APPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMIT : TP ... - City of Melbourne

FUTURE MELBOURNE (PLANNING) 

COMMITTEE REPORT 

APPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMIT : TP-2012-225 

315-321 LA TROBE STREET, MELBOURNE 

Presenter: Angela Meinke, Manager Planning and Building 

Purpose and background 

1. This application is presented to the Future Melbourne Committee at the request of the Lord Mayor. 

Agenda Item 5.1 

3 July 2012 

2. The purpose of this report is to advise the Committee of an application for demolition of an existing 

building and construction of a multi-level building (30 levels with roof) at 315-321 La Trobe Street, 

Melbourne (refer Attachment 2 – Locality Plan and Attachment 3 – Proposed Plans). No set-back is 

proposed from La Trobe Street or from either side boundary. A set-back of one metre from Flanigan Lane 

to the rear is proposed. 

3. The subject site is located within Capital City Zone, Schedule 1 (Outside the Retail Core) and is affected 

by Schedule 1 to the Design and Development Overlay (Active Street Frontages). There is no applicable 

height control, however Clause 22.01 Urban Design within the Capital City Zone sets out relevant policy 

relating to building design and tower setbacks. 

4. The subject site is located on the south side of La Trobe Street, between Elizabeth and Queen Streets. It is 

rectangular with a 14m frontage to La Trobe Street and a depth of 21.5m, resulting in a total area of 

301sqm. The southern boundary of the site abuts Flanigan Lane which runs parallel with La Trobe 

Street. 

5. A previous planning permit (TP-2010-995) was issued on 5 April 2011 for the demolition of the existing 

building and construction of a residential building having an overall height of approximately 65 metres 

(22 storeys) with 124 apartments. The building has no setback from La Trobe Street and a 1m setback 

from Flanigan Lane at the upper levels. 

6. The application is exempt from notice requirements, therefore the application was not advertised. 

Key issues 

Page 3 of 71 

7. The key issues for consideration in the assessment of this application are building height and street 

setback, side setbacks, and internal amenity. 

8. At 91 metres, the height of the street wall is 127.5% higher than that contemplated by the Melbourne 

Planning Scheme, which encourages podiums of a height of approximately 40 metres; and would not 

comply with the proposed Planning Scheme Amendment C188 (Capital City Built Form). It is also 

contrary to the mediated position arrived at before VCAT which determined TP-2010-995. 

9. The proposal also fails to provide setbacks from the side boundaries. If the proposed built form were 

repeated on the adjoining sites to the west, it would result in a continuous wall of towers to Queen Street, 

which is not an acceptable built form outcome. Amendment C188 recognises that gaps between taller 

buildings help to spread wind load and maintain access to daylight and sunlight, including at street levels. 

The amount of sky that is visible between buildings results in a spacious open feel that has a strong 

influence on perceptions of public domain amenity; sky outlook and daylight penetration versus sense of 

enclosure. 

10. The Municipal Strategic Statement encourages new residential developments within the Central City to 

be designed to ensure that they provide occupants with a reasonable level of amenity. Direct natural light 

and ventilation to all habitable rooms is desirable and the ‘borrowing’ of light and air should be avoided. 

In those apartments

that are two-bedroom, the second bedroom is wholly reliant on its light and ventilation from either the 

main living area, or in some instances, the corridor associated with the apartment. While this situation 

was approved in Permit No. TP-2010-995 it is noted that the layout of the apartments have altered, 

making the source of light more indirect and the number of apartments relying on borrowed light 

significantly greater. The resultant internal amenity is therefore considered unreasonable. 

Recommendation from management 

11. That the Future Melbourne Committee issue a Refusal to Grant a Permit, subject to the grounds included 

on the delegate’s report (refer Attachment 4, Delegate’s Report). 

Attachments: 

1. Supporting Attachment 

2. Locality Plan 

3. Proposed Plans 

4. Delegate Report 

Page 4 of 71

SUPPORTING ATTACHMENT 

Legal 

1. Division 1 of Part 4 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (the Act) sets out the requirements in 

relation to applications for permits pursuant to the relevant planning scheme. 

2. Sections 64 and 65 of the Act provides that the Responsible Authority must give the applicant and each 

objector a notice in the prescribed form of its decision to either grant a permit or refuse to grant a permit. 

The Responsible Authority must not issue a permit to the applicant until the end of the period in which an 

objector may apply to the Tribunal for a review of the decision or, if an application for review is made, 

until the application is determined by the Tribunal or withdrawn. 

3. In making its decision, section 60(1)(c) of the Act requires the Responsible Authority to consider, 

amongst other things, all objections and other submissions which it has received. 

Finance 

4. There are no direct financial issues arising from the recommendations contained in this report. 

Conflict of interest 

5. No member of Council staff, or other person engaged under a contract, involved in advising on or 

preparing this report has declared a direct or indirect interest in relation to the matter of the report. 

Stakeholder consultation 

6. No advertising was carried out as the application is exempt from giving of notice. No further 

consultation was arranged as there were no objections to the application. 

Relation to Council policy 

7. Relevant Council policies are discussed in the attached officer report (refer Attachment 4). 

Environmental sustainability 


Attachment 1 

Agenda Item 5.1 

Future Melbourne Committee 

3 July 2012 

8. Environmental sustainability is discussed in the attached officer report (refer Attachment 4). 

1


07/06/2012 12:49 PM 

Locality Plan : 315-321 Page 7 of La 71 

Trobe Street, Melbourne 

The City of Melbourne does not warrant the accuracy, currency or completeness of information in this product. Any person using or relying upon such information does 

so on the basis that the City of Melbourne shall bear no responsibility or liability whatsoever for any errors, faults, defects or omissions in the information. 

Approx. Scale 1:1000


1173 

Li 

1:1 

El 0 

C3 

El 

ILJ 

1:1 

Mixed Use Development / 315-321 La Trobe Street, Melbourne 

4.0 Design Response 

4.5 3D View - La Trobe Street 

Photomontage View of Subject Sfte Entry 


II 

8.1111 fin MN 

'ILI till Mb 

t- 

0— 

— DEVELOPMENT 

Rothe Lowman Pty Ltd ACN 005 783 997 F VJO55121000G5210201. 315-321 Lame, oh Mooaseensnnd2 - 5cesicF121312- 04- 03 .03.04.12 A3 L, There SNEELTOWIS PLum.AMICK11011 20 

012 

ROMER l ii'l I'l lil

CP 

CP 

CP 

DISCLAMER 

ROTHELOWMAN Property Ply. Ltd. retain all common law, statutory law and other 

rights ind Ld rig copynght and intelleutual properly rights In respect ol 

document. 

The recipient indernifies RDTHELOWMAN Fly Ltd against all daims 

resulting from use of Its dacurnent for any purpose other Ms its infended use. 

mautwrized changes or reused the document co ahm prcieols without the 

omission of ROTHELOWWVN Properly Pty. Ltd 

Under no circumstance shall transfer ol Ihis document be deemed a sale or 

crust tuta a transfer of the license louse this document. 

190412012 914 29 AM 

Rothe Lowman Pty Ltd ACN 005 783 997 

BICYCLE LANE 

CP /7 

1E1 

1945 U1500 , 

MIN 

MINERI 

L. 

0 

u_ 

0 lm 

Scale 1:100 

FIRE CONTROL 

11.4 rn° 

I 

Afr I ACIAllt AS Leis I 

witlimmumlim=========t 

RETAIL 

110.0 mz 

REVISIONS 

No Dare 

F 30.01.2012 

G 31.01.2012 

H 137.02.12 

J 17.02.12 

K 21.02.12 

L 07.03.12 

M 04.04.12 


T - • Nr: , - :Y 

I I 

I 1 I I , 1 04. r HF,L,163!„1 

1111,1111111111 

Description 

ISSUED FOR INFORMATION 

MEETING PRESENTATION 

FOR INFORMATION 


PLIMINARY TOM PLANNING ISSUE 

ISSUED FOR ENDORSEMENT 

PLANNING APPLICATION 

NMI 

F1108512100004210201- 315-321 LATKee Sr 1.1a...ESDA0ARGA2 TP11wAs.3/.12012- 04035304 1203 LA Twee SmErr To PLeox Anntossen 

• 

5. 

/ 

/ 

/ 

'5. 

N 

N N / 

'N 

/ 

N / 

/ 

'N 

/ \ 

SUBSTATION 

44.8 rn 2 

PROJECT TITLE 

MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT 

315-321 LA TROEE STREET, 

MELBOURNE, SIC 3000 

DR/SHOD TITLE 

/ 

\ 

iN 

N 

N / 

/ 

/ 

GROUND LEVEL 

/ 

\ 

• 

RtJBBtS N. 

N / 

'N 

/ N 

• 

S. / S. / 

X 

/ N / N 

h r h 

N 

/ 

/ 

N 

SCALE A3 

1 100 

DATE: 

DEC 2010 

DWG No 

/ N 

h 

N x / 

E 

PROJECT No: 

210201 

DRAWN BY: 

SC/DT 

PEV 

TP1.01 I M 

>- 

‹ 

0 

153 STURT STREET SOUTH BANK 

VIC 31106 AUSTRALIA 

T 61 3 9268 6800 

61 3 9268 5888 

info@rothelomancom.au 

symynothalomantom.au 

ACN 005 783 997 ©copyright 

29

DISCLAMER: 

ROTHELOVvMAN FOopsfly Pty. Ltd. retain at common law, statutory law aid other 

rights inducing copyright and irtiellechal property rights in respect of this 

document. 

The recipient ii.etes ROTMELOWMAN Property Pty. Ltii against at claims 

resulting from use of thls oloopment far any outpost. other than its intended use, 

unauthorized changes an reuse of the document as other projects Mthoot the 

permission of POTHELOWMAN Properly Ply. Ltd 

Under no creumstance shall transfer at this obcument te deemed a sale or 

constitute a transfer of he !Cense lo use this document. 

11/0472012 91433 Am 

0 

11=111111110121111:1111 

APARTMENT 1.04 

(02B) 

33 1 m 2 


MA) 

25.5 m 

IOWA 


(02A) 2 

APARTMENT 1.0 

(01) 

‘L' 44.4m° 

For,f17/"" 

0 lm 

1.1.1 

Scale 1:100 

/ 

• 

• Alr 

5m 

I I 

m mom% 

iamunio 

• Vaal Immomen 

RESIsIoNs 

No Dale 

E 20.01.2912 

F 31.01.2912 

G 07.02.12 

H 17.02.12 

.1 21.02.12 

07.03.12 

L 0404,12 


ii 0-=-■ 

•agAmturi 

IP e., 4146111R ! ay, . 

