Page 1 of 217
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT Agenda Item 5.6 COMMITTEE REPORT
6 September 2005 HERITAGE PRECINCTS AND POLICY REVIEW PROJECT
Division Sustainability & Innovation Division
Presenter Con Livanos, Principal Officer Development Planning
Purpose
1. To advise Council of the ‘Heritage Precincts and Policy Review’ project and to seek authorisation to pursue preparation of a planning scheme amendment to implement the objectives of this project.
2. This project commenced in 2001 to review planning for heritage areas in Melbourne. A final consultant report has been submitted and a consultation process undertaken to examine the merit of and support for the recommendations.
Recommendation
3. That the Planning and Environment Committee:
3.1. note the Heritage Precincts and Policy Review Project, its objectives and status; and
3.2. seek authorisation from the Minister for Planning to prepare a planning scheme amendment for public exhibition generally as contained in the final study reports of the Heritage Precinct and Policy Review Project.
Key Issues
4. The Heritage Precincts Project is a project which reviews planning for heritage areas or precincts in Melbourne.
5. The aim of the project is to assist Council make consistent and better decisions about the care of heritage places through the planning permit system. Improvements are proposed to be made to the existing base of information to understand how heritage places are important and how change can be managed. Melbourne’s heritage precincts are identified at Attachment 1.
6. The final study report on the Heritage Precincts Project is at Attachment 2. This study report proposes recommendations for change to the existing controls. Consultation on the development of the report has occurred since 2001 and is summarised at Attachment 3.
7. Consultation on the final study report with key stakeholders has been carried out during 2005 and culminated in a recent round of consultation through workshops and meetings, conducted by IUM Planning Consultants. The key issues identified through the consultation are presented in the report by IUM Planning Consultants at Attachment 4.
Page 2 of 217
8. This report has summarised key issues on the study raised during consultation and has made a number of recommendations to resolve them.
9. It is proposed that a planning scheme amendment process is commenced based upon the consultants study and which resolves the issues raised by consultation and presented in the IUM Planning Consultants report.
10. The recent changes to the Planning and Environment Act 1987 require Council to seek authorisation from the Minister for Planning to proceed with the preparation of a planning scheme amendment.
11. It is recommended that Council seeks authorisation from the Minister to prepare a planning scheme amendment for public exhibition generally as recommended by the consultant and reworked structurally into an appropriate form of amendment as recommended by IUM Planning Consultants.
12. Once prepared, the recommended planning scheme amendment would be reported to Council seeking authorisation to exhibit. This future exhibition phase of a planning scheme amendment enables public examination of the detailed content and heritage analysis presented in the consultants Study Report.
Relation to Council Policy (including Municipal Strategic Statement)
13. The existing policy context is as follows:
“The Council adopted Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS) states the Council’s strategic objectives for the management of heritage in the City of Melbourne. Clause 21.05-1 establishes a conservation policy to protect heritage places and precincts. Implementation strategies to achieve this conservation ethic for each heritage precinct (Local Area) are specified in Section 21.08 of the adopted MSS.
The Melbourne Planning Scheme’s heritage policies at Clause 22.04 and 22.05 provide guidance as to the management of heritage places, respectively, within and outside of the Capital City Zone.”
Time Frame
14. The project commenced in 2001 and a final draft report was received from the consultants in December 2004.
15. A comprehensive consultation process has occurred on the comple ted study during 2005. It is anticipated that exhibition of an amendment based on the consultants final report (as amended to resolve substantives issues raised during the consultation), will occur by close of financial year 2006.
Consultation
16. Undertaking the formal legal amendment procedure triggers a lengthy public and statutory process of consultation and examination of the recommendations. It is practice to consult earlier than that required by statutory processes, however, by consulting during the Study development phase of a strategic policy review. Upon completion of the Study, an initial consultation has been carried out to evaluate the merit of and community support for, the Consultant’s recommended changes.
2 Page 3 of 217
17. The progress of the consultation with key stakeholders from 2001 to date is summarised in Attachment 2.
18. There are three clear phases of consultation on this project:
18.1. Phase I is consultation during preparation of the study from 2001 – 2004;
18.2. Phase II is consultation with key stakeholders on the completed study during 2005; and
18.3. Phase II is the most thorough and public phase of consultation, taking place during exhibition of an amendment.
19. Phase II, consultation on the completed study, has just been completed and involved a series of meetings, workshops and receipt of detailed written comments from key stakeholders, including community groups as represented on Council’s Heritage Advisory Committee, the Department of Sustainability and Environment, Heritage Victoria and the City of Melbourne Development Planning Staff. Consultation on the report was open to addressing all aspects of the work’s structure, content, policy standards and implementation.
20. Consultation on the completed study has been open and comprehensive. At the completion of the Phase II, the recommendations made by IUM Planning Consultants were reported back to all stakeholders consulted.
Finance
21. Costs will be associated with the subsequent exhibition of an amendment. These costs can be met from the Development Planning Branch’s 2004/05 Operating Budget.
Legal
22. If the Planning Scheme is to be amended, Divisions 1 and 2 of Part 3 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 need to be complied with.
Sustainability
23. The Heritage Precincts Project will have a positive impact on the sustainability aim to “Protect Melbourne's distinctive physical character and ensure it continues to develop a 'strong sense of place and identity' (SD 3.5)”.
Background
What are the Existing Heritage Planning Controls
24. Melbourne adopted heritage controls more than thirty years ago to conserve the significant built environment. Heritage places include individual buildings, important streets and whole areas or precincts.
25. These heritage places were comprehensively identified and their level of importance ranked from A to D during a raft of 1980s studies. This information is recorded in Council’s i-heritage public internet database.
3 Page 4 of 217
26. Many of these places were given legal protection in the Melbourne Planning Scheme requiring a permit to make changes which may affect their heritage values or significance. These heritage controls have delivered a legacy of significant places that contribute to Melbourne being a high quality, multifaceted and culturally rich city.
27. Council relies on local heritage policies to guide good decisions about appropriate changes to heritage places. The local policy tells owners, applicants, interested members of the community and decision makers what is an acceptable change (repainting) and what is not (demolition of an A graded building).
28. While the heritage policies and listed places have been expanded and updated since the 1980s studies, there has been no comprehensive review of the heritage policy for the management of whole areas or precincts. There are special heritage precincts, for example, in Carlton, in the CBD and in Kensington. Melbourne’s heritage precincts are shown in Attachment 1.
29. Good management of heritage precincts requires respecting their character, conserving essential elements and adding new sympathetically designed elements.
Review of Existing Heritage Planning Controls
30. The submitted Heritage Precincts and Policy Review Study comprise two documents prepared by Consultant Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd and attached at Attachment 2. The key outcomes of these reports are also summarised at Attachment 5. “City of Melbourne, Heritage Precincts Project, A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy, December 2004, Final Report. This is the consultants final study report reviewing the City of Melbourne’s policy on heritage precincts.
City of Melbourne, Heritage Precincts Project, Incorporated Document: Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne, December 2004, Final Report. It is drafted as an Incorporated Document, proposed to form part of the Melbourne Planning Scheme. This document is the product which implements the review recommendations.”
31. This study report proposes recommendations for change to the existing controls. There are three key elements of the Heritage Precincts Project which, if supported, will require amendment to the Melbourne Planning Scheme. These include:
31.1. new/improved Statements of Significance for all of Melbourne’s Heritage Precincts. This information would tell us what is important about Melbourne’s heritage areas. This work included reassessment of the boundaries of certain of the heritage precincts;
31.2. new local policy just to apply to Heritage Precincts. This policy states the principles for the care of heritage areas; and
31.3. new/improved performance standards to guide decision making for Melbourne’s Heritage Precincts.
32. A companion study to the Heritage Precincts Project is the Individual Heritage Places Review Project, currently in the scoping phase, which will assess the current management of individual heritage buildings in the City of Melbourne. This project will be informed by the implementation of the Heritage Precincts Project.
4 Page 5 of 217
Consultation on the Proposed Changes the Existing Heritage Planning Controls
33. Consultation carried out from 2001 to date is summarised in Attachment 3. Due to the breadth of issues raised during initial consultation, IUM planning consultants was engaged to run some further consultation sessions and advise the Council on the outcome. The consultation process has identified a number of significant issues which require resolution prior to formal exhibition of a planning scheme amendment based on the final consultants report. These are outlined in the discussion below.
Where to from here
34. IUM Planning Consultants have prepared a report Heritage Precincts and Policy Review project, Report on consultations (Attachment 4) which documents feedback from consultation held to review the material prepared by the consultants.
35. IUM Planning consultants identified the following positive features of the work:
35.1. the development of Statements of Significance;
35.2. performance standards for corner sites; and
35.3. the background material and literature review.
36. IUM Planning consultants identified the following issues with the work:
36.1. the proposed structure was confusing and difficult to follow. A particular concern was how the proposal related to existing policies and the MSS.
Specific concerns covered:
36.1.1. proposed extensions to the Heritage overlay and use of sub-precincts;
36.1.2. drafting and content of the Statements of Significance;
36.1.3. proposed changes to the definition of building gradings;
36.1.4. treatment of graded buildings adjacent to precincts;
36.1.5. objectives for each precinct;
36.1.6. prescriptive nature of the performance standards & definitions related to performance standards;
36.1.7. language of the standards and policy;
36.1.8. the performance standards for concealment;
36.1.9. issues around works abutting laneways;
36.1.10. the performance standards for retention of rear private open spaces;
36.1.11. retention of trees and the performance standards related to parklands; and
36.1.12. the control of civic works.
5 Page 6 of 217
37. This report concludes that it is clear from the feedback that revision of the material prepared to date is required and suggests splitting revision into three phases:
37.1. preparation of revised statements of significance;
37.2. developing revised policy/performance standards guidance; and
37.3. review of precinct boundaries.
38. It is recommended that Council seeks authorisation from the Minister for Planning to prepare a planning scheme amendment, generally based upon the consultants recommendations and which addresses the issues with the work as raised by the consultation with the community and other stakeholders. The planning scheme study and amendment process is shown as a flowchart in Attachment 6.
Attachments: 1. Map of Heritage Precincts 2. A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy 3. Heritage Precincts Project - Consultation 4. Heritage Precincts and Policy Review Project Report on Consultations 5. Key Outcomes of Reports 6. The Planning Scheme Amendment and Study Process 6 Page 7 of 217
PARK
City of Moreland
ST
CHILDRENS WELFARE
ROYAL PARK
PSYCHIATRIC HOSPITAL ST PARK Western Oval ROYAL TULLAMARINE PRINCES PARK BOWEN Ransford Oval PARK MOUNT ROYAL HOSPITAL McAlister Oval TENNIS GOLF POPLAR CLUB PDE
COURSE AVENUE
PRINCES PARK
BOWLING CLUB
COMMONWEALTH SERUM LABORATORIES Ryder Oval
LA McPHERSON PRINCES BASEBALL FIELD RD
THE
OAK Royal Park Station PARK POPLAR OVAL
IEVERS ST
Clubhouse CR ROYAL PARK Hockey Field
GOLF COURSE
Tramway ST
AVENUE
Ross Straw Field
RIDLEY OPTUS OVAL
COLLEGE
MANNINGHAM AV WALKER ST MELBOURNE ZOOLOGICAL GARDENS KENDALL GARTON TREACY COLLEGE HO1HO1 MACPHERSON
Hockey Field
Princes DR Hill ST FWY
Netball Courts Tennis DR State Hockey Centre Club
ST HO4HO4 Pavilion THE
ST
Brens Oval BRENS Tramway WHITLEY PRINCES G.Smith COLLEGE
Oval LEONARD PARK ST MACARTHUR
THE ST CHURCH BRENS RD FLEMINGTON
DR MILE ST
MELBOURNE GENERAL SOUTHGATE CEMETERY EPSOM
CRAWFORD OVAL
CEMETERY
Tennis
ST Courts PRINCES PARK PRINCES RD
Tramway AVENUE WEST
LYGON
UNIVERSITY RD COLLEGE CR CURRAN BELMONT RD PRINCES ST ROYAL PARK SOUTH City of Yarra RD HOUSING ST CEMETERY ST EAST COMMISSION ST ST ST ST OF VICTORIA COLLEGE RD PL ST VICTORIA ST RD BROUGHAM BAYLES DEGRAVES
LYTTON ST DR QUEEN ST DRUMMOND ST ELIZABETH ST ST ST ST MACAULAY HO3HO3 HOSPITAL ST RIDGEWAY HO3HO3 BANGALORE ST ST KEPPEL NEILL HO9HO9 RD City ERSKINE HO9HO9 BELLAIR ST EASTWOOD ROYAL CHILDRENS HOSPITAL MORRAH OF THE ST of ST Moonee Valley ST ST KAY HENRY RD CHAPMAN
RD WIMBLE
LANGFORD ST HARDIMAN MELROSE
DERBY ST PITT GOWER PDE ST STEEL MACAULAY ST CANNING CARROL ST ALTONA ST SHIEL ST PALMERSTON
Moonee ST HO9HO9 ST HO9HO9 STATION CHELMSFORD GATEHOUSE HAMPDEN STRAKER ST ELIZABETH BENJAMIN ST ST ST ST ST MOLESWORTH STORY FITZGIBBON BARRETT PARK ST ST WOLSELEY GR REYNOLDS ELGIN HENDERSON ST ST FINK LA UNIVERSITY HIGH SCHOOL HOUSING ST WOOD ST ST ST COMMISSION ST ST PARK HO9HO9 OF HO9HO9 LA VICTORIA SCHOOL OF SOUTHEY STEWARTS
ST ST VET MACARTHUR SCIENCE ST ST HARDWICK ST ST GRACIE UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE ST BRUCE ST ST PL NTH HAINES HAWKER J.J.HOLLAND ST GREEN ST ST FARADAY MACARTHUR PARK ST ST ST ARDEN ST MURPHY PL STH ST ST ST ST HAINES ST MARY ROYAL MELBOURNE HOSPITAL TENNYSON ST ORMOND ARDEN ST ST NICHOLSON CHILDERS ST DRYBURGH ST HARCOURT HO1HO1 NORTH MELBOURNE HO1HO1 ST HO1HO1 HARRIS ST South Kensington Station GRATTAN CRICKET GROUND COURTNEY ARDEN FOGARTY RD O'SHANASSY ST STATE COLLEGE ROYAL MURCHISON ROYAL DENTAL OF VICTORIA WEST MELBOURNE WOMENS HOSPITAL LLOYD S.E.C. ST ST
ST HOSPITAL TERMINAL CARDIGAN STATION Ponds VILLIERS ST ST ST RD ST BARKLY OWEN ROYAL ST DRUMMOND ST
ST
ST CARLTON CANNING TCE ST ST LENNON ST ST WRECKYN ST ST BALLIE HO1HO1 LINCOLN ST ST DEFEU ST ST BERKLEY SQ DYNON ROAD ST ST NORTH ST PROVOST PELHAM BARRY FREIGHT TERMINAL ST BLACKWOOD ARGYLE ST ST BERKLEY ELIZABETH PL NTH
QUEENSBERRY O'CONNELL BARRY ST.GEORGES
LLOYD R.C. SCHOOL ST ST PL ST BEDFORD LINCOLN ST
RAILWAY SQ ST SOUTH
RADCLIFFE HO3HO3 ARGYLE HO3HO3 ST Creek ELM ST PL STH ST QUEENSBERRY HO1HO1 STAWELL ST HO1HO1 MELBOURNE EXHIBITION BUILDING
LOTHIAN VICTORIA ST ST
CURZON
ERROL
LAURENS
MUNSTER LEVESON ST RD MILLER HO3HO3 ST ST
EADES COBDEN Pond SPENCER ST. MARY'S ST ABBOTSFORD ST ST KING R.C. LEICESTER ST CHURCH VICTORIA DYNON BRIDGE ROAD BOUVERIE Pond SWANSTON WILLIAM ST CARDIGAN Creek IRELAND PL ST LYGON North VICTORIA ST CARLTON VICTORIA DRUMMOND
DRYBURGH Melbourne MARKET
RATHDOWNE GARDENS MELBOURNE WHOLESALE HOWARD MARKET
Station ST ST FRUIT & VEGETABLE ELIZABETH EMILY NICHOLSON MILTON THERRY MARKET ST McPHERSON ST CHETWYND ST CAPEL COLLEGE HO7HO7 SWANSTON MACKENZIEST STEWART HO7HO7Public Toilets ST ADDERLEY ABBOTSFORD RUSSELL ST PEEL VICTORIA ST ROYAL M.C.C. FISH SPRING City
RAILWAY ST EXHIBITION MARKET WALSH MELBOURNE EVELYN Ponds ST ST HO3HO3 INSTITUTE of FRANKLIN ST QUEEN OF
ST FRANKLIN PL Yarra TECHNOLOGY
PL HAWKE ST ALBERT ST
NATIONAL MORRISON QUEEN ST Museum LATROBE LIBRARY ST MUSEUM Station EADES RD RODEN ST PDE ST MMTB PL ST.JAMES LATROBE Museum C.O.E FLAGSTAFF Station ST ST A'BECKETT STANLEY WILLS ST GARDENS ST STATE
HOUSES CATHEDRAL FREEMASONS ST Moonee OF ROSSLYN PL ST PARLIAMENT ST Parliament HOSPITAL SUDHOLZ ST Station PL FESTIVAL HALL BATMAN ST POWLETT PARLIAMENT GREY HO2HO2 HO2HO2RESERVE Flagstaff ST ANDREWS Dam REGISTRAR MARRIAGES HO507HO507 HO500HO500 ST HO500HO500 OF HO500HO500 ST LONSDALE PL RD RD JEFFCOTT Station STATE (ROYAL MINT) ST BOYD DUDLEY SOUTHERN MERCY HOSPITAL MELBOURNE OFFICES ST MACARTHUR CROSS ST REMAND KING CENTRE CENTRE PL ST LATROBE GIPPS ST AUSTRALIAN STATE GOVERNMENT OFFICES
ST LONSDALE DARLING APPLETON DOCK BROADCASTING COMMISSION SPENCER NAURU ST HOUSE ST TREASURY ST LITTLE CONSERVATORY HOTHAM SUPREME HO509HO509 COURT BOURKE ST FOOTSCRAY TREASURY GARDENS FITZROY GARDENS ST SCOTS LA ST THE AGE HO504HO504 ST CHURCH HO504HO504 MELBOURNE M.C.C. GEORGE LONSDALE BOURKE TOWN LANSDOWNE NURSERY HALL WELLINGTON ST ST ST LITTLE CLARENDON HO502HO502 WELLINGTON HILTON HOTEL DOCK POWLETT COLLINS ST HODDLE AV
SIMPSON PIER HO503HO503 HO506HO506 PDE RD MELBOURNE HO503HO503 HO501HO501 ST MAIL EXCHANGE HO501HO501 GARDEN SOUTH Jolimont Station PDE
INTERSTATE TERMINAL BOURKE ST
ST COLLINS LA CENTRAL HO506HO506 HO506HO506 TCE HO505HO505FLINDERS PALMER ST MARKET Princes Bridge Station
LITTLE ST ST ST ST HO506HO506 ST DOCK Spencer Street JOLIMONT AGNES JOLIMONT Flinders Street RD ST Station STATE SWIMMING CENTRE JOLIMONT CHARLES Station BATMAN AV JOLIMONT ST BRUNTON CHILDRENS COLLINS ST ST Princes COURT BERRY Yarra Bridge Yarra VALE RAILWAY VAULTS HO2HO2 VALE AL River ST MELBOURNE RD FLINDERSDOWNIE ST BANANA SOUTH CHARLES GRIMES BRIDGE CONCERT CRICKET PROMENADE JEFFRIES HALL ST.KILDA GROUND ST YARRA of
Queens BROWN PARK Bridge WHARVES NORTH ST ALEXANDRA PDE WEBB DOCK RAILWAY SOUTHBANK FLINDERS Car Park SOUTHBANK RD THEATRES
City ST COOK AND WHARVES Kings Bridge NATIONAL ST SPIRE ST QUEEN VICTORIA TCS CONTAINERS ST TENNIS GARDENS RICHMOND WORLD ST ST ST AV CRICKET ST CONGRESS CENTRE NATIONAL GALLERY CENTRE GROUND FANNING OF VICTORIA CROWN CASINO ST ST FLINDERS River SIDDELEY Spencer
PUNT INGLES WORLD TRADE CENTRE AV HO5HO5 LINLITHGOW AV Bridge HO5HO5 Swan St. St Richmond Charles VICTORIAN ARTS CENTRE Grimes Bridge ST Station Yarra Bridge
HALL SWAN BLVD ALEXANDRA ST LINLITHGOW BOUNDARY
TURNER POWER ST ST FAWKNER CLARENDON BATMAN SEC ST ST
DOUGLAS S.E.C. WORKSHOPS ST HO6HO6 ST WALKER KINGS DOMAIN ST TYNE KINGS OLYMPIC PARK GROUND No.1 ROGERS FERRARS ST MELBOURNE VICTORIAN COLLEGE
ST EXHIBITION OF THE ARTS ST LORIMER HARTLEY CENTRE BALSTON ST ST WHITEMAN QUEENS BRIDGE ST ST ARMY DEPOTS MOORE AV RD
GRAHAM CITY RD LA
CT ST CLARKE ST OLYMPIC PARK GROUND No.2
KRAFT FOODS LIMITED MAZDA ST RD MONTAGUE ST ST MACGOWANST WADEY ST GOVERNMENT YARRA PARK ST Tan Track MUNRO RD KAVANAGH ST City of Port Phillip GRANT ST AV HAIG HO5HO5 HOUSE BOULTON CATHERINE HO5HO5 HO5HO5 ST NORMANBY ST ST ST ST PDE COOK WHITEMAN FREEWAY BIRDWOOD GOVERNMENT HOUSE PL ST
BLACKENEY HANCOCK Morell ST MILES HO5HO5 bridge WEST GATE City of Port Phillip HAIG VICTORIA BARRACKS WELLS
CITY PUNT ST WELLS River ST
ST
MIDDLETON ST LEONARDS KINGS DOMAIN MOORE HO5HO5
DODDS LA
CT
Hoddle
Bridge
WAY ST AV GOVERNOR LATROBE'S COTTAGE ROYAL STURT COVENTRY ST BOTANIC RD CLOWES
GARDENS ST
NATIONAL HERBARIUM
ST
SHRINE OF REMEMBRANCE HO6HO6 HO6HO6 RD HO6HO6 BROOKS HO6HO6
DR
LILY LAKE FAIRLIE DOMAIN AIRLIE THE CT RIGHI
DALLAS ACLAND LEGEND HO6HO6 A ST HO6HO6 V ANDERSON ST KILDA MELBOURNE WITCHWOOD
GRAMMAR SCHOOL PL CL
PRECINCTS OUTSIDE THE CAPITAL CITY ZONE ST
ST KURNEH ST RD DAY ST
BROMBY ST ST ST HO1HO1 CARLTON PRECINCT ST ST ST MARTINS
ST ST LA HO2HO2HO2 EAST MELBOURNE & JOLIMONT PRECINCT TIVOLI ST RANDALL PL PL HO3HO3 NORTH AND WEST MELBOURNE PRECINCT ARNOLD
ADAMS
HOPE MONA HO4HO4 PARKVILLE PRECINCT DOMAIN PL
MILLSWYN
MASON
LEOPOLD PARK
ST. KILDA TOORAK HO5HO5 SOUTH MELBOURNE PRECINCT MARNE FAWKNER
PARK WALSH MELBOURNE'SMELBOURNE'SMELBOURNE'S HERITAGEHERITAGEHERITAGE PRECINCTSPRECINCTSPRECINCTS TENNIS MELBOURNE'SMELBOURNE'SMELBOURNE'S HERITAGEHERITAGEHERITAGE PRECINCTSPRECINCTSPRECINCTS CLUB
HO6HO6 SOUTH YARRA PRECINCT Stonnington
RD CHRIST
CHURCH HO9HO9 KENSINGTON PRECINCT OF SLATER ENGLAND of
ST PL
PRECINCTS WITHIN THE CAPITAL CITY ZONE FAWKNER PARK PARK City
City
HO500HO500 BOURKE HILL PRECINCT ARMADALE of ST HO501HO501 BOURKE WEST PRECINCT HO6HO6
ST WEST HO502HO502 THE BLOCK PRECINCT Port
CORDNER OVAL HO503HO503 BANK PLACE PRECINCT
Phillip HO504HO504 COLLINS EAST PRECINCT PASLEY
HO505HO505 FLINDERS GATE PRECINCT
PARK LA HO506HO506 FLINDERS LANE PRECINCT COMMERCIAL
HO507HO507 LITTLE BOURKE STREET PRECINCT RD
ALFRED HOSPITAL HO509HO509 POST OFFICE PRECINCT
HO7HO7 QUEEN VICTORIA MARKET PRECINCT
ROYAL VICTORIAN
INSTITUTE FOR ORMOND
THE BLIND FREEMASONS HOMES HALL MOUBRAY
ST
OVAL
WESLEY COLLEGE OVAL
RD HO6HO6 0 200 400 HIGH DEPARTMENT OF SUSTAINABILITY AND ENVIRONMENT ST PREPARED BY: PLANNING DATA AND MAPPING TEAM metres Indicative map of Melbourne's Heritage Precincts, excluding individual heritage overlays Page 8 of 217 Attachment 2 Agenda Item 5.6 Planning and Environment Committee 6 September 2005
City of Melbourne, Heritage Precincts Project
A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy
December 2004
Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd Ground Floor, 69 Silverdale Road, Eaglemont, Victoria 3084
Study Team Meredith Gould John Keaney Gary Vines
City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 9 of 217
Contents
1 STUDY PARAMETERS 5
1.1 Scope of the Project 5
1.2 Study area 6
1.3 Consultation 6
2 SUMMARY OF OUTCOMES FROM THE HERITAGE PRECINCTS PROJECT 8
3 BACKGROUND TO HERITA GE CONTROLS IN THE CITY OF MELBOURNE 9
4 EXISTING HERITAGE RESOURCES 12
4.2 Existing Heritage Data – Overview and data availability. 12
4.3 Early reports prepared under the auspices of the City of Melbourne and the State Government 12
4.4 Reports prepared for the areas outside the Capital City Zone under the auspices of the City of Melbourne, after the introduction of heritage controls in the Planning Scheme in 1983 13
4.5 The 1985 Guidelines outside the Capital City Zone 13
4.6 Relationship of the existing heritage data to the current Local Policy provisions in the Planning Scheme for precincts outside the Capital City Zone 14
4.7 Reports prepared for the areas inside the Capital City Zone under the auspices of the City of Melbourne, after the introduction of heritage controls in the Planning Scheme 14
4.8 Existing Heritage Data – Particular Studies 14
4.9 Existing Statements of Significance for Heritage Precincts. 20
4.10 Heritage Data for elements within the public realm. 21
4.11 Summary of findings in relation to heritage data 22
4.12 Human Resources in the Planning Department 22
5 CURRENT LOCAL HERITA GE POLICY 23
6 PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE MELBOURNE PLA NNING SCHEME 26
6.1 Insertions to the July 2004 Municipal Strategic Statement 27
6.2 MSS Additions 28
21.02-3 City structure (and built form – delete) 28
21.03-3 Approach to managing built form 30
2 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 10 of 217
21.04-1 Housing and community 30
21.05-1 Heritage 31
21.05-2 Structure and character 31
6.3 Incorporated Document under Clause 81 34
6.4 Amendments to Clause 22.04 and Clause 22.05 34
6.5 How the system will work 35
6.6 Proposed Local Policy Clause 22.XX 35
7 PRECINCT STATEMENTS OF SIGNIFICANCE IN THE PROPOSED INCORPORATED DOCUMENT 43
7.1 The Preparation of Precinct Statements of Significance 43
8 THE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS IN THE PROPOSED INCORPORATED DOCUMENT 44
9 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AMENDMENT TO HERITAGE OVERLAY PRECINCT BOUNDARIES 46
9.1 Scope for boundary amendment 46
9.2 Summary of Changes 47
Carlton 47
East Melbourne including the Parliamentary Precinct 47
Kensington and Milling 47
North and West Melbourne 48
Parkville 48
South Yarra 48
Around Grant Street, south of the National Gallery. Existing HO5 (deletion) 48
Bank Place 48
Bourke Hill 49
Bourke West (current H501 deleted) 49
Collins Street East 49
Flinders Lane 49
Flinders Street 49
Guildford Lane (new) 49
Hardware Street (new) 49
Little Bourke Street 49
3 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 11 of 217
Queen Victoria Market 49
Retail Core 49
9.3 Proposed Heritage Overlay Boundaries 50
10 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER INVESTIGATION AND REVIEW 58
Local Policy for Individual Heritage Overlays 58
Grading and streetscape definitions 58
Streetscape levels 58
Laneways 58
Street trees 59
Protocols for Civic Works 59
Updates to data in existing Heritage Studies. 59
Individual Heritage Overlays outside precincts 59
Amendment to the Capital City Zone to include the Parliamentary Precinct 60
APPENDICES A, B. 61
APPENDIX C DOCUMENT REVIEW 62
4 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 12 of 217 1 Study Parameters
1.1 Scope of the Project
The City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project is a review of heritage local policy for precincts, within the context of the 1999 new format Planning Scheme. It commenced in 2001.
When the City of Melbourne adopted heritage controls more than twenty years ago, it was amongst the first municipal bodies to do so in Victoria and Australia. It led the way in recording assets, and administering the heritage provisions applying within the Planning Scheme at that time. Whilst there have been some updates and additions to the inventory of identified heritage items since most were undertaken in the mid 1980s, and a Local Heritage Policy has been included in the Melbourne Planning Scheme (1999), there has been no full review of the heritage precinct matters. The guidance for development and the vast majority of the data upon which planners rely in making decisions, is up to twenty years old.
In part this review is brought about by changes to the Victorian Planning Provisions (VPP’s) outlining the requirements for Heritage Overlays in 1996; in particular noting the need for a ‘Statement of Significance’ for each Heritage Place. There was no requirement for such a statement to be prepared when the areas now covered by Heritage Overlay became subject to heritage controls - then ‘Urban Conservation Areas’ - in the 1980s. The situation is somewhat similar to that for the Victorian Heritage Register. Commenced in 1976 as an initiative of the Hamer government 1, the first State Heritage Register included many properties with information mostly limited to an address and description of the place. As techniques and standards for the assessment and recording of heritage places developed, additions to the Register included more rigorous research and eventually a ‘Statement of Significance. Heritage Victoria has undertaken a systematic review of the early registrations over the last decade to provide a clear understanding of what, how and why, certain places have State cultural heritage value, including a ‘Statement of Significance’ for each one. The Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project addresses similar matters as part of a prudent and timely review.
The Heritage Precincts Project has five key study tasks: > to review the adequacy of existing heritage resources – data and staffing; > to prepare a Statement of Significance for each heritage precinct; > to assess existing Local Policy in the Planning Scheme, and to make recommendations for change to this where necessary; > where required, to adjust the precinct boundaries, > to make recommendations for signposting the Local Policy within the revised Municipal Strategic Statement adopted by Council in 2004; and > to provide a prioritised list of desirable additional heritage information.
1 Historic Buildings Preservation Act, 1976. 5 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 13 of 217
1.2 Study area
The Study area covers heritage precincts in the whole of the City of Melbourne, excluding Docklands.
1.3 Consultation
There has been consultation with local community groups, the National Trust, City of Melbourne staff, the City of Melbourne Heritage Advisory Committee and the Department of Sustainability and Environment.
Consultation with local community groups has been through meetings and requests for submissions over a period of two years. The six local groups were initially asked to provide written information on heritage issues within their local area. This was reviewed and a separate meeting followed with each group. After release of draft proposals, a second round of explanatory meetings occurred attended all groups. Further written submissions were then reviewed and taken into account in the preparation of this final draft.
The City of Melbourne Heritage Advisory Committee has representatives from local community groups, the Department of Sustainability and Environment, and the National Trust, and expert community members. The committee reviewed the draft proposals for change to the Local Policy and Statements of Significance for the areas within and outside the Capital City Zone in 2003 and in February 2004. Preliminary maps indicating boundary changes were prepared in draft form in 2002 and provided to the committee for review in February 2004.
The National Trust was invited to make submissions in 2001 and did so in that year, suggesting possible additions to Heritage Overlays within the central city. Review of the Capital City Zone HO’s included review of the Trust’s recommendations. The proposed changes to Local Policy were reviewed by the Trust in 2003. Through their representation on the City of Melbourne Heritage Advisory Committee, the Trust have also had an opportunity to review and make comment on the updated draft Local Policy, the Statements of Significance, and the proposals for changes to precinct boundaries.
To establish the suitability of the approach to the task, in mid 2002 Geoff Austin, John Phillips and Paul Jerome from the Department of Environment (now DOI and DSE) were provided with a preliminary document outlining possible changes to Local Policy and Statements of Significance for areas outside the Capital City Zone. The format proposed at that time was for inclusion of a substantial increase in information in Clauses 22.04 and 22.05. DSE considered this form was not appropriate and as a consequence, the approach to the task was changed to the format recommended in this final draft. DSE have not been subsequently consulted, however there has been an opportunity for review through the Geoff Austin’s membership on the City of Melbourne Heritage Advisory Committee.
Meetings with City of Melbourne planners have sought responses on issues of concern in the administration of the heritage provisions in the Planning Scheme. The information collected was particularly useful in preparation of the amended Local Policy. City of Melbourne planners have reviewed the draft of the proposed Incorporated Document through a series of meetings. Written comments were
6 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 14 of 217 provided by some planners and modification to the document has followed. Heritage consultant to the Planning Department Bryce Raworth, reviewed the Statements of Significance, the proposed local policy Clause and the proposed performance standards heritage overlays within the for Capital City Zone in 2003, making recommendation for change, only through addition to Clause 22.04-5 to require a Heritage Impact Statement where directed by Council. A delegated representative of the City of Melbourne Parks and Gardens division, reviewed the draft Incorporated document in 2003.
7 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 15 of 217 2 Summary of Outcomes from the Heritage Precincts Project
The Heritage Precincts Project has produced the following integrated documents:
§ A new Local Policy (Clause 22.XX) This is to apply to precinct Heritage Overlays, replacing the precinct provisions of the previous Clauses 22.04 and 22.05. Heritage Overlays to individual sites outside a precinct will not be covered by the proposed Clause 22.XX. Clause 22.05 will require amendment by others to cover the individual Heritage Overlays sites.
§ An Incorporated Document Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne This includes a framework for Melbourne, Statements of Significance for each Heritage Overlay Precinct, Performance Standards within and outside the Capital City Zone, definitions and background information for each overlay.
§ Amendment to the Municipal Strategic Statement and insertions in the Planning Scheme to give effect to the Incorporated document and the new Local Policy
§ Draft maps for new Heritage overlay boundaries, including recommendations for two additional HOs within the Capital City Zone and two deleted HOs..
