.com.auIn theory, I like the idea of Melbourne moving towards being a less car-centric city. And allowing development that doesnt include parking is part of that transition. The problem is that because the vast majority of housing still has dedicated parking, there isnt much familiarity with a truly "car-free" lifestyle. I'd wager a lot of the people who aim to live car-free on a day-to-day basis still own a car for travelling to their parents house and going to bunnings on the weekend. Leaving the car at home and catching the tram to work every day is easy, not owning a car at all is a significant sacrifice for a lot of Australians. Because most apartments have private parking, most people don't consider parking when deciding to buy a car, like they would in cities like London where the difficulties of parking are ingrained into the culture. And because the demographics that live in apartments are generally not looking at their living arrangement as a long term commitment, people may be reluctant to sell their car when moving into an apartment with no parking, because in 5 years time they might be living somewhere where owning a car is essential. Until/unless there is a significant amount of parking-free apartments, there will be few people who are wholly committed to the car-free lifestyle, as it will not be of much benefit in the long run.
I also think there are a lot of upsides to creating more housing diversity, including housing that has "limitations", if those limitations make the housing significantly more affordable. For people who already dont drive, regardless of parking, being able to save money on an apartment that doesnt come with a superfluous parking space is great. My concern is that these new apartments will all be too high end for this to really be of any impact.
31
Bang on they money as far as I'm concerned. There's a development that went up on the crest of the hill on Burwood Hwy, just between the RSPCA and the cnr of Station St that has become an absolutely shit-show and accident hotspot because there's not enough residential parking - cutting that City bound traffic from 3 lanes to 2.
5
Apartments with the target of being 'environmentally friendly' generally sell and lease really well, especially around this particular area. The access to the city along Sydney Rd via trams along with the train station being so close gives people the opportunity to leave a car out of their lifestyle. I personally couldn't do this, but I know a lot of people that do and they seem to really enjoy it. At first it seems like an easy way for developers to get out of providing parking, but when parking isn't an option the living spaces attract people that are looking for somewhere to live and want to ride their bike to work every day anyway, plus they don't pay the excess of a parking space in the purchase price/rental. It provides an option for people that don't rely on a car and also offers discounted apartments because the developer doesn't have to create multiple level parking.
3
Personally, I believe people should be able to not have a parking space if they wanted to. That being said, people will just free ride on the free on street parking spaces, meaning less spaces will be available for delivery vans, shoppers and potentially those who park and ride.
In my opinion, developments which do not meet minimum parking requirements must pay for the establishment and running costs of the residential parking zones.
Alternatively, they could do what Moonee Valley Council are trying to do - if you don't build the minimum number of parking spaces, you will have to pay a levy which is used to improve cycling routes, public transport and provide more off street parking for businesses
26
I disagree - my apartment comes with a parking space that i don't use - i rent it out to my neighbor. I highly doubt anyone in the same position would struggle to find someone to rent out a secure car space in that area.
9
How about if you supply car parking you have to pay a levy to support the billions of dollars of roads.
-2†
Areas of Melbourne are already effected by levys from the State Revenue Office (http://www.sro.vic.gov.au/car-parks).
1
Not even one or two carparks to be leased out to Goget/Flexicar etc, helping to offset body corporate fees and provide residents and neighbours with access to those kinds of services? Weird.
10
I kinda like the concept, but there are serious problems with this that I can see with a 20 second risk analysis.
Sure, the people who live there may decide to live car free. But it's 2am and their toilet backs up. They need a plumber stat. Well the problem is they can't call one because there is no where for the plumber to park his van and hook up the equipment. Similar for moving vans, and every other form of trade person.
I assume it's going to have a service lift at least, if not a general use one. Well they require maintenance. What happens when the guy who does that doesn't show up because he can't park?
Sure we are moving to a more car free world, I do believe that. But there are a lot of industries that are going to be a long way behind that trend.
7
Same thing all the tradies that service almost every small apartment build do? Park on the street.
8
Sure, the people who live there may decide to live car free. But it's 2am and their toilet backs up. They need a plumber stat. Well the problem is they can't call one because there is no where for the plumber to park his van and hook up the equipment. Similar for moving vans, and every other form of trade person.
How is that different to any other location where there is parking, but it's all full of residents' cars?