0717 

Descradion 

ISSUED FOR INFORMAION 

MEETING PRESENT/WON 

FOR INFORMKPON 

I010200 F012 INFORMATION 

PRELIMINARY TOM PLANNING ISSUE 



" 144 

4 

r I I , J'arfr 

Rothe Lowman Pty Ltd AGN 905 783 997 FM0902100001210201. 316421 1/Taioac Sr MhenandiDsArwasl2 - 7Piaccocm2012-04-00030412A3 LA Mow Sarr_Towx Puuar.s laeorres 

30 

LIFT LOBBY 

13.7m° 

vim 

iy. 

alas 

PI A 

8 '-'6 t 1..5' 

NIL 

FIRE PUMP ROOM 

17.3m° 

..11,.■■•■• 

SWITCH ROOM 

7.9 m° 

FIRE WATER 

STORAGE TANK 

40KL 

15 2 rn 2 

BIKES x 44 

41.0 m2 

.1111•1,1111••■=1,Mr 

PROJECT TITLE 


315-M1 LA TROOP STREET, 

MELBOURNE VIC 3000 

DRAWING TITLE 

LEVEL 1 

0 

— —1 

11- 

L 

GENERATOR ROOM 

13.3 m 2 

SCALE: fl A3 

1: 100 

DATE, 

DEC 2010 

LWOW: 

1 

PROJECT No: 

210201 

DRAWN BY: 

SC1 DT 

REV 

153 STURT STREET SORTHBAN 


T 61 3 9259 6800 

F 61 3 9269 6888 

inteathelowrescanau 

vAnw.raltm1oveman.conau 

ACN 005 783 997 Cocpyright 

TP1.02 I L RITHEI 1 I iYI

DISCLANIER 

ROTHELOWMAN Property Pty. Ltd retain all common law, statutory law and other 

rights inducting copyrrght and intellectual properly rights in respect of this 

rixurreet 

The recipiwn infirenrefiee R0THELOMAN Property Pty. Lid. against all crams 

resulting Nun use of this document Ice any purpose other than its intecided use. 

unauthorized changes of reuse of Ihe document on other projects without the 

parrnission ciROTHELOWMAN Properly FIN. Ltd 

Lender no circurnstarce shall transfer of Ihis document 4a Oil:erred a sale or 

constitute a hangar 013w license to we this *ferment. 

1504120120:14:31 AM 

[NI 

LE BOUNDARY 6200 

A gla..10 A Aic2 

- - - - - - - - - - - 

l'APARTMENT 2.04 

(02B) 

33.1 rn, 

A'APARTMENT 2.03 

(02A) 

25.5 m2 

ARTMENT 2.02 

(02A) 

11 APARTMENT 2.01 

(01) 

44.3 mz 

I MI 


1 m 5r1 REVISIONS 

'mount 

Scale 1,100 

I I I 

No 

E 

F 

Date 

20.91.2012 

31,01,2012 

Description 



G 07.02.12 FOR INFORMATION 

H 17.02.12 ISSUED FOR INFORMATION 

J 21.02.12 PRELIMINARY TOWN PANNING ISSUE 

K 07.03.12 ISSUED FOR ENDORSEMENT 

L 04.04.12 PLANNING APPLICATION 

/ 

A_ ; s a sla 4 ■400, . 1 ; Al AI0,1 4 

1;.1 1;1 ST-01 1ST-02 1ST-031ST-04 1 ST-05 ST-06 

_I _I 

vi 

Rothe Lowman Ply Ltd ACN 005 783 997 FMCBS12100001210291- 315-321 Lame Sr Mraoccag12nwed.12 • TRkces0r17012- 04- 01101041 2 A3 LA Tacee three Tee Penore Preuooror. 31 

LIFT LOBBY 

18.2 rn 2 

III LE I3UUNI.JAHY .1.1201 00 (21.b(2 rr) 

8 Pr; 2614 

COMMUNAL 

LAUNDRY 

11.1 ni2 

\ STORAGE! 1,8 m2 PLANT 

—I 7 7 

I I I I I 

ST-12 ST-11 1ST-101 51-091 ST-08 ST-071 

r1=1=11 

121•1•0= lig lir 

,w 1•I . Tril riti 

PROJECT TITLE 


315-321 LA TROBE STREET. 

MELBOURNE, VIC 3030 

DRAWING TITLE 

LEVEL 2 

PARTMENT 2.05 

40.2 m 2 

APARTMENT 2,06 

36.6 m 2 

SCALE: tg 43 

1: 100 

DATE: 

DEC 2010 

DWG No: 

PROJECT No 

210201 

DRAWN BY: 

SC / DT 

REV 

153 STURT STREET SOLITHBANK 

TIC 3006 AUSTRALIA 

T fil 3 9266 6BDO 

F 61 392586058 

infolitrottelownenconau 

yew. rotheloreown.coroau 

ACM 005 753 997 &copyright 

TP1.03 IL BOTHER !I I,

DISCLAMER: 

ROTHELOWMAN Properly Pty. Ltd retain all common law, statutory law aid other 

rights instil:Mg copyright and Intellectual properly rights in respect of ha 

olccument. 

The recipient indemnifies ROTHELOWMAN Property Pty. Ltd against ali daims 

result ng from use of this document for any purpose other than Its intended use. 

unauthorized changes Cf rime of Vie doarnent on other prinects without the 

omission ot ROTH ELCIWWW Property Ply Ltd. 

Under do ducurnstance shati transfer of this document be deemed a age or 

constitute a transfer of the license to use this document 

1110412012 3.1431 Ala 

.0404. 14 A . 42 

_ 


(02B) 

33.1 m 

..■■=10=111•081111MI 

lm 

Scale 1:100 

E. 

APARTMENT 3.0 

(01) 

F 44.4 e 

M=M 1511111111111 

0 

1•11= 

-.1■11 

[ftmii 0 

Elm 

I 

I I 

5m 

&Min 

• mi=E410■1 

learfil limmemem 

REVISIONS 

No Data 

E 29.01.2012 

F 31.012012 

G 07.02.12 

H 1202.12 

.1 21.02.12 

I( 0203.12 

L 04.04.12 


MOM 

LIFT LOBBY 

L01 

17 6m ° 

HILL bilk/NU/WY 332- 01 01) (21 5/2 tn) 

Description 

LSSUED FOR INFORMATION 




PRELIMINARY TOWN PLANNING ISSUE 

ISSUED FOR ENCORSEM ENT 


By 

AP 

AP 

MY 

NW 

FIN 

MY 

GO 

111M 

PROJECT TITLE 


315-321 LA "RAE STREET. 


DRAW NG TITLE 

-9ummu 

ilmr=m1 

%EMMEN 

11=1■1Y1 

IIF 


(03A) 

35.0m2 

• M1= 

APARTMENT 3.06 1 

(04) 

WWII* mimi___AT)_a-ir 

=INEM 0 •IL 

TYPICAL LEVEL 3- 10 

APARTMENT 3.07 I 

(03B) 

IIIIIIMIN11111111111111111 

I _ 

Ilt■—■111 

2 

SCALE A3 

1 100 

DATE. 

DEC 2010 

■.7.■ 

_ 

TITLE BOU NDAR 

PROJECT No: 

210201 

DRAWN BY 

SC1131- 

REV 

0 

153 STURT STREET SOLITHBANIC 

010 5206 AUSTRALIA 

T61 3 CM 6890 

F 61 3 C2613811311 

infotWathelowmananntau 

wow rolholowmenannau 

AGN 005 783 997 6:copyright 

TP1.04 IL BOTHER NJ f 

Rothe Lowman Pty Ltd ACN 805 783 997 FAJORM213000k210201. 315-321 LeTRom Sr Ma......tewmiceS2 -TPIIT.Es.42012. 55 13V:2.04,12 A3 Lo. TFICOE SIKET _Ton Pumws ARMIGVION 32

DiSCLAMER: 

ROTHELOWMAN Property Pty. Ltd retain all common law, stalutory law and other 

righls incluring copyright end intellectual property fights in respect of this 

document. 

The recipient indemnifies ROTHELOWMAN Property Pty. Ltd against all claims 

resulling horn use ol this document Ix any purpose other than its intended use, 

unauthorized chasges or reuse at the document on other pro:facts without the 

permission of ROTH:LOWMAN Prtperly Pty. Ltd 

Under no circumsMnce shall hornier of the document he deemed a sale or 

oonstitula a trassfer of the kerne to use this doom :rent 

1110412012 9:1432 AM 

Ald 21i...0 • 7 

APARTMENT 11 03 

(02B) 

\I" 31m2 

\I" 


(6) 

6 


(5) 

42.3 m2 

0 1m 

I now!! I 

Scale 1:100 

5m REVISIONS 

Na Date 

LIFT LOBBY 

18.2m2 

1111± HOUNDARY 332 Ul U (21.5(2 m) 

B 20.01.2012 

C 31.912012 

C 07.02.12 

E 17.02.12 

F 21.0212 

G 07.93.12 

11 04.04.12 


Descriplion 


MEETING PRESENTAllON 






LO2 

8 

D 

PROJECT TITLE 


45.4 m2 

RTM ENT 11. 