§ Recommendations for additional work to update the existing Heritage resources.
8 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 16 of 217 3 Background to Heritage Controls in the City of Melbourne
Quantitative building controls were the primary mechanism for planning in the early decades of Melbourne’s development. In 1849 the Melbourne Building Act was passed addressing the requirement for fireproof construction inside the first Town Reserve. This covered the areas south of Victoria Parade and north of the river and included the residential area of East Melbourne. In areas beyond the Town Reserve compliance with the Act was not required, allowing construction of less substantial buildings (including timber), without construction to prevent spread-of-fire between sites.
In the early 1870s compliance with the Act was extended to the extended Town Reserve, including parts of West and North Melbourne, South Yarra and all of Carlton. The impact of the Act can be seen in the built form of these regions. A masonry row house without a parapet carried above the roof will generally mark it as pre Act compliance or pre 1870, and similarly timber construction on the property boundary is indicative of a pre Building Act compliance date. The majority of North Melbourne and Kensington were not within the City of Melbourne at the time of peak development and did not have to comply with the Melbourne Building Act until much later.
The issues of height, light, ventilation and healthy living conditions were dealt with in subsequent building regulations. In the central city, 132 feet (40.23m) was set as the maximum height for the wide streets in 1912, (provided “fireproof” construction was used and fire hoses and taps were provided on each floor), with a much lower height for the narrower streets. Keeping vehicle assess off the major streets in the central city was also controlled from a very early date.
On the residential sites in inner Melbourne where the land area is small, compared to the suburban development which would become common in the twentieth century, the Uniform Building Regulations (UBR) and the Victoria Building Regulations (VBR which replaced them in 1983) prevented tall buildings through their setback and site coverage requirements.
The UBR Regulations which preceded Heritage Control operated much like some of the current Clause 54 (Rescode) provisions, to restrict development: Clause 11.6 (2) Height related to minimum setback Where any part of an external wall measured above the natural ground level exceeds 3.6m in height, the minimum prescribed distance of that part of the wall from a boundary other than the street alignment shall be increased in the proportion of 100mm for every 300mm or part thereof by which the height of that part of the wall exceeds 3.6m
Clause 11.8 (1) ….all buildings pursuant to these Regulations to have a building approval shall be constructed in such a way that together they do not occupy more than 50 percent of the total area of the allotment. [For allotments less than 418 square metres an increase was possible provided adequate open space was provided, but site coverage was not to exceed a maximum of 80 %]
9 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 17 of 217
Orderly planning through use of building regulations was a feature of development in the central city for over 120 years from the first subdivision in 1837. But in the mid 1950s, all this would change with the ICI building which exceeded the maximum height for a building through a ‘modification’ from the Building Referees. Extensive redevelopment followed in the centre and in areas fringing the grid. By the 1960s a maximum height had became difficult to achieve because of the frequent application and granting of modifications to the maximum height. Community concern resulted in pressure for more effective planning and in response; Minister Lou Lieberman introduced the first planning controls to address heritage and urban amenity in 1981. In effect, the assessment of the ‘public interest’ in consideration of ‘modifications’ to buildings, would now pass from the Building Referees to a growing band of new professionals - Town Planners. These planning provisions would be the first broad scale, qualitative rather than quantitative controls.
In June 1981, an independent panel appointed by the Minister for Planning, reported on Amendment 151 to the Planning Scheme related to Parks Boulevards and Historic Precincts. In the Introduction it notes: “Town planning in Australia has traditionally been concerned with controlling land use by means of restrictive zoning. It has not been concerned with urban design which is the underlying purpose of the proposed amendment. “2 In a news release from the minister of 13 August 1981, Minister Mr. Lieberman indicated that change was to come:
This Amendment 151 is the beginning of a new framework of planning controls to provide certainty that both the unique character of Melbourne will be protected, and that appropriate development to enhance this character will be encouraged and facilitated.
Amendment 151 was a key component in the development of the controls in the Parks and in subsequent Heritage Areas. The background to the Amendment is noted in the Introduction to the report including the following (items 1.4 and 1.5):
The parklands, incorporating the Royal Botanic Gardens and Domain, Fawkner Park, Albert Park, Yarra Park, the Fitzroy and Treasury Gardens, Royal Park and the Flagstaff gardens and the boulevards, form the dominant landscape features of metropolitan Melbourne and compensate, to a degree, for the fact that Melbourne, unlike Sydney, does not stand on a site of outstanding natural beauty. If Melbourne is to avoid becoming just another twentieth century commercial city, it is essential that its parks, boulevards and its historic precincts are protected and enhanced. This will undoubtedly need firm and probably innovative planning controls.
There is a world-wide trend towards the revitalisation of inner metropolitan areas. The reasons for this include a desire for easier access to work and entertainment, the increased costs of fuel and travel, more leisure time and interest in restoration and re-use of buildings. The Panel believes that this trend is apparent in Melbourne and that the network of Boulevards, parks and historic
2 Report on Amendment 151 Concerning Parks, Boulevards and Historic Precincts, June 1981, p.3. 10 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 18 of 217
buildings provides an identifiable framework for the development and conservation of the inner metropolitan area .3
Amendment 151 considered the impact of height on the Parks. It went beyond the immediate street frontage to consider the effect of height one block back, suggesting raking forms akin to sight lines. In assessing impact, it distinguished between residential areas and commercial areas. It noted the effect of height on the quality of the parks. “Fitzroy and Treasury Gardens are considered by the Panel to be only second in importance to the Botanic Gardens. Sensitively designed and intensively landscaped, they form a landscaped buffer between the Golden Mile and inner residential areas. Height control surrounding such an area is essential if visual intrusion into, and overshadowing of parkland is to be avoided, and the future visual qualities of the parkland maintained.”4
In 1983, a blanket IDO was introduced to cover the “heritage areas” of inner Melbourne. Eventually the matters for consideration under “Urban Conservation Areas” were set down in the Planning Scheme in Clause 25L. In particular this required the assessment of whether “the bulk, location and external appearance will harmonise in character and appearance with any adjacent buildings and with the character and appearance of the area”5 . The provisions of Clause 25L have been replaced by the current general heritage Clause in the Planning Scheme at 43.01.
In the current Planning Scheme, the “Urban Conservation Areas” of 1983 have been replaced by Heritage Overlays applying to the precinct. The matters which the responsible authority must consider have varied somewhat, but the requirements to ensure development of a complementary scale and character have remained.
3 Ibid, p3. 4 Ibid, p23. 5 Clause 25L, Melbourne Planning Scheme, 1986 11 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 19 of 217 4 Existing Heritage Resources
4.2 Existing Heritage Data – Overview and data availability.
The City of Melbourne have an extensive collection of heritage reports including a data record for every building, most parks and some landscape and civic features, which contribute to the cultural heritage significance of the municipality. The precinct reports are mostly entitled ‘Conservation Study’ or ‘Heritage Study’ and the individual data records are ‘Building Identification Forms’ – or ‘BIF’s. Most of these have been adopted by Council and are referral documents within the Planning Scheme. All BIF’s are available for viewing at the Planning Department and some have been recently transferred to an electronic form available on the Council website. The BIF’s include a photograph of the street frontage for every property and are now an historic record in themselves. The Conservation Study and Heritage Study reports are available to the public through the municipal library.
Only a single copy of the maps associated with the area studies was prepared by consultants. All but one of these has survived, although all are now affected by light exposure. None are readily available to planners or the public. The c1985 brochures Urban Conservation Areas, Guidelines for Owners, include maps which are not entirely reliable due in large part to their large scale.
Reports with a more specific purpose for example a study on city laneways, CBD Laneway Study,1991, are in short supply and are not readily available. Adoption of these reports and their status within the Planning Scheme is more variable. The most substantial not adopted by Council, is the Central City Heritage Study Review completed by Goad et.al. in 1993, including the commissioned history Melbourne, The City’s History and Development, by Lewis et. al. which has been published by the City of Melbourne.
4.3 Early reports prepared under the auspices of the City of Melbourne and the State Government
In 1974, the City of Melbourne set up several Community Planning Groups which eventually produced substantial reports on planning issues in their respective areas including – Kensington, Flemington (no longer part of the City of Melbourne, South Yarra, East Melbourne and Jolimont, and Carlton. Heritage was an important part of each of the ensuing final report to Council at the end of the 1970s. Following from these was the first substantive assessment and recording of contributory buildings as the Parkville Historic Area Study, prepared by Jacobs Lewis Vines, commissioned by the City of Melbourne ‘under the sponsorship of the Ministry for Planning’, in 1979.
In the late1970s, the State Government through the Historic Buildings Preservation Council, commissioned a series of heritage studies for areas within the CBD. These lead to the application of heritage controls over areas in the Capital City Zone. A series of documents with status in the Planning Scheme, defined the character of these places, set boundaries, and included guidelines for development within these heritage areas. (Central City Planning and design Guidelines, 1991) The Local Policy for the
12 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 20 of 217
Capital City Zone (Clause 22.04) prepared in 1999 is derived from these studies and documents and later work for the City of Melbourne by Graeme Butler (see below).
4.4 Reports prepared for the areas outside the Capital City Zone under the auspices of the City of Melbourne, after the introduction of heritage controls in the Planning Scheme in 1983
Following the introduction of Urban Conservation Areas in 1983, the City of Melbourne commissioned several Heritage Studies outside the Capital City Zone, primarily in the mid1980s. At the time, there were no standard procedures for undertaking a Heritage Study and a Study Brief was either absent or limited in its detail. Over the course of the first three of these reports, a data entry system was developed which has eventually been applied over most areas. Several other municipalities subsequently copied the approach taken.
It was several years before Heritage Victoria (HV) eventually developed a standard brief for the preparation of a Heritage Study. This would eventually have a broader reference, including elements which had significance outside the well recognised architectural sphere such as gardens and sites of social significance; and a substantial thematic history component. The Heritage Victoria, Heritage Study brief has been used in the majority of municipalities outside the City of Melbourne, where heritage assessment occurred much later. The HV brief placed more emphasis on documenting the significance of items of State and regional significance and lesser emphasis on items of local significance. For precincts, this has proved to be problematic in some cases, with inadequate information resulting for the majority of the items which make up the Heritage Precinct, and in some cases not even a list of contributing sites. Applicants for development approval have found this a very unhelpful system. There has been renewed support for the highly structured MCC system from the early 1980s, which provides a rank order for sites in an ‘A, B, C and D grading, and a rank order for collections of sites through a streetscape ‘level 1, 2 and 3’ rating. In the 2003 seminar run by the Heritage Council on local heritage issues6 the greater certainty offered by this system was supported by architects. Heritage Studies for East Melbourne and Jolimont, Carlton and North Carlton, North and West Melbourne, South Yarra, and Flemington and Kensington, broadly adopt the structured MCC system.
4.5 The 1985 Guidelines outside the Capital City Zone
In 1985, the City of Melbourne prepared guidelines (for areas outside the central zone) to assist in decision making. Called Urban Conservation in the City of Melbourne, this quite comprehensive document was amongst the first of its type and set a benchmark for others to follow. These guidelines are intricately linked with the A, B, C, D, E and F grading system and the streetscape level classifications, 1 2 and 3. In essence these guidelines direct that: § the higher the grading, the more an existing building is required to be retained, § the higher the grading, the greater the restrictions on visibility of additions; and § the higher the streetscape level, the more respectful any new works must be - for all grades of building.
6 Seminar run by the Heritage Council, attracting building consultants, architects, planners, heritage advisers and VCAT members and. The event was oversubscribed.. 13 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 21 of 217
In 1999, the provisions of this document were transferred almost word for word to the new format planning scheme as Local Policy for areas outside the Capital City Zone (Clause 22.05)
4.6 Relationship of the existing heritage data to the current Local Policy provisions in the Planning Scheme for precincts outside the Capital City Zone
The system for identification of contributory sites within a precinct and the process for dealing with development applications are an inter-related suite, in operation for approximately twenty years.
4.7 Reports prepared for the areas inside the Capital City Zone under the auspices of the City of Melbourne, after the introduction of heritage controls in the Planning Scheme
The City of Melbourne commissioned Graeme Butler, architectural historian to undertake a systematic assessment of the buildings within the Central Activities District (CAD). The Melbourne CAD Conservation Study was completed in 1985. The Study assessed the whole of the then ‘CAD’, filling in the gaps left from the 1970s precinct studies prepared by the State government through the Historic Buildings Preservations Council. No new precincts were resolved as a consequence, but the Study brought a better understanding of the resources within those already defined, and excellent information for buildings with individual heritage significance, many of which had individual Planning Scheme protection. BIF data sheets are available for all identified buildings.
The Central City Heritage Study Review, 1993 by Goad et.al., was commissioned to update the 1985 work, particularly in response to buildings of more recent date of construction eg the early glass curtain- wall building of 1957 at 12-22 Collins Street. This included the commissioned history Melbourne, The City’s History and Development, by Lewis et. al. The Review has not been adopted by Council, although it is a referral document under Clause 22.04.
4.8 Existing Heritage Data – Particular Studies
The various area studies prepared for the City of Melbourne were prepared by a variety of consultants to varying briefs or no brief. Improvements or additions of data are variously appropriate to bring the areas to a common level, as noted below:
Matters relevant to all studies in all precincts Recommendations for additional or clarified information: § Reassess the streetscape levels to take account of development over time and to ensure uniform standards with other areas. Document the streetscape levels on a readily accessible map. § Laneway levels are not explained in any documents and appear to be based primarily on ground surface treatment rather than the significance of the three dimensional laneway including the rear of buildings, outbuildings, consistency of open space, and surface materials. Define laneway levels and document the laneway levels on a readily accessible map.
14 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 22 of 217
§ Integrate data on significant elements within the public realm eg, street trees, kerbs and gutters and street furniture.
Described in roughly chronological order, the existing Heritage Studies are as follows:
Parkville Historic Area Study, published in 1979. Prepared by Jacobs, Lewis, Vines, format update by Meredith Gould Architects, Conservation Architects, in 1993. The primary survey and assessment for this Study was undertaken by Jacobs Lewis Vines in 1979. The format is setup to address the sites individually for the potential for inclusion on the Historic Buildings Council and National Estate lists and or inclusion under Clause 8 of Town and Country Planning Act (Third Schedule). Clause 8 was used to list buildings of individual heritage significance, not necessarily related to their precinct context. This study does not have an A,B,C,D,E building grade or a streetscape level assigned.
In 1993 the council took new photographs and Meredith Gould Architects transferred the 1979 information onto the standard forms without resurvey or assessment. The streetscape gradings included in the Urban Conservation Areas – Parkville- Guidelines for Owners brochure of c1985 was used for the streetscape levels. It is not clear who undertook these streetscape assessments.
Local historian Nora Killip has researched the date of construction, owner and builder for each property in Parkville and provided this information to the MCC. This has been added to the Building Identification Form inventory as a separate document.
Recommendations for additional or clarified information: § Although this study contains a large quantity of historical information and descriptions from the 1979 work, there is not a clear Statement of Significance for every ‘A’ and ‘B’ graded property.
The Lygon Street Action Plan, 1984, prepared by Daryl Jackson Pty Ltd and Nigel Lewis and Associates. The first Carlton study was undertaken in 1983 and centred on the retail precinct of Lygon Street, particularly addressing built form aspects. This study was agglomerated into the later Carlton and North Carlton Conservation Study. See noes for that Study below.
East Melbourne & Jolimont Conservation Study, prepared by Meredith Gould Architects, Conservation Architects, published 1985 This early study was undertaken in 1983 and was to compile three previous pieces of work – a report on individually significant buildings for the Historic Buildings Council by Graeme Butler and Winston Burchett, a review by Planners Wilson Core Sayer, and the East Melbourne Action Plan prepared in 1978 by the Local Community Planning Group. The latter lists precincts and important buildings and adopts an A, B,
15 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 23 of 217
C, D, E grading system for individual sites. It would appear that the City of Melbourne A, B, C, D, E, grading system first appears in this community work7.
The A4 Building Identification Sheet with photo for every site adopted by the Gould, East Melbourne and Jolimont Conservation Study, was refined into the standard BIF for later studies. The Study brief precluded research for any properties. The requirement for streetscape assessment was added at the end of the project and as a consequence each BIF does not show the relevant streetscape level. Only one accurate map of streetscape levels is in existence. The laneway gradings were not undertaken by the consultant and appear ad hoc.
Recommendations for additional or clarified information: § There is no clear Statement of Significance for every ‘A’ and ‘B’ graded property. At present A and B graded buildings are not supported by statements of significance. Further and comprehensive assessments of significance would provide the necessary evidence to support existing gradings. § The hand written BIF’s should be edited and the information transposed to the standard form. § For buildings of all grades thought to be constructed before 1865, the accurate date of construction should be researched.
Carlton, North Carlton and Princes Hill Conservation Study, prepared by Nigel Lewis and Associates, published in 1985 with later update. (Sometimes also referred to and published under the title Carlton Conservation Study). Following the Carlton Street Action Plan, the subsequent Carlton, North Carlton and Princes Hill Conservation Study completed the survey and assessment of the whole of Carlton. The Study includes limited information for A and B graded buildings. Whilst the Volume 1 Report for the study indicates the importance of surviving buildings from the early period of development in the 1850s and 1860s, there is no accurate data for these.
Recommendations for additional or clarified information: § At present A and B graded buildings are not supported by statements of significance. Further comprehensive assessments of significance would provide the necessary evidence to support existing gradings. § For buildings of all grades thought to be constructed before 1865, the accurate date of construction should be researched.
North & West Melbourne Conservation Study 1985 and subsequent additions up to 1993, undertaken by Graeme Butler, Architectural Historian. The first phase of this study was undertaken in 1984. It includes some information on sub precincts. All BIF’s are completed in hand written form, with typed information for A and B and some C graded buildings. Additional review and additions were made by Butler up to 1993. In the grading review for ‘E’ and ‘F’ graded buildings in 1999, there were a relatively large number of re-gradings in North and West
7 East Melbourne and Jolimont Community Planning Group, East Melbourne and Jolimont Action Plan Studies, 1978, p18. 16 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 24 of 217
Melbourne. There is no accurate map of streetscape levels. That originally prepared for Council appears to be lost. Some of the handwriting on the BIF’s is difficult to read.
There are several groups of buildings where the documentation for contributory sites is absent. The reassessment of streetscape levels undertaken in the early 1990s is recorded by hand correction on the BIF and there is no other record of these changes to enable verification.
Well researched and documented, whilst the Butler study has adequate information for many buildings graded ‘A’ and ‘B’, this is not put in a Statement of Significance form. It has similar problems to the other studies in relation to laneway gradings. North and West Melbourne has an important industrial component to its cultural significance, much of which is now subject to a change of use. Many of the existing industrial sites are not assessed. The most pressing issue however, is the mismatch of streetscape levels compared to other areas. In North and West Melbourne, streetscapes which are comprised of buildings of similar period and style and relatively high integrity are sometimes ascribed a level 3 where the structures are simple. For example single storey weatherboard row houses. In other precincts, streetscapes of similar consistency and integrity are general delineated as level 2 whether the structures are simple or more complex.
Recommendations for additional or clarified information: § Assess the sites which have been missed. § Assess industrial sites for their contribution to the cultural heritage significance of the precinct § Prepare a Statement of Significance for each ‘A’ and ‘B’ graded site. § For buildings of all grades thought to be constructed before 1865, the accurate date of construction should be researched.
Flemington & Kensington Conservation Study 1985, prepared by Graeme Butler Similarly well researched and documented, to the North and West Melbourne Study, the Kensington Study has adequate information for many buildings graded ‘A’ and ‘B’, though this is not put in a Statement of Significance form. It does not fully address the significance of the industrial sites in this precinct. It has similar problems to the other studies in relation to laneway gradings. The BIF’s are prepared in hand written form. Some writing is difficult to read.
Recommendations for additional or clarified information: § Assess industrial sites for their contribution to the cultural heritage significance of the precinct § Prepare a Statement of Significance for each ‘A’ and ‘B’ graded site.
South Yarra Conservation Study 1985, prepared by Meredith Gould, Architects, Conservation Architects This Study includes research for every identified property regardless of grade. All BIF’s are in a typed format. There is some information on sub precincts. Like other studies, the laneway assessment appears to be based on a limited range of elements. The information for ‘A’ and ‘B’ graded properties is adequate in many cases but insufficient to meet current requirements in others.
17 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 25 of 217
This study does include some mid twentieth century buildings, including some sub-precincts. Notwithstanding, the assessment of post WW2 structures (unlikely to form precincts) is not undertaken for all sites.
Recommendations for additional or clarified information: § Prepare a Statement of Significance for each ‘A’ and ‘B’ graded site. Some sites require further research.
South Melbourne Conservation Study 1985 and 1998. (The 1985 Study was undertaken by the City of South Melbourne.) Prepared by Allom Lovell Sanderson This study does not adopt the MCC grading definitions and does not assess streetscape levels. Statements of Significance for buildings which are equivalent to an MCC A or B grading are not adequate in all instances. The number of sites covered by this Study is small.
Recommendations for additional or clarified information: § Reassess and assign MCC gradings and streetscape levels and prepare a standard MCC BIF for each site. § Prepare a Statement of Significance for each ‘A’ and ‘B’ graded site.
Harbour, Railway, Industrial Conservation Study 1985, also known as the Gap Study prepared by Meredith Gould Architects, Conservation Architects. This Study was intended to address the gaps between study area boundaries. The study output is limited to Building Identification Forms, all of which are typed. These have been inserted into the folders for other areas. Notwithstanding the title nomenclature, this study contains information on structures within several large parks. The information is not presented as a Statement of Significance in most cases.
Recommendations for additional or clarified information: § Prepare a Statement of Significance for each ‘A’ and ‘B’ graded site.
Central Activities District Conservation Study, 1985, prepared by Graeme Butler, Architectural Historian. This study covers most of the Capital City Zone, providing generally thorough information on most properties. The study output is limited to lists of sites and BIF’s which have handwritten insertions, some of which are difficult to read. A system of abbreviations is used which is not always explained on each sheet. Properties constructed after the Second World War are not generally covered in this Study. Whilst most of these later buildings have been addressed in the 1993 review by Goad et.al., that study has not been adopted by Council. Neither study provides precinct assessments. The laneways within the city are not assessed.
Recommendations for additional or clarified information: § Assess the central city laneways
18 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 26 of 217
§ Prepare a Statement of Significance for each ‘A’ and ‘B’ graded site. § Provide a key for abbreviations and attach to the back of each BIF
Central Activities District Review, 1993, prepared by Phillip Goad et.al. This study output is an explanatory report including recommendations for additions and removal from the 1985 Butler CAD Study; and individual BIF’s for 37 places not previously graded to be graded ‘C’, and 43 places graded ‘A’ or ‘B’, al of which have a Statement of Significance. The BIF’s are handwritten. None include a streetscape level8 or an indication of inclusion or otherwise in a precinct heritage overlay. Additional information is provided on interiors in some cases. The information contained in the separate sheets is otherwise sufficient in detail. No information on laneways is included.
This study proposes abandonment of the existing four tier grading system (in 1993 this was a 5 tier system) and adoption of a three tier A, B, C, grading system. Such a system would be unlikely to impact on places of individual significance, but might have a considerable effect where the removal contributory elements which are individually unremarkable might substantially compromise precinct significance. This study and the three tier system has not been adopted by Council.
Recommendations for additional or clarified information: § Reassess and assign streetscape levels. Whilst not relevant for sites which have significance in isolation from their context, streetscapes are very important within most heritage precincts within the CCZ. § Indicate whether a precinct or individual HO applies § Assess laneways § Put forward the additional 80 graded sites for adoption by Council, without the amended grading system.
Melbourne, The City’s History and Development, prepared by Lewis et.al., 1994 This published history provides an excellent background to an understanding of the cultural heritage significance of the City of Melbourne. It is a stand alone document arising from the Central Activities District Review, 1993, prepared by Phillip Goad et.al. The document includes a Statement of Significance for Melbourne but does not include Statements of Significance for the individual heritage precincts in the municipality. See item 4.9 below.
East Melbourne, Twentieth Century Buildings, prepared by Bryce Raworth, Heritage Consultant. This Study assesses later twentieth century buildings in East Melbourne, generally those constructed after the Second World War. Often these are multi unit dwellings. These buildings do not make a contribution to precinct significance in most cases. The information contained in the separate sheets is generally sufficient in detail.
8 The consultants considered that ascribing streetscape levels within the Capital City Zone was inappropriate. 19 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 27 of 217
Minor Reviews. In 1999, Allom Lovell undertook a limited City of Melbourne grading review. This study assessed and re- graded ‘F’ and ‘E’, and some ‘D’ graded places within precincts, as part of a sunset Clause requirement in the Planning Scheme. It takes the form of a brief report and separate sheets. The information contained on the sheets includes historical research and is more substantial than would normally be found for ‘C’ and ‘D’ grade buildings elsewhere except for those in South Yarra and Parkville. It does not follow the standard BIF format.
Where the findings of the Allom Lovell Study were in dispute, a review of those sites was undertaken by Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd. in 2000. The outcome for this review takes the form of separate sheets similar to those prepared by Allom Lovell, and is generally adequate for the grading level.
The City of Melbourne Heritage Places Inventory, prepared by the City of Melbourne Planning Department in 2003 This document lists all graded sites with their streetscape level for all areas outside the Capital City Zone. Some sites at the fringes of the Capital City Zone do not appear to be included. A small number of listed sites are not correctly mapped.
Recommendations for additional or clarified information: § Add the sites on the fringes of the Capital City Zone § Review the mapping and correct inconsistencies.
4.9 Existing Statements of Significance for Heritage Precincts.
Addressing the absence of a comprehensive history of the municipality, in 1993 the City of Melbourne commissioned a thematic history. Prepared by Dr Miles Lewis and others, this book Melbourne, The City’s History and Development, 1994, provides an excellent background to the development of the principal city in Victoria. It includes a Statement of Cultural Significance of some two printed pages in length.
In conclusion it notes: While the rigor of the grid and the quality and prominence of the architectural fabric of the nineteenth and the first half of the twentieth century are the most distinctive and frequently hailed aspects of its physical presence, it is the marriage of these with a strong and diverse cultural persona which sets Melbourne apart as a distinctive post-colonial city within its immediate Australasian context and the rest of the world. 9
The document provides an excellent resource of information, but as is to be expected for a project generated by a CAD study, the heritage overlay precincts outside the central zone are not specifically addressed.
9 Lewis, M. p11.
20 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 28 of 217
Background histories for most but not all regions outside the Capital City Zone are found in the relevant Heritage Study, however these do not include a Statement of Significance as such. A little closer to a formal statement, but still falling short of the mark, is the text found on the c1985 documents know as the ‘maroon pamphlets’ entitled Urban Conservation Areas, Guidelines for Owners, delivered to every property within a then ‘Urban Conservation Areas’ outside the Capital City Zone. Statements of Significance remain wanting in the current information available to the Planning Department and Council.
Within the Capital City Zone, brief Statements of Significance are available in Clause 22.04. These broadly indicate what is significant, but do not generally indicate how.
4.10 Heritage Data for elements within the public realm.
The extensive parks are a primary component of the cultural heritage significance of the city as a whole and each precinct Heritage Overlay. The individual Heritage Studies are strongly architectural in emphasis and do not provide comprehensive information on these and other landscape issues such as street trees, and civic features such as monuments. However the City has been steadily adding to its heritage data resources in these areas.
Parks and street trees A principal landscape reference is Melbourne’s Historic Public Gardens – A Management and Conservation Guide, prepared by Rex Swanson in 1984. Conservation Plans have subsequently been prepared for many of the city parks. However these have not been distilled into a Place Identification Sheet to fit within the current format. City of Melbourne Parks and Gardens also have a comprehensive street tree index however this is not readily available to the Planning Department.
Civic assets Civic heritage assets are not comprehensively documented. Sculptures and monuments are listed and described in an MCC document however, there is no accompanying assessment of cultural heritage significance. The information which is available is not slotted into the existing inventory held in the Planning Department.
Elements within the public zone make a major contribution to precinct character and are often important components of significance. For example, bluestone kerbs and gutters, street paving particularly in lanes, street furniture, early signs and some services installation etc, are not comprehensively recorded in Council records and have only general references in Heritage Studies. Although the relevant MCC department keeps records of each roadway, this is not in a form which is readily accessible for the planning department and is not a comprehensive listing or an assessment of heritage assets within laneways.
Within the central city there is a document CBD Laneway Study, prepared in 1991, which addresses only the paving surface, but this is not a referral document in the Planning Scheme. In 2000, Andrew Ward
21 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 29 of 217 reviewed heritage overlay boundaries within the City of Melbourne (City of Melbourne Heritage Overlay Boundary Review). He identified several items within the public realm that contribute to precincts, including, bluestone gutters, trees and street furniture including timber poles. The assessment has only been undertaken for boundaries to precincts, but could be used as a basis for a complete review and be integrated into the BIF data base.
4.11 Summary of findings in relation to heritage data
Heritage Overlay precincts lack: a clear Statement of Significance, and a definitive list of elements which contribute to the Heritage Overlay. In most cases the historical information and Statement of Significance for A and B graded sites within the precinct, is not sufficient for current standards,
Notwithstanding, the City of Melbourne Heritage Studies have several excellent features: the MCC grading system; the assignment of streetscape levels; and a range of information contained on each Building Identification Form (BIF) including a photograph and a basic integrity assessment . The BIF’s are an excellent resource, invaluable to planning officers who can access them immediately, and provide basic information to applicants about the heritage issues which should be considered in a development proposal. The recent transfer of BIFs to a digital format, and accessibility through the City of Melbourne website, has extended the information to a wider audience. Many municipalities do not have access to such detailed data.
There is no good reason to abandon the current system and every reason to keep it with modifications where improvements are required.
4.12 Human Resources in the Planning Department
The City of Melbourne is adequately provisioned with planning staff, including several strategic planning officers with heritage expertise. Three heritage consultants provide independent advice to the department approximately one day a week, covering applications, and pre-application advice as required.
22 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 30 of 217 5 Current Local Heritage Policy
The current Local Heritage policies at Clause 22.04 and 22.05 are included at Appendix A.
When the Victoria Planning Provisions (VPP’s) were introduced in 1996 they were accompanied by a “Manual” which (among other things) briefly explained the role of the respective suite of new zones and overlays. The Manual noted the following with respect to the Heritage Overlay:
Any heritage place with a recognized citation should be included in the schedule to this overlay. In addition, any heritage place identified in local heritage studies can also be included. A heritage place is defined widely and may include a single object or area. The heritage assessment process leading to the identification of the place should be undertaken with rigour. The documentation for each place should include a Statement of Significance which establishes the importance of the place. (Emphasis added)
The Heritage Overlay is to be found at Clause 43.01 of all those planning schemes which wish to utilise heritage controls. The Overlay has five explicit purposes, the first of which is to implement the state and local planning policy framework. This includes the Municipal Strategic Statement and any local planning policies. The overlay is limited to those “heritage places” specified in the schedule to the overlay. The overlay contains permit requirements; exemptions from notice and appeal; use details; and decision guidelines.
The decision guidelines (at 43.01-5) require that before deciding on an application, the Responsible Authority must consider, as appropriate, (and among other things);
· the significance of the heritage place and whether the proposal will adversely affect the natural or cultural significance of the place. · any applicable heritage study and any applicable conservation policy.
Other decision guidelines repeatedly refer to consideration of the proposal affecting the “significance, character or appearance of the heritage place”.
Taken in isolation, the heritage overlay and its schedule has its limitations in that while it is demanding of a permit application, its detailed consideration is dependent on their being some reference point for an assessment of the “significance, character or appearance” of an area. In other words, if a Council were to have a heritage overlay alone without any support documentation then it will be difficult for anyone to make an assessment of the impact of a proposal on the matters which the overlay requires. For the overlay to work as intended it needs the support of statements elsewhere inside or outside the scheme.
23 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 31 of 217
So as to assist in using the Heritage Overlay in the new format schemes, Heritage Victoria published a draft version of “Guidelines for the assessment of heritage planning applications” in August 2000. The Guidelines state that:
In assessing any development application for a heritage place the assessment must be based on a consideration of how the proposal will impact on significant fabric and the significance of the place. Any changes that destroy or adversely affect significance should be avoided. Changes that will reveal or enable a better interpretation of the significance of a place should be encouraged.
Therefore, prior to assessing a planning application, the Statement of Significance for the heritage place should first be examined. Prior to the inclusion of a heritage place in the Heritage Overlay, a Statement of Significance should have been prepared, an attempt should first be made to establish why the place is significant, the nature of its significance and to identify the components or fabric of significance. (Emphasis added) …………………………. An understanding of what is significant about the place, how significant it is, why it is significant and which are the significant components should underpin any conservation or development work. This information should be encapsulated in a Statement of Significance which should exist for most places that are subject to the Heritage Overlay control. (Emphasis added).
At the very least then, Statements of Significance are required to assist in assessing applications lodged under the Heritage Overlay. The Statements of Significance are the critical reference points for decision makers.
The existing Melbourne Planning Scheme (MPS) was gazetted on 4th March 1999. The scheme contains two relevant “heritage” policies to assist with the discretion provided by Clause 43.01.
These two local polices are: § Clause 22.04 Heritage Places within the Capital City Zone § Clause 22.05 Heritage Places outside the Capital City Zone
The policies both have their foundation or link in the existing MSS at Clause 21 (Aim 5.2 and Outcomes 5.2.1; 5.2.2 and 5.2.3) although the connection is limited.
The policies are significantly different in that the “Capital City Zone” policy (22.04) calls up Statements of Significance as the primary reference point for assessment; whereas that for areas “outside the Capital City Zone ” (22.05) relies on reference to a raft of heritage studies which are included as “Policy References” at the end of the policy, and the application of performance standards in relation to demolition, restoration, alterations and additions and new buildings. Definitions are included and are essential to the application of the performance standards. While the definitions are important, they tend to clutter up the local policy. They already reside in the existing Reference Document “Urban Conservation
24 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 32 of 217 in the City of Melbourne” 1985 (at page 39) and it is unclear why the policy needs to cross reference to this list except if the intention is to have the policy as the “stand alone” heritage document.
Both policy sections suffer from being repetitious (in part) and both are too long. The major problem with both policies, is that they do not provide clear enough direction to the decision maker or to the user of the scheme.
Both Clauses provided insufficient direction. Clause 22.04 requires clearer “decision guidelines” to supplement the statements of significance and would benefit form from the itemised list of considerations in Clause 22.05. Clause 22.05 could be improved by adding statements of significance for each respective heritage places. In addition, the Clause needs to delete reference to the definitions (see comment above) and should be further rationalised in accordance with the Practice Note on Writing Local Policy.
The technical difficulty with the existing local policies is that they are difficult to interpret. The Practice Note makes it clear that a local policy is simply there to help the exercise of discretion and to provide clarity on how that discretion may be exercised. Because there is no Statement of Significance to cross reference to in Clause 22.05 the existing polices (especially 22.05) deliver a tidal wave of further discretion making the task for the proponent, the officer and the decision maker all the more difficult.