4
Our common area cleaner parks in our spot when my wife goes to the gym in the morning and every week gets a blast about it. He still does it, useless prick.
1
fuck his car up
1
Try get a park at 2am in a residential permit area like Richmond.
2
The difference is for an apartment you generally need to get your stuff as close to the main entrance as possible. When we lived residential we had a plumber visit and he double parked a few doors down, because if someone had to move it was pretty obvious where he was because there were a lot of hoses from his van to the house he was working in.
I don't know. Maybe they have a solution to this, but I expect there are going to be problems they haven't considered.
3
The solution is fold, don't scrunch.
In our office we've never had a plumber run hoses up 14 flights of stairs, because it's a hazard and no hose is that long, so that wouldn't be a requirement for every plumbing emergency.
Car parking for visitors is always a problem in the inner city and I'm not sure if in the scheme of things this makes it a whole lot worse. If I needed to use a car all the time I simply wouldn't buy one of those apartments. Just like if I need three bedrooms I wouldn't buy a one bedroom.
2
I think idea is sound, if there is one thing that's needed is more buildings designed with energy efficiency in mind. Maybe add charge points for electric vehicles, even one or two for electric bikes? Seems from the photo there will be on street bike racks, I hope that's not the only parking, given the large number of bike thefts.
2
Exactly - add 6 more bicycle parking spaces - because they're so fucking hard to find.
Literally just a bigger buffet for bike thieves.
3
photo is of different development (The Nightingale which was refused).
3
Sure, but how is that different to a house on the street, you can't always get into a driveway.
And I have never let a plumber into the car park in my apartment, I only have a park for myself. It is gated.
2
It's called a loading zone.
2
What a load of shit.
8
I'd be likely to speak to the local private car parking operator for a long term lease than have it take away from my property size? Isn't Brunswick a tight fit due to street sizes to begin with?
4
Patently it's a green building and doesn't require car parks.
4
A win for developers that's for sure, let's wait and see all these "green" buildings start suddenly being pushed by developers.
4
What a joke.
1†
Main reason this development doesn't have parking - it cannot be realistically accommodated on-site.
Site has limited frontage to ROW at rear and vehicle access to Lygon Street would never be approved for new development (i.e. active frontage more important in commercial zone).
1
More profitable you mean. Why build a car park when you can fill that area with two or four more units - Moar $$$ for investors!
These places can always provide on-site parking, it's a financial decision not to, one that makes a lot of sense in the short-term, but hurts the area in the long-term.
10
you're not suggesting that property developers are acting in their investors best interests, and not the interests of the community, are you!?
2
what a dumb thing to be condescending about. of course he is. he is just it's shit and needs to stop.
1
No, I literally mean this development site could not feasibly accommodate basement car parking due to its dimensions. Source: I've seen the plans.
1
[deleted]
1
This site is 4.8m at the rear (less once you allow for structure) and only 9.2m at the front.
2
Then they never planned for parking.
Source: trained as a architect. The dimensions required to allow for parking are well understood.
1
maybe - maybe not.
but in any case it only further justifies the result under the Planning Scheme which includes "The practicality of providing car parking on the site, particularly for lots of less than 300 square metres" as a decision guideline for car parking (52.06).
1
I don't have a huge problem with this.
- Council should not issue any permits for street parking for any of the dwellings in this property. Not now and not in the future. This also needs to be a permanent fixture on the contract of sale of any dwelling within this property.
- Ideally there would be a parking bay internal to this property for 'services' which would be for body corporate organised trade services and deliveries.
This is an excellent location to be 'car free'.
The adequate daylight to my mind is a biggest concern.
1
Don't like it, then don't buy one. Problem fucking solved, except for the whingers.
1†
This is curious, I live round here, very close to this development. I have off street parking, and in fact all the buildings in this block do. Some have been built underground due to the size of the sites.
There is really not enough on street parking in the area. Also note the street is a clearway on either side at certain times of day, and then the nearest carparks are permit parking in a quiet side street nearby.
Hellenic Republic has a big impact on block as every night there are about 30+ cars on the road trying to get parking. There is another 3 apartment developments going on in this block too, and they all have off street parking for residents.