42.1 m2 


315-321 LATROBE STREET, 

MELBOURNE, TIC 3100 

DRAWING TITLE 

TYPICAL LEVEL 11, 15& 19 

PLANT 

12.4 m2 

L J 

SCALE: @ A3 

1: 100 

DATE: 

94/05111 

DWG No: 

TP1.05 IH 

PROJECT Nor 

210201 

DRAWN BY: 

SC) DT 

REV 

Pi 

....OPMENT 

APR 2012 

ANN1NG 

153 STURT STREET SOUTHBAN 

1AO WOG AUSTRALIA 

T 61 3 9268 6200 

F 61 3 9258 6898 

into@rothelowmanocritau 

weer. rothelowrturummou 

ACN 005 783 997 citcpyrighl 

Rothe Lowman Pty Ltd AGNS 005 783 937 F M1.1088S21 MO0210201- 310-321 L,Toaw 8, NEACUP ME01.11.12 liNsoss.120 I 2. 04- 03V13.04.12 A.3 Loleoto STSEET _ Tann P... APPLICATION 33

DISCLAMER 

ROTHELOMM El otierty Ply. Ltd, retain all common law, statutory law and cirer 

Oghts incluzing ow/right ard intellectual property rights in respect of dis 

document 

The recipient indemnifies ROTHELOVIAIAN Properly Ply. Ltd againsl ell claims 

resulting front LISe Of this document for any currnee oder then its rnlended use, 

unauthorized changes or reuse of Ihe cidc.ranent olher projects Y4thout the 

permission of ROTHELOWMAN Property Ply, Ltd 

Under no circumstance shel transfer of thk document Le deemed a sale or 

conslitute a 00000400 04 tine 400000 04 use this doccrient 

11/04/2012 9:14:33 AM 


(02B) 

33.1m2 


APARTMENT 1 

(05) 

42 2 m 2 


LIFT LOBBY 

17.6m 2 

111±BUUNUAKY J.311.11 00 (21.512 m) 

0 lm 5m REvIsioNs 

1.1.1 

Scale 1:100 

I I No 

E 

F 

Dale 

20.01.2012 

31.01.2012 

Description 

ISS4JED FOR INFORMATION 


G 07.02.12 FOR INFORMATION 

H 17.02.12 ISSUED FCR tNIFORMATION 

J 210212 PRELIMINARY TOWN PLANNING ISSUE 

I< 0703.12 ISSUED FOR ENDORSEMENT 

L 04.04.12 PLANNING APPLICATION 

Rothe Lowman Pty Ltd ACN 005 783 997 F0406512100000210201- 3 5-321 LaTaaanSa MELBOUREIDFRem.12 - TMIKescAl2012. 04- 1303.04.12 A3 La Twon0awwlorw Parwkonoenoa 

PROJECT TITLE 


31E-321 LATROBE STREET 


ORIVAING TITI_E 

TYPICAL LEVEL 12 - 22 


AP NT 

(0813) 

51.0 

SCALE: f% A3 

1 : 100 

DATE: 

DEC 2010 

DWG No: 

PROJECT No 

210201 

DRAWN BY: 

SC/CT 

REV 

DI_ :LOP6AENT 

153 STURT STREET SOUTH BANK 


1013 926136920 

F01 3 9268 6988 

klodatithelcorrnan.com.au 

eyntrothelowrnar.comuu 

AON 005 783 997 thcoptrtight 

TP1.06 IL ROTHE! I I 

1 APR 2012 

P ANN1NG 

34

DIFOLANER 

ROTHELOWMAN Prude* Pty. Ltd, retain Al ammo law, statutory law and other 

Ors inducing copyright and intellectual properly ries in respect of this 

document. 

The recipient indemnifies ROTHELOMAN Property Pty. Ltd. viral of claims 

resulting from use of tNs documerd for any purpose other than its intended use, 

unauthorized 01-ranges or reuse of the document on ether prefects yothaut the 

permission of ROTNELOWMAN Property Ply. Ltd. 

Under no circumstance shall translw of this dxument Pe deemed a sale or 

constitute a transfer al the license to soothe document. 

11/0472012 g 14 33 AM 

7 

TITLE BOUNDARY 62.00 00" ( 1 4. 021 m) 

.3 m 

3m 

TITLE BOUNDARY 15149 00" (11.392 m) TITLE BOUNDARY 15f Og 00' (10.158 m1 

0 lm 

Lwow,' I 

Scale 1:100 

11=1 


52.8 m 0 

AFL)VIENT 23.0 

61.9 mz 

CAME 

5m 

RELISIONS 

No Date 

F 3141.2012 

02.42 2012 

EC 07.42.12 

J 17.02.12 

K 21.02.12 

L 07.03.12 

M 04.04.12 


XIIII=11111 

TITLE BOUNDARY 33701 00 (21.572 m) 

Description 






ISSUES FOR ENDORSEMENT 


NINUI mmi 

mom m 

■■ 

Immo 

maw 

m■ 

-- 

LIFT LOBBY 

16,5 m° 

1 11111 111 

L02 

\11\0111111111 

4 

• 

PPPP-- 

PROJECT TITLE 


315-321 LA TROEE STREET, 

MELBOURNE, VIC MOO 

DRAWING TITLE 

LEVEL 23 

• 

Emimi 

111111INEERMII=Mi 

• 


6.4 m 2 

EMI 

111111111111111111 

=TM, 

M111M, 

,41.14 

— — 

11111111‘11111A1 

APARTMENT 23.D 

n 2 

SCALE ft 63 

1 100 

DATE: 

DEC2010 

DWG Ncr 

PROJECT Nu 

210201 

DRAWN SY: 

Sot D7 

TP1.07 IK; R 

-J 

U- 

153 STURT STREET SOUTHBANK 

ABC 3006 AUSTRAIJA 

01 3 9248 6000 

F01 3 9200 

irto@rothelconnan.com.ar 

minyinothelowman.comau 

ACN 005 783 997 elkopyright 

Rothe Lowman Ply Ltd /ION 025 783 597 EIJ06S12100001210201- 310321 Lamm St PARracumalatalnaa • TiAlroEsm12012- 01- 03'0344.12 A3 LA TRIVE STRferjun Prewwc Areccircs 35

El 

El 

0 

ci 

El 

ci 

El 

Li 

DISCLAMER: 

ROTHELOWHAN Property Ply. Ltd, retain al commcn law. statutory law and oiher 

rights inducing copyright and Intel1sctual prcperly rights in respect of this 

document. 

The recipMnt inctemnites ROTTIELOWMAN Property Pty. Ltd against all claims 

resoling from use of his dccurnent tor any purpose ether than its intended use, 

unateodzscr changes or reuse 01 1110 document cn other poUocts withcut the 

pecnission at ROTHELOWMAN Pneporty Ply. Ltd 

Under roc circumstance shall transfer at this document Ps deemed a ssle 

cuistilule a transfer at the license to use this clocurreaL 

111042012 9:1434 AM 

Rothe Lowman Ply Ltd ACN 0 05 78 3 907 

1 

c7, 

TITLE BOUNDARY 1514 00" (11.392 m) TITLE BOUNDARY 151 09 00 (10.158 m) 

HENN 


33.6m 


50.8m2 

IL ___,. ..,.....21 

'AR .11It 


42.9n° 

IN=M11 

91 ,EAM 

o 0 =1= 

• PP" 

REVISIONS 

Ito Dale 

29.03.12 

A 04 04 12 


I ME1=1 

lira 

1•11111111M6 

Amami 

4Milhzimm. IMILM 

I wpm MM. 

I I I LE JUUNIDARY 63101 00 (21.572 m) 

Description 

LEVEL 27-28 REVISED 

PLANNING APPUCATION 

LO1 LO2 

AMIN 

• • IP' • Ni I • 

Ill/11 111AI 

FIJOBS12103011S210201- 310321 LOA. S Siusousicoweveicso - TPIlecrescauo12. 124.0311304.12 Y1/43 Le Team SIFTS_ Tam Rem mc Ara r..enzx 

• IAMV1i 

11111MS==MI 

PROJECT TITLE 


315321 LA TROBE STREET 

MELBOURNE. VIA 3000 

DRAWING TITLE 

LEVEL 24-26 

IMISMO■■IMINNI 

n 

APARTMENT 

3 m2 

ca- 

0 0 

ii 

ti./4011 111 

SCALE i@ A3 

1 100 

DATE: 

28103112 

MGR@ 

PROJECT Na: 

210201 

DRAWN B5': 

SC) DT 

REV 

3 it 

1 2012 

153 STURT STREET SOLI -THANK 

VIA 3206 AUSTRAUA 

161 3 926E16800 

F 61 3 926E1 FAMB 

inhogrotheLowman.ccm.au 

www.rolhelowmerscom.au 

ACM 005 753 997 @copyright 

--7.17NT-1 'A- 

TP1.08 IA ROTHE! I I 11.1 

36

DISCLAIMER 

ROTHE LOWMAN Properly Ply. Ltd. retain all common law, statutory raw and other 

rights Inducing anstyright and intellectual property rights in respestol this 

document. 

The recipient indemnifies ROTHELOWMAN Property Pty. Ltd against 61 claims 

resulting from U. of this docrsnent -tor any purpose ether than its intended use, 

unauthorized charges cr resound the duo:marl on other projects tailhout the 

pent-Ulan of ROTH E_OWNIAN Property Pty Ltd 

Under no crournstaree shall nosier of the &anent be dawned a salsa 

constitute a transfer of lha Lunge to use Ads document. 

1154/2012 9:14 -35 AM 

0 

TLTLE BOUNDARY 151 - 49' 00" 11.392 m TILE BOUNDARY 151 09 00" 10.158 m 


eaa ma 

_ 

411111. 3.11 

410 NEM • • LIFT LOBBY 

APARTMENT 27. 

68.7m° 

00 .N. p.m. 

-0 

_...mmem. itet.em =MEM! 

---.. I 

REVISIONS 

143 Date 

17.02.12 

A 2102_12 

07.03.12 

C 04.04.12 


r 

1 •IA 

3mmild mom 

=MMEI .11 

idman Em■ 

-- 

-- 

LO1 

16 5 m° 

TITLE BOUNDARY 332 01 OD (21 5/2 m) 

Description 




PLANNING APF11DATION 

By 

Mv 

GO 

PROJ 50111 TLE 


31E-321 LA TROBE STREET, 


DRAWING TITLE 

LEVEL 27 - 28 

N 

ENT 

52.5 m 2 

SCALE: it A3 

1: 100 

DATE: 

15/0202 

DtAn No: 

LLJ 

PROJECT Na 

210201 

DRAWN BY: 

SC/OT 

REV 

DD./ 

153 SEAT STREET 000THBAN8 

410 3500 AUSTRALIA 

T61 392686300 

F81 392686880 

info@robelowrnancornau 

yeawsonetownan.cadtau 

AC14005783 997 if:copyright 

1 3 APR 2012 

PLANNING 

TP1.09 I C RIME' I IlYilT1f 1.1 'k 

Rothe Lowman Pty Ltd ACN 005 783 997 EL09612100049210201- 315-321 LYTapeE Sn MELICCIIMORNIOGSV T Pt 110.11,4i20 12- 04- 5310104 12 A3 In TRoef StRFAI_Toanr PunconApvcprol 37

171 

Ii 

E 

El 

El 

C 

El 

El 

DISCLAMER 

ROTHELOWWW Property Pty LOU retain gl common law. statutory law and other 

rights inducing copyrigM and intellectual properly nights in respect of this 

document 

The recipient indertintrws ROTHELOWMAN FroperN Pty. ild. against I claims 

nssulIng from use of this document:Mr spy purpose other than its Intended use. 

unaulhedod changes or reuse of the document on other prcliects withont the 

pamisgon 01ROTHELOVMAAN Properly Pty. Ltd. 