A further complicating issue arising from the existing MPS regime is the role of the 1985 Reference Document “Urban Conservation in the City of Melbourne”. It is unclear from the policy how this document will be invoked and if indeed if it is still relevant. On the basis of this Heritage Precincts Project and its proposed inclusion in the planning scheme, it is considered that these existing guidelines can now be replaced by the more recent work. Accordingly, the “Urban Conservation in the City of Melbourne” should be deleted as a Reference Document from the local policy and be replaced by the incorporated document Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
In summary, the existence of a Heritage Overlay alone, does not enable a good heritage outcome as the overlay is dependent on a clear understanding of the “significance, character and appearance” of the heritage place. Unless there is a document or policy to support this overlay then it becomes benign. Inevitably, a benign overlay will be ignored by decision makers leading to decisions based primarily on the zone. Similarly, an overlay which relies on documents or policies which are unclear or unhelpful is also likely to be ignored by the decision maker.
In the case of the existing Melbourne Planning Scheme, it is considered that the two existing local policies should be replaced by one policy for precincts, be more directly referenced in the MSS and be supported by an incorporated document laying down statements of significance, and clear assessment guidelines.
25 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 33 of 217
6 Proposed Amendments to the Melbourne Planning Scheme
The shortcomings of the existing Melbourne Planning Scheme heritage regime in relation to heritage overlays which cover precincts, are discussed at Section 5. Modifications the scheme would be required to accommodate the recommendations of the City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project. Note that heritage overlays covering individual sites have not been considered.
Under the VPP system there are a number of tools which can be used in the planning scheme to implement the heritage objectives within the City of Melbourne. The critical initial step (as outlined in section 5) is to develop specific precinct based Statements of Significance. The next step is how to support these Statements of Significance and the options include;
n The existing Decision Guidelines in the Heritage Overlay n Reference Documents (including “Guidelines”) in the LPPF n Local Planning Policy at Clause 22. n Incorporated Documents (Clause 81)
As it presently exists the Melbourne City Council’s preference is to use two local policies (Clause 22.04 and 22.05) plus a Reference Document to implement its MSS objectives and strategies. As discussed at Section 1.5, the overall problem with this approach is that the policies are too long, are repetitious of the overlay or the MSS, don’t help in making a decision or are confused as to what they are trying to achieve. Important aspects of the reference document tend to get lost in the translation.
An Incorporated Document at Clause 81 is the other option. This has been reluctantly used throughout Victoria, as there is the perception that once incorporated, such a document is difficult to change as this would require a planning scheme amendment. An Incorporated Document is one which is to be used in day to day decision making, as would occur for the City of Melbourne.
The August 2000 VPP Practice Note on “Incorporated and Reference Documents” states that:
Incorporated Documents are essential to the proper functioning of the planning scheme and decision making…….incorporated documents must be taken into account by responsible authorities in decision-making and can only be amended by the Minister. ……Development guidelines …are common types of local incorporated documents. One of the benefits of incorporating documents into the planning scheme is that the document carries the same weight as other parts of the scheme. A document must be incorporated if …the document will be used to guide the exercise of discretion by the responsible authority..
26 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 34 of 217
The real difference between a Reference Document and an Incorporated Document is that if a document is to be used in day to day decision making then it should be incorporated so that it can be given greater weight. Modifications to a key decision-making document should be done via a publicly transparent amendment process and not changed on a whim or day-to-day basis.
Having considered the strengths and weaknesses of the various options it is considered that:
n There needs to be very strong MSS statements about heritage matters and the strategic outcome that Council is trying to achieve within heritage precincts. (Modifications to the July 2004 draft MSS have been prepared to achieve this principally by including explicit reference to the “Framework for Melbourne” as described in Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne). n Having identified heritage as an issue, there then should be a series of precinct-based Heritage Overlays (HO) inside and outside the Capital City Zone. This will require that a permit be granted for all buildings and works. n There then needs to be one (only) combined local policy for heritage precincts at Clause 22.XX giving general and precinct specific objectives; application requirements and decision guidelines and acting as a “signpost” to the key decision-making tool at Clause 81. n The detail of how Council will assess applications should then be left to an Incorporated Document at Clause 81, which would consist of the Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne inclusive of Statements of Significance for all precincts. n The Incorporated Document needs to be augmented by the fine detail of the Performance Standards and their associated Performance Measures which are attached to the document.
6.1 Insertions to the July 2004 Municipal Strategic Statement
With the above structural comments in mind, the consultants assessed the latest version of the Melbourne MSS (post Am C60 Panel version July 2004). The consultants suggest that the Melbourne MSS needs modification (albeit minor) to ensure there is a solid enough platform for the introduction of detailed heritage controls.
The most substantial modification occurs at Clause 21.02-3 (“City Structure and built form”) where a précis of the “Framework for Melbourne” (from Clause 81) is inserted so as to provide a sound context for the discussion in the MSS concerning heritage. While this leads to some repetition between Clause 21 and Clause 81, they are stand alone documents and the consultants feel it is important to list why Melbourne is historically, architecturally, scientifically, aesthetically and socially significant to the state of Victoria, as well as to list the “key components” of the Framework.
Minor changes are made throughout the rest of the MSS (at 21.03-3; 21.04; and 21.05) which either identify linkages to later important Clauses in the scheme; or which elaborate from the Policy basis of Clause 22.XX; or which insert an additional specific strategy at Clause 21.05-2; or which provide minor but important clarification at 21.05-1 and 21.05-2. The most substantial change in the “back end” of the
27 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 35 of 217
MSS is to augment the generic implementation mechanism for all relevant local areas by inserting the following implementation provision:
6.2 MSS Additions
All of the following is suggested as an inclusion in the July 2004 draft MSS. All changes are in bold.
21.02-3 City structure (and built form – delete) Insert the following: The Framework for Melbourne Melbourne’s distinctive urban form is directly related to the framework developed in the two decades after the 1835 settlement. In the short period from 1837 to 1858, the use of the land within the centre and in the extended town reserve was set, parks and areas for public purposes were set aside, construction began on major public institutions and the formal layout of the boulevards into and out of the city were determined.
Melbourne’s golden mile grid, aligned to the river and adapted to suit the topography, its parks, and its boulevards, and its well set out residential suburbs, form the framework for Melbourne. These elements connect the City to its foundation in 1835, its formal origins as a British colonial outpost, and to the aspirations of the first administrators for a city with high urban amenity.
The civic framework for Melbourne is historically, socially and aesthetically significant to the state of Victoria. It represents the planning ideals of the colonial administration and key indivi duals including Lt. Gov. Charles La Trobe, and surveyors Robert Hoddle, Clement Hodgkinson and Andrew Clarke. Rather than a grand plan at a single point in time, the outcome is in large measure a result of Charles La Trobe’s visionary ideas, his response to the petitions from the community and his capacity to hold back large tracts of land from sale whilst decisions about reserves could be made for recreation, parks and public purposes, cultural institutions and the grand boulevards.
Melbourne is a great nineteenth century city. All but a handful of its buildings are constructed after the 1851 gold rush. Its rich architectural legacy reflects ‘the rapid evolution of a wealthy society from the mid-century gold rushes, through the era of protection of native industry, to the financial boom of the late 1880s, when buildings of an eclectic High Victorian character and principally British province dominated.’ As the new century begins, American influences play a part both in style and methods of concrete construction. In the twentieth century, control over building through regulation has a clear influence on architecture both in the central city, where the 40m maximum height combines with sensitivity to streetscape to produce a highly valued, coherent and elegant character; and in the suburbs where fire control measures are applied to the generally row house forms. Industrial components support and strengthen the robust economy. The architectural significance of Melbourne is reflected in individual buildings and the sixteen precinct heritage overlays.
The civic framework for Melbourne is of historical significance for the evidence of the aspirations of the colonial administrators for Melbourne’s prosperous future. It reflects the instructions given by British colonial administrators for the provision of settlements in newly settled lands, and the adaptation and modification of these instructions to the specific conditions and local requirements. Key buildings associated with governance and the cultural development of the community survive to illustrate the intentions for the City during this foundation phase.
It is of social significance for the layout for Melbourne, which established future growth and settlement patterns, defining districts according to their convenience to particular facilities (the port, river crossings, fresh water, reserves, etc), and determining the locations of key social and economic institutions such as the commercial hub, industry, the parliamentary, civic and religious precincts, markets, and transport areas.
28 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 36 of 217
It is of aesthetic significance for its architecture, the variety of distinctive views, vistas and the visual character of the urban form, including important terminal vistas (consciously planned by governor La Trobe), towards Parliament House – Bourke Street, the Treasury – Collins Street; and city edge views – Flinders Street and Spring Street; the grand processional entrances from the historically important travel routes into the city; and for the parkland which (almost) surrounds the grid and defines the borders of the residential precincts.
Melbourne is of scientific significance for its botanical collection and in particular for the avenues of Ulmus procera, now rare on a world scale.
The key components in the Framework for Melbourne include:
· The key components (not in rank order) in the framework for Melbourne include:
· The sixteen Precincts covered by Heritage Overlay
· All the main streets of the CBD golden mile including: running north south - Spencer, King, William, Queen, Elizabeth, Russell, Exhibition and Spring Streets; running east west - Flinders, Collins, Bourke, Lonsdale and Latrobe Streets; and Market Street -the break in the grid defining the importance of the port/customs location on the bank of the river.
· The east-west little streets of the CBD golden mile, including Flinders Lane, Little Collins, Little Bourke, and Little Lonsdale Streets
· The main boulevards radiating to the north west, north, east and south being Flemington Road, Royal Parade and its extension as Elizabeth Street north, Peel Street, Victoria Parade, Wellington Parade and St. Kilda Road; and the boulevard on the east boundary at Hoddle Street in East Melbourne.
· All the Park reserves which ring the CBD - Royal Park, Princes Park (including Melbourne General Cemetery), Carlton Gardens, Fitzroy Gardens, Treasury Gardens, Parliament Gardens, Gordon Reserve, Yarra Park (including Olympic Park, the Domain (including the Government House reserve, Alexandra Gardens, Queen Victoria Gardens), Royal Botanic Gardens, and Fawkner Park); the smaller parks within the residential subdivisions; and the parks within the city including the Flagstaff Gardens.
· The Yarra River, from Swan Street to the Charles Grimes Bridge including Princes Bridge, the ‘Pool’ (the natural turning basin for small ships, below the rocky ledge -The Falls - which separated the fresh and salty water, situated near the end of Queen Street), Batman Park and the remaining docks and wharves on the north and south banks.
· The government and public buildings positioned on the grid and boulevards including: the site of the first government area, now containing the Mint, Births, deaths and Marriages Registry, the Titles Office and the Law Courts; the Customs House which defines the first port; the Parliament, government and Treasury buildings, Victoria Barracks, Old Melbourne Goal, the Post Office, Melbourne Town Hall, the State Library, the Melbourne University Reserve including the 1854-7 University buildings and Moonee Ponds Creek bridge at Flemington Road and Princes Bridge..
· Archaeological areas as identified in the CBD Archaeological Zoning Plan and Heritage Inventory, in particular along the river banks, within the reserves and government sites, and evidence relating to the pre-1837 survey establ ishments beneath roads.
· Areas of Aboriginal cultural importance as identified in the AAV Archaeological Sites Register and Aboriginal Historic Places Register and including the Government House battle site, Yarra Yarra falls, Batman’s Hill, corroboree and camp sites at Parliament hill, Treasury Gardens, Royal Park and on the Domain, tress in Yarra Park, Feeding and protectorate Mission stations at the Botanic Gardens and Royal Park and Aboriginal burial sites at the Old Melbourne Cemetery.
29 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 37 of 217
21.03-3 Approach to managing built form
Enhance City structure and urban form
The important challenge is to ensure that new development adds positively to the overall character of Melbourne and helps create an accessible, safe, inclusive and engaging public environment. It is also important that new developments provide high levels of public and private amenity for existing and future residents. To maintain and enrich the City’s distinctive urban character and cultural heritage, it is important to achieve good built form outcomes in all areas of the City’s urban environment, including the design of private developments and public spaces, parks and gardens, the provision of infrastructure and the maintenance of civil infrastructure assets.
Preserve places and precincts of cultural heritage significance
The City has many of Victoria’s most important heritage assets which need to be preserved, including the world heritage listed Royal Exhibition Building. In addition to preserving these assets, the cultural significance of these identified heritage places and precincts must not be compromised by surrounding development. The importance of site context; surrounding landscape, views and topography, should be considered when understanding a site’s significance. To assist in this process, Council has included the Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne and the Melbourne Heritage Places Inventory as Incorporated Documents at Clause 81.
21.04 LAND USE
A site analysis that considers: § Existing and future uses and development within a 100 metre radius of the site and whether these uses could affect the future amenity of the proposed development; § How the Amenity Principles that relate to the site have been met (see Tables 3 and 4); § Whether the proposed development will have an impact on the amenity of adjoining and nearby residential properties; § The affects on heritage places and precincts both on and nearby the site in accordance with Clause 22.XX and Clause 81;
21.04-1 Housing and community
Objectives and strategies The objectives and strategies set out below must be read in conjunction with Figure 5 – Housing Opportunities, the objectives and strategies in other parts of this MSS especially Clause 21.05 City Structure and Built Form and Figure 10 - Built Form Character, Clause 22.XX (Heritage Precincts Policy) and the detailed Implementation Strategies set out in Clauses 21.08 (Local Areas).
21.05 CITY STRUCTURE AND BUILT FORM
This section details objectives and strategies for built form under the themes of: • Heritage • Structure and character • The public environment • Sustainable built form • Disability access • Parks, gardens and open space • Community safety The high standard of design of some modern buildings and civic projects, combined with the wealth of heritage places comprising both individual buildings such as the Royal Exhibition Building and whole precincts, has created a visually exciting and vibrant City, internationally recognised as the ‘world’s most liveable City’. Melbourne’s heritage features are amongst its greatest assets. Melbourne is recognised as a high quality, multifaceted and culturally rich city. “Cultural heritage” is an extremely important component of the urban form and sense of place, which
30 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 38 of 217
characterise Melbourne. The structure of the City; the concentration and dispersion of land uses in certain parts of the municipality, has influenced the existing and future built form of the City. The heart of the municipality is the Hoddle Grid, within which there are numerous precincts, each with their own distinct character. The Hoddle Grid is the State’s foremost business district. The Retail Core in the heart of the City has a built form of lower scale and comprises significant heritage buildings, significant public spaces such as Bourke Street Mall and intimate laneways. Heritage precinct areas are a significant part of Melbourne’s attraction as a place in which to live, visit, do business and invest. They are also important for cultural and sociological reasons, providing a distinctive historical character and a sense of continuity. Much of Melbourne’s visual form is provided by collections of buildings, which, while not always of high individual significance, together form precincts which have cultural heritage significance.
21.05-1 Heritage The importance of heritage Heritage features, buildings and streetscapes are a significant part of Melbourne’s attraction, distinguishing it from other cities in Australia and internationally. As noted at Clause 21.02-3, much of Melbourne’s character is defined by its historic street pattern, boulevards and parks, the collection of buildings within heritage precincts, as well as individually significant buildings, identified and protected for their high cultural heritage value. Sensitivity to heritage buildings and places, local landmarks, landscape, views and character is an important component of development in context. The heritage character of particular Local Areas is conditioned by the timing and pattern of subdivision, predominant uses, topography and original socio-economic structure of the population. This has created unique neighbourhoods which are identified in the municipality’s Heritage Overlays. The distinctive character of heritage precincts and places is a critical element in the diversity of the City's cultural heritage and its collective identity. Preservation of these distinctive neighbourhoods is achieved through the Heritage Precincts policy at Clause 22.XX, the Incorporated Documents at Clause 81 and Local Area Implementation Strategies as they apply to the heritage precincts.
Objectives and strategies
The objectives and strategies set out below must be read in conjunction with Figure 10 - Built Form Character and the detailed Implementation Strategies set out in Clauses 21.08 (Local Areas). To conserve and enhance places and precincts of identified cultural heritage significance. (Minor wording difference to align with the policy at 22.04) · Conserve, protect and enhance the significant fabric of identified heritage places and precincts. · Support the conservation of heritage buildings and places. · Maintain the visual prominence of historic buildings and local landmarks. · Protect the valued historic buildings, subdivision pattern, boulevards and significant public open space within the heritage precincts. · Protect the significant landscape and cultural heritage features of the City’s parks, gardens, waterways and other open spaces. · Protect buildings, streetscapes and precincts of cultural heritage significance from the visual intrusion of higher built form both within precincts and from adjoining areas.
21.05-2 Structure and character Reinforcing urban structure The City of Melbourne’s structure and urban form is made up of a number of distinct patterns and the relationship between them. These include: • Places and precincts of cultural heritage significance. • The regular layout of the Hoddle Grid and its relationship to the magnetic north bearing as used in the Cadastral Survey of Victoria. • Boulevards • Waterways
31 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 39 of 217
• Topography • Transport infrastructure—especially the boulevards • Extensive ring of parklands • Contrast in scale between Central City and surrounding areas. Scale of existing and future development The City of Melbourne offers a range of opportunities for new development. Some areas can absorb higher density development without threat to their existing valued character or heritage and some are suited to less intense infill development. There are opportunities in some areas to develop a new built form character. The height, scale, mass and bulk of new development needs to preserve the existing character of areas, except where a new built form character has been explicitly identified. It is important that new residential developments provide high levels of on-site amenity for residents. All developments should min imise their effects on the amenity of adjoining and nearby residential properties.
Objectives and strategies
The objectives and strategies set out below must be read in conjunction with Figure 9 – City Structure, Figure 10 - Built Form Character, Heritage Precincts policy at Clause 22.XX, the Incorporated Documents at Clause 81 and the detailed Implementation Strategies for Local Areas set out in Clause 21.08.
To reinforce the City’s overall urban structure. Protect Melbourne’s distinctive physical character and in particular, maintain the importance of: · Identified places and precincts of heritage significance · The regular layout of the Hoddle Grid and its relationship to the magnetic north bearing as used in the Cadastral Survey of Victoria. · the Yarra River and waterways · the network of parks and gardens · the Central City’s retail core · the network of lanes and arcades · Boulevards. Promote a strong sense of place and identity in different areas of Melbourne. Ensure a strong distinction between the built form scale of the Central City with that of development in surrounding areas. Protect and enhance the built form, character and function of laneways and the laneway system as a significant determinant of the City’s built form, and distinguish them from other larger streets. Protect iconic views, including views to the: · Shrine of Remembrance along Swanston Street from the State Library · Parliament House along Bourke Street. · Treasury Buildings along Collins Street · Flinders Street Station clock tower along Elizabeth Street · Yarra River from the Central City wherever possible, and particularly along the Bourke and Latrobe Street corridors from Docklands. · St. Paul’s Cathedral Ensure that development on the City’s boulevards respects and maintains the prominence of their landscaped boulevard character. Maintain cultural heritage character as a major distinguishing feature of the City and ensure new development does not intrude visually so as to damage the character and heritage value of these areas in accordance with the Heritage Precincts policy at Clause 22.XX and the Incorporated Documents at Clause 81.
To ensure that the height, scale, massing and bulk of new development helps achieve an identified preferred future character and amenity.
32 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 40 of 217
Ensure a high level of on-site amenity for future occupants of new residential developments through the provision of access to daylight, sufficient solar access, privacy, outlook, acoustic amenity and open space, consistent with the Amenity Principles and Preferred Built Form Character relevant to the area. Ensure that residential developments over 4 storeys in the Residential and Mixed Use Zones, consider the objectives of Clause 54 and 55 of the Planning Scheme (or the Guidelines for Higher Density Housing when completed). Encourage residential developments in the Business Zone to meet the objectives of Clause 54 and 55 of the Planning Scheme to ensure a high standard of amenity for residents. Ensure the overshadowing and privacy impacts of new development on surrounding properties is minimised, mindful of the context of the area, including the preferred neighbourhood character, lot size, lot orientation, existing site conditions, the existing level of amenity, built form expectations and reasonable development expectations. Ensure that non-residential developments in the Residential and Mixed Use Zones consider the building height, setbacks, walls on boundaries, overshadowing and overlooking objectives of Clause 54 and 55 of the Planning Scheme to minimise their impacts on neighbouring residential developments. Ensure that all applications covered by the Heritage Overlay consider the provisions of the Heritage Precincts policy at Clause 22.XX and the Incorporated Documents at Clause 81
Planning Scheme Response This list highlights some of the key land use and built form directions in the Planning Scheme. It is not exhaustive and other provisions of the Planning Scheme also apply. • The Capital City Zone applies to the Central City. The Zone allows a broad range of uses including retail, commercial, entertainment, offices, education, public spaces, arts and cultural facilities and residential uses. • Design and Development Overlays provide design objectives on building heights and other built form outcomes. Design and Development Overlays specific to the Central City include: o DDO 1 – Active Street Frontages – Capital City Zone o DDO 2 – Height Controls – Capital City Zone o DDO 3 – Traffic Conflict Frontage – Capital City Zone o DDO 4 – Weather protection – Capital City Zone o DDO 5 – Bridge Protection Area o DDO 7 – Former Fishmarket Site Northbank o DDO 12 – Noise Attenuation Area o DDO 38 – Southbank Central Core o DDO 39 – Southbank Central Interface o DDO 40 – Arts Centre and River Environs • The Heritage Overlay identifies designated buildings and precincts. The Heritage Precincts Policy at Clause 22.XX gives guidance on heritage buildings, places, precincts and streetscapes. The Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne at Clause 81 provides detailed Statements of Significance, objectives, performance standards, definitions and background history for assessing applications within the Heritage Overlay.
· The Heritage Overlays identify designated elements which make a contribution to the cultural heritage significance of the precincts. The Heritage Precincts Policy at Clause 22.XX gives guidance on heritage places, including buildings, landscape elements, streetscapes and the public realm. The Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne at Clause 81 provides a detailed historical framework, Statements of Significance, objectives, performance standards, definitions and background history, for assessing applications within the Heritage Overlays.
33 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 41 of 217
6.3 Incorporated Document under Clause 81
As noted in the above discussion, the consultants prefer that the Incorporated Document at Clause 81 (Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne) becomes the key day-to-day decision making tool for heritage assessment.
6.4 Amendments to Clause 22.04 and Clause 22.05
The consultants were provided with the existing Clause 22.04 (Heritage Places within the Capital City Zone) and Clause 22.05 (Heritage Places outside the Capital City Zone) which, as noted above, are either incomplete (without Statements of Significance), repetitive or unclear. The consultants are aware of the fate of other local “heritage” policies (see Yarra, Ballarat etc) and believe that the heritage objectives and strategies can be best implemented by use of the Incorporated Document at Clause 81.
It is legitimate to question whether there is a need for any local policy at Clause 22 given that decision making will principally rest with the Incorporated Document at Clause 81. In the final analysis the consultants have recommended that a local policy remain but that it be something of a “signpost” to the reader with a succinct summary of the typical level of detail that any applicant would need to provide. For ease of reference, the specific objectives for each of the 16 heritage precincts is included in the policy as it was felt that these needed to be reflected somewhere in the LPPF.
The consultants also concluded that there was merit in rationalizing the existing two policies into the one policy (at Clause 22.XX) especially as it is essentially a set of application requirements which are going to be the same both inside and outside the Capital City Zone.
Consideration was given to deleting a local policy completely and there is still some merit in considering this option given the elevated status of Clause 81. However, the consultants are aware of the current structure of the Melbourne Planning Scheme and the fact that applicants and decision makers are now accustomed (after five years) to referring to Clause 22 for some heritage direction. In the recommended version, that level of direction is much more limited than before in that it directs the reader to a more all- encompassing document at Clause 81.
As indicated in Chapter 10, Recommendations for Further Investigation and Review, the consultants recommend that policy guidance is provided to address issues around three matters, namely, streetscape levels, laneways and street trees. Where produced, such policy documents should be included in the ‘policy reference documents’ and listed as such in the proposed new heritage precincts local policy of the Melbourne Planning Scheme (Item 6.6, proposed local policy clause).
34 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 42 of 217
6.5 How the system will work
In an operational sense, the reader would be told in the MSS that heritage was an important theme in Melbourne and the “Framework for Melbourne” would provide the context for the imposition of heritage controls and provisions.
The MSS would then implement the objectives by reference to the heritage overlay, then Clause 22.XX and ultimately, Clause 81 for the Statements of Significance, fine detail, decision guidelines and performance standards.
The Incorporated Document at Clause 81 would be a consolidated version of Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne which would include:
n An accurate map for each precinct n A succinct Statement of Significance for each precinct addressing historical, architectural, scientific, social and aesthetic significance as relevant, and including a list of contributory elements to the HO; and finally n Performance standards and their associated performance measures to provide greater clarity for assessment.
6.6 Proposed Local Policy Clause 22.XX
The proposed Local Policy is included in the following 7 pages.
35 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 43 of 217
22.04 HERITAGE PRECINCTS
This policy applies to all precincts subject to a Heritage Overlay within the City of Melbourne.
22.04-1 Policy Basis The Municipal Strategic Statement (at Clause 21.05) identifies Melbourne’s heritage features as being amongst its greatest assets. Melbourne is recognised as a high quality, multifaceted and culturally rich city. “Cultural heritage” is an extremely important component of the urban form and sense of place, which characterise Melbourne. The identification, assessment, and citation of heritage places have been undertaken over decades, as part of an ongoing heritage conservation process and their recognition and protection have been a crucial component of planning in central Melbourne since 1982. Heritage precinct areas are a significant part of Melbourne’s attraction as a place in which to live, visit, do business and invest. They are also important for cultural and sociological reasons, providing a distinctive historical character and a sense of continuity. Much of Melbourne’s visual form is provided by collections of buildings, which, while not always of high individual significance, together form precincts which have cultural heritage significance. This policy sets out the objectives, application requirements and decision guidelines for those heritage precincts which have been identified as part of the cultural heritage of Melbourne. The policy is to be read in conjunction with the documents: Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne and the Melbourne Heritage Places Inventory which are both Incorporated Documents at Clause 81. The Incorporated Documents set out: · A Framework for the Development of Melbourne, · Statements of significance for each of sixteen precincts, · Performance Standards and associated performance measures, to guide applicants and decision makers, · Definitions, and · Background information on precincts.
22.04-2 Objectives
Objectives Common to all Heritage Precincts
· To conserve and enhance precincts of identified cultural heritage significance. · To ensure that the significant portions of the contributory parts of the precinct are retained. · To guide the consideration of the impact of development on the cultural heritage significance of the precinct and its contributing component parts. · To encourage development which shall respect the significant cultural heritage context and which shall not dominate the individual significant parts, the streetscape or the precinct as a whole. · To encourage development which is related to the contributing component parts of the Heritage Place. · To encourage development which is in harmony with the existing character, scale, form and appearance of the contributing component parts precinct. · To encourage development which makes a positive contribution to the existing character and appearance of the precinct. · To promote the identification, protection and management of Aboriginal cultural heritage. · To promote the identification, protection and management of archaeological sites.
Additional Objectives for Individual Heritage Overlays
Carlton HO 1 · To ensure that development in the Carlton Gardens and Royal Exhibition Building and the buffer zone around it, has regard to the world heritage significance. · To strengthen the functional and visual connection between Spring Street and the Royal Exhibition Building and Carlton Gardens. · To ensure that development in and around the University of Melbourne, Melbourne General Cemetery and Princes Park has regard to the of the cultural heritage significance of the open landscape setting. · To encourage the retention of open space in rear yards where this contributes to the historic urban form.
36 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 44 of 217
· To ensure that development in the Victoria Street HO1B sub precinct will maintain and strengthen the prominence of the institutional buildings on the southern allotments, and strengthen the boulevard status of the street. · In the High rise housing sub precinct HO1C, to minimise the impact of the existing intrusive development and to discourage similar development
East Melbourne HO 2 · East Melbourne and the Jolimont sub precinct: · To enhance the status of Wellington Parade as a major historic boulevard into Melbourne. · In Wellington Parade, Wellington Parade South, Jolimont Road, and Clarendon, Grey and Gipps Streets, to minimise the impact of the existing intrusive tall development and to discourage similar development. · To encourage the retention of open space in rear yards where t his contributes to the historic urban form.
Parliamentary sub-precinct: · To retain and strengthen the zone as the civic precinct of Melbourne within its park setting. · To retain the outstanding vistas to the Old Treasury and Parliament House from within Spring, Collins and Bourke Streets. · To retain the clear delineation of the city edge to Hoddle’s 1837 grid along Spring Street · To control the height of development within the precinct to ensure that the vistas to, and the prominence of, the several landmark buildings remain. Landmark buildings include Parliament House, Old Treasury building, State Government Offices, Commonwealth Building, St Patrick’s Cathedral, St Peters Church, and Eastern Hill Fire Station. · To retain the skyline silhouettes to all Landmark buildings (noted above) from any position within public areas in the precinct, including parks. · To retain the key attributes of consistent scale, height, architectural quality within level 1 and 2 streetscapes. · To document the Aboriginal heritage sites and interpret these in the context of the development of Victoria.
Eastern Hill sub-precinct: · To minimise the impact of intrusive tall development on contributory buildings and the Fitzroy Gardens, by limiting height to ensure that the existing contributory buildings remain prominent. · To prevent development which would overshadow the Fitzroy Gardens and the Parliament Gardens at 12 noon at the winter solstice. · To retain the key attributes of consistent scale and low height, within level 1 and 2 streetscapes in the sub precinct. · To control the height of development within the precinct to ensure that the vistas to landmark Eastern Hill Fire Station and its lookout tower remain.
Yarra Park sub -precinct · To encourage connection of the northern and southern portions of Yarra Park by increased pedestrian connection across the railway lines . · To protect indigenous vegetation. · To document the Aboriginal heritage sites and interpret these in the context of the development of Victoria.
Kensington and Flour Milling HO 3 · To facilitate the retention of a viable flour milling industry · In Kensington, west of the railway line, to retain the open landscape character at the rear of residential sites. · To retain contributory stables structures and other original outbuildings in laneways
North and West Melbourne HO 4 · To strengthen the visual connection between the Victoria Market and the North Melbourne residential core.
37 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 45 of 217
· To strengthen the visual connection between the Flagstaff Gardens and the residential buildings in Dudley Street. · To maintain and enhance views to North Melbourne Town hall. · To acknowledge that sub precincts HO4A, HO4B, HO4D and HO4E have a lower proportion of contributory heritage places.
Parkville HO 5 · In South Parkville, to encourage a very hig h retention of contributory building fabric, the retention of open space in rear gardens and contributing stables and other original outbuildings in laneways. · In North Parkville, to encourage an open landscape setting with substantial front and side setbacks except on sites already developed for row housing. · To ensure that development in and around Princes Park and Royal Park has regard to the cultural heritage significance of the landscape setting. · To document the Aboriginal heritage sites in Royal Park and interpret these in the context of the development of Victoria.
South Yarra HO 6 · To ensure the retention and enhancement of views to Government House tower from the city. · To investigate and interpret the position of Langhorne’s 1837 Mission House at the Aboriginal Mission Reserve and interpret the focus of pre-contact Aboriginal activities along the river. · To ensure that development in and around The Royal Botanic Gardens, The Domain, The Queen Victoria Gardens and The Alexandra Gardens, has regard to the cultural heritage significance of the landscape setting.
Bank Place HO 7 · To retain the key attributes of scale, enclosure, architectural quality and intactness. · To retain the skyline silhouette of contributory structures when viewed from public areas within Bank Place.
Bourke Hill HO 8 · To retain the key attributes of scale, height and contributory building fabric. · To retain the existing skyline silhouettes of contributory buildings when viewed from: > The south side of Exhibition Street at the centre of Bourke Street (See view protection zone on map below.); > Each side of Bourke Street at the property line to buildings on the opposite side of the street; > The north side of Spring Street at the property boundary, for the full width of Bourke Street. · To retain the outstanding vistas to the Old Treasury and Parliament House from within Spring, and Bourke Streets. · To control height in the Bourke Hill and Collins Street Precincts to ensure retention of the dominance of the terminal vista to Parliament House from all public land within the precinct · To prevent intrusions into the open sky around Parliament House when viewed from the south side of Exhibition Street at the centre of Bourke Street · To strengthen the connection between Spring Street and the Royal Exhibition Building and Carlton Gardens. · To retain the open footpath without street verandahs on the north side of Bourke Street.
Collins Street East HO 9 · To retain the key attributes of consistent scale, height, architectural quality and contributory building fabric. · To retain the outstanding vista to the Old Treasury building from within Collins Street. · To retain the outstanding vistas to the Old Treasury and Parliament House from within Spring and Collins Streets. · To strengthen the connection between Spring Street and the Royal Exhibition Building and Carlton Gardens. · To retain the skyline silhouette to the Old Treasury building from any position within public areas in the precinct. · To retain the skyline silhouettes to the Town Hall tower and the spires of Scots church and St Michael’s church; from any position within public areas in the precinct.
38 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 46 of 217
· To retain and not exceed the 40 metre height limit within the block from Swanston Street to Russell Street. Height to be calculated at the footpath level at the centre of the site. · To diminish the impact of taller development within the blocks from Russell to Spring Streets by setting back any elements which would exceed 40 metres, for a distance of 30 metres from the Collins Street frontage. · To retain the open footpath without street verandahs. · To ensure development will not have an adverse impact on street trees. · To ensure that new development retains a public interface at the ground floor level. · To ensure that signage is discrete.
Guildford Lane HO 10 · To retain the key attributes of consistent scale, height, architectural quality and contributory building fabric and civil works. · To protect the archaeological potential for 1850s residential structures below the existing buildings.
Flinders Lane HO 11 · To retain the network of lanes and side lanes, and the built form of abutting contributory structures. · To retain similar height, scale, and frontage width. · To retain the skyline silhouette of contributory structures.
Flinders Street HO 12 · To protect the Skyline silhouette for St Paul’s Cathedral within two view protection zones as shown on the Heritage Overlay map > St Paul’s skyline silhouette protection zone 1. From the south bank of the river in the centre of St. Kilda Road, aligned with the centre of Alexandra Avenue. > St Paul’s skyline silhouette protection zone 2. From Flinders Street Station at the centre of the top of the steps · To limit the maximum height to 40m for the whole of allotments between Exhibition and Elizabeth Streets. · To enhance the relationship between Flinders Street, the river and the early wharves.
Hardware Street HO 13 · To retain the network of public and private lanes and side lanes · To retain the key attributes of similar height, low scale, and contributory fabric to street, lane and side lane frontages. · To control the height and position of development to ensure the retention of existing direct sun to lane and street surfaces between 12 noon and 2 pm Eastern Standard Time at the winter solstice. · To protect the archaeological potential for 1850s residential structures below the existing buildings.
