The rule change that could shield suburbs from a sweep of boxy towers
'It would be remiss of the government not to rely on the great work that we've done,' she said. 'This is going to be there for generations to come, so let's get it right at the start.'
Urban Design Forum joint president Katherine Sundermann said floor area ratios brought many benefits and should be mandatory in every activity centre.
Sundermann warned against a long-standing perception in Victoria that floor area ratios depressed the values of development sites and that a building site's floor space should be used to the fullest extent. She said the certainty the ratios gave the sector was crucial for speeding up the delivery of housing.
Victoria's planning system favours 'deemed-to-comply' controls, under which a proposed building is green-lit if it meets certain height and setback rules. However, developers can apply to exceed these limits to increase the floor space across a project.
Sundermann said this approach inflated land values because the potential yield of a building site was seen to be far greater than may be desirable.
It also creates a 'jelly mould' approach to planning, whereby developers have an incentive to fill a site as much as possible to make a return.
A floor area ratio control sets the yield of any given site, so developers know exactly how much floor space they can build when they buy land. It's this certainty that helps speed up the delivery of housing. There may be instances where a developer can exceed a height limit, without increasing floor space, if the project involves a superior design.
'When yield is locked in, you're able to respond to the specifics of each site and get better design outcomes,' Sundermann said. 'You can actually have better separation between buildings so there's more light. You can have more space for planting trees … It's a no-brainer to implement.'
She said the current situation was just another example of Victoria lagging NSW, with apartment design standards also known to be stronger north of the border.
Pockets in Melbourne that have floor area ratio rules, overseen by councils, include South Melbourne, West Melbourne, the CBD and Moonee Ponds. Two of the state government's 10 pilot activity centres also have them – Preston and Epping – where councils are already considering their use.
Loading
Sundermann praised the mandatory controls in Preston but said Epping's were a waste of time because they were discretionary.
SGS Economics and Planning senior associate Andrew Spencer told a seminar in October that strict limits on density through floor area ratio controls instilled clarity.
'We're more likely to get more housing if we can agree to the price of land and the density [at the start].'
He noted that capping density 'seems to be very anathema to planning in Victoria'.
'[But] wherever you've got a set of controls that can be exceeded, that does undermine confidence in the planning system,' he said.
Kris Daff, managing director of property developer Assemble, spoke at the same event. Daff said his teams liked working in Sydney because they could take a more bespoke approach to layout and design, which was harder to do in Melbourne, where competitors were motivated to bulk out sites.
'Whereas, philosophically, we won't want to fill every corner, and hence won't be able to pay as much for the land.'
Daff said knowing exactly how much floor area could be built on from the beginning was critical.
'It'd be much better if it's just absolutely fixed and there's no ability to vary that.'
Cath Evans, the Property Council's Victorian executive director, warned that the viability of new housing projects was already extremely challenging, with a dwindling number of build-to-sell apartments in the pipeline.
Loading
'Imposing blunt and inflexible floor area ratios in the current market poses a potential additional risk to the feasibility of new projects,' Evans said.
'Quality design is clearly important to attract purchasers and renters and will always be part of a developer's consideration, but it's critical that policies don't push ... new projects further out of reach.'
Planning Institute of Australia Victorian president Patrick Fensham said he supported floor area ratios being a planning tool in activity centres, and they should work in harmony with other controls, such as heights and setbacks.
A spokeswoman for Planning Minister Sonya Kilkenny said that as well as being in two of 10 pilot activity centres, floor area ratios were in the draft structure plans for the Suburban Rail Loop's six development precincts. She said the proposed ratios could be exceeded only if a developer included public benefits like affordable housing.
Apartment design standards had been implemented under Labor, as well as a new fast-track approval pathway for developments demonstrating great design, she said.
'No government has done more for improving the standards of apartment designs. We're already looking at floor area ratios in our plan for more homes.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
AU Financial Review
26 minutes ago
- AU Financial Review
This inner-west Sydney home just fetched $1.25m. It won't happen again
We speak to the team behind the most intriguing recent property sale. The property: A two-bedroom house with a garage on 342 square metres at 10a Derbyshire Road, Leichhardt, NSW. Sold by private treaty for $1.25 million.
