MACEDON URBAN DESIGN GUIDELINES - … · MACEDON URBAN DESIGN GUIDELINES ... The Study Team recognises that the State of Victoria has an ancient and proud ... The Macedon Village

MACEDON

URBAN DESIGN

GUIDELINES

AUGUST 2016

MACEDON RANGES SHIRE COUNCIL

(REVISED AUGUST 2017 -REFERENCE DOCUMENT VERSION)

---·

Dl=t•I i-i•i •t4i=i PL ANNINO .. DESIGN+ PEOPLE

Macedon Design Guidelines | Design Guidelines

© planisphere 2016 2

© Planisphere 2016.

This publication is copyright. No part may be reproduced by any process except in accordance with the provisions of the Copyright Act 1968.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The Study Team recognises that the State of Victoria has an ancient and proud Aboriginal history and complex ownership and land stewardship systems stretching back many thousands of years. We would like to acknowledge the Traditional Owners of this land, and offer our respect to the past and present Elders, and through them to all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People.

PROJECT CONTROL

NAME NO. PM APPROVED PD APPROVED DATE

Draft UDG 1 KW BH 24/03/16

Draft for exhibition 1 KW BH 19/04/16

Final Draft 1 KW LR 5/07/16

Final 1 KW BH 10/08/16

Reference Document version – draft DDO schedule removed as per C114 Panel Recommendation 5.

24/08/17

pschier

Highlight



CONTENTS

1 Introduction ............................................................................................... 4

2 Background Review ................................................................................... 6

3 analysis and Recommendations ................................................................. 9

4 Community Feedback ................................................................................ 9

Appendix A

Macedon C1Z – Lot Analysis .................................................................... 19



1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 THE PROJECT

At the direction of Macedon Ranges Shire Council, Planisphere developed urban design guidelines for the township of Macedon.

The Guidelines will inform the design and built form outcomes in the township (Commercial Zone 1), and will be implemented in the Macedon Ranges Planning Scheme as a new schedule to the Design and Development Overlay (DDO). The DDO may also inform changes to the Municipal Strategic Statement and specifically sub clause 21.13-6 – Macedon.

The DDO will provide guidance for the development of key infill sites in Macedon which is consistent with the key directions from the framework plan in the Macedon Village Centre Study, 2014.

The Macedon Village Centre Study was adopted by Council in November 2014. Council resolved that the Council prepare detailed design guidelines to inform future land use and development within the Macedon Village Centre Study area.

This report explains the process by which the guidelines have been developed and outlines a suite of design guidelines and objectives that will form the basis of the proposed DDO.

1.2 THE STUDY AREA

The proposed design guidelines apply to all land within the Commercial 1 Zone, as shown on the study area map below. This land includes a mixture of commercial businesses, residences and vacant sites.



1.3 THE DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY

The Design and Development Overlay (DDO) is a planning tool used to achieve specific urban design and built form outcomes on private land by introducing design objectives and development requirements for new buildings.

The purpose of the DDO, as outlined at Clause 43.02 of the Macedon Ranges Planning Scheme is:

To implement the State Planning Policy Framework and the Local Planning Policy Framework, including the Municipal Strategy Statement and local planning policies.

To identify areas which are affected by specific requirements relating to the design and built form of new development.

The DDO sets out permit requirements for buildings and works which specifies that a permit is generally required for all buildings and works unless the schedule specifically states that a permit is not required. The Schedule to the DDO can require a planning permit for a range of requirements relating to building setbacks, building height, plot ratio, landscaping and various other design, development or built form requirements.

In some instances, it may be appropriate to set mandatory requirements for particular design elements such as height or setbacks.

A set of decision guidelines must also be taken into consideration by Council prior to the approval of any development application for land within a DDO.

The DDO does not control the use of the land, which is determined by the Commercial 1 Zone provisions and particular provisions.



2 BACKGROUND REVIEW

2.1 MACEDON VILLAGE CENTRE STUDY

The Macedon Village Centre Study, 2014 (MVCS) sets out strategic urban design principles and a framework plan to guide the future form and character of the Macedon township. The review area for the MVCS differs from the proposed DDO area as it included land north and south of Victoria Street between Smith Street and to the east of Bruce Street.

A number of themes and key issues were identified in the MVCS which have been considered and incorporated into the proposed DDO controls as follows:

[The] Streetscape character of the village centre should achieve a balance between elements of trees, open space and landscaping to maintain rural village character

Existing trees make a positive contribution to the street character and should be protected and maintained.

The setback and landscape treatment of some properties, including non-commercial uses is a positive feature of the streetscape.