Little Bourke HO 14 · To retain the low scale in Lonsdale and Little Bourke Streets and in the associated lanes. · To retain the network of abutting side lanes
Queen Victoria Market HO 15 · To retain the key attributes of consistent scale, height, architectural quality and contributory building fabric, open spaces and civil works. · To retain the skyline silhouette for market buildings towards the north and west. · To retain the existing level of sunlight penetration to open spaces within the market. · To protect the archaeological potential for burial sites below the existing buildings and paving. · To ensure that development in Victoria Street will maintain and strengthen the boulevard status of the street.
Retail Core HO 16 · To retain the key attributes of consistent scale, height, architectural quality and contributory building fabric. · To retain the outstanding vista to the Shrine of Remembrance from public areas within t he Precinct. · To retain the vista to the Flinders Street Railway Station clock from public areas within Flinders Street.
39 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 47 of 217
· To retain the skyline silhouettes to the Post Office and the Melbourne Town Hall from any position within public areas in the precinct and the skyline silhouette of contributory elements in all streets. · To retain and not exceed the 40metre height limit · To retain the open footpath without street verandahs in Collins Street. · To ensure development will not have an adverse impact upon street trees in Collins Street. · To ensure that new development retains a public interface at the ground floor level.
22.04-3 Application Documentation Requirements In addition to the standard documents required for planning applications, within a Heritage Overlay a planning application must also be accompanied by the following, where applicable: · Existing conditions drawings showing: > the floor plan, roof plan and elevations of any structure on the site; > the position of the centre of the trunk of any trees over 300mm diameter on the site; > the position of the trunk and canopy of any trees adjoining on public land. · Outside the Capital City Zone, a site plan showing the building footprint for the two adjoining allotments on each side (ie - five allotments in total). · Accurate street facing façade heights for the two buildings adjoining on each side. · Applications for additions, or higher rear parts to new buildings, visible from the public domain, must include: a plan indicating accurate ground levels to AHD for the site, the footpath adjoining and the footpath opposite the site; and sight-line sections indicating the extent of visibility at the critical viewing points as determined by Council. · All applications for new buildings and additions visible from the public domain, must include façade heights to AHD for the buildings adjoining on each side. · Applications for new buildings must include a streetscape elevation that also shows the two buildings adjoining on each side. · An application for demolition of all or part of a contributory element shall only be considered when accompanied by an application for the development proposed as replacement.
22.04-4 Decision Guidelines The following matters shall guide decision making when considering applications within the overlay. Before deciding on an application the responsible authority shall consider as appropriate:
General · The “Statement of Significance” for the Heritage Overlay as contained in the incorporated document at Clause 81. · The individual conservation studies, including grading and streetscape context, and the individual “Building Identification Sheets” which in some cases include information on the age, style, notable features, integrity and condition of the building for some sites. · The City of Melbourne Heritage Places Inventory for places outside the Capital City Zone · The “Performance Standards” and their associated performance measure, as contained in the Incorporated document Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne at Clause 81 · Any applicable City of Melbourne Heritage Study including in relation to laneways, streetscapes, individual trees, street trees, parks and gardens and civil works. · The AAV Archaeological Sites Register and the Aboriginal Historic Places Register.
For Retention of Contributory Buildings, Structures or Parts, including Demolition of all or part of a graded component. Refer to Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne, sections 18.01 and 19.01 · The degree of its significance. Note that all graded structures within a precinct have been determined to be significant. · The character and appearance of the structure or works or contributory component and its contribution to the cultural heritage of the streetscape and the precinct. · Whether the demolition or removal of part of the structure or works contributes to the long-term conservation of the significant fabric of the remaining parts or the precinct. · In the Capital City Zone, whether the demolition or removal is justified for the development of land or the alteration of, or addition to, a structure. · Outside the Capital City Zone, whether the demolition or removal of any part of the structure, works or contributory component contributes to the long-term conservation of significant fabric.
Additions, Alterations, and New Development includ ing Subdivision and Amalgamation and Civil Work, Refer to Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne, sections 18 and 19.
40 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 48 of 217
· The impact on the cultural heritage significance of an existing structure, an adjoining structure and the precinct. · The impact on the cultural heritage significance of existing civic works, adjoining civic works and the precinct. · The impact on contributory trees within the site and on adjoining public land. · The impact on the cultural heritage significance of Aboriginal sites · The impact on the cultural heritage significance of Archaeological sites · The contribution of the proposed development to the character and appearance of a building and/or streetscape and/or precinct.
22.04-5 Policy within the Capital City Zone It is policy that: · Applications within precincts shall be assessed in accordance with the Statement of Significance and the Performance Standards in the document Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne incorporated at Clause 81. Within that document Performance standards for: > Retention of Contributory Buildings Structures or Parts are found at item 19.01 > Alterations to existing buildings are found at item 19.02 > Additions to existing buildings are found at item 19.03 > New buildings are found at item 19.04 > Vehicle Access are found at item 19.05 > Civic works are found at item 19.06 > Buildings and works adjacent to and within parklands are found at item 19.07 > Subdivision and Amalgamation of Sites are found at item 19.08 > Archaeological sites are found at item 19.09 · Where directed b y Council, proposals shall be accompanied by a Heritage Impact Statement, prepared by a recognised expert in the field.
22.04-6 Policy outside the Capital City Zone It is policy that: · Applications within precincts shall be assessed in accordance with the Statement of Significance and the Performance Standards in the document Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne incorporated at Clause 81. Within that document Performance standards for: > Retention of Contributory Buildings Structures or Parts are found at item 18.01 > Alterations to existing buildings are found at item 18.02 > Additions to existing buildings are found at item 18.03 > New buildings are found at item 18.04 > Works abutting laneways are found at 18.05 > Definition of the property boundary are found at 18.06 > Vehicle Access, Parking and Garaging are found at item 18.07 > Civic works are found at item 18.08 > Buildings and works adjacent to and within parklands are found at item 18.09 > Subdivision are found at item 18.10 > Archaeological sites are found at item 18.11
41 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 49 of 217
POLICY REFERENCE DOCUMENTS Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne The City of Melbourne Heritage Places Inventory East Melbourne & Jolimont Conservation Study 1985 Parkville Conservation Study 1985 North & West Melbourne Conservation Study 1985 and 1993 Flemington & Kensington Conservation Study 1985 Carlton, North Carlton and Princes Hill Conservation Studies 1994 and 1985 South Yarra Conservation Study 1985 South Melbourne Conservation Study 1985 and 1998 Harbour, Railway, Industrial Conservation Study 1985 Central Activities District Conservation Study, 1985
42 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 50 of 217
7 Precinct Statements of Significance in the Proposed Incorporated Document
7.1 The Preparation of Precinct Statements of Significance
As previously noted, when the Victoria Planning Provisions (VPP’s) were introduced in 1996 they were accompanied by a “Manual” which (among other things) briefly explained the role of the respective suite of new zones and overlays, noting with respect to the Heritage Overlay that the ‘documentation for each place should include a Statement of Significance which establishes the importance of the place.’ (Emphasis added)
An essential component of the City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project, has been the preparation of a Statement of Significance for each precinct heritage overlay.
The Statements of Significance have broadly adopted that used by Heritage Victoria for places include on the Victorian Heritage Register. Essentially this includes: § A short statement indicating what is significant, including a clearly identified ‘primary period of development’, § How it is significant, historically, scientifically, architecturally, aesthetically, and/or socially, § A list of elements which contribute to the identified Statement of Significance (Contributing parts), and § A map showing the boundary to the heritage place, and additional to the Victorian Heritage Register prototype, § Identification of the key precinct characteristics, including variations for sub-precincts, and § Precinct objectives additional to the objectives common to all heritage overlay precincts in the City of Melbourne.
Background historical information for each heritage overlay is included in Appendix A of Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne is not generally footnoted and the reader is directed to consult the heritage study relevant to the area. Earlier versions of the proposed incorporated document had included the background historical information in the Statement of Significance, however several consultation groups found this too long and agglomeration in an appendix was suggested by the MCC steering group.
The Statements of Significance have been prepared from the existing heritage studies and the reports identified in Appendix C of this report. No additional research has been undertaken.
43 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 51 of 217
8 The Performance Standards in the Proposed Incorporated Document
The performance standards remain intricately linked with the MCC grading and streetscape level system, which has now been in continuous use for over twenty years.
Recognising the different form of development between the areas outside the centre and those within the Capital City Zone10, two sets of Performance Standards are included. Section 18 for Precincts subject to Heritage Overlay outside the Capital City Zone and Section 19 for Precincts subject to Heritage Overlay inside the Capital City Zone. A summary of the performance standards is given at the beginning of each section.
An objective is provided for each Performance Standard and performance measures are given to assist in the assessment of whether or not proposed works would meet the Performance Standard.
The performance standards cover topics similar to those in the existing local policy Clauses with refinements and additions which respond to the issues identified by consultation groups to the project. Clearly building works are the major development activity within the City of Melbourne and a substantial portion of the performance standards address them. The performance standards also address subdivision and archaeological sites; and the important landscape components within the City of Melbourne, including parks and civic works for which guidance was previously not clearly defined.
Issues addressed in the proposed performance standards include: § A clear indication of what fabric is to be retained. § A clear indication of where assessment in relation to new works would apply; to replace the current provisions applying for the whole of street in which the building has a frontage. § A quantitative assessment for visibility of high rear parts to new and existing buildings; to replace the current definition for partial concealment. § Clarity for the height of new buildings in relation to existing development. § Clarity in relation to corner sites. § In what circumstances assessment from adjoining streets would apply. § Where heritage issues would apply to works at the rear of a site. § Property boundary definition. § Vehicle access. § Direction in relation to civic elements § Additional issues for works adjacent to and within parkland. § Reference to archaeological matters
10 The Parliamentary precinct. Currently this area is included as a sub precinct of the Eat Melbourne and Jolimont Heritage Overlay because it is outside the designated Capital City Zone. However, both from an urban form and historical development perspective, it would more properly be included as a separate heritage overlay within the Capital City Zone.
44 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 52 of 217
In applying sections 18 and 19, compliance with the relevant performance measures will achieve compliance with the performance standard, increasing certainty in the development approval process.
45 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 53 of 217
9 Recommendations for Amendment to Heritage Overlay Precinct Boundaries
9.1 Scope for boundary amendment Boundary changes to the existing Heritage Overlays have been recommended to address six issues:
§ Boundary anomalies In 2000, Andrew Ward reviewed heritage overlay boundaries within the City of Melbourne (City of Melbourne Heritage Overlay Boundary Review). He identified anomalies in the existing boundary locations in relation to adjoining municipalities, within streets and across streets, and at the junction of heritage overlays within the municipality. The findings of that report are broadly incorporated into the revised boundary maps.
§ Within the Capital City Zone, recommendations for two new overlays Heritage Overlays, modification of boundaries to others and removal of one Heritage Overlay. Areas for further review were recommended in the Goad et.al report of 1994. The National Trust made similar recommendations. These areas were assessed on site and from the existing available information. New areas are Guildford Lane and Hardware Street, Bourke Street west has been removed. Several areas have been extended.
§ Agglomeration of individual HO sites to a precinct format In some areas, there are many adjacent individual heritage overlays which are more properly dealt with as precincts. Sometimes the existing HOs are for buildings which do not have individual heritage significance, but in combination are contributory to precinct character. Eg Kensington
§ Inclusion of parks and the river In some locations these components, which are vital to an understanding of the cultural significance of Melbourne, have not previously been fully included. Elsewhere the boundaries do not relate to most appropriate adjoining suburb.
§ Recognition of the contribution of industry to the significance of Melbourne Eg flour milling linked with the railways in Kensington and North Melbourne.
§ Amendment where development has altered the heritage place considerably. In some locations new development has had a deleterious impact on significance, or the proportion of contributory sites is low.
All areas were assessed on site and existing secondary sources were used for research.
46 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 54 of 217
9.2 Summary of Changes Note small changes are not listed here. Refer to the maps at 9.1.
Carlton § Sub-precincts have been added recognising the variations in built form. § Inclusion of the encircling parks, the major boulevards and roads eg, Grattan Street, Swanston Street, Victoria Parade, Royal Parade, Princes Park Drive, Cemetery Road East and West etc. The Melbourne General Cemetery is included as part of the park system. § Inclusion of the University of Melbourne, the Colleges to the north and University College as part of the encircling parks and provisions for public institutions. The University of Melbourne includes many individual HOs. These can be removed (except where covered by secondary overlay related to the Victorian Heritage Register) and included as part of the precinct. The University of Melbourne forms a sub-precinct. § Inclusion of Lincoln Square and the connecting Pelham Street spine as part of the 1850s town plan for three connected parks within the urban development in Carlton - namely Carlton Gardens, Argyle Square and Lincoln Square; and linkage to the slightly later fourth park at University Square. § Inclusion of the primarily public use buildings clustered at the northern end of Russell Street (outside the grid) and associated streets and roads. Again many are currently covered by individual HO. § Inclusion of the individually listed HOs abutting or nearby the precinct including: at the west end of Faraday Street, in Cardigan Street; and in several other locations. Similarly in Rathdowne Street where the whole of Rathdowne Street is included as part of the buffer to the World Heritage Site adjoining. § Removal of portions of the existing HO where new development has had a deleterious impact on significance. In particular around Barry and Leicester Streets. § Sundry small changes related to roads
East Melbourne including the Parliamentary Precinct § Sub-precincts have been added recognising the different development patterns § Inclusion of the encircling parks, the major boulevards and roads eg, Wellington Parade, Victoria Parade, Batman Avenue, Jolimont Reserve and all of Yarra Park. § Inclusion of the individually listed HOs at Eastern Hill and the Parliamentary Precinct. The individual HOs can be removed except where covered by secondary heritage overlay related to the Victorian Heritage Register. Note that it is preferable for the Parliamentary Precinct to be included within the Capital City Zone. (HO 2C on the map) § Inclusion of the Hilton Hotel . This would otherwise be a small island site within the HO. § Inclusion of the individually listed HOs abutting or nearby the precinct: § Removal of portions of the existing HO where new development has had a deleterious impact on significance. In particular around Barry and Leicester Streets. § Sundry small changes related to roads
Kensington and Milling § Inclusion of the large number of individually listed HOs abutting and nearby the existing precinct north west of Kensington Road, and inclusion of the railway land east of Bellair Street. The
47 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 55 of 217
individual HOs can be removed except where covered by secondary overall related to the Victorian Heritage Register. § Inclusion of the flour milling precinct in Kensington and North Melbourne, including the railway land connection these sites. This is a sub-precinct. § Sundry small changes related to roads
North and West Melbourne § Sub-precincts have been added recognising the different development patterns and in some cases a lower proportion of contributory sites. § Inclusion of major boulevards and roads eg, Flemington Road, Peel Street and Elizabeth Street. § Transfer of the flour milling precinct to the Kensington and Milling HO § Deletion of an area southeast of Harcourt Street due to the low proportion of contributory sites. § Small changes around Stanley and Roden Streets, based on the proportion of contributory sites § Sundry small changes related to roads
Parkville § Sub-precincts have been added recognising the different development patterns. § Inclusion of a row of sites in North Parkville where development might impact upon the surrounding HO including parkland. § Inclusion of two individual HOs abutting the precinct in Church Street, North Parkville. § Inclusion of parkland west of Manningham Road. § Inclusion of the former market wall at the existing University of Melbourne Veterinary School. § Sundry small changes related to roads
South Yarra § Sub-precincts have been added recognising the different development patterns § Inclusion of the encircling parks, the major boulevards and roads eg, St Kilda Road, Alexandra Avenue and the Yarra river, and the boat sheds area around Jeffries Parade. § Inclusion of the individually important sites which address St.Kilda Road and their parks context – the National Gallery and the Victoria Barracks. The individual HOs can be removed except where covered by secondary heritage overlay related to the Victorian Heritage Register. § Inclusion of the individually listed HOs abutting or nearby the precinct around Alexandra Avenue and Clowes Street: § Removal of portions of the existing HO where new development has had a deleterious impact on significance, or where the proportion of contributory sites is low. In particular south of Bromby Street. § Sundry small changes related to roads
Around Grant Street, south of the National Gallery. Existing HO5 (deletion) This area comprised only of roads, does not warrant inclusion as a precinct.
Bank Place § No change
48 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 56 of 217
Bourke Hill § Inclusion of sub-precincts related to views, including a small increase in area to the south. § Inclusion of a Parliament House view protection zone. § Sundry small changes related to roads
Bourke West (current H501 deleted) § This precinct is a collection of largely unrelated buildings. The precinct should be deleted and each contributory property given an individual Heritage Overlay.
Collins Street East § Substantially similar except at the City Square § Sundry small changes related to roads
Flinders Lane § Increase in length east of Russell Street and at the City Square. § Sundry small changes related to roads
Flinders Street § Inclusion of Flinders Street Station, the rail yards, the north bank of the river at the site of the early docks the Yarra River itself and the bridges which cross it. § Inclusion of the Old Customs House. § Inclusion of portions of Flinders Street east of Russell Street § Inclusion of two, St Paul’s Cathedral view protection zones. Note that these zones might have an impact on land outside the boundaries of the Flinders Street HO § Sundry small changes related to roads
Guildford Lane (new) § New area
Hardware Street (new) § New area
Little Bourke Street § Small change in Lonsdale Street at an island site.
Queen Victoria Market § Inclusion of a sub-precinct to recognise different development patterns. § Sundry small changes related to roads
Retail Core § The current H502 and H509 become one. § Addition in Elizabeth Street between Little Collins and Collins Streets. § Sundry small changes related to roads
49 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 57 of 217
9.3 Proposed Heritage Overlay Boundaries
The mapping section of DSE is currently preparing accurate Planning Scheme maps from the following draft maps.
Carlton HO, sheet 1 of2
50 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 58 of 217
Carlton HO sheet 2 of 2
East Melbourne HO sheet 1 of 2
51 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 59 of 217
East Melbourne HO Sheet 2 of 2
Kensington and Milling HO Sheet 1 of 2
52 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 60 of 217
Kensington and Milling HO Sheet 2 of 2
North and West Melbourne HO
53 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 61 of 217
Parkville HO
54 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 62 of 217
South Yarra HO
55 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 63 of 217
Capital City Zone sheet 1 of 3
Capital City Zone sheet 2 of 3
56 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 64 of 217
Capital City Zone sheet 3 of 3 Victoria Market
57 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 65 of 217
10 Recommendations for Further Investigation and Review
The following further investigations and/or review are recommended, in order of priority.
Local Policy for Individual Heritage Overlays If the recommendations for changes to the Planning Scheme are adopted, replacing the current Clauses 22.04 and 22.05 with one new Clause to apply only to precincts, a new Clause 22.05 will be required to apply to individual Heritage Overlays.
Grading and streetscape definitions The definitions used for grade A, B, C, and D, and each streetscape level 1, 2, and 3, have changed at least twice since the initial surveys were undertaken in the early 1980s. Th e most recent change does not always fully reflect the initial survey assessments and could give rise to inappropriate outcomes. A review of grading and streetscape level definitions is needed to ensure equal applicability across all the precincts and the application of gradings that have relevance to the Statement of Significance for the precinct. Draft definitions for grade and streetscape level have been prepared as part of the proposed Incorporated document Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
Streetscape levels Development over twenty years should be assessed for possible impact on the streetscape levels. In addition there is some disparity between one study and another; there are some streetscapes which cover only a very small number of properties; and some disparities between the maps and BIF sheets. The Performance Standards depend on appropriate streetscape assessment. Full review is required across the municipality. It is recommended that policy guidance, in the form of a survey and grading review, is developed for streetscape levels. Such guidance should be a ‘policy reference document’ and listed in the proposed new heritage precincts local policy of the Melbourne Planning Scheme, as outlined in chapter 6.6.
Laneways The laneway gradings in existing heritage studies appear to have a primarily two dimensional focus related almost exclusively to the surface condition of the ground. In a precinct, a three dimensional approach is needed, including assessment of the contribution of open space, detached structures abutting the laneway and visible portions of the rear of properties. On site assessment is required to address this matter.
Where development to graded buildings has occurred, it is the rear that has generally been subject to greatest change. As a consequence the characteristics of laneways are likely to have changed in some cases and this might have an impact on the current laneway level.
An up to date, assessment of laneways is required, with uniform definitions and interpretation across all HOs. A laneway definition is required. These urban spaces present a clearly different urban form to a street or road. It is recommended that policy guidance is developed to address these issues around
58 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 66 of 217 laneways. Such guidance should be a ‘policy reference document’ and listed as such in the proposed new heritage precincts local policy of the Melbourne Planning Scheme, as outlined in Chapter 6.6.
Street trees Special care is required where development is proposed near significant trees. This includes works at adjoining private sites and works (often services connections or upgrades) within the road reservation. There is not adequate accessible information within the Planning Department to flag which trees are significant and where particular care is required.
It is recommended that policy guidance, in the form of a review of the street tree records held by MCC Parks and Gardens division, further research and evaluation of the significance of existing trees, is developed. Such guidance should be a ‘policy reference document’ and listed in the proposed new heritage precincts local policy of the Melbourne Planning Scheme, as outlined in chapter 6.6.
Protocols for Civic Works The MCC Heritage Advisory Committee inquired into this matter in 2003 and made recommendations to the relevant departments.
Current protocols for civic works such as gutter replacement and laneway repair, generally do not lead to a planning permit application where ‘like is replaced with like’. If a change to design or materials is proposed, an application for permit is generally received by the Planning Department.
Difficulties arise in relation to what constitutes ‘like with like’ and what constitutes a change in design. For example, relaying existing bluestones in a laneway often leads to loss of original design features and construction details. Joints are often much wider, the number of stones often reduced, channels moved or changed in design with the net effect of a visual outcome which is frequently different to the original. In addition pattern of wear which contribute to significance, are often lost. Replacement has often been seen as a ‘like with like’ situation in the past and no permit has ensued.
A review of protocols for repair works is recommended. This should set clear parameters for what are new works and what are repairs or a replacement of ‘like with like’, and document a construction procedure which will ensure the retention of the heritage values of the existing civic works.
Updates to data in existing Heritage Studies. Section 4.8 of this document reviews the existing data and makes recommendations for each study.
Individual Heritage Overlays outside precincts There are many individual HOs outside precinct boundaries. In many cases these are sites graded ‘C’ or ‘D’, By definition of the grade, these sites do not have individual heritage significance. Those that are graded ‘A’ or ‘B’ are likely to have individual heritage significance, but in almost all cases, these have an inadequate Statement of Significance in the relevant Heritage Study.
Review of these sites would include recommendations for removal where no individual significance is found, and provision of adequate data for others.
59 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 67 of 217
Amendment to the Capital City Zone to include the Parliamentary Precinct The historical development of the Parliamentary Precinct is closely linked with the central grid and the Capital City Zone. Its urban form has a central city focus. Development within it affects the Capital City Zone more closely than the East Melbourne HO. Consideration could be given to inclusion of the Parliamentary Precinct within the Capital City Zone.
60 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 68 of 217
11 Appendices
A Existing Local Policy for areas within the Capital City Zone at Clause 22.04 B Existing Local Policy for areas outside the Capital City Zone at Clause 22.05 C References – Document Review.
61 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 69 of 217
Appendix C Document Review
Lewis et. al., Melbourne, The City’s History and Development, City of Melbourne, 1994.
City of Melbourne, Building Identification Sheets from various Conservation and Heritage Studies. Held at the Planning Department, City of Melbourne and on line.
The office of James Colmen – Urban Design Consultants, Melbourne South Yarra – Report to Melbourne South Yarra Group, 1972
National Trust of Australia (Victoria), Collins Street Report, October 1978
East Melbourne and Jolimont Community Planning Group, East Melbourne and Jolimont Action Plan Studies, 1978
South Yarra Community Planning Group, Action Plan Studies, October 1982
Flemington Community Planning Group, Action Plans, August 1980
Kensington Community Planning Group, Kensington Action Plans, May 1978
Warwick Forge, The Wade House Case, McCulloch Waterloo Press, 1985
Daryl Jackson Evan Walker Architects Pty Ltd., Drummond Street, South Carlton Historic Area Conservation Study, not dated
Jacobs Lewis Vines Architects and Conservation Planners, Parkville Historic Area Study, City of Melbourne, April 1979
Carlton, North Carlton and Princes Hill Community Planning Group, Carlton, North Carlton and Princes Hill Action Plan Studies, January 1979
Department of Planning, Report on Amendment 151 concerning Parks, Boulevards and Historic Precincts, June 1981
Melbourne Central City Development Manual Volume 2, 1982
Melbourne’s Historic Public Gardens – A Management and Conservation Guide, prepared by Rex Swanson in 1984.
Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works, City of Melbourne and the Ministry for Planning and Environment, Lygon Street Action Plan – Final Report, March 1984.
Allom Lovell Sanderson, South Melbourne Conservation Study 1985 and 1998
Graeme Butler, Precinct Identification Sheets – North and West Melbourne Conservation Study Volume 25, 1984
Graeme Butler, North and West Melbourne Conservation Study, City of Melbourne, 1984 and 1993
Graeme Butler, Flemington and Kensington Conservation Study, City of Melbourne 1985
Graeme Butler, CAD Conservation Study, City of Melbourne 1985
Nigel Lewis and Associates, Carlton, North Carlton and Princes Hill Conservation Study, City of Melbourne 1985, 1994.
Nigel Lewis and Associates, Parkville Conservation Study, City of Melbourne 1985
62 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 70 of 217
Meredith Gould, Architects, Conservation Consultant, East Melbourne and Jolimont Conservation Study, 1984
Meredith Gould, Architects, Conservation Consultant, South Yarra Conservation Study, 1985
Meredith Gould, Architects, Conservation Consultant, Gap Conservation Study(Harbour, Railway, Industrial Conservation Study, City of Melbourne, 1985
Meredith Gould, Architects, Conservation Architects, Melbourne Central Activities District Typological Study 1900 – 1939,prepred for the Historic Buildings Council, 1992
City of Melbourne, Urban Conservation in the City of Melbourne, 1985
Brochures for all precincts outside the CCZ. Urban Conservation Areas, …… Guidelines for Owners, City of Melbourne, c1985
Bernie Hannah and Peter Lau, Melbourne’s Boulevards: a Management Plan, City of Melbourne, October 1992
Government of Victoria and City of Melbourne, Creating Prosperity – Victoria’s Capital City Policy, November 1994
City of Melbourne, City of Melbourne Tree Policy, not dated
City of Melbourne, CBD Laneway Study, July 1991
City of Melbourne and the Department of Planning and Housing, Directions 1992-95 – A review of the City of Melbourne Strategy Plan 1985, July 1992
Melbourne Central Activities District: Archaeological Management Plan (8 volumes), Fels, M., Lavelle, S. & Mider, D., 1993, OCC. RPT
City of Melbourne, Fitzroy and Treasury Gardens Master Plan, 1996
City of Melbourne, Domain Parklands Master Plan, April 1997
City of Melbourne, Princes Park Ten Year plan, March 1998
City of Melbourne, Royal Park Cultural Heritage Study – Draft, September 1998
City of Melbourne, Royal Park Master Plan, 1998
City of Melbourne, Flagstaff Gardens Master Plan, 2000
John Patrick Pty Ltd et.al., Flagstaff Gardens Melbourne, Conservation Analysis, 1999
City of Melbourne, Carlton – A Vision to 2010 – Integrated Local Plan, January 2001
City of Melbourne, Draft City Plan 2010 – A Summary, April 2001
Joanna Freslov, Andrew Long and Associates, Royal Park, Parkville – an Aboriginal Archaeological and Historical Heritage Study, City of Melbourne, February 2002
City of Melbourne and the Department of Planning and Housing, Central City Planning and design Guidelines, July 1991.
Phillip Goad, Miles Lewis, Alan Mayne, Brice Raworth and Jeff Turnbull, Central City Heritage Study Review – Final Report Volume 1, November 1993
City of Melbourne, Domain Parklands Master Plan, April 1997
City of Melbourne, North and West Melbourne 2010 Local Plan, February 1999
63 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy Page 71 of 217
Melbourne New Format Planning Scheme – Report of the Panel and Advisory Committee’, April 1998
Victoria Planning Provisions Practice notes, Vegetation Protection in Urban Areas, August 1999
City of Melbourne, Student Housing – Development and Planning Controls, July 1999
Andrew Ward, City of Melbourne Heritage Overlay Boundary Review, City of Melbourne, 2000.
Johnson Joseph, A centenary of the Melbourne Savage Club 1894-1994 and a history of the Yorick Club 1868 - 1966 Melbourne Savage Club, Melbourne 1994
Weston Bate, Essential but Unplanned.
Cole, E. 1979, Melbourne Markets 1841-1979 The story of the fruit and vegetable markets in the City of Melbourne, Melbourne Wholesale Fruit and Vegetable Market Trust.
Conservation Policy for the Old Melbourne Cemetery at the Queen Victoria Market, Austral Archaeology, 2000
65-81 Victoria Street, Melbourne, Queen Victoria Market: heritage assessment and conservation management plan. Final Report, Lohning Brothers Consulting Engineers, 1991, Architects Branch, City of Melbourne
Submission for the Preservation of the Queen Victoria Market, 1973, National Trust of Australia (Victoria)
The Queen Victoria Market (chapter 5 ) - photocopy from 'Melbourne Markets, 1841 - 1979: The Story of Fruit and Vegetable Markets in the City of Melbourne, Cole, C (Ed.), Melbourne Wholesale Fruit and Vegetable Market Trust
Surveyors Board Victoria, Surveying Victoria, In Celebration of 150 years of Victoria’s Surveyor General 1851 – 2001, 2002
Conservation Policy for the Old Melbourne Cemetery at the Queen Victoria Market, Austral Archaeology, 2000
The City of Melbourne Heritage Places Inventory
64 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd LOCAL Page 72 of 217 PROVISION MELBOURNE PLANNING SCHEME
22.04 HERITAGE PLACES WITHIN THE CAPITAL CITY ZONE
This policy applies to the Capital City Zone.
Policy Basis
The heritage of the Capital City Zone area, comprising individual buildings, precincts, significant trees, and aboriginal archaeological sites, is a significant part of Melbourne’s attraction as a place in which to live, visit, do business and invest. It is also important for cultural and sociological reasons, providing a distinctive historical character and a sense of continuity. Much of Melbourne’s charm is provided by its older buildings, which, while not always of high individual significance, together provide cultural significance or interest, and should be retained in their three dimensional form, not as two dimensional facades as has sometimes occurred.
The identification, assessment, and citation of heritage places have been undertaken over decades, as part of an ongoing heritage conservation process and their recognition and protection have been a crucial component of planning in Melbourne since 1982.
Objectives
• To conserve and enhance all heritage places, and ensure that any alterations or extensions to them are undertaken in accordance with accepted conservation standards. • To consider the impact of development on buildings listed in the Central Activities District Conservation Study and the South Melbourne Conservation Study. • To promote the identification, protection and management of aboriginal cultural heritage values. • To conserve and enhance the character and appearance of precincts identified as heritage places by ensuring that any new development complements their character, scale, form and appearance.
Policy
The following matters shall be taken into account when considering applications for buildings, works or demolition to heritage places as identified in the Heritage Overlay: • Proposals for alterations, works or demolition of an individual heritage building or works involving or affecting heritage trees should be accompanied by a conservation analysis and management plan in accordance with the principles of the Australian ICOMOS Charter for the Conservation of Places of Cultural Significance 1992 (The Burra Charter). • The demolition or alteration of any part of a heritage place should not be supported unless it can be demonstrated that that action will contribute to the long-term conservation of the significant fabric of the heritage place. • The impact of proposed developments on aboriginal cultural heritage values, as indicated in an archaeologist's report, for any site known to contain aboriginal archaeological relics. • The recommendations for individual buildings, sites and areas contained in the Central City Heritage Study Review 1993.
LOCAL PLANNING POLICIES - CLAUSE 22.04 PAGE 1 OF 7 31 DECEMBER 2001 LOCAL Page 73 of 217 PROVISION MELBOURNE PLANNING SCHEME
• All development affecting a heritage precinct should enhance the character of the precinct as described by the following statements of significance. • Regard shall be given to buildings listed A, B, C and D in the individual conservation studies, and their significance as described by their individual Building Identification Sheet.
Statements of Significance and Key Attributes for Heritage Areas within the Heritage Overlay
Bank Place Precinct Statement of Significance The character of the intimate space within Bank Place is created by the architectural variety of the comparatively small, individual buildings that enclose it. They vary in style from the English domestic of the Mitre Tavern (1865), through to the Victorian facades of Stalbridge Chambers and the romanesque revival of Nahun Barnett’s Bank Houses. The Savage Club, 12 Bank Place, was erected as a townhouse in the 1880s and is now on the Victorian Heritage Register. With its narrow entrances, flanked at the northern end by the impressive and ornately detailed Stalbridge Chambers on one side and on the other by a significant row of two-storey shops, representing the oldest legal offices in what was once Chancery Lane, it provides a pleasant and intimate space in the heart of the City. The area extends across Little Collins Street to include the Normanby Chambers, another sophisticated facade featuring Italian and English Renaissance design, another office long associated with the legal fraternity, and forming an architectural focus for Bank Place. Key Attributes • The intimate scale and character of Bank Place, as well as its strong social and traditionally pedestrian role. • Architecturally interesting building facades and detailing throughout.
Bourke Hill Precinct Statement of Significance This precinct derives much importance from its association with Parliament House, which was built progressively from 1856. This 19th century complex dominates the Bourke Street vista from as far away as William Street, and is emphasised by the sympathetic scale of the buildings on either side of the Bourke Street Hill. The precinct also includes such stylish and prominent buildings facing Spring Street as the Princess Theatre (1886) and the Hotel Windsor (1883). These contribute to the high level of amenity of Spring Street and its gardens. The buildings on either side of Bourke Street reflect the variety of social activities that have taken place in this area since the mid-19th century. The scale of the City’s buildings prior to the boom era of the 1880s is seen in the simple design and low scale of the two-storey Crossley’s Building (1884-1853).
The area also comprises part of the entertainment precinct of the central city, and buildings such as the Salvation Army Temple (1890) reflect the interest of social reformers in the nearby ‘back slums’ epitomised by the nearby former Gordon House (1883-1884). A philanthropic venture built by a syndicate headed by the actor-manager and politician George Coppin, it was named after the martyr of Khartoum and was an ambitious venture intended to provide family accommodation for the respectable poor. However, the venture was not successful in achieving its purpose and Gordon House later became a shelter for homeless men and now a hotel. It survives as a unique social document in the narrow confines of Little Bourke Street, and is complemented by the low-scale of surrounding red brick buildings.
LOCAL PLANNING POLICIES - CLAUSE 22.04 PAGE 2 OF 7 31 DECEMBER 2001 LOCAL Page 74 of 217 PROVISION MELBOURNE PLANNING SCHEME
The juxtaposition of the Parliament, the former deprived areas of Little Bourke Street and the style of Bourke Street gives the precinct an unrivalled historic texture and overall the theatres, hotels, cafes and quality bookshops contribute to the relaxed and elegant character of the eastern end of the city. Key Attributes • Low-scale Victorian buildings. • The visual dominance of the parliamentary buildings on the Bourke Hill skyline, and the vista along Bourke Street to Parliament House.