Under no circumstance shot' transfer of thiLs doeurnont be doomed a sale or 

constitute a transfer of the license to use this document. 

1170412012 9:14:35 AM 

Rothe Lowman Ply Ltd ACN 025 783 997 

ROOF TERRACE 

44.0 m 2 

BBQ 

FIRE PLACE 

EVENTS AREA 

889 m 2 

ICIEDICKICE) Ail■■■ ANL_ 

REVISIONS 

No Dale 

17.02.12 

A 21.02.12 

B 07.03.12 

C 04.34.12 


CescrOtion 

LO1 

% WC 

STORE 

ISSUED FOR INFORMATEN 

PRELIM NARY TOWN PLANNING ISSUE 



LIFT LOBBY 

11 7 m° 

Al /1111111 

LO2 

11 \II \ ll l \II 

— 

BIN 

F:t108-3121000012102el• 315-321 LATROBE 51 Me.1101.1.10).1•03512 • LIPUtecoost2012-04 0202,54.0552 L.. Max S'NEr_TOW1.1 PorsoeoMgstort 

By 

MY 

MY 

MY 

GC 

• 

slop 

PROJECT TITLE 

ORAW NG TITLE 

Mull ,AMM 

11111MIEM=M11 

MC Alt 

.11r, 4111 

N 


Q50.8 m2 0 

APACI1ENT 2 

52.5 m° 

=IMMEM■MIIIMIN 

0-e- 

is 

ii 


315-321 LA TROEIF STREET. 

MELBOURNE. VIC MOO 

LEVEL 29 

SCALE @ A3 

1: 100 

DATE: 

15/02/12 

0553 05-: 

PROJECT No 

210201 

DRAWN BY: 

SCOOT 

REV 

153 STURT STREET SOLED-BANK 

VC 3006 AUSTRALIA 

T El 39268 6800 

F El 39268 6888 

Info@rotheloyeman.ocntau 

vewmotheloyemartcontau 

VON 005 783 997 Illoopyright 

TP1.10 C ROMER 1'1111 IL 

38

DISCLAMER. 

ROTHELOW14061 Property Pty. Ltd retain dl carmen law, stalutery tem and other 

rights inducing oopynght and intellectual prcpsrly fights n respect ot this 

document 

The recipient indemnifies ROTHELONAMAN Report,/ Ply. Ltd, agent ell clams 

resulting Imo use of this document for any purpose attar tan its intended use, 

unauthorized changes or reuse of the document on dher projects Mihail the 

permission or ROTHELOWWiN Property Ply. Ltd. 

Under no arcumstarce shall transfer or this eocurnent be deemed a arle or 

constitute a transfer of the license to use fids document. 

1192472012 9.14 36 AM 

0 1m 5m REVISIONS 


1 ,1 ■ 111111 I i I No Dale Description BY 

A 02.12.2010 FulI loon Raming Skarnisaon 1213 

Scale 1:100 B 0306.2011 ISSUED FOR INFCRMATION TH 

C 00 00.2011 ISSUED FOR ENDORSEMENT OH 

D 17.02.12 ISSUES FOR INFORMATION MY 

E 2102.12 PRELIMINARY TOWN PLANNING ISSUE MY 

F 07.03.12 ISSUED FOR ENDORSEMENT MY 

G 0404.12 PLANNING APPLICATION GO 

PROJECT TITLE 


315-321 LA TROBE STREET, 

MELBOURNE MC 3000 

DRAWING TITLE 

ROOF LEVEL 

SCALE @ A3 

1 : 100 

DATE . 

DEC 2010 

DWG No: 

PROJECT No 

210201 

DRAWN BY: 

SC/DT 

153 STURT STREET SOUTHBANK 

MC 3026 AUSTRALIA 

T 61 392686925 

F 61 392686068 

inloCarothelortmen.cernau 

were rothetonmannernau 

ACN 005 783 997 gtopyrighl 

TP1.1 1 I GR:v ROTHE! II I 

Rothe Lowman Pty Ltd ACM 005 781 997 F1101351110100010201• 315-311144m. Or Mnao..140FIA.AA2 • TF•Ilrase4A2012• 04- 030104 12 Al LA TRUE Sna-T_Towx Pura.° AFFUCATX. 

39 

t_IFY 

OVER 

9kuist 

RAIN 

WATER 

TANKS 

_ 

,LIFT/ 1 

OA R 

/ /RUN\ 

DEVE 

13 

OPNIENT 

PR 2012 

NG

Rothe Lowman Pty Ltd ACN 005 783 997 

DLSCLAMER 

R01-1EL011AA11 Prcpml y Ply Lid refund carrnal Mv.171U131 end 

cOmr 449..4u:hp o;ppyht ardnlekcluMwot Vd. ,,,emPed 

damned 

1411 21004324 InaMorrsR0730WMA P121031 en Pry Lr agana dan 

MU Iaptn s t:L 

the I* s Miert4 LGe. 

Lmme.m.dth..mee011.0xonal . rW a*m 

p arr.. 

Ron 4 - Lo ormo 

ri Bae y -Lk 

Ura 

umg. ho *camel bit derrei saie 

CCOSIAul¢ 1RoVer althe Imam la wefts thane,. 

11,11142012 91735AM 

Das:rpm 

P044404 1104049 

Camei Aleekm 

ISSUED FCR INPORMATION 


15511ED FOR INFORMATION 

OREUMMORY TOWN PLANNING ISSUE 

ISSUED FCAEI,t0ORSEIAENT 

PLAMMPC APPLICATION 

MY 

HE 

NORTH ELEVATION 

DRAWING TITLE 

TP2.10 I H ROMER i'iTi Ill 1:1: 

41 

3042 32 

REV 

1:E 

1/10. 

41110404 01 

MY 

TEXTURED 

B y 

CB 

MF01 

METAL 

DAR( 

MF02 

METAL. 

LICK GREY 

MF03 TL01 

REVISCNS 

33234- 

41,1431E. 

10312 

BLACK GRANITE 

It Ma 

A 14-023211 

B 22033211 

II 00052014 

17 0E112711 

E 1310342 

F 210242 

G 21(0 12 

H 0404 12 

F .L.1013SInionin210741. 315-321 barrow ST MEdOlrfNESDRAuntrGea - TP1110,9m42012- 04- 02,103.04.12043 Lo Mo. enErr_Tom Purraxa Muer= 

PROJECT TRLE 


311321 LA TRCEIE -STREET 

3IELHI0JI1320ICMO) 

SCALE 9111 

1: 150 

PROJECT No 

210201 

133 STILRT SlREET SCIffnpArx 

VIC 3:09 AUSTRALIA 

1)1 31004 

51 3926E680 

tiolDMImiweroncom 21 

we...Waxman con au 

CM CGS 783 697 Oc40411 

CF01 

CF02 

COMPETE. 

GAPIS 

CF03 

CONCRETE. 

ELLIE, GFEY 

3102 

GL,55. 

BLUE 

nom m mom 

REIN m Immo 


6 0 

_L 

1`1 ,71.75YON000 

MI=MME1=E111•1E MN 

1•111MMI=MMEME =M 

MI■ 1■Il III= 

MI I■lill=111111= ■ 

MI=MMEMM1M1111 MIM 

MI /■Il 

MI MIMI 

MI■i■I IIION IIM 

•IIMMIM•IM•I=• =M 

Mi■IIMIIIIIIIMIIIIMI■ 

MI 1■1111M1H11Mi■ 

MIMMIMM1ME1M111111.1111 

MIIIIMINIIIIIMEMEME 

M1=11111111111MINI=M1=M 

-r--- 

imm 

MOM 


=IM 

ri 

la 

--- 

-- 

-- 

Imm•ilmmil• WI 

IFAMMI 

.111,A711 

5 

it 8 

LL.1 

OZCO 

COE 

COX on 

`La 

CCM 

iI 


333 LA TROBE STREET

71=171=r71171C1C11:171=1771ME1MCDr17171171171MCIDEIDDCIMCI 

41. 

rF,2 

caFG1 

—1 

Eig 

Onmana..g 

eeti;iaegeW 

EPE8R512r-Z. 

.7,c,r,g1 

il $ V11" 

1 

4 STOREY BRICK BUILDING 

-•!s 


■ ■ 11110 

13 STOREY CONCRETE BUILDING 

EVIMNG 

CANOPYTO 

ADJONNG 

1 

LEVEL ROOF 

5& III 

LEVEL PLANT 

sa Kozo 

LEVEM 

La 1(6250 

LEVEL 28 

SSL 1W 250 

----W 

LEVEL 27 

5.51.5aa 

A 

LEVEL 26 / 

551_28M 

LEVEL 25 

'23 225 

LEVEL 24 

WA0250 

LEVEL 

551.191.253 

LEVEL 22 P 

551_8425D 

----W 

LEVEL 21 / 

La 11250 

LEVEL 20 11 

mmm 

SUBJECT SITE 

16-20 GUILDFORD LANE JLANIGANX 

'I' LANE 


LA TROBE STREET 

LEVEL 19 

mmm 

LEVEL IS 

17 

LEVEL 15 / 

mwm 

LEVEL 15 1 

mfem 

LEVEL 13 / 

saw= 

LEVEL 12 / 

50052250 

LEVEL11 

S51_51.2W 

LEVELS 

.5.51.k250 

LEVEL 7 / 

5.5L392W 

LEVEL 5 / 

530 30250 

LEVEL 4 

5502225 

LEVEL 3 

50030250 

LEVEL 2 

24250 • 

11121250 

GRourc 

00017 250 

L g

43 

1104012111221AM 

TP2.30 F 

ID 21_0711 

E d103.12 

F 240412 

REVISICNS 

No DN. 