The vacant corner site (Victoria and Margaret Streets) next to the Hotel is an important location and future development of this site, if it is to occur, should be a strongly contributing element to the village character of Macedon [sic]

The Framework Plan within the MCCS sets out the urban design and spatial strategy for the Macedon township. A number of key actions, which are reflected in the Framework Plan, have also been considered for inclusion in the proposed DDO. These are outlined below:

Encourage the use of verandahs and parapets

Encourage the use of pitched roofs and varied roof forms

Orientate buildings to the frontage and promote street level activation

New development should respect the prevailing low to moderate site coverage

Respect and protect the amenity of the surrounding low density residential interfaces

Incorporate earthy and muted tones that respect the existing character of the village centre.

The wording of these actions has been translated into design objectives as detailed in Chapter 4 of this report.

2.2 VCAT REPORT: 19VICTORIA STREET

A refusal by Council to grant a permit for a proposed two storey, mixed use development comprising six retail tenancies and 17 dwellings on land at 19 Victoria Street was appealed to VCAT in March 2015. The review site is a large corner lot located on Victoria and Margaret Streets and was identified in the MVCS as a key opportunity site.



The application was refused on a number of grounds, primarily due to its inappropriate built form response and lack of respect for existing character. Council’s initial refusal of the proposal was upheld at VCAT for failing to respond appropriately to the special character of the township.

There were a number of key determinations which were highlighted in this case which are supported in the strategic intent of the proposed DDO. The case acknowledged Macedon as being a ‘special and distinctive rural settlement’ defined by its small rural village feel and predominantly low scale built form and development. The decision has also influenced a number of the design requirements contained within the proposed DDO controls as follows:

The small rural village feel and sense of spaciousness

Varied built form however predominantly single storey including dwelling forms in garden settings

Detached dwellings, some of which are used for commercial purposes, have generous and landscaped frontages and setbacks

Low density residential areas set within the bush

Attractive street trees and spacious public realm

Irregular landscaping gaps between buildings and street frontages

Low to moderate site coverage

Views to Mount Macedon and the vegetated backdrop

These key elements have been translated into the proposed DDO under the design objectives and permit requirements as detailed in Chapter 4.

2.3 PRACTICE NOTE

When considering the application of the DDO and the nature of the mandatory versus discretionary application of controls, two practice notes are of relevance.

Practice Note 28 ‘Using the Neighbourhood Character Provisions’ (PN28) and Practice Note 59 ‘The Role of Mandatory Provisions in Planning Schemes’ (PN59) provides some guidance on the appropriate form and application of the DDO.

USING THE NEIGHBOURHOOD CHARACTER PROVISIONS

PN28 recognises the relevance of the DDO in protecting certain elements of neighbourhood character, however it should not be considered as a substitution for the Neighbourhood Character Overlay (NCO).

Specifically, a DDO ‘is more appropriately applied to promote specific urban design outcomes for a particular site or area’. According to the Practice Note, the DDO can be used to achieve very specific neighbourhood character outcomes that are not achievable through other planning mechanisms (such as controls over front fences not afforded by the NCO).

THE ROLE OF MANDATORY PROVISIONS IN PLANNING SCHEMES

PN 59 sets out a range of criteria and considerations which should be taken into account when determining whether mandatory provisions are appropriate. There are only certain elements which may be controlled by a mandatory provision within the



Victorian Planning Framework, including height, site coverage, plot ratio, setbacks to buildings, lot sizes, open space areas and sight lines. Within the context of the DDO, only site coverage, plot ratio, setbacks and heights can be mandated.

The Practice Note sets out a number of criteria which should be considered to determine whether a mandatory provision is appropriate:

Is the mandatory provision strategically supported?

Is it appropriate to the majority of proposals?

Does it provide for the preferred outcome?

Will the majority of proposals not in accordance with the mandatory provision be clearly unacceptable?

Will the mandatory provision reduce administrative costs?

The only mandatory requirement set out in the proposed DDO is with regard to height. As outlined in Chapter 4, the proposed requirement states that:

Buildings must not exceed 8 metres and 2 two storeys maximum above ground level unless the roof pitch exceeds 30 degrees, in which case the maximum height must not exceed 9 metres above natural ground level. Note that roof pitches above 30 degrees are supported, however the second storey must be constructed within the roof form and not exceed height limits. A permit cannot be granted for proposals which vary this requirement.

The draft DDO proposes mandatory controls for:

Site coverage

Building height



3 COMMUNITY FEEDBACK

COMMUNITY DROP-IN SESSION

A community drop-in session was held on 10 March 2016 at the municipal offices in Gisborne. The purpose of the consultation was to provide information and collect feedback from the community regarding the elements of building siting and design which they like or dislike within the Macedon and Mount Macedon townships.