AU Financial Review
26 minutes ago
- AU Financial Review
Three reasons why you should ‘chill out' over Labor's super tax
At a recent Committee for Economic Development of Australia gathering to discuss the process for securing difficult economic and social reforms, I was reminded of the seminal process pursued by Rob Fitzgerald, then chairman of the Council of Social Services and myself, then president of the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, to secure the major tax reform of the introduction of the GST. The course of action we pursued was simple. We drew together 100 representatives from all sections of the community and, in a tax summit, reached agreement on this significant tax reform, which a small steering group pursued through to the next federal election.
Sydney Morning Herald
29 minutes ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Trump v Musk is the final battle before a catastrophe
In any case, against total federal spending last year of nearly $US7 trillion, it is but a drop in the ocean, and only goes to show how difficult it is to find serious savings in government administration, even when given a free hand with the headcount. The rampant corruption and incompetence that Musk's Department of Government Efficiency expected to find in the Washington and wider government machine has turned out to be largely an illusion, and many of the cuts he has managed to make seem to have done more harm than good. This is not to argue that it's not worth trying, or that you cannot make public services more efficient. But it takes time, substantial upfront investment, and the savings are generally not as big as anticipated. To nobody's great surprise, it transpires that the skills needed to run a successful business do not transfer easily to the public sector, where the disciplines of the bottom line, the profit motive and competitive markets don't exist. Loading The shame of it is that the Musk who built Tesla and SpaceX into two of the world's most successful companies over a period of nearly two decades has been almost entirely absent while at DOGE these past four or five months. Instead, we have seen a reckless, chainsaw-wielding – and if the American press is to be believed, drug-fuelled – Musk who, like his one-time boss Donald Trump, seems to regard government more as performative art than public service. We can all point to myriad examples of public sector waste, of unfathomable spending decisions and stultifying, jobsworth bureaucracy, but the imagined savings from addressing these things nearly always turn out to be a mirage. In Britain, Nigel Farage's Reform UK claims there is £7 billion to be saved by scrapping public sector spending on diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs. Sadly, no such saving exists. Recent government figures showed just £27 million ($56 million) was spent by the civil service on DEI measures during 2022-23. This might well be £27m too much, but it is not going to solve Britain's debt crisis. The two big cash-burners in advanced economies' state spending are public sector salaries and welfare, and both desperately need to be addressed if Western democracies are ever to extract themselves from now mountainous debt. Musk has comprehensively failed on the first of these missions, and not surprisingly so. The sort of productivity-improving automation and digitalisation we see widely applied in the private sector to stay competitive is a marathon, not a sprint, and it requires precision in planning and execution. None of these characteristics was on display from the tech bros sent in to tackle the bloated size of the American state. Their approach was one of slash and burn rather than the slow, methodical re-engineering of government needed to achieve sustainable savings and productivity improvement. What's more, Trump shows little or no appetite for meaningful entitlement reform. OK, some attempt is being made to trim spiralling Medicaid spending, but it's half-hearted and is really only there as a gesture to appease fiscal hawks among House Republicans. Nobody can tell you exactly when the storm will break, but Musk's failure brings the final reckoning that much closer. The bottom line is that Trump is as much a creature of fantasy economics as any. He wants both low taxes and high spending, and expects economic growth to make up the difference. It's the same delusion as Liz Truss, only very much more dangerous in its seeming rejection of fiscal orthodoxies. Unlike Britain, America is the beating heart of the global financial system, and if US debt markets go belly-up they'll take everyone else down with them. Back here in Britain, Rachel Reeves, the Chancellor, shows similarly little sign of getting to grips with the leviathan of public spending as she puts the finishing touches to next Wednesday's spending review. Public sector salary costs are rising, not falling, and while ministers talk the talk on welfare reform, their approach to the issue is no more convincing than that of Trump. It's just a little tinkering around the edges. Simply getting working-age benefits back to their pre-pandemic level would save £49 billion a year – more than enough to avoid tax rises and fund the desired increase in defence spending to 3 per cent of GDP, Jeremy Hunt, Reeves' Conservative predecessor as chancellor, points out. Spending on disability benefits alone has surged from £37 billion just before the pandemic to £56 billion now, much more than in any comparable economy, with the bulk of the growth coming from mental health conditions. Loading Yet Reeves used up almost all her political capital axing the winter fuel allowance to all but the poorest pensioners, a course of action that saves only £1.5 billion a year. This has left her with virtually no space for more serious entitlement reform. In both the US and Britain, cutting state spending back to size is simply not happening on the scale needed to stem the rising tide of debt. Attempts by Musk to draw a line in the sand have ended in acrimony and recrimination. Nobody can tell you exactly when the storm will break, but Musk's failure brings the final reckoning that much closer.