11 122011 

A 11022/11 

• 030921111 

C 20012011 

Deaddbm 

Tom, mono hue 

ArricalloOkedg 

ISSLE17 FCR INFOIBIATICN 

ISM: FOR ENDCRSEMEPFI 

PSELIXIMARY TOO PLAIIMBG MILE 

15SLED FOR EICCRSEMENT 

MANN NG PAPULARON 

Ai; 

OE 

11-1 

liT 

MY 

MY 

IX 

SOUTH ELEVATION 

B1SCLAMER 

ROTPELOWMAN Ropeny Ply Ltd wanart am Id, delday kw and 

dber ridtsirduring coppgrt ard rddiedkdl paw, rght 

IA IRA 

dxurdrtt 

The reddedl..1de.ddg POTHELONMAli Prq:eFty Ply Lld wand d. dams 

esklin flom used In daeumed InlaypJRoAsnJIffIIul IMIIInACA use_ 

toudaddidundes cr reuse d the &anal Ml dds vgad,ddnd !he 

permied RORIELOWMAN ProderlyPly LAM 

Unlit ro *mud-Jame 1.1 Irandt . d de XAnAbeSenad sAner, 

dens.* tondo [Idle Icende la use Iho dimmed 

111 

ORAVANE 1111E 

1)4VG Nkr 

REM 

DATE 

11F11/d) 

WANLY BY 

MY 

CFO1 

GC.IGHEIE 

TEXTURED 

CF02 

GCBCRETE. 

DARK 

CF03 

CCNGRETE. 

ELLE/GREY 

GTO1 

Goss. 

aim 

GTO2 

GLASS. 

RUE 

GTO3 

GLASS 

ONZU, 

DARK 

GTO4 

MFG1 

METAL- 

DARN 

M F02 

TAL- 

'd7 GREY 

M F03 

ME FAL 

ead 

TL01 

%%4E1E. 

LACK GRANITE 

By 

MIXED DEVELOPMENT 

315321 LA MOW SlREET. 

KELEICUITZ. IOC xo) 

SCPLE (4 A1 

1 : 150 

PROJECT No 

210201 

153 SEAT STREET SOLITN.B.M11. 

ATE 3[C.S 11101 TRAUA 

7 61 1 9218$60:1 

III 3 928 EWE 

rgotnothedonnartcom 

wontrollmmenoan au 

gM111:05 783 991 0=9,41 


MAC ccce 1' cox 

DEC .2COE MCC 

• MC 0:0€ 


001 02Ce 0:Of COM 


ic p I 

NOI 1 1 01 >401 

4• 

Lg 

A 

_A 

>"-- 

7,E 

ANVolle- 

n=1=•11111111111MERMII =MI=• 

■/=MMEMEME 111111•ME 

■111■ 1■ 1■I ■ 1■11 

111=111■I■ R■ 1■ 1■ 

1=MI=E111111111iMEMEME (M 

■ = -- 

11=11 1 I■ 

■1111=11111111=3■ 

1111M1=MMER=MMEMII imm 

■I■1■1■111■ 1■ imm 

I I 1■ 1 

INE 

=•1=•1M11•11=M MEM• 

1 1 =i= 

2 

0 0 0 (;) 

EmmOn ■IN 

MI NI lam I MI 

=111 

1■IIM 

tn 

IMIM Mrli 

NM= 

DNII.Ar011rere 

0 6 f G 6 6 6 

u■ mi=iiimlimmtm.Wir-iiii-alim 

Ell 'ZS 

11111 1= 


1 

3 APR 

DE 

VELOP

FICIE1r117117173E1017117CIEICCICIC11170C10007317117D717317,071071 

6 ti 

688266P=1 

r.; 

NOI1VA313 ISM 

-0 5 

LEVEL ROOF 

9.11_111291 

LEVEL PLANT 

SSL 109250 

LEVEL 29 

SSIL105Z0 

LEVEL 28 

88L tD2.253 

LEVEL 27 

S.SL 99292 

LEVEL 26 

sa DE 291 

LEVEL 23 

553.17.251 

LEVEL 20 

S_7.8250 

LEVEL 19 

SS/ 75.250 

LEVEL 18 

55L72.293 

LEVEL 17 

A% Bs 24) 

LEVEL 14 

55030.250 

LEVEL 13 

5.4L 61.250 

LEVEL 12 

ES.51.250 

LEVEL 11 

ssLsono 

LEVELS 

SSL 42250 

LEVEL 7 

SSL 31250 

LEVEL 

3.5L 3825D 

LEVEL 4 

-5.1L 30290 

LEVEL 3 

ssL2125 . 

LEVEL 2 

SSI. 24 50 

LA TROBE STREET 315 LA TROBE STREET 

- 


L-1.;17 

1 STOREY BLOCKWORK BUILDING 

SUBJECT SITE 

;... 

*FLANIGA1+31( 

LANE 

AHD 11 370 

2 STOREY BRICK 

22 GUILDFORD LANE


DELEGATED PLANNING APPLICATION REPORT 

Application number: TP-2012-225 

Applicant: Focus On La Trobe Pty Ltd 

Address: 315-321 La Trobe Street, MELBOURNE VIC 

3000 

Proposal: Demolition of the existing building and the 

construction of a multi-level building, and 

waiver of the loading and unloading 

requirements. 

Date of application: 13 April 2012 

Responsible officer: Maree Klein 

1 SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDS 

The subject site is located on the south side of La Trobe Street, between Elizabeth 

and Queen Streets in Melbourne’s CBD (refer to the location plan below). The site is 

rectangular with a 14m frontage to La Trobe Street and a depth of 21.5m, resulting in 

a total area of 301 sqm. The site is developed by a two storey brick office building, 

known as the ‘Tisher Liner Building’. 

Figure 1 – Location Plan


To the north of the site, over La Trobe Street, is a variety of different developments, 

including: 

� The Welsh Calvinistic Methodist Church at 320 La Trobe Street, a simple 

Gothic revival building built in 1871. 

� The ‘Argus Centre’, a 34 storey commercial building at 300 La Trobe Street. 

� A recent approval (Planning Permit No. TP-2010-888) for the construction of 

a 30 storey building at 312 La Trobe Street. Once constructed, this building 

will have a 21.6m high podium with a tower set back between 8 and 10 

metres from La Trobe Street. 

To the immediate east of the subject site is a 13 storey office building approximately 

48 metres high with no setback to any boundary. Farther to the east is a series of 2-5 

storey commercial buildings. A 42 level building with a height of 134.5m has been 

approved by the Minister for Planning (Permit No. 2011/005187) at 279-289 La Trobe 

Street. A condition of the permit requires the tower setback to La Trobe Street to be 

increased to a minimum which varies from 3.6 to 4.2 metres and allows for a possible 

increase in height of the overall building by 2 storeys due to the increased setback. 

To the immediate west of the subject site is a single storey brick building, with a mix 

of 2-4 storey commercial buildings farther to the west. On the corner of La Trobe and 

Queen Street is the heritage graded three-storey Celtic Club, where a planning 

application (DPCD ref. TP-2011/011167) is under consideration for the construction 

of a 48 storey building. 

To the immediate south of the site is Flanigan Lane, a 4m wide Council lane, 

connecting to Guildford Lane, McLean Alley and Sutherland Street. Buildings in this 

precinct are generally early 20 th century buildings of brick construction, predominantly 

former workshop and factory buildings, between one and four storeys in height. The 

majority of these buildings have been converted for residential use. This area, 

commonly referred to as the Guildford Lane precinct, is affected by Schedule 2 (Area 

2) of the Design and Development Overlay, where a discretionary height control of 15 

metres applies. 

A number of towers have been approved farther south of the Guildford Lane precent, 

including: 

� A 35 storey building at 296-300 Little Lonsdale Street (Permit No. TP-2009-361) 

with a height of 118m (including rooftop facilities). The tower of the approved 

building is set back 2m from Little Lonsdale Street, with no setback from McLean 

Alley. 

� A 116m building at 288-294 Little Lonsdale and a 128.4m building on the 

opposite side of Sutherland Street at 280 Little Lonsdale Street, both approved by 

the Minister for Planning (Permit No. 2008/00717). There is no setback of the 

building to McLean Alley. 

� A 125m building at 399 Little Lonsdale Street, with no setback for the Little 

Lonsdale Street frontage and minimal side setbacks. Approved by the Minister 

for Planning (Permit No. 2009/1035). 

� There are two other tower developments currently under consideration by the 

Minister for Planning at 280 Queen Street and the rear of 380 Lonsdale Street.

2 BACKGROUND AND HISTORY 

2.1 Pre-application discussions 

The application was discussed between the applicant and Council officers prior to its 

lodgement. 

2.2 Planning Application History 

� Planning Application No. TP-2010-995 was lodged with Council in 

December 2010 seeking approval for the demolition of the existing 

building and construction of a 33 storey building, accommodating ground 

level retail tenancy (111sqm), 142 residential apartments and a rooftop 

garden/communal area. The building was proposed to be 103.5 m high 

with a podium height of 35.7 m. The tower was proposed to be set back 

between 2.2 and 3.4 m from the La Trobe Street boundary, a maximum of 

1m from Flanigan Lane, with no setbacks proposed from the side 

boundaries. 

� Officers had significant concerns with the proposed development in 

relation to the lack of setbacks of the proposed tower, particularly from the 

side boundaries. Setbacks from the side boundary, particularly the west, 

were encouraged so as to limit impacts on the amenity and development 

potential of the adjacent site to the west as well as to avoid the potential 

for a ‘wall of towers’ to develop. 

� Officers and the permit applicant engaged in discussions with a view to 

revising the proposal, however during the course of these negotiations the 

permit applicant lodged an appeal to VCAT for failure to make a decision 

on the application within the prescribed time. Despite this, discussions 

continued with the applicant regarding an appropriate built form outcome 

for the site. 

� The applicant prepared amended plans to address the concerns raised. 

The plans significantly reduced the height of the building to 65m (22 

storeys) and reduced the number of apartments from 142 to 124. The 

building had no setback from La Trobe Street. The setbacks from Flanigan 

Lane had been retained. 

� At a Mediation hearing at VCAT in March 2011, the City of Melbourne and the 

permit applicant consented to VCAT directing the grant of a permit based on the 

amended plans. 

� A permit was issued on 5 April 2011 and plans were endorsed to the permit in 

June 2011. 