Bourke West Precinct Statement of Significance Architecturally diverse but coherent in scale and picturesque setting, this precinct contains highly expressive elements of the late 19th and early 20th century city. Apart from containing a rare and interesting mix of diverse functions and building types, this precinct includes a range of government services located in the western quarter of the City. Some buildings such as Unity Hall (1916), Hudsons’s Stores (1876-77) and the Old Tramways Building (1891) have important historical associations with transport and the Spencer Street railway yards. The comparatively low levels of even the tallest buildings contrast well with the single-storey structures on the southern side of Bourke Street, enabling the taller structures to be seen from their original perspective. Key Attributes • A group of architecturally diverse 19th and early 20th century buildings that are consistent in scale and associated with public services and warehousing. • The dominance of the Tramways Building on the south side of Bourke Street and the Mail Exchange building on the north side. • The amenity of the garden around St Augustine’s Church.
Collins East Precinct Statement of Significance Collins Street has often been identified as Melbourne’s leading street. This is due, in part, to the pleasant amenity and distinctive character of its eastern end. Its relative elevation and proximity to the Government Reserve and points of access to the City provided for its development as an elite locale. Initially a prestige residential area, the Melbourne Club re- established itself here in 1857 and by the 1860s the medical profession had begun to congregate. By the turn of the century it was firmly established as a professional and artistic centre of Melbourne, with part of its fame due to its tree plantations in the French boulevard manner (hence the ‘Paris end’), which date from 1875.
A number of significant buildings come together in this precinct to form a series of prominent streetscapes. These include, at the western end, the Town Hall, Athenaeum, and Assembly Hall through to the Scots and Independent Churches, with the Regent Theatre through to the redeveloped T&G building opposite. The eastern end includes the early 19th century residential and artists’ studio buildings at the foot of No. One Collins, with the predominantly 20th century intact run to the north featuring Alcaston, Anzac Portland and Chanonry Houses, and Victor Horsley Chambers plus the nearby Melbourne Club.
LOCAL PLANNING POLICIES - CLAUSE 22.04 PAGE 3 OF 7 31 DECEMBER 2001 LOCAL Page 75 of 217 PROVISION MELBOURNE PLANNING SCHEME
At all times until the post 1939-45 war period, redevelopment took place in a quiet and restrained manner with an emphasis on dignity, harmony and compatibility with the intimate scale and pedestrian qualities of the street. These qualities are still embodied in significant remnant buildings and other artifacts, despite the intrusion of large developments. The qualities of the street are also embodied in the social functions of the buildings which include elite smaller scale residential, religious, social, quality retailing and professional activities. Key Attributes • The buildings remaining from before the Second World War. • The boulevard quality of this end of Collins Street with street tree plantations and street furniture. • A consistent height, scale, character and appearance of the remaining 19th and early 20th century buildings. • The historic garden of the Melbourne Club.
Flinders Gate Precinct Statement of Significance This precinct comprises the City’s southern face, a major access point at Princes Bridge, and the specialised commercial district of Flinders Street. The area has been a gateway to the City from the south ever since the first Prince’s Bridge (1841) and Melbourne’s first railway were constructed, and Flinders and Spencer Street stations were linked by a viaduct in 1879. A grand new Princes Bridge (1886) confirmed the trend to redevelopment in the latter decades of the 19th century. The present Flinders Street Station (1906-10) also dates from this period. Proximity to the centre of Victoria’s railway system explains the location and the size of the Commercial Travellers’ Club (1899) in Flinders Street.
It was here, at Melbourne’s southern gate, that the Anglican community chose to build their grand new St Paul’s Cathedral (1880-91), replacing an earlier church on the same site. The choice was a logical one as many of them lived in the southern and eastern suburbs. More commercial motives saw the construction in Flinders Street of large retail emporia such as the former Mutual Store (1891) and Ball and Welch (1899).
This precinct offers evidence of all these changes, and also includes two of Melbourne’s earliest and best known hotels, the Duke of Wellington (1850) and Young and Jackson’s Princes Bridge Hotel (1854). An important feature of Flinders Street’s southern face of buildings is their uniform height facing the station, Federation Square and the Yarra River. Key Attributes • The traditional gateway to the central city from the south and an area associated with retailing. • Major 19th and early 20th century buildings including Flinders Street Station, St Paul’s Cathedral and Princes Bridge.
LOCAL PLANNING POLICIES - CLAUSE 22.04 PAGE 4 OF 7 31 DECEMBER 2001 LOCAL Page 76 of 217 PROVISION MELBOURNE PLANNING SCHEME
Flinders Lane Precinct Statement of Significance Proximity to the Yarra River, Queens Wharf and the Customs House marked Flinders Lane as an appropriate location for the establishment of wholesaling businesses in the 19th century. Up until the 1870s and 1880s, Melbourne was the centre of the colonial re-export trade. Overseas cargoes were received, re-packed and distributed to the southern colonies and New Zealand. This trade created a demand for functional warehouses offering large areas of space close to the ground without any need for external display. This generation of buildings were plain brick or stone, up to three storeys in height, and limited to one commercial occupant.
The international exhibition of 1880-81 helped change this. International agents were introduced into the commercial economy, together with a system of indented goods sent direct from manufacturer to retailer. As this system took hold and the southern face of the city became more accessible to rail and road (with the development of Flinders and Spencer Street stations, and the construction of the new Princes Bridge), it became uneconomic to maintain large areas of warehouse space in Flinders Lane. The new wholesaler was able to store his goods elsewhere, requiring only a rented office and sample room in the city proper. However, clothing manufacturers and designers did find the larger floor areas to their liking and a number of ‘Rag Trade’ activities were established in the area.
An intense period of building between 1900 and 1930 resulted in taller buildings incorporating large showcase windows to both ground and basement floors, characteristically separated by a floor line approximately 1 metre from the ground. The new buildings of the 1970s and 1980s were even taller, more architecturally pretentious, and presented a display to the street. Flinders Lane retains buildings from all three eras, and presents a striking physical display of the changing pattern of trading activity in Melbourne. Key Attributes • The scale and character of the six and seven-storey office and warehouse buildings constructed in Flinders Lane before the Second World War and the predominant building forms and materials of the precinct. • The traditional association with ‘Rag Trade’ activities, other creative professions, or dwellings. • The large showcase windows at the ground and basement floors of the warehouse offices constructed before the Second World War.
Little Bourke Precinct Statement of Significance Chinese immigrants settled in Little Bourke Street as early as the mid 1850s. Chinese occupation in the city centre then extended north and west, creating a distinct enclave. The buildings that they occupied were not distinctively ‘Chinese’ in their appearance but were rather the typical small brick shops, dwellings, warehouses and factories of the less affluent areas of Victorian Melbourne (indeed the area was not known as ‘Chinatown’ until the 1970s).
A number of architecturally distinctive, community-oriented buildings were constructed in the heart of the precinct on Little Bourke Street. These included the Num Pon Soon Chinese Club House (1861) and the premises of leading Chinese merchant Sum Kum Lee (1888). However, the most obvious features of Chinatown were the Chinese themselves, their characteristic trades, and the often run-down general character of their quarter of the City. In the late 19th century, the overwhelmingly Anglo-Celtic community stigmatised both the Chinese and their portion of the city for an association with vice but, for many Chinese, Little Bourke Street was a centre of trade and community life. Today, Chinatown’s shops, restaurants and distinctive character are popular with many Melburnians and tourists as well
LOCAL PLANNING POLICIES - CLAUSE 22.04 PAGE 5 OF 7 31 DECEMBER 2001 LOCAL Page 77 of 217 PROVISION MELBOURNE PLANNING SCHEME
as the Chinese community.
The precinct is bordered on its northern boundary by taller strip development fronting Lonsdale Street. Many Victorian and Edwardian buildings survive in this location and they provide an important contextual link between the ‘back streets and lanes’ of the heart of the precinct and the more public areas of the City. Since the Second World War, Lonsdale Street has become a centre for Melbourne’s Greek community, further enhancing the cultural diversity of this cosmopolitan precinct. Key Attributes • The small low-scale Victorian and Edwardian buildings densely located along Little Bourke Street and the adjoining laneways. • The traditional association with the Chinese community expressed through uses and signage. • The focus for Greek commercial, entertainment, professional and cultural activities on the southern side of Lonsdale Street. • The Swanston Street, Russell Street and Exhibition Street entry points to Chinatown. • The prominence of Sum Kum Lee (112-114 Little Bourke Street) and Num Pon Soon (200-202 Little Bourke Street) within Little Bourke Street. • The amenity of Little Bourke Street and the adjoining laneways for pedestrian use. • The attractiveness of the precinct for tourism and recreation.
Post Office Precinct Statement of Significance For the immigrant community of Victorian Melbourne, dependant on the mail for news of all kinds, the General Post Office (GPO) was an important social institution. The present building reflects this social standing in its imposing architecture and occupation of a prominent corner site. The present building replaced an earlier structure of 1841 and was constructed in three stages between 1859 and 1907. The importance of the post office ensured a variety of other commercial attractions in the vicinity, many of them of retail character. The confluence of omnibus and tramway facilities assisted this.
Overall, this precinct has maintained its place as a major retail centre for the metropolis, surviving the challenges of such suburban centres as Smith and Chapel Streets and Chadstone. In the inter-war period, such establishments as Buckley and Nunn redeveloped their properties, the Myer Emporium put on its present face, and London Stores, the Leviathan Public Benefit Bootery, G J Coles and Dunklings all developed as substantial variety and specialist stores.
Important 19th century buildings such as the Royal Arcade and the GPO are now intermingled with the commercial gothic and art-deco characteristics of the 20th century shops and emporia to create a precinct characterised by glamour and variety. The precinct also contains sub-areas of great cultural value, such as the post office steps and arcades and Myer’s windows (especially when decorated at Christmas time). The precinct’s status as a meeting place has been recognised and enhanced by the establishment of the Bourke Street Mall. Key Attributes • The traditional character of the precinct as a major retail centre. • The scale, form and appearance of the buildings constructed before the Second World War and of the surviving 19th century buildings.
LOCAL PLANNING POLICIES - CLAUSE 22.04 PAGE 6 OF 7 31 DECEMBER 2001 LOCAL Page 78 of 217 PROVISION MELBOURNE PLANNING SCHEME
The Block Precinct Statement of Significance Within this precinct may be found not only the heart of Victorian Melbourne’s most fashionable retail area but also the beginnings of its ‘Chicago end’ along Swanston Street. ‘Doing the Block’, a term coined to describe the popular pastime amongst Melbourne’s middle classes of promenading outside the plush retail and accessory stores, reached its height in the boom years of the 1880s. The tradition of arcaded shopping was borrowed from nearby Royal Arcade and became a marked feature of this precinct. Block Arcade (1891-93), Centreway Arcade (1913), Block Court (1930), Manchester Unity Arcade (1932), and the Century Arcade (1938-40) testify to the continued popularity of this form.
The precinct contains a great number of significant and architecturally impressive buildings dating from the boom years of the 19th century through to the period immediately prior to the 1939-45 war. The Elizabeth Street end is dominated by the smaller buildings of the earlier period whereas along Swanston Street may be found the Manchester Unity Building, the Capitol Theatre and the Century Arcade, all based on precedents found in Chicago at the time, and pushed to the maximum height limit of 132 feet that existed in Melbourne until the construction of the ICI building in 1958. Key Attributes • The historic character of the precinct as a retail area, characterised by a large number of buildings from the late Victorian and early 20th century periods and by the network of arcade shopping. • The comfortable pedestrian movement within the precinct. • The commercial and retail buildings of the Victorian and 1900-1940 periods.
The Market Precinct Statement of Significance The Queen Victoria Market is one of the great 19th century markets of Australia and the only such market built by the Melbourne City Council to survive. The complex of enclosed food halls, open sheds, shops and stores illustrate a complete mode of commercial transaction, which is today substantially similar to the pattern in 1878 when the main fruit and vegetable market was opened. The Market was the principle market of fresh fruit and vegetable produce in Victoria from 1878 to 1975 and had a profound effect on the whole system of growing, selling and distribution in the state. As a retail market, it has been an important meeting place for a large component of Melbourne’s population and remains a vital link with a part of Melbourne’s domestic life. Key Attributes • The historic character of the precinct as a retail area. • The generally simple, low-scale and remarkably intact example of a utilitarian form from the period of its construction. Taken as a whole, the Market and its component buildings are substantially intact in its 1923 form. • The visual dominance of the Queen Victoria Market in the surrounding area.
Policy Reference Urban Conservation in the City of Melbourne 1985 Central Activities District Conservation Study 1985 Harbour, Railways, Industrial Conservation South Melbourne Conservation Study 1985
LOCAL PLANNING POLICIES - CLAUSE 22.04 PAGE 7 OF 7 31 DECEMBER 2001 LOCAL Page 79 of 217 PROVISION MELBOURNE PLANNING SCHEME
22.05 HERITAGE PLACES OUTSIDE THE CAPITAL CITY ZONE
This policy applies to all places within the Heritage Overlay Area excluding the Capital City Zone.
Policy Basis
The Municipal Strategic Statement identifies that Melbourne has a high-quality, rich and diverse urban environment. Heritage is an extremely significant component of Melbourne’s attractiveness, its character and its distinction, and therefore its appeal as a place to live, work and visit. This policy is the mechanism to conserve and enhance places and areas of architectural, social or historic significance and aboriginal archaeological sites and to encourage development which is in harmony with the existing character and appearance of designated heritage places and areas. This policy is consistent with policy document Urban Conservation in the City of Melbourne, which has been in operation since 1985 and has contributed to the conservation of the character of places of heritage significance.
Objectives
• To conserve all parts of buildings of historic, social or architectural interest which contribute to the significance, character and appearance of the building, streetscape or area. • To ensure that new development, and the construction or external alteration of buildings, make a positive contribution to the built form and amenity of the area and are respectful to the architectural, social or historic character and appearance of the streetscape and the area. • To promote the identification, protection and management of aboriginal cultural heritage values.
Policy
The following matters will be taken into account when considering planning applications for Heritage Places within the Heritage Overlay.
Performance Standards for Assessing Planning Applications The performance standards outline the criteria by which the heritage aspects of planning applications will be assessed. Definitions of words used in these performance standards and an explanation of building and streetscape gradings are included at the end of this policy.
In considering applications under the Heritage Overlay, regard should be given to the buildings listed in the individual conservation studies and their significance as described by their individual Building Identification Sheets. The Building Identification Sheet includes information on the age, style, notable features, integrity and condition of the building.
Demolition Demolishing or removing original parts of buildings, as well as complete buildings, will not normally be permitted in the case of ‘A’ and ‘B’, the front part of ‘C’ and many ‘D’ graded buildings. The front part of a building is generally considered to be the front two rooms in depth.
LOCAL PLANNING POLICIES - CLAUSE 22.05 PAGE 1 OF 6 31 DECEMBER 2001 LOCAL Page 80 of 217 PROVISION MELBOURNE PLANNING SCHEME
Before deciding on an application for demolition of a graded building the responsible authority will consider as appropriate: • The degree of its significance. • The character and appearance of the building or works and its contribution to the architectural, social or historic character and appearance of the streetscape and the area. • Whether the demolition or removal of any part of the building contributes to the long- term conservation of the significant fabric of that building. • Whether the demolition or removal is justified for the development of land or the alteration of, or addition to, a building.
A demolition permit should not be granted until the proposed replacement building or works have been approved.
Renovating Graded Buildings Intact significant external fabric on any part of an outstanding building, and on any visible part of a contributory building, should be preserved. Guidelines on what should be preserved are included in Urban Conservation in the City of Melbourne.
In considering a planning application to remove or alter any fabric, consideration will be given to: • The degree of its significance. • Its contribution to the significance, character and appearance of a building or a streetscape. • Its structural condition. • The character and appearance of proposed replacement materials. • The contribution of the features of the building to its historic or social significance.
Where there is evidence of what a building originally looked like, renovation of any part of an outstanding building, or any visible part of a contributory building, should form part of an authentic restoration or reconstruction process, or should not preclude it at a future date. Evidence of what a building used to look like might include other parts of the building or early photographs and plans.
Where there is no evidence of what a building originally looked like, renovations should preferably be respectful of an interpretive modern design, rather than "guesswork" reconstruction or any other form of reproduction design.
Sandblasting and Painting of Previously Unpainted Surfaces Sandblasting of render, masonry or timber surfaces and painting of previously unpainted surfaces will not normally be permitted.
Designing New Buildings and Works or Additions to Existing Buildings
Form The external shape of a new building, and of an addition to an existing building, should be respectful in a Level 1 or 2 streetscape, or interpretive in a Level 3 streetscape.
Facade Pattern and Colours The facade pattern and colours of a new building, and of an addition or alteration to an existing building, should be respectful where visible in a Level 1 streetscape, and
LOCAL PLANNING POLICIES - CLAUSE 22.05 PAGE 2 OF 6 31 DECEMBER 2001 LOCAL Page 81 of 217 PROVISION MELBOURNE PLANNING SCHEME
interpretive elsewhere.
Materials The surface materials of a new building, and of an addition or alteration to an existing building, should always be respectful.
Details The details (including verandahs, ornaments, windows and doors, fences, shopfronts and advertisements) of a new building, and of an addition or alteration to an existing building, should preferably be interpretive, that is, a simplified modern interpretation of the historic form rather than a direct reproduction.
Concealment Of Higher Rear Parts (Including Additions) Higher rear parts of a new building, and of an addition to an existing graded building, should be concealed in a Level 1 streetscape, and partly concealed in a Level 2 and 3 streetscape. Also, additions to outstanding buildings (‘A’ and ‘B’ graded buildings anywhere in the municipality) should always be concealed. In most instances, setting back a second-storey addition to a single-storey building, at least 8 metres behind the front facade will achieve concealment.
Facade Height and Setback (New Buildings) The facade height and position should not dominate an adjoining outstanding building in any streetscape, or an adjoining contributory building in a Level 1 or 2 streetscape. Generally, this means that the building should neither exceed in height, nor be positioned forward of, the specified adjoining building. Conversely, the height of the facade should not be significantly lower than typical heights in the streetscape. The facade should also not be set back significantly behind typical building lines in the streetscape.
Building Height The height of a building should respect the character and scale of adjoining buildings and the streetscape. New buildings or additions within residential areas consisting of predominantly single and two-storey terrace houses should be respectful and interpretive.
Archaeological Sites Proposed development must not impact adversely on the aboriginal cultural heritage values, as indicated in an archaeologist’s report, for any site known to contain aboriginal archaeological relics.
Sites of Historic or Social Significance An assessment of a planning application should take into account all aspects of the significance of the place. Consideration should be given to the degree to which the existing fabric demonstrates the historic and social significance of the place, and how the proposal will affect this significance. Particular care should be taken in the assessment of cases where the diminished architectural condition of the place is outweighed by its historic or social value.
LOCAL PLANNING POLICIES - CLAUSE 22.05 PAGE 3 OF 6 31 DECEMBER 2001 LOCAL Page 82 of 217 PROVISION MELBOURNE PLANNING SCHEME
Definitions of Words Used in the Performance Standards Concealed means not visible from any part of the street serving the front of the building, as defined under ‘visible’. ‘Partly concealed’ means that a limited amount of the addition or higher rear part may be visible, provided it does not dominate the appearance of the building's facade and the streetscape.
Conservation means looking after a place to retain its heritage significance. It may include maintenance, preservation, restoration, reconstruction and adaptation to accommodate new uses.
Context means: • The surrounding area as a whole • Adjoining or nearby significant buildings or works • In the case of additions or alterations, significant parts of the subject building.
Contributory building means a ‘C’ grade building anywhere in the municipality, or a ‘D’ grade building in a Level 1 or Level 2 streetscape.
Cultural significance means aesthetic, historic, scientific or social value for past, present and future generations.
Enhancement means: • Encouraging removal of buildings or objects that detract from an area’s character and appearance. • Allowing replacement of buildings or objects that do not contribute to an area’s character and significance by a building of a sympathetic new design. • Allowing new works specifically designed to enhance an area’s character and appearance.
Fabric means all the physical material of the place.
Outstanding building means a grade A or B building anywhere in the municipality.
Preservation means maintaining the fabric of a place in its existing state and retarding deterioration.
Reconstruction means returning a place as nearly as possible to a known earlier state and is distinguished by the introduction of materials (new or old) into the fabric. This is not to be confused with either ‘recreation’ or ‘conjectural reconstruction’.
Respectful and interpretive refer to design that honestly admits its modernity while relating to the historic or architecturally significant character of its context. ‘Respectful’ means a design approach in which historic building size, form, proportions, colours and materials are adopted, but modern interpretations are used instead of copies of historic detailing and decorative work. ‘Interpretive’ means a looser reference to historic size, form, proportions, colours, detailing and decoration, but still requires use of historic or closely equivalent materials.
Restoration means returning the existing fabric of a place to a known earlier state by removing accretions or later additions or by reassembling existing components without the introduction of new material.
LOCAL PLANNING POLICIES - CLAUSE 22.05 PAGE 4 OF 6 31 DECEMBER 2001 LOCAL Page 83 of 217 PROVISION MELBOURNE PLANNING SCHEME
Significant means of historic, architectural or social value for past, present or future generations. All graded buildings are significant. ‘Significant parts’ of a graded building means parts which contribute to the historic, architectural or social value of the building. The Building Identification Forms within City of Melbourne Conservation Schedule highlight many of the significant parts of each building.
Visible means anything that can be seen from any part of the street serving the front of the building including: • Side elevations that are readily visible from the front street. • Anything that can be seen from a side or rear laneway, if the laneway itself is classified as a Level 1 or 2 streetscape.
Grading of Buildings and Streetscape Levels Every building of cultural significance has been assessed and graded according to its importance. Streetscapes, that is complete collections of buildings along a street frontage, have also been graded for planning control purposes. The individual buildings are grade A to D, the streetscapes from Level 1 to 3, both in descending order of significance. The grade of every building and streetscape is identified in the incorporated document Heritage Places Inventory 2000.
‘A’ BUILDINGS
‘A’ buildings are of national or state importance, and are irreplaceable parts of Australia’s built form heritage. Many will be either already included on, or recommended for inclusion on the Victorian Heritage Register or the Register of the National Estate.
‘B’ BUILDINGS
‘B’ buildings are of regional or metropolitan significance, and stand as important milestones in the architectural development of the metropolis. Many will be either already included on, or recommended for inclusion on the Register of the National Estate.
‘C’ BUILDINGS
‘C’ buildings. Demonstrate the historical or social development of the local area and /or make an important aesthetic or scientific contribution. These buildings comprise a variety of styles and building types. Architecturally they are substantially intact, but where altered, it is reversible. In some instances, buildings of high individual historic, scientific or social significance may have a greater degree of alteration.
‘D’BUILDINGS
‘D’ buildings are representative of the historical, scientific, architectural or social development of the local area. They are often reasonably intact representatives of particular periods, styles or building types. In many instances alterations will be reversible. They may also be altered examples which stand within a group of similar period, style or type or a street which retains much of its original character. Where they stand in a row or street, the collective group will provide a setting which reinforces the value of the individual buildings.
LEVEL 1 STREETSCAPES
Level 1 streetscapes are collections of buildings outstanding either because they are a particularly well preserved group from a similar period or style, or because they are highly significant buildings in their own right.
LOCAL PLANNING POLICIES - CLAUSE 22.05 PAGE 5 OF 6 31 DECEMBER 2001 LOCAL Page 84 of 217 PROVISION MELBOURNE PLANNING SCHEME
LEVEL 2 STREETSCAPES
Level 2 streetscapes are of significance either because they still retain the predominant character and scale of a similar period or style, or because they contain individually significant buildings.
LEVEL 3 STREETSCAPES
Level 3 streetscapes may contain significant buildings, but they will be from diverse periods or styles, and of low individual significance or integrity.
Policy Reference Urban Conservation in the City of Melbourne 1985 East Melbourne & Jolimont Conservation Study 1985 Parkville Conservation Study 1985 North & West Melbourne Conservation Study 1985, & 1993 Flemington & Kensington Conservation Study 1985 Carlton, North Carlton and Princes Hill Conservation Study 1994 & 1985 South Yarra Conservation Study 1985 South Melbourne Conservation Study 1985 & 1998 Harbour, Railway, Industrial Conservation Study 1985
LOCAL PLANNING POLICIES - CLAUSE 22.05 PAGE 6 OF 6 31 DECEMBER 2001 Page 85 of 217 Attachment 2c Agenda Item 5.6 Planning and Environment Committee 6 September 2005
City of Melbourne, Heritage Precincts Project
Incorporated Document: Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
December 2004 DRAFT
Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd
City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project Page Incorporated 86 of 217Document Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
City of Melbourne, Heritage Precincts Project
Incorporated Document: Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
December 2004 DRAFT
Study Team Meredith Gould John Keaney Gary Vines
Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd Ground Floor, 69 Silverdale Road, Eaglemont, Victoria 3084
2 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project Page Incorporated 87 of 217 Document Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
Contents
1 Framework For Melbourne 5
Heritage precincts outside the Capital City zone 11
2 Statement of Significance for Carlton HO1 12
3 Statement of Significance for East Melbourne HO2
Including Jolimont and the Parliamentary Precinct 15
4 Statement of Significance for Kensington and the Flour Milling Precinct HO3 19
5 Statement of Significance for North and West Melbourne HO4 21
6 Statement of Significance for Parkville HO5 23
7 Statement of Significance for South Yarra HO6 25
Heritage Precincts within the Capital City Zone 27
8 Statement of Significance for Bank Place HO7 28
9 Statement of Significance for Bourke Hill HO8 30
10 Statement of Significance for Collins Street East HO 9 32
11 Statement of Significance for Flinders Lane HO10 34
12 Statement of Significance for Flinders Street HO11 36
13 Statement of Significance for Guildford Lane HO12 38
14 Statement of Significance for Hardware Street HO13 40
15 Statement of Significance for Little Bourke Street HO14 42
16 Statement of Significance for the Queen Victoria Market HO15 44
17 Statement of Significance for the Retail Core HO16 46
18 Performance Standards for Precincts Subject to Heritage Overlay,Outside the Capital City Zone HO1 to HO6 inclusive. 48
3 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project Page Incorporated 88 of 217 Document Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
19 Performance Standards for Precincts Subject to Heritage Overlay Within the Capital City Zone HO7 to HO16 inclusive. 56
20 Definitions used in the Performance Standards 61
Appendix A
Background History for the Development of the Heritage Overlay Precincts. 71
Appendix B
Proposed Clause 22.XX 111
4 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project Page Incorporated 89 of 217 Document Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne. 1 Framework for Melbourne
Melbourne’s distinctive urban form is directly related to the framework developed in the two decades after the 1835 settlement. In the short period from 1837 to 1858, the use of the land within the centre and in the extended town reserve was set, parks and areas for public purposes were set aside, construction began on major public institutions and the formal layout of the boulevards into and out of the city were determined.
Melbourne’s golden mile grid, aligned to the river and adapted to suit the topography, its parks, and its boulevards, and its well set out residential suburbs, form the framework for Melbourne. These elements connect the City to its foundation in 1835, its formal origins as a British colonial outpost, and to the aspirations of the first administrators for a city with high urban amenity.
The civic framework for Melbourne is historically, socially and aesthetically significant to the state of Victoria. It represents the planning ideals of the colonial administration and key individuals including Lt. Gov. Charles La Trobe, and surveyors Robert Hoddle, Clement Hodgkinson and Andrew Clarke. Rather than a grand plan at a single point in time, the outcome is in large measure a result of Charles La Trobe’s visionary ideas, his response to the petitions from the community and his capacity to hold back large tracts of land from sale whilst decisions about reserves could be made for recreation, parks and public purposes, cultural institutions and the grand boulevards.
Melbourne is a great nineteenth century city. All but a handful of its buildings are constructed after the 1851 gold rush. Its rich architectural legacy reflects ‘the rapid evolution of a wealthy society from the mid-century gold rushes, through the era of protection of native industry, to the financial boom of the late 1880s, when buildings of an eclectic High Victorian character and principally British province dominated.’1 As the new century begins, American influences play a part both in style and methods of concrete construction. In the twentieth century, control over building through regulation has a clear influence on architecture both in the central city, where the 40m maximum height combines with sensitivity to streetscape to produce a highly valued, coherent and elegant character; and in the suburbs where fire control measures are applied to the generally row house forms. Industrial components support and strengthen the robust economy. The architectural significance of Melbourne is reflected in individual buildings and the sixteen precinct heritage overlays.
The civic framework for Melbourne is of historical significance for the evidence of the aspirations of the colonial administrators for Melbourne’s prosperous future. It reflects the instructions given by British colonial administrators for the provision of settlements in newly settled lands, and the adaptation and modification of these instructions to the specific conditions and local requirements. Key buildings associated with governance and the cultural development of the community survive to illustrate the intentions for the City during this foundation phase.
1 Miles Lewis Melbourne, the City, Its History and Development, Melb, 1994, Statement of Cultural Significance, pages 10 and 11
5 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project Page Incorporated 90 of 217 Document Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
It is of social significance for the layout for Melbourne, which established future growth and settlement patterns, defining districts according to their convenience to particular facilities (the port, river crossings, fresh water, reserves, etc), and determining the locations of key social and economic institutions such as the commercial hub, industry, the parliamentary, civic and religious precincts, markets, and transport areas.
It is of aesthetic significance for its architecture, the variety of distinctive views, vistas and the visual character of the urban form, including important terminal vistas (consciously planned by governor La Trobe), towards Parliament House – Bourke Street, the Treasury – Collins Street; and city edge views – Flinders Street and Spring Street; the grand processional entrances from the historically important travel routes into the city; and for the parkland which (almost) surrounds the grid and defines the borders of the residential precincts.
Melbourne is of scientific significance for its botanical collection and in particular for the avenues of Ulmus procera, now rare on a world scale.
Historical Background The framework for Melbourne is significant as the foundation for the subsequent form and development of the city.
The Site for Melbourne The selection of the site of Melbourne was the result of several environmental and practical factors. Batman and Fawkner had already selected the site for the town, on elevated land and at the head of the navigable portion of the river. The location at the ‘pool’ below ‘The Falls’ near Queen Street provided a place for turning and mooring ships; up stream the water was fresh. Downstream of Batman’s hill and on the south bank, the land was swampy. The hills were also thinly wooded and so afforded pasture for the first wave of livestock. The aesthetic character of the landscape, nestled between the eastern and western hills, with gentle slopes and a pleasant outlook should not be discounted as an influence on the choice of the site. Batman’s Hill (in the west) was also known as ‘Pleasant Hill’, and the accounts of early settlers invariably refer to the visual characteristics of the area.
The City Grid and the Survey for Victoria Late in 1836, following the private settlement by Batman and Fawkner in August 1835, the Sydney authorities sent Captain William Lonsdale to act as police magistrate in the new settlement. For convenience he established himself near the settlers. In 1837 Governor Bourke arrived with surveyor Hoddle to inspect the settlement. Bourke directed the layout of town allotments at Williamstown and Melbourne, pointing out to Hoddle the approximate line of the survey. At Melbourne, this continued the site already selected by Batman and Fawkner. However, the government ignored the ‘improvements’ made by the private settlers and set about a new survey which would put into place planning principles for new settlements which had evolved over 50 years2. These were:
> Designation of a ‘Town Reserve’ of 3 miles by 1 mile, inside which allotments for sale were small and some allotments were reserved for future development. > Placement of the ‘Town reserve’ on a river. > Allocation of allotments for public buildings and institutions. > A grid form adapted to suit the topography, with blocks of 10 chains by 10 chains and streets of 1.5 chains. (The Darling Regulations) > Conditions on the sale of land that would facilitate substantial construction techniques. > Outside the ‘Town Reserve’, narrow frontages to allotments facing the river or sea, to enable water access for many sites. > A rural survey grid of 1 mile by 1 mile on a cardinal alignment - magnetic north-south and east-west.
When surveyors Russell and Hoddle were given the task of preparing the ground for a formal settlement they modified the Darling regulations to accommodate the topography, sea access and a fresh water supply. The grid was foreshortened to fit between Batman’s Hill and Eastern Hill, and the alignment substantially skewed from the magnetic cardinal points to align with the course of the north bank of the river, before it turned south up upstream. This gave maximum access to the river frontage within the grid. The ‘pool’ below the falls, where the river widened and made an ideal turning basin; and the relatively flat valley between the eastern and western hills, became the centre point of the town layout. Commercial and civic activities developed here.
When Hoddle positioned the 1837 Melbourne Town Reserve on the north of the river, he was accommodating a skewed city grid, already generally positioned to give maximum access to the river frontage by surveyor Russell. Hoddle was bound by the Darling Rules to make a 3 mile by 1 mile Town Reserve, in which only small allotments were released for shops, houses etc, leaving space for town expansion. Batman’s Hill was an expedient position from which to mark the Town Reserve. Extending magnetic north one mile from here, just
2 Ibid..
6 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project Page Incorporated 91 of 217Document Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne. captured the skewed grid within the Town Reserve. With Hoddle’s delineation two miles east and one mile west, the grid was centrally placed in the Town Reserve, and an equal quantity of land was left for expansion to the east and west3.
Elizabeth Street, at the bottom of the valley became the channel for commerce (with the public purpose reserves provided in the initial survey and the first permanent Post Office building open for business in 1841), while Swanston Street became the civic spine with reserves eventually being occupied by the State Library, Melbourne Hospital (later Queen Victoria Hospital) and the Town Hall. The council originally met in the Mechanics Institute in the 1840s with the present site selected in 1847, and the first permanent Town Hall building erected in 1851-3.
The port at the western end, where all the immigrants arrived and all the goods into and out of the settlements were landed, determined that the western end of the city would develop as the mercantile and warehouse area. The elevated east, a healthy distance from the noxious activities which quickly located downstream of the port, would develop as a residential and later professional area; and the centre with its flat land neatly placed between the ‘supply’ of goods in the west and the ‘demand’ from the population in the east, would become the retail and banking core. The prime sites were close to the river and development concentrated there. Lonsdale and Latrobe Street were sufficiently distant from it, to be left with the less desirable fringe development of mixed factories and artisans residences.
Lonsdale took over Batman’s hill (including Batman’s home and other buildings) for Government offices. The first reserve for government buildings was nearby on the site of the present law courts on William and Lonsdale Streets. North of this further government reserves later provided for the Titles Office, Registry Office, Mint and other services. Charles La Trobe, arriving in 1839 to be Superintendent of the Port Phillip district, would later direct a change to the east.
Swampy ground conditions downstream and the position of the Falls determined the bridge river crossing at Swanston Street where the rickety ‘Balbirnie’s bridge’ replaced the even more unstable punt, and was itself superseded by Lennox’s stone bridge in 1846 and eventually the current Princes Bridge. This determined the southern approach that became St. Kilda Road.