The feedback provided at the drop-in session has been used in developing the design guidelines for Macedon.

There were a total of fifteen people who attended and provided a range of feedback. The attendees included residents, business owners and two Macedon Ranges Shire Councillors. The summary provided below groups the comments under common theme headings. Existing ‘feel’ is interpreted to mean scale and character.

POSITIVE FEATURES TO BE CONSIDERED BY NEW PLANNING CONTROL

Landscape Deciduous trees

Landscaping opportunities

Extend tree avenue to Smith Street

Planter boxes and flowers

Neighbourhood Character

Informal drains and verges

Views

Spaciousness of the existing village

Existing ‘feel’ character of the village

Public art along blank walls to deter graffiti

Street Interface Balconies and awnings over footpath

Front and/or side setbacks to enhance spaciousness

Alfresco kerb side dining opportunities

Verandas on footpaths

Setbacks on southern side of the road, consistent with existing buildings

Height Single storey preferred

Two storey acceptable, if set back on upper levels

Gabled roofs preferred within a maximum height limit of two storeys

Car Parking Car parking should be to the rear of the site

Macedon already has a sufficient amount of car parking

Parking requirements and loading access should all be met on the site

Vacant 19 Victoria Street Site

Future development should extend around the corner on to Margaret Street

A suggestion that any new development on the vacant site follow the contours of the land by allowing two storeys at street level and reduced down to one storey at the rear of the site where the ground level is much higher

A low site coverage and low scale due to fire risk



Other Existing houses along the main street fit into the character

Future apartments should all have fire escape opportunities from each room

Need to consider bushfire risk in all building and site design/construction

Opportunity for lower speeds and more pedestrian crossings

DISLIKES

Landscaping Lack of trees in front of vacant site

Drainage on Bruce Street

Concrete and lack of vegetation in front of strip shops

Unmaintained gardens

Gum trees are not within the character of the village

Cars/Access Parking outside the post office- cars now hang over the footpath

Cars speeding

The new bar opened and parking was reorganised

Waiver of car parking

No tandem car parking

Enforce 15 minute time limit in front of post box

Design Flat roofs detract from village feel

Victoria Street is narrow

Shopping strip awning design square edges, needs posts

Wooden exterior finishes – doesn’t last and looks worn

North and east side of hotel needs painting

Other Lack of signage for businesses/tourists

EXHIBITION OF THE DRAFT GUIDELINES

The Draft Urban Design Guidelines for Macedon and Mount Macedon were exhibited from the 6th of May to 5th of June 2016. 10 of the 20 submissions made comments in relation to the Macedon Urban Design Guidelines. Council has made changes to the guidelines to address some of the issues raised where appropriate.



4 ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the background review, a site inspection and detailed documentation of the built form components (as provided at Appendix A), further analysis and recommendations are discussed in this section.

Macedon’s existing spacious and treed neighbourhood character is determined by the following key components:

Heights

Setbacks

Site coverage

Landscaping

Building materials and colours

The key landscaping elements that contribute to Macedon’s streetscape character are predominantly found within the public realm. However, landscape breaks on private land are important considerations within the village and have been discussed.

Each of the remaining components has been discussed further in this section to highlight the elements that contribute to Macedon and to determine design guideline recommendations for the proposed DDO.



4.1 BUILDING HEIGHT

The existing building heights within Macedon Village are predominantly single storey. Figure 2 below shows the existing building heights within the study area.

The double storey buildings along Victoria have high pitched roofs which incorporate a second floor within, as shown in the photo examples on the following page. The low built forms and separation between building forms allows for views to large trees in the area and to Mt Macedon and the ranges in the near distance.

As noted in the previous VCAT decision mentioned above, the low building height in the town is a key component of its character.



Single Storey examples showing hipped and gabled roof forms

Double Storey examples showing second storey integrated into roof

RECOMMENDATIONS

Strategy: Encourage single storey heights to the street frontage and integrated roof forms that reflect the existing character of the Village. Allow second storeys that are recessed or do not dominate the streetscape and/or incorporate second storey rooms within the roof form.

Requirement: a mandatory maximum building height of 8m for a standard two storey building form, or a maximum 9m to allow for a steep roof pitch incorporating a second level.

The proposed height diagram provided within the Draft DDO (page 20) demonstrates how a second storey may be recessed within an overall height of 8m. The second diagram provides an allowance of a 9m overall height to incorporate the second floor rooms within a steeper roof pitch.



4.2 LOT SIZE AND SITE COVERAGE

The average size of lots within the study area is 882.6sqm, with a range of lots between 420sqm and 3,074sqm. The largest lot (3,074sqm) is the Macedon hotel site located on the corner of Victoria and Smith Street.