3 PROPOSAL 


The application as submitted to Council in April 2012 seeks approval for the 

demolition of the existing building and the construction of a multi-level building (30 

levels with roof above) with a height of 91 metres to the plant level and 94 metres to 

roof level. The building will accommodate 155 apartments. 

The building would have no setbacks to La Trobe Street or either side boundary. 

Setbacks from Flanigan Lane at the rear are not notated on the plans, but scale at 

approximately one metre. 

The main elements of the application include: 

� Ground floor retail of 110sqm, extending from La Trobe Street through to 

Flanigan Lane. The residential entrance lobby at ground floor is located centrally 

to the site from La Trobe Street. Building services including fire control room;

mail room; disabled bathroom as well as substation and rubbish store to be 

accessed from Flanigan Lane. 

� Level 1: four apartments fronting La Trobe Street with bike area for 44 bikes; lift 

lobby and additional services behind. 

� Level 2: four apartment fronting La Trobe Street and 2 apartments fronting 

Flanigan Lane. Communal laundry; storage and plant room. 

� Levels 3-10: seven apartments on each level, 4 fronting La Trobe Street and 3 

fronting Flanigan Lane. 

� Levels 11, 15 and 19: at level 11, the building is set back 1 – 1.2 metres from 

Flanigan Lane, extending through to the top of the building. Five apartments are 

provided on each of these levels, three fronting La Trobe Street and two fronting 

Flanigan Lane. Plant area with AC zone provided at Flanigan Lane frontage. 

� Levels 12 -14, 16 -18, 21 and 22: again these levels have five apartments, three 

fronting La Trobe Street and two fronting Flanigan Lane. 

� Level 23: this level is a ‘feature’ level providing a visual break between the lower 

levels of the building and the upper floors. It is set back from La Trobe Street a 

uniform 1 metre, with a 4.3sqm terrace provided for each of the apartments 

fronting La Trobe Street on this level. This setback provides a feature in the 

façade as viewed from the street. Four larger apartments are provided on this 

level, two each oriented to the La Trobe and Flanigan Lane frontages. 

� Levels 24-28: again four apartments are provided on this level, two each oriented 

to the La Trobe and Flanigan Lane frontages. There are no terraces provided at 

these levels. 

� Level 29: two apartments provided to the Flanigan Lane frontage with a large 

Events Area and a Roof terrace oriented to La Trobe street. 

� Roof level: rain water tanks, lift overrun and plant area setback from the La Trobe 

Street frontage. 

The applicant describes architecture of the building as follows: 

‘The façade treatment of the building includes angled glass windows to La 

Trobe Street and Flanigan Lane. Nib wall projections extend over La Trobe 

Street on both side boundaries to provide privacy to the dwellings from 

adjoining sites. The building does not project behind the property line into 

Flanigan Lane, with the design of windows setback into the site at this 

boundary.’ 

4 STATUTORY CONTROLS 


The following permit triggers are relevant to the application: 

Clause Permit Trigger 

Clause 37.04 

Pursuant to Schedule 1 of Clause 37.01, a permit is required: 

Capital City Zone, 

Schedule 1 (Outside 

the Retail Core) 

� 

� 

To construct a building or carry out works. 

To construct any part of a building within 10 metres of a 

road frontage which is inconsistent with the dominant road 

frontage parapet height.

Clause 43.02 

Schedule 1 to the 

Design and 

Development Overlay 

(Active Street 

Frontages – Capital 

City Zone) 


� To construct any part of a building exceeding a height of 40 

metres within 10 metres of a road frontage. 

� A permit and prior approval for the redevelopment of the 

site are required to demolish or remove a building or works. 

It is noted that the use of the building for accommodation and 

retail are within Section 1 and do not require a planning permit. 

Pursuant to Clause 43.02-2 a permit is require to construct a 

building or construct or carry out works, unless a schedule to 

the overlay specifically states otherwise. 

Schedule 1 states that a permit is not required under this 

overlay for buildings and works other than at ground level. 

5 STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK 

5.1 State Planning Policy Framework (SPPF) 

The relevant provisions of the SPPF are summarised as follows: 

� Clause 11.01-1 ‘Activity Centre Network’ has a strategy to develop activity 

centres that provide different types of housing, including forms of higher density 

housing. 

� Clause 15.01-2 ‘Urban design principles’, which seeks to achieve outcomes that 

‘contribute positively to local urban character and enhance the public realm while 

minimising detrimental impact on neighbouring properties’. It includes relevant 

design principles for development proposals for non-residential and residential 

development not covered by Clauses 54 to 56 and references the Design 

Guidelines for Higher Density Residential Development (Department of 

Sustainability and Environment, 2004). 

� Clause 15.02-1 ‘Energy and resources efficiency’, with the objective ‘to 

encourage land use and development that is consistent with the efficient use of 

energy and the minimisation of greenhouse gas emissions.’ 

� Clause 16 ‘Housing’ has the following relevant objectives: 

� Planning should provide for housing diversity, and ensure the efficient provision 

of supporting infrastructure. 

� New housing should have access to services and be planned for long term 

sustainability, including walkability to activity centres, public transport, schools 

and open space. 

� Planning for housing should include providing land for affordable housing. 

� Clause 18.01-1 ‘Land use and transport planning’, aims to create a safe and 

sustainable transport system by integrating land-use and transport.

5.2 Local Planning Policy Framework (LPPF) 

5.2.1 Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS) 

Clause 21.03-1 ‘Vision for Melbourne’ is for it to be a thriving and sustainable City 

that simultaneously pursues economic prosperity, social equity and environmental 

quality, the Vision says: 

‘The key to achieving Council’s vision is the recognition that different parts of 

the municipality have to be managed differently and that development 

potential varies markedly. There is a mixture of activities and built form 

throughout the City and understanding the local context of a proposal is the 

key to understanding whether or not a proposal is acceptable.’ 

Clause 21.04 sets out objectives for 'housing opportunities' and for the 'contribution 

of residential development' as follows: 

and 


‘Figure 5 indicates the different areas where housing opportunities are 

identified. Within the municipality, Docklands, Southbank (north of City Link) 

and the Central City will over the next ten years be areas that accommodate 

the most significant population growth’ 

‘Residents are central to the vitality and liveability of the City. More people 

living within the City leads to an increase in, and diversity of, activity 

throughout the day and night, enhances safety, and ensures efficient use of 

services and infrastructure. Increased residential development contributes to 

the overall urban consolidation objectives outlined within the State Planning 

Policy Framework.’ 

Clause 21.08-1 ‘Central City’ sets out the local area policies for the Central City. The 

vision for the Central City includes: 

‘…The Central City has grown as a high-density inner city residential 

environment. Excellent construction and effective management of non 

residential uses as well as good design of new dwellings in the City has 

meant that a diverse range of uses can co-exist. Noise and light spill has 

been recognised as an inevitable part of inner city living because of the 

diverse land uses, people and traffic in the area at all times. Significant 

amenity benefits are obtained through excellent access to the facilities and 

services and to public transport.’ 

Relevant ‘land use implementation strategies’ include: 

� ‘Support permanent and short term residential development in the Central 

City that accommodates a diverse population. 

� Ensure that new dwellings are designed so that they provide occupants 

with a reasonable level of amenity consistent with the Land Use Amenity 

Principles, and do not undermine the ability of existing and new business 

and commercial, retail and entertainment uses to successfully function in 

the Central City’ 

.Relevant ‘built form implementation strategies’ include: 

� ‘Ensure new tall buildings add architectural interest to the city’s sky line. 

� Ensure that the design of tall buildings in the Central City promotes a 

human scale at street level especially in narrow lanes, respects the street 

pattern and provides a context for heritage buildings. 

� Protect the built form, character and function of laneways and the laneway 

system as a significant determinant of Melbourne’s built form and 

distinguish the laneways from other larger Central City streets.

� Ensure development fronting streets creates a continuous building edge 

and integrated streetscape. 

� Ensure sunlight penetration in the middle of the day to key public spaces, 

appropriate to their role and function.’ 

5.2.2 Local Policies 

The relevant local policies are summarised as follows: 

� Clause 22.01 ‘Urban Design within the Capital City Zone’ identifies that the future 

vitality and success of Melbourne will be achieved by new development 

responding to the underlying urban framework and fundamental urban 

characteristics, whilst establishing its own identity and character in harmony with 

the existing context. The policy has four sections: Public Spaces; Circulation; 

Building Design; and Areas of Transition. It includes design principles and 

performance guidelines. The details of the Building Design section are discussed 

later in this report. 

� Clause 22.02 ‘Sunlight to Public Spaces’ requires that development not cast 

additional shadows between 11.00am and 3.00pm at the equinox (22 September 

and 22 March) that would prejudice the amenity of public spaces. 

� Clause 22.20 ‘CBD Lanes’ seeks to protect and enhance the City’s laneways. 

The policy identifies four core value characteristics that contribute to the success 

of a lane as a pedestrian environment: Connectivity, Active Frontages, 

Elevational Articulation, and Views. Lanes within the Central City have been 

assessed against these characteristics and have been rated Class 1, Class 2 or 

Class 3 as illustrated in maps 1, 2 and 3. Flanigan Lane abuts the southern 

boundary of the site. It has been identified as a Class 3 lane, being a lane that 

shows: 

‘sign of two or less of the four core value characteristics. Many of these lanes 

may benefit from upgrading and enhancement to realise their full potential 

with regard to pedestrian amenity and urban design. These lanes generally 

provide vehicular access to the rear of buildings for loading and service 

requirements or access to car parking areas.’ 

There is a series of policy guidelines relating to buildings and works adjoining 

lanes. 

6 ZONE 

The subject site is located within Capital City Zone, Schedule 1 (Outside the Retail 

Core), the purpose of which is to: 

‘To provide for a range of financial, legal, administrative, cultural, recreational, 

tourist, entertainment and other uses that complement the capital city function 

of the locality.’ 

An application for permit must be accompanied by a written urban context report 

documenting the key planning influences on the development and how it relates to its 

surroundings. The urban context report must identify the development opportunities 

and constraints, and document the effect of the development. 

7 OVERLAY(S) 


The subject site is affected by Schedule 1 to the Design and Development Overlay, 

the objectives of which are to:

� ‘To ensure ground floor frontages are pedestrian oriented and add interest and 

vitality to city streets. 

� To provide continuity of ground floor shops along streets and lanes within the 

retail core. 