I have no issue with there being no parking, as long as these residents don't get cars, but who is to say they won't want one in the future? I never thought I'd own a car 5 years ago... and here I am today with a car, helping to congest Lygon St, which is a traffic clusterfuck at the best of times.
1
Simple. If they're renting, they'll move, if they've bought they'll rent it out and move somewhere else. I highly doubt the sort of people moving into this sort of place are too stupid to be aware that this is a potential issue.
1
I have been reading the VCAT report, since this site directly affects me. I do see they have provisioned:
"Behind this is an area proposed to accommodate seven motor scooter / motor cycle parking spaces and 14 bicycle parking spaces. These can be accessed from the rear laneway"
1
Also there will be at most 24 residents I guess? (assuming the max occupancy is 2 people in a one bed apartment)
Four levels above the ground floor. Each will include three, one bedroom dwellings, creating 12 dwellings in total across the five levels.
1
Built to a price. You get what you pay for.
0†
What do you even mean by this? Are you calling the building crappy?
The building was designed and funded by a group of architectural firms who always push for ESD buildings; this isn't some developers coming through and pushing a low price agenda. The carparks aren't missing due to corner cutting, it's because that's the ideology behind the building.
One of the main firms involved in this design is Breathe Architecture. They're a firm so heavily involved in sustainable design that they won't design a building for you if you plan to include air conditioning. And they practise what they preach in their own work environment.
This isn't a cost cutting exercise, if that's what you were implying.
-1†
Breathe is Nightingale (refused even though more sustainable design initiatives and better access to PT).
This approved design was by MOS Architects.
5
yes conveniently it also translates to greater profits for anyone who hires them - coincidence? no.
and no i'm not having a go at breathe, they're behaving as any reasonable private enterprise would - delivering profits to their shareholders.
pls don't pretend they're secretly the guardians of the galaxy or something - they're just very good at convincing people that sustainable is worth dropping coin on
4
They're a firm so heavily involved in sustainable design that they won't design a building for you if you plan to include air conditioning
How do they cool the building?
3
Good design can make a huge difference. Rather than cooling the building, they can design shading, thermal mass, airflow, etc so that it doesn't get hot in the first place.
3
I wonder how it'll cool down if a retarded flat mate decided to let some fresh air in on a 42 degree day...
Seriously though, please explain
2
I'm not sure how this building would do it, but Council House 2 has been doing it for over 10 years here in Melbourne. Here's how.
1
Oh dear oh dear. The price of the project is reflected in the building and it design is recognized. If I wanted to call it crappy I would but you see no evidence of that and you have written all those words for reasons I don't understand. ffs.
1
So wait, you were literally just pointing out a meaningless platitude? You just wanted people to know that the building was built for the amount that was spent on it and that its quality will reflect that? Uuh, thanks, I guess. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
0
u/otsegolectric is a well known troll. Don't feed the trolls mate. :)
0
and quite obviously an employee of breathe
1
[deleted]
1
Assholes with cars are going to move in and clog the street. I guarantee it.
Thats what parking restrictions are for (Permit Zone one side and 2P the other).
Why should there be permit zones catering to these people, unless they're paid permits? If they buy there it should happen with the knowledge you won't be getting a parking space unless it's paid for.
Chill. Council will not issue parking permits to residents of this building. Buyers will know this going in, but that's the point.
The point is that new developments such as this don't get access to permits for resident or visitor car parking. The purpose of permit zones is to protect existing residents not facilitate parking by the new apartments. The same principle applies in activity centers where there are high demands from commercial uses (i.e. Brunswick Street).
No council in Melbourne as far as I know provides permits to ANY new buildings.
But but but, green architecture! And the brochure had people riding bikes through parks on it.
I don't really know how they could. They won't be allowed permits for the parking in the area.
There's someone almost permanently parked in our street without a permit, and many, many others who regularly take their chances hours longer than the 2hr parking specified. The odd ticket doesn't seem to dissuade some people.
Call the council, I'm sure they love easy tickets
I've tried that but it's surprisingly difficult to get action.
I think the problem is there are much juicier areas to cover than residential streets. No doubt they love easy tickets, but I think they see the easy tickets as the parking metered retail strips where they can instantly book dozens of people without even requiring the attention span to chalk tires and come back 2 hours later.