Melbourne naturally drained to the west of the City. The previously beautiful natural swamp to the west of Batman’s Hill, quickly became a fetid wastelands under European development. By the early 1840s the west had become the site of noxious industry, boiling down works, abattoirs, brickworks and rubbish tips, and would soon be the inevitable location for the docks and railways. Residential use moved as far away as possible. The hill to the east became the preferred residential location, setting the trend for the development of the salubrious suburbs beyond the grid to the east. - So did the government. La Trobe ensured that the Parliament, the Treasury and the Government officers would occupy the Eastern Hill. He had directed impressive buildings to be constructed here, terminating two major streets.
By 1854, the pattern of land use had set the trend for the development of metropolitan Melbourne for the next 150 years. - industry to the west, government and the best residential areas to the east, and retail at the centre.
The First Town Reserve of 1837 and the 1840s Extended Town Reserve The first town reserve of 1837 is the principal determinant of the form of the centre of Melbourne. It was bounded by the river, Victoria Street and Hoddle Street. The latter were the commencement of Hoddle’s north- south and east west cardinal survey lines for the State. Within the Town Survey, land in the grid was sold over several auction dates. Here, the allotments were intended to be an appropriate size for a house or business. Around the grid, and within the reserve, there were portions of land not surveyed for sale. Outside the first town reserve, some large river allotments were surveyed in long strips giving many holders access to the river; and in Collingwood, Fitzroy and Richmond, close to the grid but outside the town reserve, large allotments were sold in 1838-9.
Very soon after the first sales in Collingwood, Fitzroy and Richmond, the government could see that the unrestrained development and the subdivision and redivision which eventuated were undesirable. An extension to the area where town allotments would be controlled by the government was required. In 1840, the parishes of North Melbourne, north to Park Street and South Melbourne, south to the bay, were formed. The slow and orderly determination of appropriate development within this much larger area would have a profound effect on the form of Melbourne’s suburbs.
In 1837 at the time of the first land sales, the population of Melbourne was around 800. In 1839 when La Trobe arrived it was 3,511, but by the end of 1841 it was 20,416. Expansion of Town allotments was needed to accommodate the growing community. The grid could not be readily extended to the east where Collingwood
3 Surveyors Board Victoria, Surveying Victoria, In Celebration of 150 years of Victoria’s Surveyor General 1851 – 2001, 2002
7 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project Page Incorporated 92 of 217Document Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne. and Fitzroy had been sold for “cultivation allotments” in 1837, outside the Town Reserve. Hoddle had surveyed the land to the south in South Yarra in 1839 but development was severely restricted here by the lack of a suitable bridge crossing and never proceeded. Extension of the grid to the west was impractical due to the swampy land, leaving only the north and the northwest as reasonably large areas suitable for development within the Town Reserve. The Town Reserve was extended to the alignment of Brunswick Road to the north in 1840s. It was not until the 1850s that substantial areas of land were released from the 1837 Town Reserve outside the grid at East Melbourne; and in the North parish, lands within the extended Town Reserve at Carlton and North Melbourne. In these ten or so years, the balance of parks and suburban development to ring the grid would be set, largely determining the character of inner Melbourne at Carlton, North and West Melbourne, Parkville, East Melbourne and parts of South Yarra.
Figure 2 Part of, Melbourne 1837, Robert Hoddle. Note the alignment of the grid with the river, and the magnetic north alignment of the Town Reserve (marked ‘Government Reserve’) with Batman’s Hill as the measuring point for its boundaries one mile to the north, two miles to the east and one mile to the west. The northern boundary became Victoria Parade, Hoddle Street to the east (not shown), the Yarra to the south, and an arbitrary line in the swamp to the west. From Surveying Victoria, In Celebration of 150 years of Victoria’s Surveyor General 1851 – 2001
Charles La Trobe and the Boulevards, Reserves and Parks At the direction of Governor Bourke, Superintendent Charles J. La Trobe came to Melbourne from Britain in 1839 to govern the fledgling community. He would have a lasting effect on the physical form of Melbourne. La Trobe presided for the whole of the period when land was withheld from sale between 1841 and 1852. By setting aside very large areas for parklands, public purposes, and recreation, he was largely responsible for the appearance of Melbourne today. All the suburban areas which were eventually released would be bounded by parks – North Melbourne by Royal Park; East Melbourne by the Fitzroy Gardens and Yarra Park; Carlton by Princes Park and Carlton Gardens, and retrospectively South Yarra by the Domain and the Royal Botanic Gardens. Parkville, released long after La Trobe had departed, follows the same principle of residential land in a park setting.
The early land routes towards Melbourne were determined by the communication to Sydney and squatting runs in the early years of settlement. By 1837 tracks ran south through the scrub to Sandridge and down to the Mornington Peninsula, north in line with Sydney Road, north-west to cross the Maribrynong and on to Geelong, and northeast to the Yarra valley. Subsequent surveys accommodated these tracks and as land was sold around them beyond the Town Reserve, formalised the routes to specific roads, becoming The Macedon Road, Sydney Road, Bridge Road, Heidelberg Road and Brighton Road. Between the Town blocks and suburban lands, the expanded Town Reserve provided space for appropriate positioning of their connection to the city. These linking thoroughfares became impressive boulevards.
8 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project Page Incorporated 93 of 217 Document Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
The placement of major entrances to the city were an integral part of the controlled planning within the expanded Town Reserve. Here, with all the land in the control of the government, it was possible for exceedingly wide boulevards to be formed. Hoddle had defined the position and enormous size of the eastern entry at Wellington Parade in the development of his 1837 plan. Hoddle also appears to be responsible for Victoria Parade and Hoddle Street in the East Melbourne section. La Trobe appears to have set the position for the roads to north west for Flemington Road (a formalised track), its extension in to the first Town Reserve giving access to the commercial and retail core in Elizabeth Street through Elizabeth Street North and to the docks via Peel Street; Royal Parade to the north, connecting the city with the Sydney Road; and St Kilda Road to the south, terminating at the gateway to the city across Princes bridge. At the turn of the twentieth century, some fifty years after La Trobe left, the Alexandra Avenue was created as a picturesque entry to the city from the east.
The ring of parks and reserves and the major boulevards that run through them and link with the city, define Melbourne’s sense of place. Whilst problems reconciling the cost of maintenance with the practical demands of the colony prevented La Trobe’s grand intentions from full realisation, his intention to create high quality living conditions and a city surrounded by parkland has prevailed.
The major parks and reserves set aside or reserved during this time include: > The Royal Botanic Gardens > The Domain including the Government House Reserve. > Parliament House Reserve including the Treasury Gardens, Gordon Square and the Parliament Gardens > Fitzroy Gardens – > Yarra Park, including the areas now known as Olympic Park and Flinders Park > Royal Park, Princes Park and the Melbourne General Cemetery > Carlton Gardens > Flagstaff Gardens > Fawkner Park > Albert Park (Not in the City of Melbourne) > Studley Park (Not in the City of Melbourne) > Batman’s Hill was permanently reserved in1850 but following the eventual selection of the south of the river for the Botanic Gardens, this area eventually became the inevitable site for the railways and the docks.
Subdivision outside the central grid Many small parks were included in the residential subdivisions. In part these show the hand of the surveyors Hoddle, Clarke and Hodgkinson. Clarke’s ambitious crescents and parks were not generally implemented however. In summary, in South Yarra the 1840 government cultivation allotments sold in 1846 and 1849, were subsequently subdivided privately in fits and starts. East Melbourne was subdivided in the 1840s but not released until 1852. In the north, land was subdivided and part released for sale in 1852 and 1855 in North Melbourne. Small parks were integral to development in Carlton, where land released in 1852, 1858 and the early 1860s. A very small portion of land in West Parkville near the crossing to Moonee Ponds Creek was released before 1855, but the majority of Parkville’s developed area was subdivided in 1868 from the old market sites. In 1875 subdivi sion in North Parkville and in Gatehouse Street was extracted from the park to raise funds for the government. At a similar time the land set between Fawkner Park and Albert Park along St Kilda Road in South Yarra, was sold in large allotments. Kensington was not subdivided until the 1880s.
By the turn of the twentieth century, Melbourne became the “quintessential expression of early nineteenth century planning”4. Its grid, boulevards, parks and contemporary public buildings survive to illustrate the city’s early planning and development.
Provision of Public Buildings and Institutions in the key period La Trobe ensured that a policy of provision of land for public buildings and institutions was carried out in Melbourne. There was generous provision for churches across a broad range of denominations, but also provision for secular education. This included the National School, the very large allocation of land in a park setting for the University of Melbourne in 1853, with construction of buildings from 1854 – 1857, the Public (State) Library with construction in the mid 1850s, establishment of the Observatory in the Domain and an Herbarium. Government building proceeded apace in the 1850s with the commencement of construction of the impressive Parliament House, the Treasury, and the Government Offices in the new reservation at Eastern Hill. Defence of the Colony was also considered with Victoria Barracks commenced in 1854. The Customs House was replaced (at the same location) in 1856, the Melbourne Hospital ex tended and works continued at the Melbourne Goal.
4 Lewis op.cit.
9 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project Page Incorporated 94 of 217Document Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
Buildings Refer to Statements of Significance and Appendix A for the sixteen heritage overlays.
Key Components The key components (not in rank order) in the framework for Melbourne include: · The sixteen Precincts covered by Heritage Overlay · All the main streets of the CBD golden mile including: running north south - Spencer, King, William, Queen, Elizabeth, Russell, Exhibition and Spring Streets; running east west - Flinders, Collins, Bourke, Lonsdale and Latrobe Streets; and Market Street -the break in the grid defining the importance of the port/customs location on the bank of the river. · The east-west little streets of the CBD golden mile, including Flinders Lane, Little Collins, Little Bourke, and Little Lonsdale Streets · The main boulevards radiating to the north west, north, east and south being Flemington Road, Royal Parade and its extension as Elizabeth Street north, Peel Street, Victoria Parade, Wellington Parade and St. Kilda Road; and the boulevard on the east boundary at Hoddle Street in East Melbourne. · All the Park reserves which ring the CBD - Royal Park, Princes Park (including Melbourne General Cemetery), Carlton Gardens, Fitzroy Gardens, Treasury Gardens, Parliament Gardens, Gordon Reserve, Yarra Park (including Olympic Park, the Domain (including the Government House reserve, Alexandra Gardens, Queen Victoria Gardens), Royal Botanic Gardens, and Fawkner Park); the smaller parks within the residential subdivisions; and the parks within the city including the Flagstaff Gardens. · The Yarra River, from Swan Street to the Charles Grimes Bridge including Princes Bridge, the ‘Pool’ (the natural turning basin for small ships, below the rocky ledge -The Falls - which separated the fresh and salty water, situated near the end of Queen Street), Batman Park and the remaining docks and wharves on the north and south banks. · The government and public buildings positioned on the grid and boulevards including: the site of the first government area, now containing the Mint, Births, deaths and Marriages Registry, the Titles Office and the Law Courts; the Customs House which defines the first port; the Parliament, government and Treasury buildings, Victoria Barracks, Old Melbourne Goal, the Post Office, Melbourne Town Hall, the State Library, the Melbourne University Reserve including the 1854-7 University buildings and Moonee Ponds Creek bridge at Flemington Road and Princes Bridge.. · Archaeological areas as identified in the CBD Archaeological Zoning Plan and Heritage Inventory, in particular along the river banks, within the reserves and government sites, and evidence relating to the pre- 1837 survey establishments beneath roads. · Areas of Aboriginal cultural importance as identified in the AAV Archaeological Sites Register and Aboriginal Historic Places Register and including the Government House battle site, Yarra Yarra falls, Batman’s Hill, corroboree and camp sites at Parliament hill, Treasury Gardens, Royal Park and on the Domain, tress in Yarra Park, Feeding and protectorate Mission stations at the Botanic Gardens and Royal Park and Aboriginal burial sites at the Old Melbourne Cemetery.
10 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project Page Incorporated 95 of 217Document Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne. Heritage Precincts Outside the Capital City Zone
Six precincts outside the Capital City Zone are subject to Heritage Overlay. Listed in alphabetical order with provisional numbers these are:
Carlton HO1
East Melbourne including Jolimont and the Parliamentary Precinct HO2
Kensington and Flour Milling HO3
North and West Melbourne HO4
Parkville HO5
South Yarra HO6
Sub precincts where noted, are part of the overall HO precinct.
Each should be seen in the developmental context provided in Section 1 Framework for Melbourne. A separate Statement of significance for each follows. For background historical information to the Statement of significance refer to Appendix A.
11 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project Page Incorporated 96 of 217 Document Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne. 2 Statement of Significance for Carlton HO1
What is significant? Carlton was subdivided and sold at government auction less than twenty years after the commencement of non-Aboriginal settlement at Melbourne in 1835. It is an early part of the development of the metropolis, and an essential component of Governor La Trobe’s plan for a city with high urban amenity. The University of Melbourne is an important element in the development of a plan for the cultural development of the state.
Carlton has outstanding heritage value as an element of the mid-nineteenth century plan for a high quality urban environment to encircle central Melbourne, surviving with reasonable intactness. The framework of parks, boulevards and public institutions laid down in the 1840s and 1850s played a vital role in the developing form of the metropolis and is a primary contributor to its distinctive sense of place. At Carlton this is represented by Princes Park, Carlton Gardens, Royal Parade, the Melbourne General Cemetery and The University of Melbourne. In this elegant park setting, is a planned suburb from the second half of the nineteenth century incorporating small London-square style parks. A high proportion of the pre 1900 building stock survives, including row houses, retail, community and institutional buildings. The streetscapes have cultural heritage significance for their representation of nineteenth century inner urban development, in some instances at the State level.
Carlton is an essential component of Melbourne’s historic urban form.
The principal period of development contributing to the cultural significance of Carlton is 1852 to 1920.
How is Carlton significant? Historical Significance Carlton is historically significant as a part of La Trobe’s ambitious 1840s plan for a landscape focus for the physical form of Melbourne. Princes Park, Carlton Gardens, the Melbourne General Cemetery and The University of Melbourne are historically significant in the development of a plan for the cultural and physical development of the City of Melbourne. The institutional sites in the triangular land parcels along Victoria Street, illustrate the founding intentions for a culturally rich city and mark the intersection of the first Town Reserve and the cadastral grid for Victoria. The Royal Exhibition Building and Carlton Gardens are historically significant as the most complete nineteenth century International Exhibition site in the World.
Scientific Significance Carlton has scientific (horticultural) significance for its collection of mature plants in parks5 and street plantings, including avenues of Ulmus procera, now rare throughout the world.
Architectural Significance Carlton has architectural significance for the nineteenth and early twentieth century built forms and the nineteenth century plan-form of streets, lanes and associated civic works. Some sites have additional architectural significance through their surviving 1850s and early 1860s components, which are now rare. The consistency of building type combined with high integrity has resulted in some precincts and or streetscapes of local, metropolitan or state significance, for their illustration of nineteenth and early twentieth century row housing.
The College precinct north of Tin Alley within the University of Melbourne, has outstanding architectural significance as a unique urban form, with large and impressive residential colleges set within an extensive landscape framework, reflecting their location within the ring of Melbourne Parks.
Aesthetic Significance Carlton has aesthetic significance for: the open park landform in a city setting; the mature avenues and individual trees in parks and some streets; the views into the parks, particularly the view from Victoria Street to the south entry of the Royal Exhibition Building; the mature tree avenues in Royal Parade, College Crescent, Cemetery Road East, Cemetery Road West, and Swanston Street (north of Elgin Street); the landscape design for the Carlton Gardens, Princes Park and the small squares; and the open treed landscape within The University of Melbourne north of Tin Alley and on the south and west of the campus.
Social Significance Carlton has social significance for its connection with several immigrant groups after World War 1. Lygon Street remains a focus for Australians of Italian background.
12 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project Page Incorporated 97 of 217Document Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
Carlton Precinct Characteristics Key attributes of the Carlton precinct character include: · Wide principal streets and a network of lanes · Large parks/open spaces with mature tree plantings and smaller parks in the London-square style · Residential buildings and residential service buildings from the second half of the nineteenth century and the first two decades of the twentieth century. · Terrace row form as the most common residential building type, usually including: a front garden setback, rear wing scale lower than that at the front; and open space at the rear often with access to a lane. · A low scale - two storey and single storey development as the most common. · Face brick and rendered masonry construction, often incorporating a verandah element. Timber construction before 1870 and stone construction are uncommon. · Small scale industrial redevelopment in the early twentieth century, generally limited in extent and primarily located in the small streets. · A small number of buildings surviving from the 1850s and the early 1860s. · Bluestone street engineering works and asphalt roads and footpaths.
Additional attributes of the Carlton precinct character south of Grattan Street include: · Views to the dome of the Royal Exhibition Building · A collection of buildings using stone on the façade
Additional attributes of the Carlton precinct character north of Grattan Street include: · A collection of early buildings east of the University of Melbourne. · A small number of timber buildings predating the fire-rated construction required after adoption of the Melbourne Building Act.
Contributing Parts to the Cultural Heritage Significance of the Carlton Precinct: The following elements contribute to the cultural significance of the Carlton precinct: · The whole of Princes Park, Carlton Gardens, Argyle Square, Murchison Square, Macarthur Square, Barry (University) Square and Lincoln Square including – mature specimen trees; mature tree avenues; perimeter borders and garden bed borders (e.g. the rock edging to Argyle Square), and the original landscape design in all these parks. · The boulevards of Royal Parade and College Crescent, Princes Park Drive, Cemetery Road West Cemetery Road East and Victoria Street and Victoria Parade, including the street trees and road form. · The mature tree avenue in Swanston Street north of Elgin Street, in Royal Parade, Princes Park Drive, College Crescent, Cemetery Road East and West, Keppel Street, Grattan Street, Cardigan Street, Canning and Drummond Streets. · The road form in Neill Street · The open landscape form of the Melbourne General Cemetery, The University of Melbourne north of Tin Alley, and Princes Park. · Buildings graded A,B, C and D. · Places included on the Victorian Heritage Register which are within the primary period of significance for the Precinct · Individually “Significant” trees within Melbourne University · Civic works, including bluestone kerb and channels and gutters, bluestone paving, sewer siphons and monuments. · The town plan including the nineteenth century form of the roads and lanes. · Archaeological sites associated with the Aboriginal community before and after European settlement.
Precinct Objectives for Carlton, Additional to the Objectives Common to All Heritage Overlay Precincts as Noted in Clause 22.XX. · To ensure that development in the Carlton Gardens and Royal Exhibition Building and the buffer zone around it, has regard to the world heritage significance. · To strengthen the functional and visual connection between Spring Street and the Royal Exhibition Building and Carlton Gardens. · To ensure that development in and around the University of Melbourne HO1A, Melbourne General Cemetery and Princes Park has regard to the of the cultural heritage significance of the open landscape setting. · To encourage the retention of open space in rear yards where this contributes to the historic urban form. · To ensure that development in the Victoria Street HO1B sub precinct will maintain and strengthen the prominence of the institutional buildings on the southern allotments, and strengthen the boulevard status of the street. · In the High rise housing sub precinct HO1C, to minimise the impact of the existing intrusive development and to discourage similar development.
13 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project Page Incorporated 98 of 217Document Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
Performance Standards for Development in HO 1are included in Section 18 of this Document
General Objectives, Precinct Objectives and Application Requirements are at Clause 22.XX
Maps to be inserted
Carlton HO1, including sub precincts: HO1A the University of Melbourne sub precinct; HO1B Victoria Street sub precinct; HO1C High rise sub precinct.
14 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project Page Incorporated 99 of 217Document Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne. 3 Statement of Significance for East Melbourne HO2 Including Jolimont and the Parliamentary Precinct
What is significant?
East Melbourne has outstanding heritage value as the best example of La Trobe’s planning intentions for Melbourne - residential precincts of high urban amenity with planned parks, encircling parks around the central city and impressive boulevards through them. East Melbourne was planned in the 1840s. It includes the most intact residential area in the City of Melbourne area from the 1850s and contains many nineteenth century buildings that are individually significant. The framework of parks and boulevards laid down in the 1830s, 1840s and 1850s played a vital role in the developing form of the metropolis and is a primary contributor to its distinctive sense of place. The Fitzroy Gardens have outstanding significance to the city, state and nation. Jolimont is also significant as the home of Lt. Gov. Charles La Trobe.
East Melbourne has important cultural connections to the development of cricket and Australian Rules football in Australia and was the primary location for the 1956 Melbourne Olympic Games. The MCG in Yarra Park is amongst the major sports stadiums in the world. Yarra Park contains remnant vegetation from pre-European settlement and some significant Aboriginal sites.
A high proportion of the pre 1914 building stock in East Melbourne and Jolimont survives, and in many instances forms streetscapes with very high cultural heritage significance for their representation of nineteenth century inner urban development.
The Parliamentary Precinct is the centre of state government and was for over two decades the centre of government for the Commonwealth of Australia. It has outstanding cultural heritage significance at the National level for its impressive and elegant architecture set within the socially inclusive planning of extensive gardens and parks. Nowhere else in Melbourne are the ambitious intentions for a gracious, planned city clearer than at the Parliamentary sub precinct on Eastern Hill. In the growing nineteenth century movement towards universal franchise, it is a symbol of equity and of the power of community. The Parliamentary sub precinct reflects the social, cultural, and religious life of the city, state and nation.
Over time, the Parliamentary sub precinct has developed from a meeting place for local groups, to a state assembly, and was for twenty six years, the national meeting and decision making forum. Its natural features defined the position for Hoddle’s 1837 survey boundaries and contributed to La Trobe’s selection of the Eastern Hill for the continuation of the community meeting-place role. Despite being clearly on its edge, the parliamentary precinct is the focus of the 1837 grid, providing public open space for the city, a large space for public celebration, commemoration and protest, impressive views, and a commanding image of an ordered community through its impressive built forms. It has outstanding, uninterrupted social significance. It provides a physical expression of the influence of La Trobe and Hoddle in the formation of the city.
Individually and collectively, the several landmarks and contributory buildings in the Parliamentary sub-precinct have outstanding architectural significance for their high quality and integrity. Individually and collectively, the several gardens both public and private have outstanding aesthetic and scientific significance for their design, collections of plants and as the context for the principal buildings. The precinct has outstanding historical significance for its association with governance of the state and after federation, the nation. Tall intrusions are few, except for the 1960s government offices. Visually, the precinct is largely as planned in the nineteenth century and as built and/or planted by the commencement of the First World War.
The structures and landscapes which contribut e to the precinct date from the late1840s to 1914. The principal period of development contributing to the cultural significance of the East Melbourne Precinct is pre 1835 to 1914. Social and historical significance extends beyond to the present.
How is it significant? Historical Significance East Melbourne is historically significant as a part of La Trobe’s ambitious 1840s plan for a landscape focus to the physical form of Melbourne. The Fitzroy Gardens and Yarra Park are historically significant in the development of a plan for the cultural and physical development of the City of Melbourne.
The sub precinct of Jolimont within East Melbourne, is historically significant as the place selected by Lt. Gov. Charles La Trobe, the most important figure in the development of Melbourne, as his home in Melbourne.
15 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 100 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
The Parliamentary sub precinct is historically significant as a recorded site for Aboriginal ceremonies soon after European contact; and as one of the three topographical features selected by surveyor Robert Hoddle to limit the boundaries of the township plan to be applied to the land by the Colonial government of New South Wales.
It has outstanding historical significance for its association with the governance of Victoria from 1851 to the present day and the governance of Australia from 1901 to 1927, including the formal expression of the will of the people through the parliamentary process and informally through the right to assemble in Spring Street and in the Treasury Gardens. The region is associated with historical figures important to the city, state and nation.
Encouraging religious tolerance, the colonial government made generous land grants for education and religious purposes across the city. With a high concentration here, the Eastern Hill and Parliamentary sub precincts illustrate this policy. The precinct has historical significance for its association with education in the early years of settlement at three schools all of which are now closed - the government Modern School, Scotch College, and Cathedral College. An education component continues at the Modern School site through its use by the College of Surgeons.
East Melbourne is historically significant for its association with the development of Australian Rules football.
Scientific Significance East Melbourne has scientific (horticultural) significance for the collection of mature plants in parks and street plantings including: avenues and individual specimens of a variety of elms, amongst these Ulmus procera, now rare throughout the world; and specimens of Eucalyptus camaldulensis which predate European settlement in 1835. East Melbourne has scientific (archaeological) significance for its association with the Aboriginal community before European settlement.
Architectural Significance East Melbourne has architectural significance for the nineteenth and early twentieth century built forms; and the 1840s subdivision plan of streets and related parks, nineteenth century lanes, and the civic works associated with both of these. East Melbourne has many individually significant buildings and some buildings surviving from the 1850s which are extremely rare in Melbourne. The buildings, precincts and streetscapes generally have high integrity.
The Eastern Hill Parliamentary sub-precinct has outstanding architectural significance for the exceptional quality and integrity of Parliament House, the Old Treasury Building, and St Patrick's Cathedral; the almost universally high quality of the other buildings within the precinct; and the integration of buildings into the park setting. Several buildings, which have individual architectural significance, are amongst the best examples of their particular styles in Australia. The fine streetscape of residential and church buildings in Parliament Place is architecturally significant for the illustration of the city as a residential location in the late nineteenth century.
Aesthetic Significance East Melbourne has aesthetic significance for: the open park landform in a city setting; the mature avenues and individual trees in parks and some streets; the views into and within parks and the private gardens at Bishopscourt and Parliament House.
East Melbourne has aesthetic significance for the landscape design for the Fitzroy Gardens, Darling Square and Powlett Reserve. The Fitzroy Gardens are of aesthetic significance to the city, state and nation.
The Parliamentary sub-precinct has a strong sense-of place. Views within, into and out of the precinct are defining images of Melbourne. The terminal vistas to the Old Treasury and Parliament House are grand statements enhanced by their nineteenth century park setting. Views to the west side of Spring Street provide a clear definition of the city grid edge: and views to Government House in The Domain to the south and the Carlton Gardens to the north, visually connect the city with its intended encircling parks. The fine streetscapes in Spring, Albert and Gisborne Streets; Parliament, Macarthur, Treasury and St Andrews Places; illustrate elegant nineteenth century architecture. Individually, the gardens are fine examples of their nineteenth and early twentieth century plantings and garden design, providing the soft landscape edge to the austere grid, as intended by La Trobe and Hoddle.
Social Significance Spring Street; the Parliament and the Treasury Gardens have been associated with the formal and informal expression of democracy throughout the post contact settlement period. The forecourt to the government precinct provided by Spring Street, particularly adjoining Parliament House, has been the site for community protest, commemoration and celebration over that time.
Aboriginal corroborees are recorded at the site of the Treasury Gardens.
16 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 101 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
Social significance also arises from the use of the public parks, and the institutions, (principally churches) as meeting places for small groups and broader sections of the Melbourne community. The sporting events at the Melbourne Cricket Ground have social significance for the city, state and nation.
Contributing Parts to the Cultural Significance of the East Melbourne Precinct: The following elements contribute to the cultural heritage significance of the East Melbourne precinct: · The whole of the Fitzroy Gardens, Powlett Reserve, Darling Square, Treasury Gardens, Parliament Gardens, Gordon Square, the College of Surgeons, and the centre plantings in Wellington Parade; the significant and contributory plants and the original landscape design in these parks. · The whole of Yarra Park, the mature indigenous trees, mature non-indigenous trees and the contributory sporting facilities including the MCG, Olympic Pool, Richmond Cricket Ground and Old Scotch Oval, and Gosch’s Paddock. · The boulevards of Victoria Parade and Wellington Parade including the plantations, street trees and road form. · The mature tree avenues in Simpson Street, Powlett Street, George Street, Victoria Parade, Grey Street, and Wellington Parade South, Clarendon Street, Wellington Parade, Wellington Parade South, Spring Street, Nicholson Street, Gisborne and Mac arthur Street, Eades Street, and Parliament Place, St Andrews Place, Cathedral Place and Batman Avenue. · Buildings graded A, B, C and D. · Civic works, including bluestone kerb and channels and gutters, bluestone paving, sewer siphons, street furniture, monuments etc. · The town plan including the nineteenth century form of the roads and lanes. · Archaeological sites associated with the Aboriginal community before and after European settlement. · Places included on the Victorian Heritage Register which are within the primary period of significance for the Precinct · The private gardens associated with Parliament House and Bishopscourt. · The corroboree site in the Treasury Gardens and sites significant to the Aboriginal community in Yarra Park. · Archaeological sites as identified in the CAD Archaeological Zoning Plan
East Melbourne Precinct Characteristics Key attributes of the East Melbourne precinct character include: · Wide principal streets in East Melbourne and small principal streets in Jolimont · A network of lanes · Large parks/open spaces with mature tree plantings and smaller parks in the London-square style. · Some remnant indigenous trees. · Long distance views to development from the park setting within Fitzroy gardens. · Residential buildings from the second half of the nineteenth century and the first two decades of the twentieth century. · Free-standing or terrace row form as the most common residential building types, usually including: a front garden setback, rear wing scale lower than that at the front; and open space at the rear usually with access to a lane. · A low scale - two storey and single storey development as the most common residential form. · Face brick and rendered masonry construction, often incorporating a verandah element. Timber construction and stone construction are uncommon. · Bluestone street engineering works and asphalt roads and footpaths.
Additional attributes within the Jolimont sub precinct: · The private access system and mature trees within Jolimont Square. · In the western sector, connections with La Trobe’s House ‘Jolimont’. · Long distance views to development from the park setting within Yarra Park. · Views towards the river.
Additional attributes within the Yarra Park sub precinct · A dominant landscape setting for the sporting facilities within Yarra Park
Additional attributes within the Parliamentary sub precinct · Landmark buildings in a park and garden setting · Outstanding terminal vistas from the city grid to the Old Treasury Building and Parliament House · An outstanding streetscape vista to Spring Street west side, from Nicholson Street and Spring Street east side. · Open views to parkland outside the precinct to the north and south. · Clear definition of the 1837 Hoddle grid along Spring Street.
17 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 102 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
· The skyline silhouettes for the Old Treasury, Parliament Buildings and the parkland between and on either side viewed from Spring Street. · The large number of contributory buildings and their high level of external intactness. · Open footpaths without street verandahs or awnings.
Additional attributes within the Eastern Hill sub precinct · Institutional buildings · Contributory streetscapes of outstanding consistency in: Morrison Street; Albert Street and Victoria Parade between Lansdowne and Morrison Street; the north side of Lansdowne Street.
Precinct Objectives for East Melbourne, Additional to the Objectives Common to All Heritage Overlay Precincts as Noted in Clause 22.XX.
East Melbourne and the Jolimont sub precinct: · To enhance the status of Wellington Parade as a major historic boulevard into Melbourne. · In Wellington Parade, Wellington Parade South, Jolimont Road, and Clarendon, Grey and Gipps Streets, to minimise the impact of the existing intrusive tall development and to discourage similar development. · To encourage the retention of open space in rear yards where this contributes to the historic urban form.
Parliamentary sub-precinct: · To retain and strengthen the zone as the civic precinct of Melbourne within its park setting. · To retain the outstanding vistas to the Old Treasury and Parliament House from within Spring, Collins and Bourke Streets. · To retain the clear delineation of the city edge to Hoddle’s 1837 grid along Spring Street · To control the height of development within the precinct to ensure that the vistas to, and the prominence of the several landmark buildings remain. Landmark buildings include Parliament House, Old Treasury building, State Government Offices, Commonwealth Building, St Patrick’s Cathedral, St Peters Church, and the Eastern Hill Fire Station. · To retain the skyline silhouettes to all Landmark buildings (noted above) from any position within public areas in the precinct, including parks. · To retain the key attributes of consistent scale, height, architectural quality within level 1 and 2 streetscapes. · To provide permanent interpretation of significance for the Aboriginal community.
Eastern Hill sub-precinct: · To minimise the impact of intrusive tall development on contributory buildings and the Fitzroy Gardens, by limiting height to ensure that the existing contributory buildings remain prominent. · To prevent development which would overshadow the Fitzroy Gardens and the Parliament Gardens at 12 noon at the winter solstice. · To retain the key attributes of consistent scale and low height, within level 1 and 2 streetscapes in the sub precinct. · To control the height of development within the precinct to ensure that the vistas to the landmark Eastern Hill Fire Station and its lookout tower remain.
Yarra Park sub-precinct · To encourage connection of the northern and southern portions of Yarra Park by increased pedestrian connection across the railway line. · To protect indigenous vegetation. · To document the Aboriginal heritage sites and interpret these in the context of the development of Victoria.
Performance Standards for Development are included in Section 18 of this Document
General Objectives, Precinct Objectives and Application Requirements are at Clause 22.XX
East Melbourne HO2 including Jolimont sub precinct HO2A, Yarra Park sub precinct HO2B, Parliamentary sub precinct HO2C, Eastern Hill sub precinct HO2D.
18 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 103 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne. 4 Statement of Significance for Kensington and the Flour Milling Precinct HO3
What is significant? Kensington has cultural heritage significance as a late nineteenth century residential area linked with industry in the City of Melbourne. The Flour Milling Precinct has cultural heritage significance as the only relatively intact and operational industrial area in the City of Melbourne. It demonstrates the topographical determinants and the related nineteenth century transport infrastructure which moulded the land use in the city and inner suburbs.
By the end of the nineteenth century a concentration of flour milling had developed between Kensington and West Melbourne, close to the city and clustered around the railway system to the hinterland. It is largely responsible for the built and land use character of the area. The mills unique built form produces a distinctive and significant urban industrial streetscape. Nearby is workers’ housing in South Kensington providing domicile for the labour force at the mills and warehouses. Associated with the flour mills are large brick wool stores, which co-located to take advantage of the shared rail sidings.
Kensington is significant for its illustration of nineteenth and early twentieth century workers housing. A small shopping precinct services the residential development to create a complete nineteenth century industrial living and working place.
The principal period of development contributing to cultural significance is the mid 1880s to 1914. Significance at the four mills continues beyond 1914 through the twentieth century.
How is Kensington significant? Historical Significance The Kensington Flour Milling precinct is historically significant for its surviving collection of flour mills and wool warehouses, representing an industrial Melbourne active in the processing and/or export of agricultural products from the state. It reflects the dominance of wool and wheat in Australia’s economy from the middle of the nineteenth to the middle of the twentieth century. It is of historical significance for the contribution of flour milling to the economy of Victoria, in particular through the overseas export of bagged flour. It is the only relatively intact and operational large-scale industrial area in the City of Melbourne. All other industrial facilities along the Maribyrnong are now closed.
Scientific Significance Kensington has scientific (engineering) significance for the industrial engineering solutions required to provide appropriate functional space for mills which were at the time vast industrial enterprises.