� To ensure ground floor frontages contribute to city safety by providing lighting and 

activity.’ 

8 PARTICULAR PROVISIONS 

The following particular provisions apply to the application: 

� Schedule to Clause 52.06 ‘Car Parking’ identifies that a parking precinct plan 

affects the Capital City Zone including the subject site. The Schedule to this 

Clause specifies a maximum number of car parking spaces. No car parking is 

proposed as part of the development, therefore no permit is required. 

� Clause 52.07 ‘Loading and Unloading of Vehicles’ specifies loading bay 

requirements for the sale of goods or materials. The development proposes 

110sqm of ground floor retail area. The requirements as they relate to the retail 

floor area of the development have not been met, therefore a planning permit is 

required. A permit may be granted to reduce or waive these requirements if 

either: 

o The land area is insufficient. 

o Adequate provision is made for loading and unloading vehicles to the 

satisfaction of the responsible authority. 

� Clause 52.34 ‘Bicycle Facilities’ specifies that a new use must not commence 

until the required bicycle facilities and associated signage has been provided on 

the land. For residential developments over 4 storeys, Table 1 to Clause 52.34-3 

requires the provision of one resident bicycle parking space to each 5 dwellings 

and one visitor bicycle parking space to each 10 dwellings. The development 

proposes 155 apartments, therefore a total of 47 spaces are required. A total of 

44 spaces are provided on level 1 of the development. At only 110sqm, the 

restaurant is required to provide 1 bicycle parking space to an employee. 

� Clause 52.35 ‘Urban Context Report and Design Response for Residential 

Development of Four or More Storeys’ requires that an application for a 

residential development of 4 or more storeys be accompanied by an urban 

context report and design response. 

� Clause 52.36 ‘Integrated Public Transport Planning’ requires that where in excess 

of 60 dwellings are proposed, the application be referred to the Director of Public 

Transport. 

9 GENERAL PROVISIONS 


The following particular provisions apply to the application: 

� Clause 65 ‘Decision Guidelines’ includes the matters set out in Section 60 of the 

Planning and Environment Act 1987. 

� Clause 66 ‘Referral and Notice Provisions’ requires an application under Clause 

52.36-01 (Integrated Public Transport Planning) be referred to the Director of 

Public Transport.

10 PUBLIC NOTIFICATION 

� An application to construct a building or construct or carry out works for a use in 

Section 1 of Clause 37.04-1 (Capital City Zone) is exempt from the notice 

requirements of Section 52(1)(a), (b) and (d), the decision requirements of 

Section 64(1), (2) and (3) and the review rights of Section 82(1) of the Act. 

� An application to demolish or remove a building or works in the Capital City Zone 

is exempt from the notice requirements of Section 52(1)(a), (b) and (d), the 

decision requirements of Section 64(1), (2) and (3) and the review rights of 

Section 82(1) of the Act. 

� An application to construct a building or construct or carry out works under 

Schedule 1 to the Design and Development Overlay is exempt from the notice 

requirements of Section 52(1)(a), (b) and (d), the decision requirements of 

Section 64(1), (2) and (3) and the review rights of Section 82(1) of the Act. 

Therefore the application was not advertised. 

11 OBJECTIONS 

The application has not received any objections. 

12 CONSULTATION 


No further consultation was arranged as there were no objections to the application. 

13 REFERRALS 

13.1 Internal 

The application was referred to the following areas of Council for comment: 

Engineering Services Group made the following conclusions regarding the traffic 

and parking associated with the proposed development (summarised): 

� The lack of parking provision is acceptable and in accordance with the Planning 

Scheme. 

� Bicycle parking spaces provided are adequate. 

� It is recommended that a suitable loading dock for the residential component of 

the development be provided. 

� A note should be included on any permit issued advising that Council will not 

change the on-street parking restrictions to accommodate the 

servicing/delivery/parking needs of the development and that those who occupy 

the development will not be eligible to receive parking permits. 

� Civil Engineering provided a number of recommended conditions which should be 

applied to any permit issued. 

� A revised Waste Management Plan is required. 

Urban Design can not support a building with a height of 94m and no tower setbacks 

other than 1m from Flanigan Lane, advising that: 

‘This is considered unacceptable, creating an overbearing presence and 

being inconsistent with the urban design policy in the Melbourne Planning 

Scheme. We note that the wind assessment indicates conditions along La 

Trobe St are expected to be on or within the criterion for walking comfort. We 

recommend that the short-term stationary criterion should apply along the La 

Trobe Street footpath (this being the sunny side of the street).’ 

Further comments by Urban Design are summarised below:

� There is some scope for zero setback on the east boundary (at least up to the 

height of the adjoining building, which has zero side setback up to RL69.54). 

The tower should be set back at least 5m from the west boundary to limit 

impacts on the amenity and development potential of the adjacent site as well 

as to avoid the potential for a ‘wall of towers’ to develop. 

� The front setback should be close to 10m, no less than 6m. The rear setback 

should be increased to about 3.6m (the approximate width of Flanigan Lane). 

� Lack of setbacks would be appropriate if the building’s height did not exceed 

60m which would reduce the extent of blank walls and would help transition 

down to the 15m height limit area on the south side of Flanigan Lane. 

� The horizontal projections in the north elevation do not seem to be deep enough 

to provide effective sunshading. Together with the walls flanking the north 

elevation, they diminish the positive impact of the folded façade. Openable 

windows should be shown on the north and south elevation. 

� Recommend light wells be introduced to the east and west elevation to provide 

natural light and ventilation to adjoining rooms as well as to articulate the 

extensive blank side walls (small indents currently proposed are insufficient for 

this purpose). 

� Support the involvement of an artist in the design of the wall to Flanigan Lane. 

� Do not support the wing walls projecting over the north boundary. These, 

together, with the lack of inset balconies, increase the overbearing presence of 

the building, particularly when viewed at an oblique angle up from or down the 

street. 

� Provision of pedestrian shelter over La Trobe Street is supported and it is 

recommended that the 1.5m projection be increased, provided it doesn’t have a 

negative impact on street trees. 

� Support the retail outlet and lobby having access from both streets. Note that 

the through-site access is less effective than in the approved proposal. 

� Recommend that the sub-station be located at first floor level as per approved 

proposal. 

� Support the communal laundry, but note lack of windows and is unlikely to be a 

convivial space. 

13.2 External 


As required by Clause 52.36 and Clause 66 of the Planning Scheme, the application 

was referred to the Director of Public Transport (now Public Transport Victoria) as 

the development proposed in excess of 60 residential units. No objection was 

offered to the development subject to three conditions being included on any permit 

issued. These related to minimisation of disruption to tram and bus operations during 

construction and avoidance of damage to public infrastructure. 

14 ASSESSMENT 

The key areas of consideration in the assessment of the application are demolition, 

design & built form, and internal amenity. Each of these issues is addressed below. 

14.1 Demolition 

The proposed demolition is considered to be acceptable given that the subject 

building has no identified heritage significance. To avoid the potential of a long term 

vacant site, it is considered appropriate to recommend the inclusion of a permit 

condition requiring the provision of evidence that substantial progress has been 

made towards obtaining the necessary building permits and that the permit holder 

has entered into a construction contract.

14.2 Design & Built Form 


Clause 22.01 ‘Urban design within the capital city zone’, together with Clause 22.20 

‘CBD Lanes’ provide a range of design principles which support those contained in 

Clause 15.11 of the SPPF. The following discussion is based around key sections of 

these clauses. 

Building Height and Street Setback to Latrobe Street 

As described in the local policy ‘Urban Design within the Capital City Zone’ the 

standard model for developing taller buildings in the City is based on a 35-40 metre 

high podium with the tower element setback from the podium by at least 10 metres. 

Approval was granted under Permit No. TP-2010-995 for a tower with a building 

height (excluding rooftop plant and equipment) of 65 metres with no setbacks from 

La Trobe Street or from either side boundary, and a 1m setback from Flanigan Lane. 

The height of 65 metres was supported for the following reasons: 

� A height of approximately 60 metres was consistent with recent planning 

decisions and the approach taken where podium/tower form is not possible for 

smaller sites. Buildings of this height are generally viewed as not really a tower, 

but more a tall podium 

� The limited dimensions of the site restrict the ability to achieve an efficient 

traditional tower and podium arrangement where the tower is setback 10 metres 

from the street alignment; 

� The development would abut a 13 storey office building, constructed flush to all 

four title boundaries with no setbacks; 

� There is no established podium parapet height in this section of La Trobe Street; 

� There would be no resultant adverse amenity impacts from the proposed height 

of 65 metres. 

The current application seeks to increase the approved height by an additional 40%, 

proposing to construct a building with an overall height (excluding rooftop plant and 

equipment) of 91 metres. Like the earlier approval, no setbacks are proposed from 

La Trobe Street or either side boundary. Setbacks from Flanigan Lane at the rear 

are not notated on the plans, but scale at approximately 1m. 

The proposed building can no longer be considered a tall podium like the previous 

approval, but rather a tower with zero street setback from La Trobe Street. The 

applicant explains that ‘the proposed building does not follow the podium-tower 

typology due to the site’s dimensions, namely its narrow width. It would be 

impractical, nor desirable to follow this form on such a site’ (page 21, Town Planning 

and Urban Context Report, Contour Consultants, April 2012.). 

The failure of the proposal to adopt the podium-tower typology encouraged by the 

Planning Scheme cannot be supported for the following reasons: 

� At a height of 91 metres, the height of the street wall is 127.5% higher than that 

contemplated by the planning scheme, which encourages podiums of a height of 

approximately 40m. Some relaxation of the podium height is warranted for this 

site, given the 13 storey building to the east; however the proposed building fails 

to respond to this immediate neighbour, either through height or architectural 

treatment. 

� The proposal to build sheer to the street edge to this height is at odds with the 

consistent vision for the Central City built form since the mid 1960s for the

creation of a city that provides a high standard of amenity in the public domain. A 

sheer wall to 91 metres on La Trobe Street is considered to be detrimental to the 

level of amenity experienced by the public and is an unwarranted precedent. 

� Objective 2.2 of the Guidelines for High Density Residential Development also 

advocates the use of setbacks and podium treatments, recognising that ‘setbacks 

allow greater light access to the street, broader views to the sky and reduce the 

‘canyon’ effect for pedestrians at street level.’ Further, the Guidelines recognise 

that the ‘relationship between street width (including front setbacks) and building 

height is important for defining the character of a place. 