The average site coverage for lots within the study area is 37.3% with the minimum site coverage 11.7% and the maximum 57.3% of the lot. The median site coverage across the study area overall is 40.3% with only one site over 50%.

By comparison, if the large hotel site and the 5 smallest sites (strip shops on the corner of Victoria and Margaret Streets) are removed from the calculations, the largest lot size is 1,644sqm, the median lot size is 553sqm and the median site coverage remains at approximately 40%.

These calculations do not include the sites at 6 or 19 Victoria Street, which are vacant. Further details of the site coverage analysis can be found in the table at Appendix A.

RECOMMENDATIONS

As indicated through the analysis above and at Appendix A, the Macedon Village has a very low level of site coverage for a commercial area. This characteristic contributes to the valued spacious and vegetated feel of the Macedon Village.

Strategy: Maintain the low site coverage of the commercial area, while allowing for infill development on vacant sites and limited expansion of existing business.

Requirement: A maximum site coverage of 50% is appropriate.

4.3 FRONT SETBACKS

The average front setback of buildings on lots fronting onto Victoria, Smith, Margaret and Bruce Streets within the study area is 4.4m. The range of setbacks, as shown in Figure 3 below was between 0 metres (no front setback) and 9.9 metres.

As illustrated in Figure 3, the front setbacks within the village centre are inconsistent, however the majority of buildings are generally set back at least 4 metres from the front boundary. The inconsistency of setbacks is also a key characteristic of the Macedon Village.

Often, where a building is built to the front boundary, a verandah is provided over the footpath within the public realm. This is also a key characteristic of Macedon that breaks up the front facades, provides weather protection and encourages greater street activation.

It is the mix of the inconsistent setbacks and verandahs over the footpaths that is valued by the community and clearly contribute to the overall streetscape character.



RECOMMENDATIONS

Given these findings, the proposed DDO requires that buildings between Margaret and Smith Streets along Victoria Street and including the north-west corner of Victoria and Bruce Streets (existing Olive Jones restaurant) should have no front set back requirements. This requirement reflects existing conditions in the western part of the township and allow for greater activation and growth on the vacant sites.

In all other areas, the proposed DDO requires a minimum setback of 3m to provide a separation from the street and landscaped front garden setting to reflect existing conditions in the eastern part of the village centre. Refer to Appendix A. This control will ensure that the spaciousness and landscape character of the streetscape will be retained whilst maximising commercial opportunities.

Where a large canopy tree is provided within a 3m (or greater) front setback, the space to protect the tree as part of a new development should be considered and weighed up against the benefits of the proposal.

Strategy: Maintain a diversity of front setbacks with small setbacks providing opportunities for landscaping and protection of street trees.

Requirement: No front setback between Margaret and Smith Streets along Victoria Street, and a minimum 3m setback in remaining areas of the Commercial 1 Zone.



4.4 FENCES

Front fences within the village centre are generally low or non-existent as shown in the range of example images below. Where there are fences, they are generally low (approximately 1.2 metres high) and semi-permeable/transparent.

The existence of most front fences within Macedon does not detract from spaciousness of the village.

Front fence examples showing variety of permeable low-medium front fences and landscaped frontage

RECOMMENDATIONS

Given the commercial zoning of the township, front fences should generally be discouraged. However, a front fence could be considered if it was no more than 1.0m high and with 50% transparency, to ensure the open spacious character is retained.

Strategy: Discourage front fences, however if a fence is required, it should be no more than 1m in height and 50% transparent.

Requirement: No front fences along Victoria Street



4.5 MATERIAL AND COLOURS

Buildings within the study area comprise predominantly red brick or painted timber weatherboard. Some dwellings incorporate stucco render.

Buildings generally incorporate a muted and earthy colour palette comprising of red, cream, green, white and dark grey.

The muted tones and mix of timber and brick are characteristics that reflect the small village qualities.

Examples of building materials and colours are shown below.

Example building materials and colours

RECOMMENDATIONS

By encouraging the use of building materials and colours, consistent with the existing palette, future buildings and developments will better fit within the existing and preferred streetscape character for the village.

Similarly, bold and bright colours should be discouraged where they distract from the streetscape. The use of brick and masonry is preferred for bushfire reasons.

Strategy: Encourage the use of typical materials and muted tones and colours in new buildings.

Requirement: Utilise brick and masonry materials and muted tones and colours.

APPENDIX A MACEDON C1Z – LOT ANALYSIS



Documents

MACEDON URBAN DESIGN GUIDELINES - … · MACEDON URBAN DESIGN GUIDELINES ... The Study Team recognises that the State of Victoria has an ancient and proud ... The Macedon Village