Architectural Significance The Kensington Flour Milling precinct has architectural significance for the illustration of nineteenth and twentieth century industrial built forms; and nineteenth and early twentieth century residential sites associated with industry. Most housing in the precinct was constructed over a short period from the mid 1880s. The local service centre is contemporary with the housing. The precinct also retains a distinctive but now rare streetscape of nineteenth and early twentieth century industrial buildings.
Contributing Parts to the Cultural Significance of the Kensington and Flour Milling Precinct: The following elements contribute to the cultural heritage significance of Kensington: · The block bounded by Chelmsford, Elizabeth, Arden and Bellair Street Kensington; including the railway line and sidings · The block bounded by Laurens, Munster, Queensberry and Miller Streets, North Melbourne; and the block bounded by Chelmford, Elizabeth, Arden and Bellair Street Kensington; including the railway line and sidings adjoining, between and linking these sites. · Brunton’s, Kimpton’s and Minifie’s flour mills. · The rail lines linking the Kensington flour mill sites with the State rail system · The brick retaining wall in Bellair Street, and the railway foot bridge between Bellair Street and the Kensington Flour Mills. · The residential precinct in Kensington west and north of the Flour Mills · All buildings graded A, B, C, and D. · Places included on the Victorian Heritage Register which are within the primary period of significance for the Precinct · The nineteenth century form of the streets and lanes.
19 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 104 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
· Mature street trees. · Civic works including bluestone kerb and channels and gutters, bluestone paving, sewer siphons, service covers etc.
Kensington Precinct Characteristics Key attributes of the Kensington Street precinct character include: · Principal streets of moderate size and a network of lanes · The railway reservation · Industrial buildings associated with flour milling from the late nineteenth century to the present day, on large sites. The scale of these buildings is functionally derived and is substantially greater than that for the nearby residential areas. · Industrial buildings associated with the wool industry on small sites. Scale generally at single or two tall storeys. · Residential buildings and residential service buildings from the late nineteenth century and the first two decades of the twentieth century. · Terrace row or free-standing forms as the most common residential building types, usually including: a front garden setback, commonly a side setback on one side, rear wing scale lower than that at the front; and large open space in the rear garden, often with access to a lane. · Single storey development as the most common residential scale. · An open landscape character in rear gardens and abutting lanes. · For residential buildings weatherboarded timber as the more common construction with some buildings of face brick or rendered masonry construction. Verandah as a common element. · Bluestone street engineering works and asphalt roads and footpaths.
Precinct Objectives for Kensington Additional to the Objectives Common to All Heritage Overlay Precincts as Noted in Clause 22.XX. · To facilitate the retention of a viable flour milling industry · In Kensington, west of the railway line, to retain the open landscape character at the rear of residential sites. · To retain contributory stables structures and other original outbuildings in laneways
Performance Standards for Development are included in Section 18 of this Document
General Objectives, Precinct Objectives and Application Requirements are at Clause 22.XX
Kensington and the Flour Milling Precinct HO3, including the flour milling sub precinct HO3A
20 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 105 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne. 5 Statement of Significance for North and West Melbourne HO4
What is significant? Primarily residential, but fringed and overlaid with industry, North and West Melbourne has cultural heritage significance for its representation of the nineteenth century development which characterised the north western fringe to the city grid. Partly in and partly out of the 1837 Town Reserve, central city functions have been a consistent influence on development. Particularly important are the early markets, and industries which developed to service them and which boomed after the gold rush. The Victoria Market was a key generator for the small-scale peripheral industry in the eastern portion of the precinct.
Although there are some buildings of individual significance, most contributory elements in North and West Melbourne are typical and sometimes humble examples of their date and style. Grouped together, they illustrate a nineteenth century living and working place. Some early buildings from the 1850s and early 1860s survive. Areas of outstanding architectural significance are found in the shopping precinct of Errol and Victoria Streets, focused on the fine Town Hall. Victoria Market has city, state and national significance as a nineteenth century market. It is also significant as a burial ground for the early settlers of Melbourne and for the Aboriginal community.
North and West Melbourne is an area of irregular shape. The West Melbourne swamp and Moonee Ponds Creek define the west; and the important boulevards of Flemington Road and its extension as Elizabeth Street, define the north and east. Broad Streets provide a distinctive urban form through the oblique relationships of the four street layout patterns, separately generated by the juxtaposition of the position of the city grid, the magnetic north cadastral layout for the State and topographical factors. The boulevards, Flemington Road, Elizabeth Street and Peel Street, illustrate La Trobe’s intention for Melbourne to have well planned entrances from the hinterland to the city centre.
Except for the Benevolent Asylum site, the principal period of development contributing to cultural significance is 1837 to 1914. The principal period of development contributing to cultural significance of the Benevolent Asylum site bounded by Elm, Abbotsford, Miller and Curzon Streets is 1913 to 1930.
How is it significant? Historical Significance North and West Melbourne is historically significant as a part of La Trobe’s intentions for Melbourne to have residential precincts of high urban amenity, and impressive boulevards defining the entrances to the city.
Scientific Significance North and West Melbourne has scientific (horticultural) significance for the collection of mature plants in street plantings including avenues and individual specimens of Ulmus procera, now rare throughout the world. North and West Melbourne as scientific (archaeological) significance at the burial ground on the site of Victoria Market, including the post 1835 settlers and the Aboriginal community
Architectural Significance North and West Melbourne has architectural significance for the diverse range of nineteenth and early twentieth century built forms; including industrial and residential sites. Often these are typical and sometimes humble structures. North and West Melbourne has some individually significant buildings that are landmarks in Melbourne, some outstanding nineteenth century shopping precincts and some buildings surviving from the 1850s which are rare in Melbourne.
Aesthetic Significance North and West Melbourne has aesthetic significance for the sometimes dramatic spaces and views created by the interaction of the undulating topography, and the broad streets with sometimes quirky oblique intersections.
Social Significance North and West Melbourne has social significance through the burial ground which remains under Victoria Market.
Contributing Parts to the Cultural Significance of the North and West Melbourne Precinct: The following elements contribute to the cultural heritage significance of North and West Melbourne: · Victoria Market, Royal Park and the Flagstaff Gardens. (Note that these abut the precinct boundary) · The boulevards of Flemington Road, Elizabeth Street and Peel Street, including the plantations, street trees and road form.
21 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 106 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
· Buildings graded A,B, C and D. · Places included on the Victorian Heritage Register which are within the primary period of significance for the Precinct · The nineteenth century form of the roads and lanes. The oblique intersections, at the abutment of the four different subdivision directions, are a key feature of the precinct. The extensive railway system. · Mature street trees. · Pleasance gardens including the mature trees. · Civic works, including bluestone kerb and channels and gutters, bluestone paving, sewer siphons, service covers etc.
North and West Melbourne Precinct Characteristics Key attributes of the North and West Melbourne precinct character include: · Wide principal streets and a network of lanes · Large parks/open spaces with mature tree plantings and smaller parks in the London-square style · Residential buildings and residential service buildings from the second half of the nineteenth century and the first two decades of the twentieth cent ury. · Terrace row form as the most common building type, rear wing scale lower than that at the front and a small open space. · A low scale - two storey and single storey development as the most common. · Face brick and rendered masonry construction, sometimes incorporating a verandah element. Less common, is timber and stone construction. · Small scale industrial redevelopment in the early twentieth century, generally limited in extent and primarily located in the small streets. · Consistent scale adapted to the changing topography. · Bluestone street engineering works and asphalt roads and footpaths.
Additional attributes of the Hotham Hill sub-precinct character include: · Terrace row form, usually including: a front garden setback, rear wing scale lower than that at the front; and open space at the rear of allotments. · Few non-contributory intrusions to streetscapes
Additional attributes of the Benevolent Asylum sub-precinct character include: · Face red brick or render as the prominent wall materials · Single storey construction or single storey with a discrete attic roof first floor · A front garden setback. Side setbacks are common on one or two boundaries. · Prominent roof forms, usually with terracotta tiles. · Consistent date of construction between 1913 and 1930, with few non-contributory elements.
Additional attributes of the O’Connell Street sub precinct · Nineteenth and early twentieth century warehousing as the dominant built form. · Occupation of the whole of the site with built form.
Precinct Objectives for North and West Melbourne, Additional to the Objectives Common to All Heritage Overlay Precincts as Noted in Clause 22.XX.
· To strengthen the visual connection between the Victoria Market and the North Melbourne residential core. · To strengthen the visual connection between the Flagstaff Gardens and the residential buildings in Dudley Street. · To maintain and enhance views to North Melbourne Town hall. · To acknowledge that sub precincts HO4A, HO4B, HO4D and HO4E have a lower proportion of contributory heritage places.
Performance Standards for Development are included in Section 18 of this Document
General Objectives, Precinct Objectives and Application Requirements are at Clause 22.XX
North Melbourne HO4 including: sub precinct O’Connell Street HO4A, sub precinct Rosslyn HO4B, sub precinct Elm Street HO4C, sub precinct central west HO4D, sub precinct Flemington Road HO4E, sub precinct Hotham Hill HO4F.
22 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 107 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne. 6 Statement of Significance for Parkville HO5 What is significant? Parkville has outstanding heritage value, as an integral component of La Trobe’s intentions for Melbourne as a city, encircled by parks and punctuated by impressive boulevards. The framework of parks and boulevards laid down in the 1830s, 1840s and 1850s played a vital role in the developing form of the metropolis and is a primary contributor to its distinctive sense of place. Royal Park constitutes the majority of Parkville and two of Melbourne’s grand boulevards – Flemington Road and Royal Parade, define its boundaries.
The small built up areas are dominated by their park context and include areas of remarkable consistency in built form and high integrity. South Parkville is amongst the best examples of nineteenth and early twentieth century residential development in Victoria. It has high integrity and consistent construction over a relatively short period of time.
Royal Park includes remnant indigenous vegetation and an open landscape which provides the best reference to the pre 1835, landscape in the City of Melbourne. It has important cultural connections through the traditional Aboriginal owners.
Parkville is an essential component of Melbourne’s historic urban form
The principal period of development contributing to the cultural significance of Parkville is pre1835 to 1920.
How is it significant? Historical Significance Parkville is historically significant as one of the last sites in Melbourne where Aboriginal people occupied their land; for its association with the ill-fated Bourke and Wills expedition; and as a part of La Trobe’s ambitious plan for a landscape focus for Melbourne. Royal Park is historically significant in the development of a plan for the cultural and physical composition of Melbourne. West Parkville is historically significant as the marker for the western entry to the city at the crossing to the Moonee Ponds Creek.
Scientific Significance Parkville has scientific (horticultural) significance for its collection of plants including several indigenous species. Parkville is of scientific (archaeological) significance for its association with the Aboriginal community before and after the 1835 settlement.
Architectural Significance Parkville has architectural significance for the nineteenth and early twentieth century built forms; and the nineteenth century plan form of streets, lanes and associated civic works. In South Parkville the remarkable consistency and high level of integrity of the buildings place it amongst the best examples of nineteenth and early twentieth century row housing development in Victoria.
Aesthetic Significance Parkville has aesthetic significance for: its topography, the open landform in a city setting, its remnant indigenous vegetation, the mature avenues within Royal Park and some mature specimen trees within the park, the views into Royal Park particularly from Flemington Road, the views out of the park towards the city, and the tree avenues in Royal Parade and Flemington Road.
Social Significance Parkville has social significance for its association with the Aboriginal community before and after 1835.
Contributing Parts to the Cultural Significance of the Parkville Precinct: The following elements contribute to the cultural significance of the precinct: · The whole of Royal Park including: remnant indigenous vegetation individual trees, shrubs and grasslands; mature tree avenues, some mature specimen trees, the landscape design in the main Avenue at the Melbourne Zoo, the remnant tree avenue and roadway defining the entry to the zoo from Gatehouse Street; archaeological sites associated with the Aboriginal community before and after the 1835 settlement and buildings graded A,B, C and D. · The boulevards of Royal Parade and Flemington Road, including the street trees and road form. (Note these are included in the adjoining Heritage Overlays) · Ievers Reserve · All buildings graded A, B, C, and D. · Places included on the Victorian Heritage Register which are within the primary period of significance for the Precinct · The town plan including the nineteenth century form of the roads and lanes.
23 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 108 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
· Civic works, including bluestone kerbs, channels and gutters, bluestone paving, sewer siphons, service covers etc. · Mature street trees.
Parkville Characteristics Key attributes of the South Parkville precinct character include: · Generous principal streets and a network of lanes · Large parks/open spaces with mature tree plantings and smaller parks in the London-square style · Residential buildings and residential service buildings from the second half of the nineteenth century and the first two decades of the twentieth century. · Terrace row form as the most common building type, usually including: a front garden setback, rear wing scale lower than that at the front; and open space at the rear often with access to a lane. · A low scale - two storey and single storey development as the most common. · Face brick or rendered masonry construction, usually incorporating a verandah element. · Bluestone street engineering works and asphalt roads and footpaths.
Key attributes of the North Parkville character include: · Large allotments with large freestanding houses, generally in two storey form, and substantial gardens.. · Generous principal streets and lane access to the rear. · Residential buildings from the late nineteenth century and the first two decades of the twentieth century. · Face brick or rendered masonry construction, usually incorporating a verandah/arcade element. · Bluestone street engineering works and asphalt roads and footpaths.
Key attributes of the West Parkville character include: · Small residential buildings from the second half of the nineteenth century and the first two decades of the twentieth century. · Generally single storey, row house form, with a front garden setback, some side setbacks and open space at the rear. · Historical connection with the early development of Flemington Road and the road to Geelong.
Precinct Objectives for Parkville, Additional to the Objectives Common to All Heritage Overlay Precincts as Noted in Clause 22.XX. · In South Parkville, to encourage a very high retention of contributory building fabric, the retention of open space in rear gardens and contributing stables and other original outbuildings in laneways. · In North Parkville, to encourage an open landscape setting with substantial front and side setbacks except on sites already developed for row housing. · To ensure that development in and around Princes Park and Royal Park has regard to the cultural heritage significance of the landscape setting. · To document the Aboriginal heritage sites in Royal Park and interpret these in the context of the development of Victoria.
Performance Standards for Development are included in Section 18 of this Document
General Objectives, Precinct Objectives and Application Requirements are at Clause 22.XX
Parkville HO5, including sub precinct HO5A South Parkville, sub precinct HO5B North Parkville, sub precinct HO5C West Parkville.
24 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 109 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne. 7 Statement of Significance for South Yarra HO6
What is significant? Lt. Gov. La Trobe’s intended Melbourne to be encircled by parks and punctuated by impressive boulevards. South Yarra has outstanding heritage value as an integral component in this idea. The framework of parks and boulevards laid down in the 1830s, 1840s and 1850s played a vital role in the developing form of the metropolis and is a primary contributor to its distinctive sense of place. The Domain, Royal Botanic Gardens, Government House reserve, Alexandra Gardens and Queen Victoria gardens, are significant to the city, state and nation. They contain monuments and institutions that are important contributors to cultural values. The Royal Botanic Gardens have world significance for their collection of plant and their landscape design. Two important boulevards – St.Kilda Road and Alexandra Avenue - are contained within South Yarra. St.Kilda Road and its termination at Princes Bridge, form the principal gateway to the city.
The built -up portion of South Yarra was not planned, developing from the 1840s to the end of the nineteenth century through small private subdivision of the very early government land sales. It illustrates a diverse range of residential development over this period including the churches and institutions, and has cultural heritage significance for its representation of nineteenth century inner urban development. Some early buildings from the 1850s survive. .Some small areas developed in the twentieth century and are significant for the distinctive architectural form of their period.
South Yarra contains remnant vegetation from pre European settlement and has cultural connections with the traditional Aboriginal owners.
South Yarra has important cultural connections for the Melbourne community as a focus for passive recreation since 1846.
Whilst the principal period of development contributing to cultural significance of the precinct is pre 1835 to 1914, later individual buildings reinforce the metropolitan focus up to 1968. In the Marne Street, St Leonard’s Court, Fairlie Court and Alexandra Avenue sub precincts, the principle period of development contributing to cultural significance streets is up to 1950.
How is it significant? Historical Significance South Yarra is historically significant as a part of La Trobe’s ambitious 1840s plan for a landscape focus to the physical form of Melbourne. The parks are historically significant in the development of a plan for the cultural and physical development of the city of Melbourne.
South Yarra is historically significant as a region where the government granted extensive potions of land for community purposes – the churches and institutions. South Yarra is historically significant for its association with the provision of lands for the Aboriginal community.
Scientific Significance South Yarra has scientific (horticultural) significance for the collection of mature plants in parks and street plantings including many avenues, individual specimens, amongst these Ulmus procera, now rare throughout the world; and specimens of Eucalyptus camaldulensis and Bursaria spinosa which predate European settlement in 1835. South Yarra has scientific (archaeological) significance for its association with the Aboriginal community before European settlement. South Yarra has scientific significance for the nineteenth century centres of learning established at the Observatory Reserve, and the National Herbarium.
Architectural Significance South Yarra has architectural significance for the nineteenth and early twentieth century built forms; and the twentieth century residential developments in Marne Street, St. Leonard’s Court and Fairlie Close. South Yarra includes individually significant buildings that are landmarks in Melbourne, including several out side the primary period of significance (eg The Shrine and The National Gallery). Some buildings survive from the 1850s which are extremely rare in Melbourne. The group of institutions in St. Kilda Road are the best surviving example of the initial development of the St. Kilda Road boulevard.
Aesthetic Significance South Yarra has aesthetic significance for: the open park landform in a city setting; the mature avenues and individual trees in parks and some streets; the views into and within parks; the views within the major boulevards; and the prominence of the landscape in the residential setting.
South Yarra has aesthetic significance for the landscape design for the Yarra River improvement works 1898 to 1904, The Domain, The Royal Botanic Gardens, Observatory Reserve, Government House Reserve,
25 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 110 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
Alexandra Gardens, the Shrine Reserve, the Observatory Reserve and Fawkner Park. The Royal Botanic Gardens are of aesthetic significance to the city, state and nation.
Social Significance South Yarra has social significance as a major location for commemoration of events important to the state and nation; and for passive recreation.
Contributing Parts to the Cultural Significance of the South Yarra Precinct: The following elements contribute to the cultural heritage significance of South Yarra: · The whole of the River Yarra, The Domain, The Royal Botanic Gardens, Observatory Reserve, Government House Reserve, Alexandra Gardens, the Shrine Reserve, and Fawkner Park, their internal roads, the significant plants, tree avenues and the original landscape design in these parks. · The boulevards of Alexandra Avenue, and St Kilda Road including the plantations, street trees and road form. · The mature trees and open landscapes facing St Kilda Road at Victoria Barracks, The Deaf Society, Wesley College and The Royal Victorian Institute for the Blind; and the street tree avenues in St. Kilda Road, Alexandra Avenue, Clowes Street and Bromby Street. · Buildings graded A, B, C and D. · Places included on the Victorian Heritage Register which are within the primary period of significance for the Precinct · Civic works, including bluestone kerb and channels and gutters, the form of the riverbanks, bluestone paving, sewer siphons. · The nineteenth century form of the roads and lanes. · The twentieth century form of Marne Street, St. Leonard’s Court and Fairlie Close. · Archaeological sites associated with the Aboriginal community before and after European settlement.
Precinct Objectives for South Yarra, Additional to the Objectives Common to All Heritage Overlay Precincts as Noted in Clause 22.XX. · To ensure the retention and enhancement of views to Government House tower from the city. · To investigate and interpret the position of Langhorne’s 1837 Mission House at the Aboriginal Mission Reserve and interpret the focus of pre-contact Aboriginal activities along the river. · To ensure that development in and around The Royal Botanic Gardens, The Domain, The Queen Victoria Gardens and The Alexandra Gardens, has regard to the cultural heritage significance of the landscape setting.
Performance Standards for Development are included in Section 18 of this Document
General Objectives, Precinct Objectives and Application Requirements are at Clause 22.XX
South Yarra HO6, including sub precinct Marne Street H06A, sub precinct St. Leonard’s Court HO6B, sub precinct Fairlie Court HO6C, sub precinct HO6D Alexandra Avenue.
26 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 111 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne. Heritage Precincts within the Capital City Zone
Ten precincts are subject to Heritage Overlay within the Capital City Zone. Listed in alphabetical order these are:
Bank Place HO7
Bourke Hill HO8
Collins Street HO9
Flinders Lane HO10
Flinders Street HO11
Guildford Lane HO12
Hardware Street HO13
Little Bourke Street HO14
Queen Victoria Market HO15
Retail Core HO16
Sub precincts where noted, are part of the overall HO precinct.
Each should be seen in the developmental context provided in Section 1 Framework for the Development of Melbourne. A separate Statement of significance for each follows. For background historical information to the Statement of significance refer to Appendix A.
27 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 112 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne. 8 Statement of Significance for Bank Place HO7
What is significant? Bank Place is an urban precinct associated with the development of the Melbourne financial and legal district. It contains a visually cohesive group of distinctive architectural forms clustered around the early street Bank Place, including examples from the early post gold rush development in the city (parts of the Mitre Tavern), to the 1925 Temple Court Building. Many of the important architectural styles from nineteenth and early twentieth century Melbourne are represented in the precinct.
The short street and its built enclosure at each end, including the important terminal view to Normanby Chambers, provides a distinctive scale. The terrace row and Stalbridge Chambers continue the Bank Place scale into Little Collins Street.
Unusual for its enclosure, architectural diversity and cohesive scale, Bank Place is a high quality central city precinct from the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Association with the arts and politics through the Savage Club and the T square Club, adds to its significance.
The principal pe riod of development contributing to cultural significance is 1850 to 1925.
How is it significant?
Historical Significance Bank Place is historically significant as one of the early, privately subdivided roads in Hoddle’s 1837 city grid; providing small allotments for construction of buildings to serve the increasingly diverse social and commercial functions of the growing town. The Mitre Tavern continues very early hotel usage. A range of legal offices which have characterised the ‘western end’ of Collins Street since the 1870s, contribute to the historical significance of the precinct.
Architectural Significance Bank Place has architectural significance for the range of nineteenth and early twentieth century architectural styles set within a remarkably consistent scale. These provide a rare sense of variety and rhythm within a tightly defined and intimate space. It is a fine example of the well-mannered streetscape approach to design which characterised Collins Street before the Second World War.
Aesthetic Significance Bank Place has aesthetic significance for the intimate scale of the enclosed street and its diverse but distinctive architectural character. Enclosed views north and south are an important component of its character.
Social Significance Bank Place has socially significance for its connection with the Savage Club and Mitre Tavern. The Savage Club has associations with the Melbourne Artistic Community and later with Robert Menzies. The Mitre Tavern was a meeting place for the T-Square Club (of architects and other professionals) and members of the finance/legal fraternity. Mitre Tavern, an early Melbourne hotel, has been a meeting place for Melbourne's business and artistic community since the middle of last century.
Contributing Parts to the Cultural Significance of the Bank Place Precinct: The following elements contribute to the cultural heritage significance of: · The form of the public streets including Bank Place, Mitre Lane, Roeszler Lane, and the abutting sections of Collins Street and Little Collins Street · Places graded A, B, C and D in the Central Activities District Conservation Study. · Places included on the Victorian Heritage Register which are within the primary period of significance. · Civic works, including street signs, bluestone kerb and channels and gutters, bluestone and asphalt paving, sewer siphons, service covers associated with previous use in the precinct e.g. Melbourne Water Works, Metropolitan Gas Co., Melbourne Hydraulic Co. etc. · Tenancy signs which indicate the previous use in the precinct. · The skyline silhouette of contributory buildings. · Archaeological sites identified in the Melbourne CAD Archaeological Zoning Plan
Key attributes of the precinct character of the Bank Place Precinct Key attributes of the precinc t character include: · The height and scale of the contributing buildings. · The diverse but congruous architectural forms.
28 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 113 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
· The intactness of the contributing buildings. · The width of the public spaces and the relationship with the height of the contributing buildings. · The skyline silhouette of the contributing buildings.
Precinct Objectives for Bank Place, Additional to the Objectives Common to All Heritage Overlay Precincts as Noted in Clause 22.XX. · To retain the key attributes of scale, enclosure, architectural quality and intactness. · To retain the skyline silhouette of contributory structures when viewed from public areas within Bank Place.
Performance Standards for Development are included in Section 19 of this Document
General Objectives, Precinct Objectives and Application Requirements are at Clause 22.XX
Bank Place HO7
29 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 114 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne. 9 Statement of Significance for Bourke Hill HO8
What is significant? As the forecourt to Parliament House, Bourke Street Hill illustrates the intentions of Gov. La Trobe for an impressive civic precinct in Melbourne. As the site of State and (former) Federal governance, Parliament House has outstanding heritage significance for the State and Nation. Architecturally outstanding, Parliament House and views to it are defining images of Melbourne. Bourke Hill precinct provides the low scale context of the period, for this landmark terminal view.
Within the city centre, the Bourke Street Hill precinct is the best illustration of the small-scale, mixed-use buildings, which are typical of development before the 1850s gold rush. It is one of few central city locations to retain nineteenth century residential accommodation.
Bourke Street Hill has been the focus for important influences on Melbourne society including theatres and several restaurants, which have been historically and socially significant for their influence on the development of Melbourne as a cultural centre for the Arts. The first Australian feature film was made at the Salvation Army Building within the precinct. The Bourke Hill Precinct has outstanding social significance as a place where the community has expressed the democratic process through gatherings outside Parliament House.
The primary period of architectural and historical significance is 1837 to 1914. Social significance is continuous to the present day.
How is it significant? Historical Significance Victoria’s superintendent and early governor, Charles La Trobe had a major role in the planning for Melbourne. The Bourke Hill precinct is historically significant for its illustration of his intention to create an impressive civic precinct on the eastern hill of Melbourne. Parliament House has historical significance as the first parliament house for the Commonwealth of Australia, and as the parliament house for the State of Victoria from 1856. Bourke Hill precinct is historically significant as a gathering place outside Parliament House since the 1850s, providing location for the expression of community commemoration and celebration, and for community protest as part of the Australian democratic process.
Bourke Hill has historical significance as a focus for cultural activities from the mid nineteenth century, including theatres and restaurants, and as the location for the production of the first full length feature film in Australia
Architectural Significance Bourke Hill precinct has architectural significance as the best city example, of the small-scale, mid-nineteenth century, mixed-use buildings which were prominent before the gold rush but which were mostly removed elsewhere in the central city by the end of the First World War. The small-scale buildings relate to the 1840s private re-subdivision of Hoddle’s Grid, exhibiting narrow frontages, small allotments, nineteenth century access lanes, and very small allotments facing the predominantly north south lanes off Bourke Street. It is one of few central city locations to illustrate nineteenth century residential accommodation. In marked contrast are the gracious boom style Princess Theatre and Windsor Hotel, which take advantage of their park frontage and city grid boundary position. These flank the low scale Bourke Street buildings and frame the view from the steps of Parliament House to the west.
As the forecourt to Parliament House, Bourke Street, has outstanding architectural significance for the State and Nation.
Aesthetic Significance The scale of the Bourke Street buildings, the wide street and the enclosure at Parliament House, provide a nineteenth century city scale, which is now rare. The terminal view to Parliament House is a landmark image of Melbourne throughout the Nation. Few planned terminal views are found in Australian cities. The view from Parliament House to the city edge and the low scale of Spring and Bourke Streets is an important part of its commanding image.
Social Significance Bourke Hill precinct has social significance as the location for important influences on Melbourne society; in the development of Melbourne’s cosmopolitan character both in the nineteenth century, and particularly the twentieth century as the centre of the European restaurant and cafe scene; as a theatre precinct developed from the mid nineteenth century; and for the purpose built structures intended to address social problems at the turn of the nineteenth century. Bourke Hill precinct is socially significant as a gathering place to protest, commemorate and/or celebrate aspects of Australian life.
30 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 115 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
Contributing Parts to the Cultural Significance of the Bourke Hill Precinct: · The form of the public streets and lanes including Bourke Street, Spring Street, Lees Lane, Mornane Place, Crossley Lane, Liverpool Lane, Turnbull Lane, Westwood Place, Lilly Lane, Meyers Place and Windsor Place. · Existing skyline silhouettes of contributory buildings when viewed from: > The south side of Exhibition Street at the centre of Bourke Street; > Each side of Bourke Street at the property line to buildings on the opposite side of the street; > The north side of Spring Street at the property boundary, for the full width of Bourke Street. · The skyline silhouettes for the Old Treasury, Parliament Buildings and the parkland between and on either side viewed from Spring Street. · Places graded A, B, C and D in the Central Activities District Conservation Study. · Places included on the Victorian Heritage Register which are within the primary period of significance. · Civic works, including street signs, bluestone kerb and channels and gutters, bluestone and asphalt paving, sewer siphons, service covers associated with previous use in the precinct e.g. Melbourne Water Works, Metropolitan Gas Co., Melbourne Hydraulic Co. etc. · Tenancy signs which indicate previous contributory use in the precinct. · Archaeological sites identified in the Melbourne CAD Archaeological Zoning Plan · Subprecinct HO8A (2 parts) is a low scale buffer zone.
Key attributes of the precinct character of the Bourke Hill Precinct Key attributes of the precinct character include: · The outstanding vista to Parliament House, unencumbered by modern intrusions to its skyline silhouette. · The low height of the Bourke Street buildings, generally two storeys on the north side and up to four storeys on the south. · The channelled eastern view line bounded by the low height Bourke Street buildings, to the horizontal form of Parliament House, surrounded with open sky. · The high level of sunlight penetration to public areas of the street, throughout the year. · Diversity through small allotments and frontage widths in Bourke Street. · Open footpaths without street verandahs on the north side of Bourke Street. · The large open carriageway at the intersection of Spring and Bourke Streets.
Precinct Objectives for Bourke Hill, Additional to the Objectives Common to All Heritage Overlay Precincts as Noted in Clause 22.XX. · To retain the key attributes of scale, height and contributory building fabric. · To retain the existing skyline silhouettes of contributory buildings when viewed from: > The south side of Exhibition Street at the centre of Bourke Street (See view protection zone on map below.); > Each side of Bourke Street at the property line to buildings on the opposite side of the street; > The north side of Spring Street at the property boundary, for the full width of Bourke Street. · To retain the outstanding vistas to the Old Treasury and Parliament House from within Spring, and Bourke Streets. · To control height in the Bourke Hill and Collins Street Precincts to ensure retention of the dominance of the terminal vista to Parliament House from all public land within the precinct. · To prevent intrusions into the open sky around Parliament House when viewed from the south side of Exhibition Street at the centre of Bourke Street. · To strengthen the connection between Spring Street and the Royal Exhibition Building and Carlton Gardens. · To retain the open footpath without street verandahs on the north side of Bourke Street.
Performance Standards for Development are included in Section 19 of this Document
General Objectives, Precinct Objectives and Application Requirements are at Clause 22.XX
Bourke Hill HO8
31 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 116 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne. 10 Statement of Significance for Collins Street East HO 9
What is significant? Culminating in the terminal vista to the Old Treasury building, and lined with an array of prestigious, pre World- War-Two buildings, this premier central Melbourne location has outstanding cultural heritage significance for its cohesive, elegant, pedestrian oriented, urban form. Collins Street East reflects the social, cultural, religious and commercial life of the city. A well-mannered development approach set within a constrained height, has resulted in outstanding architectural significance for the high quality built form.
The terminal vista through the precinct to the Old Treasury Building at the eastern end is a Melbourne landmark. High quality architecture marks the many dignified contributions to the precinct across the commercial, medical, religious and residential built forms. Many of the important architectural styles from the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries are represented in the precinct. The consistent built form of contributory structures enhances the pedestrian scale of the cohesive streetscapes.
A high status address from the beginning, Collins Street East maintained its premier status in its subsequent development as the centre for professional medical rooms in the latter decades of the nineteenth century; and for commercial premises in the twentieth century. Its many Clubs, entertainment facilities, the congregation of artists and its mature street trees, reinforce the high status of the precinct as a cultural focus in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.
Collins Street East encompasses streetscapes of respectful form and gracious scale. A large proportion of buildings have individual cultural heritage significance. The structures which contribute to the precinct date from the 1850s to the end of the Second World War, with the major building phase between the two World Wars.
The principal period of development contributing to cultural significance is 1837 to 1956.
How is it significant?
Historical Significance Historically significant as the premier street of central Melbourne, Collins Street East has been a prime residential quarter, the chief location for medical chambers, home to elite residential clubs, religious, and commercial premises; and the location for many Melbourne cultural institutions including churches, elite clubs and theatres. Several buildings have direct associations with important historical figures, including important Australian artists.
Architectural Significance The Collins Street East Precinct has outstanding architectural significance for the high quality built outcome arising from a well-mannered approach to development within a constrained height. Consistency in architectural approach sets Collins Street apart from other central Melbourne Streets, particularly in the period between the two World Wars, but also within the wide variety of nineteenth and early twentieth century built forms;
Between Russell and Swanston Streets, Collins Street East has architectural significance for the expression of the 132 feet (40 metre) height limit through the skyline silhouette of contributory buildings.
Several buildings which have individual architectural significance are located within the precinct. The Treasury building and the churches are landmarks. Meshing with the precinct character are the works of many important architects including James Gall, Leonard Terry, Joseph Reed, Charles D'Ebro, Nahum Barnet, Cedric H Ballantyne, W. A. M. Blackett and W. B. Forster, with excellent examples of particular styles or respective periods.
Aesthetic Significance Collins Street East has aesthetic significance for: the distinctive, pre 1956 streetscapes; the views to the landmark Town Hall tower and church spires; the ambience created within the footpath zone by the aged arching street trees, discrete building entrances, and uncluttered shop fronts; and the terminal view to the Old Treasury building.
Between Russell and Swanston Streets, Collins Street East has aesthetic significance for the skyline silhouette of contributory buildings.
32 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 117 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
The Melbourne Club garden is important as the last private garden in the city grid.
Social Significance Collins Street has social significance for its connections with cultural establishments including the public performance halls, artist studios and influential private clubs. It is also important as the street which focused attention on the heritage character of Melbourne in the 1970s.