� This immediate locality is undergoing significant change with tower developments 

emerging. There is planning permission for tall buildings on nearby sites where a 

podium is incorporated, for example at 312 Latrobe Street and 279-289 Latrobe 

Street. The applicants for the subject site argue that the podium-tower building 

typology is not capable of being achieved on the subject site because of its 

relatively small width and overall site area. However the previous proposal as 

originally submitted to Council in December 2010 did propose setbacks between 

2.2 and 3.4 m from the La Trobe Street boundary, with a podium height of 35.7 

m. It is quite feasible for a set-back to Latrobe Street to be provided 

� The applicant has proposed a distinct treatment of Level 23 of the building 

through different materials and colours and a small setback. The applicant argues 

that this ‘feature’ level provides a visual break between the lower levels of the 

building and the upper floors, reducing the monolithic impact of the built form on 

the street. It is not considered that this design device is effective. 

Setback from Flanigan Lane 

Neither the MSS nor local policy specifies an appropriate setback for Class 3 Lanes. 

Local policy ‘CBD Lanes’ recommends that higher tower forms are set back from the 

predominant parapet height along the laneway to ensure a sense of openness that 

reinforces a human scale. The setbacks from Flanigan Lane are consistent with 

those approved under Permit No. TP-2010-995 and continue to be appropriate in this 

instance given that: 

� There is no predominant parapet height on the northern side of Flanigan Lane; 

� The office development to the east is not set back from Flanigan Lane; 

� The development would improve the relationship to Flanigan Lane from that 

which currently exists by the inclusion of an active frontage at ground floor, highly 

articulated and well detailed facades that create visual interest on all levels, and 

the orientation of windows and balconies to overlook Flanigan Lane at the upper 

levels. 

Tower Separation (side setbacks) 


The ‘Urban Design in the Capital City Zone’ local policy generally encourages 

podium-tower developments above 45 metres be setback 24 metres from any 

surrounding podium-tower. Like the previous approval on the site under Permit No. 

TP-2010-995, the proposed development does not adopt this approach. At 65 

metres high, the lack of side setbacks was considered acceptable as: 

� The building to the immediate east of the site is constructed to the boundary for a 

height of 13 storeys. A setback is not warranted as there would be no adverse 

amenity impacts on the adjoining office building, nor would the proposed 

development prejudice the development potential of the site. 

� There is no podium-tower on the western side of the proposed development, so 

there would be no adverse amenity impacts. The lack of setbacks for a building


of this height would also not prejudice the development potential of the adjacent 

site. 

� Further development to a height of 65 metres to the west, possibly with setbacks, 

was considered acceptable. 

As noted earlier, the current application seeks to increase the approved height by an 

additional 40%, proposing to construct a building with an overall height (excluding 

rooftop plant and equipment) of 91 metres. At this height the building must be 

considered a tower with no side setbacks. 

Clause 21.05 of the MSS states that: 

‘New buildings should be well spaced and offset to equitably distribute access 

to outlook and sunlight between towers…” 

Objective 2.2 of the Guidelines for High Density Residential Development also 

advocates consideration of the possible future development of adjoining sites and 

allow, as far as possible, an equitable spread of development potential throughout 

the area. 

If the proposed built form were repeated on the adjoining sites to the west, it would 

result in a continuous wall of towers to Queen Street. The applicants have submitted 

a ‘possible future development strategy’ which attempts to show that a wall of towers 

would not result. However this strategy appears to rely in at least one instance of the 

consolidation of two separate sites, an outcome that is generally not supported as it 

does not maintain the fine grain subdivision pattern of the Hoddle Grid. 

It is not considered that an unbroken wall of towers is an acceptable built form 

outcome. The ‘Central City (Hoddle Grid) Built Form Review May 2011’ recognises 

that gaps between taller buildings help to spread wind load and maintain access to 

daylight and sunlight, including at the street level. The amount of sky that is visible 

between buildings results in a spacious open feel that has a strong influence on 

perceptions of public domain amenity; sky outlook and daylight penetration v sense 

of enclosure. 

Despite the above direction in the Guidelines for High Density Residential 

Development, VCAT in CK Designworks v Melbourne CC [2011] VCAT 584 (5 April 

2011) has ‘rejected this view in favour of a first-come-first-served approach to 

apportioning available development opportunities’. In this case VCAT cites the 

following from Brady Lonsdale Pty v Melbourne CC [2007] VCAT 349: 

‘on balance, we think that the guidelines should be applied in respect of 

existing development, in other words, it is really a first come first served 

consideration. The alternative approach would be that neither site can be 

developed, because the development of one would always prevent the 

development of the other.’ 

By ‘development’ VCAT appears to mean development above the 40 metre height 

stipulated for podiums. In the case of the subject site, a permit has already been 

granted for a building 65 metres in height with no setback from Latrobe Street or the 

side boundaries and minimal set-back from the rear; and an equivalent development 

on the adjacent site to the west would be acceptable in principle. Developments of 

this scale achieve a plot ratio of approximately 20, which is considered a generous 

level well above the recommended maximum of 12.0 for an overall city block. 

Facades 

The local policy ‘Urban Design in the Capital City Zone’ recommends that all visible 

sides of a building should be fully designed.


Urban Design advises that the articulation of the highly visible side walls of the 

development in the form of shallow indents is ineffective in breaking up the mass of 

the extensive blank side walls. They recommend that light wells be introduced to the 

east and west elevations to provide natural light and ventilation to adjoining rooms 

(see internal amenity comments below), in addition to articulating the extensive blank 

side walls. 

Projections 

The development includes some projections over Latrobe Street in the form of nib 

walls. These projections are not dimensioned on the plans. The applicant advises 

that the projections are ‘to provide privacy to the dwellings from adjoining sites’. 

Urban Design does not support these nib walls, advising that these, together with the 

lack of inset balconies increase the overbearing presence of the building, particularly 

when viewed at an oblique angle. 

Wind and Weather Protection 

Both Clause 37.04 (Capital City Zone 1) and Clause 22.01 (Urban Design within the 

Capital City Zone) encourage developments not to have any adverse wind impacts at 

the street level. The most relevant Capital City Zone 1 decision guideline (when 

considering wind impacts) is “The potential for increased ground-level wind speeds 

and the effect on pedestrian comfort and the amenity of public places.” 

Wind tunnel tests have been conducted on a 1/400 scale model of the proposed 

development by Mel Consultants. Their subsequent report concluded that: 

‘wind conditions in the streetscapes adjacent to the proposed 315 La Trobe 

Development have been shown to be on or within the criterion for walking 

comfort for all wind directions.’ 

Urban Design however recommend that the short-term stationary criterion should 

apply along the La Trobe Street footpath, given that this is the sunny side of the 

street. 

Sunlight to Public Spaces 

Clause 22.02, Sunlight to Public Spaces states that development should reduce the 

amenity of public spaces, including streets and lanes, by casting any additional 

shadows between 11.00 am and 2.00 pm on 22 September. The proposal complies. 

14.2 Internal Amenity 

The MSS encourages new residential developments within the Central City to be 

designed to ensure that they provide occupants with a reasonable level of amenity 

and that they incorporate design measures to attenuate against noise associated 

with the operation of other businesses and activities associated with a vital 24-hour 

capital city. The decision guidelines of the Capital City Zone specify that ‘habitable 

rooms of new dwellings adjacent to high levels of external noise should be designed 

to limit internal noise levels to a maximum of 45 dB in accordance with the relevant 

Australian Standards for acoustic control’. This requirement can be made a condition 

of any approval. 

Objective 5.4 of the Design Guidelines for Higher Density Residential Development 

encourage direct natural light and ventilation to all habitable rooms in the form of 

operable windows. The ‘borrowing’ of light and air should be avoided. Where light is 

borrowed from another room, ideally it should be taken from the principle living area 

rather than from corridors. With respect to this direction, the following is noted:

� All dwellings are orientated in the north/south direction, with living areas and in 

many cases, main bedrooms with direct access to direct natural light, ventilation 

via La Trobe Street to the north and Flanigan Lane to the south. 

� The living areas of all apartments have an outlook over La Trobe Street or 

Flanigan Lane. 

� In those apartments that are two-bedroom, the second bedroom is wholly reliant 

on its light and ventilation from either the main living area, or in some instances, 

the corridor associated with the apartment. While this situation was approved in 

Permit No. TP-2010-995 it is noted that the layouts of the apartments have 

altered, making the source of light more indirect and the number of apartments 

relying on borrowed light significantly greater. It is therefore considered that light 

wells should be introduced as recommended by Urban Design in order to improve 

the amenity levels of these apartments. 

Private and communal open space considerations are at Objectives 6.1 to 6.3. In 

this regard, it is noted that: 

� No private open space in the form of balconies is provided given that that they 

would be exposed to wind, making them unusable. Rather, a north facing 

communal open roof terrace area (44sqm) and a covered events area of 89sqm 

is provided for residents of the development, with an outdoor barbecue and dining 

facilities. 

14.3 Conclusion 


The proposal is inconsistent with the relevant sections of the Melbourne Planning 

Scheme with respect to setbacks and the height of the building directly abutting 

Latrobe Street. It is also well in excess of the development mediated before VCAT in 

March 2011, there being no change in planning circumstances to justify the increase 

in building height. The proposal would represent an overdevelopment of the site and 

may compromise development opportunities on adjacent sites, particularly sites to 

the west. An adequate level of amenity for future occupants would not be provided as 

there is an over-reliance on borrowed light and ventilation for habitable rooms. 

15 RECOMMENDATION 

That a Refusal to Grant a Permit be issued for the following reasons: 

1. The proposal by virtue of its height, lack of setbacks and projections will have an 

overbearing impact upon the public realm, contrary to the relevant provisions of 

the Melbourne Planning Scheme, including Clauses 21.05, 21.08 and 22.01. 

2. The proposal by virtue of its lack of setbacks will have an adverse impact on the 

development potential of adjoining land and is contrary to the relevant provisions 

of the Melbourne Planning Scheme, including Clauses 21.05, 21.08 and 22.01. 

3. The proposal would result in an inadequate level of amenity for future occupants 

given the over-reliance on borrowed light and ventilation for habitable rooms.

APPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMIT : TP ... - City of Melbourne

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?