Contributing Parts to the Cultural Significance of the Collins Street East Precinct: · The form of the roadway and footpaths in Collins Street, Spring Street and intersecting streets and lanes. · The skyline silhouettes for the Old Treasury, Parliament Buildings and the parkland between and on either side viewed from Spring Street. · Buildings graded A, B, C and D in the Central Activities District Conservation Study. · Sites included on the Victorian Heritage Register which are within the primary period of significance. · Civic works, including street signs, bluestone kerb and channels and gutters, bluestone and asphalt paving, sewer siphons, service covers associated with previous use in the precinct e.g. Melbourne Water Works, Metropolitan Gas Co., Melbourne Hydraulic Co. etc. · The skyline silhouette of contributory buildings in the blocks between Russell and Swanston Streets. · The street trees in Collins Street. · Archaeological sites identified in the Melbourne CAD Archaeological Zoning Plan
Key attributes of the precinct character of the Collins Street East Precinct Key attributes of the precinct character include: · The outstanding vista to the landmark Old Treasury building, the open forecourt formed by the Spring Street carriageway. · The skyline silhouette for The Old Treasury building and the skyline silhouettes to the towers of Scots church and St Michael’s church. · The skyline silhouette of contributory buildings in the blocks between Russell and Swanston Streets · Physical evidence of changes in topography through the skyline silhouette, of 132 feet (40metre) height-limited buildings · Cohesive pre WW2 streetscapes of high quality. · Buildings of consistent scale with a maximum height of 40metres (132 feet). · Prominent landmarks: the Treasury building, the Town Hall tower and the church spires. · An elegant public interface for buildings at the ground floor, · An open footpath without street verandahs and discrete signage. · Prominent street trees
Precinct Objectives for Collins Street East, Additional to the Objectives Common to All Heritage Overlay Precincts as Noted in Clause 22.XX. · To retain the key attributes of consistent scale, height, architectural quality and contributory building fabric. · To retain the outstanding vista to the Old Treasury building from within Collins Street. · To retain the outstanding vistas to the Old Treasury and Parliament House from within Spring and Collins Streets. · To strengthen the connection between Spring Street and the Royal Exhibition Building and Carlton Gardens. · To retain the skyline silhouette to the Old Treasury building from any position within public areas in the precinct. · To retain the skyline silhouettes to the Town Hall tower and the spires of Scots church and St Michael’s church; from any position within public areas in the precinct. · To retain and not exceed the 40 metre height limit within the block from Swanston Street to Russell Street. Height to be calculated at the footpath level at the centre of the site. · To diminish the impact of taller development within the blocks from Russell to Spring Streets by setting back any elements which would exceed 40 metres, for a distance of 30 metres from the Collins Street frontage. · To retain the open footpath without street verandahs. · To ensure development will not have an adverse impact on street trees. · To ensure that new development retains a public int erface at the ground floor level. · To ensure that signage is discrete.
Performance Standards for Development are included in Section 19 of this Document
General Objectives, Precinct Objectives and Application Requirements are at Clause 22.XX Collins Street East HO9
33 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 118 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne. 11 Statement of Significance for Flinders Lane HO10
What is significant? Flinders Lane provides a rare example of cohesive architectural form within tightly defined spaces. Within the 1837 Hoddle Grid, it is the best example of the urban form which resulted from manufacturing, warehousing and distribution, and small scale retail activity in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. It has three distinct sub-precincts - the east section, associated with the rag trade for over a hundred years; the small business and wholesaling adjunct to the retail core in the centre section; and the warehouses associated with the Customs House and the port in the west. The three are drawn together in Flinders Lane by the common characteristics of small allotments; relatively low-rise buildings; the locational advantages of proximity to supply through shipping, and local manufacturing; and of demand through proximity to the retail core, the railway and export facilities.
A distinctive building form developed in the 1880s to 1930s - narrow buildings up to six storeys, often with a semi-basement form to create two street frontage addresses, and multiple upper tenancies served by a separate street entrance. There is a strong relationship with the street through display windows and/or retail frontages, and on upper floors the generally large number of windows. The generous provision of windows to the facades, and the provision of light wells or lanes to the rear, provided the natural daylight important to many of the industrial functions which developed in this region. Cohesive buildings, combined with a complex secondary street pattern of narrow and sometimes interconnecting secondary lanes and branches, has resulted in a distinctive, pedestrian oriented urban form, which is a key component of the character of central Melbourne. Intermixed with the development from the two decades on either side of the turn of the nineteenth century, are earlier warehouses and industrial buildings which reflect pre1880 trading activity in Melbourne.
The principal period of development contributing to cultural significance encompasses the 1880s to 1930s. A few contributory buildings reflect the decades on either side and demonstrate the origins and evolution of the precinct.
How is it significant?
Historical Significance Flinders Lane Precinct is historically significant for its illustration of the fine-grain and complex central city town plan resulting from private subdivision and re-division of the 1837 allotments and overlaying the rigid grid. It illustrates the increasingly diverse social, manufacturing and commercial functions of the growing town of Melbourne in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. It is historically significant for the strong connections with port related functions in a remote western colony: and as the focus for clothing and apparel (the ‘rag trade’) in Victoria, with the large cloth importers fronting Flinders Lane itself and the back lanes crowded with dressmakers, tailors, shirtmakers, furriers and the like; and some allied trades such as leatherwork, pleating, spokestitching and sewing machine repairers.
Architectural Significance Flinders Lane has architectural significance for both architecturally elaborate and utilitarian buildings, often forming cohesive groups through form, scale, materials and period details to facades and secondary frontages. It presents a range of nineteenth and early twentieth century architectural styles set within a remarkably consistent scale. Many buildings have façades of Romanesque revival form, pioneered by Richardson in America. The preponderance of semi-dry pressed red bricks as the facade finish, reflects the most common construction period for surviving buildings - the last decade of the nineteenth and first two decades of the twentieth centuries.
The limitation to building height in secondary streets like Flinders Lane, arose from fire related, height restrictions in the Building Regulations in 1916, imposing a lower limit for narrow streets.
Aesthetic Significance Flinders Lane has aesthetic significance for its distinctive forms, low scale and the complex pedestrian oriented urban form. It is a key component of the character of central Melbourne.
Contributing Parts to the Cultural Significance of the Flinders Lane Precinct: · The form of the public streets and lanes including side lanes, and the form of private lanes, access- ways and lightwells. · Places graded A, B, C and D in the Central Activities District Conservation Study. · Places included on the Victorian Heritage Register which are within the primary period of significance. · External fittings and features of contributory buildings which project into the private and public lanes, including hoisting jibs, loading platforms, timber traffic fenders, external drains, fire-escapes, etc.
34 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 119 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
· Civic works, including street signs, bluestone kerb and channels and gutters, bluestone and asphalt paving, sewer siphons, service covers associated with previous use in the precinct e.g. Melbourne Water Works, Metropolitan Gas Co., Melbourne Hydraulic Co. etc. · Tenancy signs which indicate the previous contributory use in the precinct. · The skyline silhouette of contributory buildings. · Archaeological sites identified in the Melbourne CAD Archaeological Zoning Plan
Key attribute s of the precinct character of the Flinders Lane Precinct Key attributes of the precinct character include: · Generally small allotments often of narrow frontage width. · The height and scale of the contributing buildings, many of which have a high level of intactness. · The diverse but congruous architectural forms. · The network of lanes and side lanes and the built form of abutting contributory structures. · Face brickwork as the dominant building material · The skyline silhouette of contributory buildings.
Precinct Objectives for Flinders Lane, Additional to the Objectives Common to All Heritage Overlay Precincts as Noted in Clause 22.XX. · To retain the network of lanes and side lanes, and the built form of abutting contributory structures. · To retain similar height, scale, and frontage width. · To retain the skyline silhouette of contributory structures.
Performance Standards for Development are included in Section 19 of this Document
General Objectives, Precinct Objectives and Application Requirements are at Clause 22.XX
Flinders Lane HO10
35 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 120 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne. 12 Statement of Significance for Flinders Street HO11
What is significant? Flinders Street is surveyor Hoddle’s 1837 delineation of the natural edge to the city, giving maximum frontage to the river bank. Its geographical advantages in straddling the salt and fresh water zones of the river; the relationship to the fringing low lying land which would eventually become park in the east; and the early development of the wharf areas at the western end; ensured that Flinders Street would become the southern edge to the city. The location of Prince’s Bridge determined Swanston Street as the central gateway. Prominent views to and from Flinders Street and a desirable location with a high pedestrian usage, have encouraged a strong city edge streetscape along the Yarra River. By the early twentieth century, Flinders Street had become the inviting perimeter wall to the city, consistent in its scale, elegant in its architecture, and punctuated by St Paul’s Cathedral and Flinders Street Station - a symbolic entrance to Melbourne.
Four patterns of use have influenced the form of the Flinders Street precinct. West of Swanston Street, the accommodation and hostelry sector grew from the early requirements associated with Customs at the wharf and reinforced by the railway in the late nineteenth century, including the Customs House and the Commercial Travellers Association, and also Young and Jackson’s amongst many surviving hotels. A major retail zone developed through the ninetieth and into the early twentieth century, with many large stores capitalising on the through pedestrian traffic from Flinders Street Station to Collins Street, including Mutual Stores and Ball and Welsh. The cathedral and entertainment facilities at the State Theatre, contributed further to high pedestrian use of the region, and in the east section, nineteenth century residential zones were redeveloped with the offices and the large printing works of the Herald and Weekly Times by the1920s.
The Flinders Street Precinct has some built elements from the nineteenth century, but the majority reflect the turn of the nineteenth century in style, scale and strong address to the River and the Domain beyond.
The principal period of development contributing to cultural significance is 1837 to the 1930s. The social significance of Swanston Street intersection as a meeting place continues to the present day.
How is it significant?
Historical Significance The Flinders Street Precinct is historically significant for its definition of the 1837 Hoddle grid and its strong connections with the port related and transport functions vital to the remote new city. The northern river bank generated the early development zones within Melbourne, best illustrated at the Queens Wharf in front of the Customs House in Flinders Street.
Architectural Significance The Flinders Street Precinct is architecturally significant for its cohesive streetscape addressing the open land to the south and forming the southern ‘wall’ of the city. The built form is primarily from the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, Individual buildings within the precinct illustrate the main development phases of the city from its early years as a small remote settlement at the Customs House, through to the 1920s as a thriving metropolis at Ball and Welsh and the Herald and Weekly Times Building.
St Paul’s Cathedral, Flinders Street Station and Princes Bridge have architectural significance as landmarks in Melbourne.
Aesthetic Significance Views from Flinders Street to the southern parklands are a key component of the character of the city. Views to Flinders Street, particularly from St.Kilda Road to St Paul’s cathedral, mark the gateway entrance to Melbourne
Social Significance Flinders Street Station and the surrounding public areas have been a meeting and gathering place since the 1850s.
Contributing Parts to the Cultural Significance of the Flinders Street Precinct: · The form of Flinders Street and the north bank of the Yarra River, including early wharves which may remain as archaeological sites. · Places graded A, B, C and D in the Central Activities District Conservation Study. · Places included on the Victorian Heritage Register which are within the primary period of significance. · Civic works, including street signs, bluestone kerb and channels and gutters, bluestone and asphalt paving, sewer siphons, and service covers associated with previous use in the precinct e.g. Melbourne Water Works, Metropolitan Gas Co., Melbourne Hydraulic Co. etc. · Street trees eas t of Russell Street.
36 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 121 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
· The skyline silhouette of St Paul’s Cathedral. · The skyline silhouette of contributory buildings between Exhibition and Elizabeth Streets · Archaeological sites identified in the Melbourne CAD Archaeological Zoning Plan
Key attributes of the precinct character of the Flinders Street Precinct Key attributes of the precinct character include: · Potential archaeological sites associated with early Melbourne development along the north bank of the river between Spencer Street and Queens Bridge and on the south bank, downstream of the Spencer Street bridge. · A strong streetscape, primarily from the late nineteenth and early decades of the twentieth century. · A low to medium height to a maximum of 40 metres (132 feet). · St Paul’s Cathedral and its skyline silhouette as a landmark in the city · The skyline silhouette for contributory buildings in the blocks between Russell Street and Elizabeth Street. · A pedestrian focus for ground level development between Elizabeth and Swanston Streets. · The polychrome brick and riveted metal railway viaduct connecting Flinders Street and Spencer Street Stations
Precinct Objectives for Flinders Street, Additional to the Objectives Common to All Heritage Overlay Precincts as Noted in Clause 22.XX. · To protect the Skyline silhouette for St Paul’s Cathedral within two view protection zones as shown on the Heritage Overlay map > St Paul’s skyline silhouette protection zone 1. From the south bank of the river in the centre of St. Kilda Road, aligned with the centre of Alexandra Avenue. > St Paul’s skyline silhouette protection zone 2. From Flinders Street Station at the centre of the top of the steps · To limit the maximum height to 40m for the whole of allotments between Exhibition and Elizabeth Streets. · To enhance the relationship between Flinders Street, the river and the early wharves.
Performance Standards for Development are included in Section 19 of this Document
General Objectives, Precinct Objectives and Application Requirements are at Clause 22.XX
Flinders Street HO11
37 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 122 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne. 13 Statement of Significance for Guildford Lane HO12
What is significant? Set in the block formed by Little Lonsdale and Latrobe, and Queen and Elizabeth Streets is a circuit of little streets and lanes forming a precinct of turn of the century brick warehouses and factories. The town plan of three, parallel, east west lanes within an original 1837 Hoddle block, was established by 1855 and is unique in the city, where north south redivision is typical. The particularly tight configuration resulted in small-scale development which continued into the early twentieth century, and was not subject to the substantial further redevelopment typical elsewhere on larger sites. The almost universal use of red brick in colonial bond for walls, unrelieved by decoration or extraneous detail, and rising unrelieved from the boundary with the narrow lanes, has resulted in a unique industrial urban precinct form.
Printers, stationers, boxmakers and other small manufacturers, wholesalers and warehousing; were located around the Guildford Lane precinct, to serve the retail core towards Elizabeth Street and the legal districts east and west. The precinct is one of few industrial locations to survive in the central city grid, complete with consistent contributory building stock. It illustrates the way people worked in commerce and industry in the city in the early twentieth century.
The principal period of development contributing to cultural significance is pre 1850 to the 1920s.
How is it significant?
Historical Significance The Guildford Lane Precinct is historically significant for its illustration of ordered but constrained, redivision of the original 1837 Hoddle blocks for small-scale development. It is the best surviving example of small scale, early twent ieth century industrial and warehousing building fabric. The cohesion of the precinct both in its regular plan and utilitarian building form, demonstrates a distinctive function and use which contrasts strongly with the commercial facades of buildings in the adjoining main streets.
The house and garden at 300 Queen Street is one of few to illustrate housing in the grid before the gold rush.
Architectural Significance The Guildford Lane Precinct has architectural significance for its high level of integrity across remarkably uniform styles and materials up to an early twentieth century date; and for the pre 1855 townscape of lanes and small streets. The buildings, while utilitarian and plain, present a striking mass of uniform face brick walls, rising from bluestone kerbs and cobbled lanes, with associated functional industrial details, including recessed downpipes, skewed access-ways, chamfered corners, and massive timber carriage doors. It is architecturally significant for its illustration of small scale industrial and commercial buildings in central Melbourne from the early twentieth century.
The house at 300 Queen Street, first constructed in 1847, has outstanding significance as a rare example of pre gold rush construction and design..
Aesthetic Significance The precinct has aesthetic significance for the distinctive early twentieth century, urban industrial streetscape, with unusual closed vistas through the long, narrow, sloping lanes.
Contributing Parts to the Cultural Significance of the Guildford Lane Precinct: · The form of the public streets and lanes including side lanes, and the form of private lanes and access-ways. · Places graded A, B, C and D in the Central Activities District Conservation Study. · Places included on the Victorian Heritage Register which are within the primary period of significance. · External fittings and features of contributory buildings which project into the private and public lanes, including hoisting jibs, loading platform, timber traffic fenders, external drains, fire-escapes, etc. · Civic works in Guildford Lane, Sutherland Street, McLean Alley, Flanigan Lane and Zevenboom Lane, including street signs, bluestone kerb and channels and gutters, bluestone and asphalt paving, sewer siphons, service covers associated with previous use in the precinct e.g. Melbourne Water Works, Metropolitan Gas Co., Melbourne Hydraulic Co. etc. · Tenancy signs which indicate the previous use of contributory buildings in the precinct. · Archaeological sites identified in the Melbourne CAD Archaeological Zoning Plan
Key attributes of the precinct character of the Guildford Lane Precinct Key attributes of the precinct character include:
38 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 123 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
· The town plan of small streets and lanes. · The consistent low scale and height of contributing buildings within the narrow lanes. · Adaptations to the town plan and buildings required to facilitate small vehicle access. · Contained internal views · The large number of contributory buildings and their high level of external intactness. · The lack of footpaths and awnings. · The bluestone civic works within the precinct.
Precinct Objectives for Guildford Lane, Additional to the Objectives Common to All Heritage Overlay Precincts as Noted in Clause 22.XX. · To retain the key attributes of consistent scale, height and architectural form and the relationship of contributory building fabric with contributory civic works. · To protect the archaeological potential for 1850s residential structures below the existing buildings.
Performance Standards for Development are included in Section 19 of this Document
General Objectives, Precinct Objectives and Application Requirements are at Clause 22.XX
Guildford Lane HO
39 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 124 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne. 14 Statement of Significance for Hardware Street HO13
What is significant? The laneways of Melbourne’s CBD served an essential role in the commercial and social life of the city from an early date. They are the fine grain pattern of living and working places in the city, adding variety at a human scale within the strictly ordered street grid. The Hardware Street precinc t comprises late nineteenth and early twentieth manufacturing, wholesale and warehousing buildings, set in a group of mostly north south lanes of varying dimensions, all springing off Little Bourke Street between Elizabeth and Queen Street.
Small freeholds characterise the distinctive urban form, reflecting the city as a small business work-place in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.
The principal period of development contributing to cultural significance is pre 1850 to the 1920s.
How is it significant? Historical Significance The formal pattern of the original 1837 Hoddle survey for Melbourne was overlaid by an informal private redivision of secondary streets and lanes. North-south streets and lanes were commonly inserted to satisfy the demand for small-scale industrial and residential development. The Hardware Street Precinct is historically significant for its illustration of this typical pattern. Replacing early small-scale residential buildings in part, it is a large and cohesive example of small scale, early twentieth century industrial and warehousing functions within the city, set within a complex of small allotments and lanes,.
Architectural Significance The Hardware Street Precinct has architectural significance for its reasonably uniform, nineteenth and early twentieth century urban form comprising narrow, utilitarian, industrial/commercial/warehouse structures, generally of two to four storeys. Often plain, they form distinctive groups through their relatively uniform pedestrian address to the street, vertical emphasis and reasonable integrity to a 1920s date. Architecturally significant for its townscape of lanes and small streets developed from before 1850 to the early twentieth century.
Aesthetic Significance The precinct has aesthetic significance for the network of distinctive early twentieth century, urban industrial/commercial/ warehouse small-scale streetscapes.
Contributing Parts to the Cultural Significance of the Hardware Street Precinct: · The form of the public streets and lanes including side lanes, and the form of private lanes and access-ways including civic works, bluestone kerb, channels and gutters, bluestone paving and contributory service covers, street signs and street furniture for: Little Bourke Street between Elizabeth and Queen Streets, White Hart Lane, Warburton Alley, Warburton Lane, Niagara Lane, Hardware Street (also known as Hardware Lane), Goldie Place, Kirks Lane, Platypus Alley, Racing Club Lane, Rankins Lane, Somerset Place. in: · Places graded A, B, C and D in the Central Activities District Conservation Study. · Places included on the Victorian Heritage Register which are within the primary period of significance. · External fittings and features of contributory buildings which project into the private and public lanes, including hoisting jibs, loading platform, timber traffic fenders, external drains, fire-escapes, etc. · Civic works, including street signs, bluestone kerb and channels and gutters, bluestone and asphalt paving, sewer siphons, service covers associated with previous use in the precinct e.g. Melbourne Water Works, Metropolitan Gas Co., Melbourne Hydraulic Co. etc. · Tenancy signs which indicate the previous use in the precinct. · The skyline silhouette of contributory buildings. · Archaeological sites identified in the Melbourne CAD Archaeological Zoning Plan
Key attributes of the precinct character of the Hardware Street Precinct Key attributes of the precinct character include: · The large number and pattern of small streets and lanes and the small scale development abutting these. · Direct sunlight to lane and street surfaces in the middle hours of the day throughout the year. · Small allotments. · A strong pedestrian character. · The network of narrow streets and lanes, often without footpaths. · The bluestone civic works within the precinct.
40 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 125 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
Precinct Objectives for Hardware Street, Additional to the Objectives Common to All Heritage Overlay Precincts as Noted in Clause 22.XX. · To retain the network of public and private lanes and side lanes · To retain the key attributes of similar height, low scale, and contributory fabric to street, lane and side lane frontages. · To control the height and position of development to ensure the retention of existing direct sun to lane and street surfaces between 12 noon and 2 pm Eastern Standard Time. · To protect the archaeological potential for 1850s residential structures below the existing buildings.
Performance Standards for Development are included in Section 19 of this Document
General Objectives, Precinct Objectives and Application Requirements are at Clause 22.XX
Hardware Street HO13
41 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 126 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne. 15 Statement of Significance for Little Bourke Street HO14 What is significant? The north east corner of the city grid was on the fringe of the desirable residential and the retail zones in the nineteenth century. Its less desirable status fostered is occupation by immigrant groups. In the 1850s following the gold rush, the Little Bourke Street sector, became the centre for Chinese trade, commerce and social activity in the CBD. While the surviving building stock was not generally erected for or by the Chinese, their occupation of this area and the subsequent Chinese associations for alterations and elaboration of the street, have an important historical and social link for Australians of Chinese background.
Much of the building fabric in Little Bourke Street is low scale, at two to three storeys, with architecture characterised by utilitarian, late nineteenth and early twentieth century commercial premises, usually face brick. A few buildings have more direct design connections with groups of Chinese background.
After the Second World War, newly arrived Greek immigrants made Lonsdale Street a focus for their community, abutting the Chinese precinct.
The principal period of development contributing to cultural significance is 1850s to the 1920s. Social Significance for Australians of Greek and Chinese background continues to the present day.
How is it significant? Historical Significance The Little Bourke Street precinct has historical significance for its association with occupation of the less desirable fringe zones of the city grid by immigrant groups, in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.
Its association with the Chinese community in Melbourne has been strong, providing accommodation and business opportunities for Chinese immigrants and their descendants from the early 1850s. The development of distinctive ethnic enclaves is unusual in Australia particularly those which become a relatively homogenous precinct and remain so for many generations after the initial immigration has ceased.
Architectural Significance The precinct has architectural significance for the survival of small scale, generally utilitarian, late nineteenth and early twentieth century commercial buildings in the city. The low scale buildings have narrow frontages, small lot sizes, and utilitarian materials, which reflect the fine-grain pattern of development in the fringe areas of the city at the turn of the nineteenth century. Lonsdale Street includes some grander commercial buildings and some nineteenth century residential components now rare in the city grid.
Aesthetic Significance The precinct has aesthetic significance for the network of small-scale streetscapes from the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, diverse in style but similar in scale and reflecting the city as an urban living and working place.
Social Significance The precinct has social significance for the long-standing association with the Chinese community and social gatherings such as the Chinese New Years Festival
Contributing Parts to the Cultural Significance of the Little Bourke Street Precinct: · The form of Little Bourke Street and the lanes extending off Little Bourke Street within the precinct including Cohen Place, Smythe Lane, Lacey Place, Pender Place, Corrs Lane, Belman Place, Lees Place, Market Lane, Croft Alley, Paynes Place, Brien Lane, Coverlid Place, Golden Fleece Alley, Waratah Place, Heffernan Lane, Celestial Avenue Tattersalls Lane, Stevenson Lane, Globe Alley, Bullen’s Lane, Dean Alley , Hughes Alley, La Trobe Place and Star Alley. The form of Lonsdale Street between Russell and Swanston Streets. · Places graded A, B, C and D in the Central Activities District Conservation Study. · Places within the primary period of significance also included on the Victorian Heritage Register. · Civic works including bluestone kerb and channels and gutters, contributory bluestone and asphalt paving, service covers associated with previous use in the precinct e.g. Melbourne Water Works, Metropolitan Gas Co., Melbourne Hydraulic Co. etc. · The remains of early (pre 1970s) signage and external finishes on buildings which relate to earlier periods of Chinese occupation. · Archaeological sites identified in the Melbourne CAD Archaeological Zoning Plan
42 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 127 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
Key attributes of the precinct character of the Little Bourke Street Precinct Key attributes of the precinct character include: · Buildings from the late nineteenth and early decades of the twentieth century. · The network of lanes and side lanes and the rear built form of abutting contributory structures. · A low scale with face brick as the dominant façade material. · In Little Bourke Street, early signage associated with the Chinese community. · The relatively small scale of redevelopment which may have retained archaeological evidence of early Melbourne.
Precinct Objectives for Little Bourke Street , Additional to the Objectives Common to All Heritage Overlay Precincts as Noted in Clause 22.XX. · To retain the low scale in Lonsdale and Little Bourke Streets and in the associated lanes. · To retain the network of abutting side lanes
Performance Standards for Development are included in Section 19 of this Document
General Objectives, Precinct Objectives and Application Requirements are at Clause 22.XX
Little Bourke Street HO14
43 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 128 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne. 16 Statement of Significance for the Queen Victoria Market HO15 What is significant? The Queen Victoria Market is one of Australia’s great 19th century markets and the only survivor from a group of four central markets built in the nineteenth century by the Corporation of Melbourne. It has been an important component in the distribution of fresh food in Melbourne. The market is an expression of the success of the nineteenth century City of Melbourne and has great cultural heritage significance for the complementary range of purpose designed structures necessary for a the variety of commercial functions of a major market, which survive intact.
Surrounding properties have evolved as a functional adjunct to the market precinct, including shops and hotels in Peel and Victoria Streets and commercial premises in Therry, Franklin and Elizabeth Street. Stables and stores proliferated in the blocks around the market, particularly in the 1880s and up to the First World War, continuing the transport related uses also associated with the Horse and Corn Market in what is now Parkville.
Beginning in the irregular eastern block, with construction of the wholesale meat market building in the 1860s, the western rectangular block in use as a cemetery was added in 1877, more, than doubling its size and providing accommodation for the wholesaling of fruit and vegetables whilst continuing to serve the retail sector. The Old Melbourne Cemetery was the first development in Melbourne to follow the magnetic north planning which dominates the surveying, planning and building development in Victoria. It was part of the infrastructure planned for the fledgling 1837 community. Set outside the grid and abutting the magnetic east-west alignment of the Town Reserve at Victoria Street, the cemetery is amongst the early allocations of land for community purposes and the first development in Melbourne to follow the magnetic north planning, which dominates surveying, planning and building development in Victoria.
The precinct has been closely associated with the city as a living and working place, initially as the cemetery, from 1868 as the primary wholesale market for fresh food, and as a continuous retail market to the present day.
The principal period of development contributing to cultural significance is from 1837 to the 1920s. Social significance continues to the present day.
How is it significant?
Historical Significance The Queen Victoria Market Precinct is historically significant: as a fresh food market, both wholesale for around 100 years, and retail from its inception to the present day. It is the only surviving nineteenth century market in Melbourne. The wholesale role for the Queen Victoria Market reflects the substantial population growth of the metropolis after the gold rush. The progressive development of the market between 1868 and the 1930s as the principal supplier of fresh food to Melbourne's populace reflects the expansion of Melbourne up to the Second World War.
The development surrounding the market is historically significant for its association with the precinct as a transport hub in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.
Architectural Significance The Queen Victoria Market has outstanding architectural significance for illustration of simple but subtle organisation of open spaces and buildings associated with a functioning nineteenth century market. The market shed buildings, while utilitarian and plain, display a remarkably high level of integrity. The long rows of repeating market and shop/dwelling structures on the perimeter present a striking run of uniform elements which create important streetscapes. Development surrounding the market illustrates the structures and functions which augmented the markets central role in the distribution of fresh food in the nineteenth century and much of the twentieth century.
Aesthetic Significance The precinct has aesthetic significance for the unique nineteenth century precinct forms and streetscapes, associated with the city as a living and working place. The integration of the natural slope into the functional market design adds to the distinctive internal vistas.
Social Significance The Market Precinct is socially significant for its past and present role as both a mercantile and social gathering point and as a record of change and continuity in market activity over a long period. It has been an important shopping, leisure and meeting place for generations of Victorians. The complex of enclosed food halls, open sheds, shops and stores perpetuates distinctive forms of trading from nineteenth century and earlier market
44 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 129 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne. traditions. The precinct maintains the legacy of the former Eastern and Western Markets. It has become one of the key identifying symbols of Melbourne for locals and tourists alike, its popularity reflected in community and union campaigns to prevent its redevelopment during the 1970s.
Contributing Parts to the Cultural Significance of the Queen Victoria Market Precinct: · Buildings and associat ed spaces graded A,B, C and D. · All buildings, spaces and land included on the Victorian Heritage Register which are within the primary period of significance for the Precinct · The form of streets and laneways including Peel Street with its tramway and median, Victoria Street, Queen Street, Franklin Street, Therry Street and Elizabeth Street · Victoria Square or Market Square in Elizabeth street and the buildings on the east side of the square · Civic works, including bluestone kerb and channels and gutters, as phalt and bluestone paving, early signs, contributory street furniture, and service covers, sewer siphons etc. · Archaeological sites identified in the Melbourne CAD Archaeological Zoning Plan including the form and potential burials sites within the Old Melbourne Cemetery. · Areas of Aboriginal cultural importance as identified in the AAV Archaeological Sites Register and Aboriginal Historic Places Register and including the potential for Aboriginal burial sites at the Old Melbourne Cemetery. · To promote the identification, protection and management of archaeological sites.
Key attributes of the precinct character of the Queen Victoria Market Precinct Key attributes of the precinct character include: · The height and scale of the contributing buildings, the open spaces between and around them, including streets and footpaths; and the high level of integrity · The consistent architectural forms associated with the various market functions. · The skyline silhouette of market building when viewed towards the north, west and south. · Sunlight penetration to the open spaces within the market throughout the day.
Precinct Objectives for Queen Victoria Market. Additional to the Objectives Common to All Heritage Overlay Precincts as Noted in Clause 22.XX. · To retain the key at tributes of consistent scale, height, architectural quality and contributory building fabric, open spaces and civic works. · To retain the skyline silhouette for market buildings when viewed from the south and east, towards the north and west. · To retain the existing level of sunlight penetration to open spaces within the market. · To protect the archaeological potential for burial sites below the existing buildings and paving. · To ensure a low scale buffer zone around the Market buildings. · To ensure that development in Victoria Street will maintain and strengthen the boulevard status of the street.
Performance Standards for Development are included in Section 19 of this Document
General Objectives, Precinct Objectives and Application Requirements are at Clause 22.XX
Queen Victoria Market HO15 including sub -precinct Victoria Street HO15A,
45 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 130 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne. 17 Statement of Significance for the Retail Core HO16 What is significant? Melbourne’s Retail Core is the pedestrian focus for the city. Nestled in the valley between the east and west hills, this precinct bounded by Swanston, Bourke, Elizabeth and Collins Street, has been the hub for retail activity from early in Melbourne’s development. It has a tightly controlled form, characterised by low scale, a multitude of generally small allotments, a strong public interface and high quality building design. The precinct contains a variety of commercial and retail tenancies within a building stock of diverse, mostly nineteenth and early twentieth century styles. The precinct’s high visitation has encouraged intensive development, including above ground level where small tenancies and specialty suppliers congregate.
The Collins Street ‘Block’ between Swanston and Elizabeth Streets, was well established as the fashionable promenade zone in the nineteenth century. Encouraged by the high levels of pedestrian movement from the several public transport routes nearby, the precinct has developed the greatest concentration of lanes and arcades in the city; connecting south towards the railway station, and north to the post office and major department stores in Bourke Street. Illustrating the high pedestrian amenity that characterises the precinct are the elegant Royal Arcade and Block Arcade -amongst the best examples of this building type in Australia. The pattern of respectful, elegant development in Collins Street East, continued in this predominantly retail block of Collins Street through the late nineteenth century; with high status businesses locating here in a striking streetscape of consistent height.
Early twentieth century development is prominent in Elizabeth, Swanston and Bourke Streets. The major department stores developed their holdings in Bourke Street between the wars, contributing architecturally complex and up-to-date styles to the already varied built forms. Eye catching designs like the Buckley and Nunn Men’s Wear Store, were used to attract shoppers. On the eastern edge of the retail core, Swanston Street is particularly rich in early twentieth century styles for commercial buildings including the Manchester Unity, the Century Building and structures displaying innovative building construction techniques including Walter Burley Griffin’s Capitol building and the Nicholas Building. Elizabeth Street completes the block, connecting the high pedestrian nodes of Flinders Street Station with the General Post Office with some fine examples of the art nouveau style, otherwise rare in the city context.
The limited height of buildings contributes to a high pedestrian amenity. No building exceeds the 40 metre (132feet) historical height limit, ensuring a human scale, and sunlight in the major streets. It includes a remarkably high proportion of buildings which contribute to the cultural heritage significance of the precinct, and is the most extensive example of the physical form of Melbourne before high rise (pre 1956). Its strong pedestrian focus has made it a meeting place for the community, focused on the Post Office, Flinders Street Station, Collins Street and Myer.
The principal period of development contributing to cultural significance is 1852 to 1940.
How is it significant?
Historical Significance The Retail Core Precinct is historically significant as the primary retail centre for metropolitan Melbourne and as a civi c focal point through the GPO and the Melbourne Town Hall “Doing the Block”- in Collins Street, is historically significant as the fashionable meeting place in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries The major change in retailing in the inter-war period is reflected in the expansion of department stores including the Myer Emporium, and Buckley and Nunn. The Post Office is historically significant as the geographical centre of Melbourne and as the primary method of long distance communication in the early years of the settlement. The Town Hall is historically significant as a centre of governance.
Architectural Significance The Retail Core has outstanding architectural significance for the built forms from the nineteenth and the twentieth centuries up to 1940. A very high proportion of the existing buildings contribute to the architectural significance of the precinct, generally with a high level of integrity. Many buildings have individual heritage significance, reflecting the high status of the retail and commercial enterprises which established here from the late nineteenth century. It is the most extensive example of the high urban amenity which has resulted from limitation of building height in Melbourne by custom and legislation to 40 metres (132 feet). The best examples of arcade architecture in Victoria are found in this block.
Aesthetic Significance The precinct has considerable aesthetic significance for the range of unusual spaces and views created by the network of lanes and arcades; and for the elegant streetscapes, exhibiting distinctive architectural styles within a frameworks of consistent scale.
46 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 131 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
Social Significance The precinct has social significance as the major retail centre for metropolitan Melbourne for much of its history; retaining this status despite challenges from both the suburban strip centres such as Smith and Chapel Streets in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, and the car based enclosed shopping centres such as Chadstone in the later twentieth century.
The General Post Office was an important social centre for the early colonial immigrant community, maintaining communication with the outside world. Its status is reflected in the imposing architecture and prominent site. The Post Office steps have continued as a meeting place. The adjacent Myer Windows have had a unique social focus though the Christmas window displays in recent decades.
Contributing Parts to the Cultural Significance of the Retail Core Precinct: · Places graded A, B, C and D in the Central Activities District Conservation Study. · Places included on the Victorian Heritage Register which are within the primary period of significance for the Precinct · Civic works, including street signs, bluestone kerb and channels and gutters, bluestone and asphalt paving, sewer siphons, service covers associated with previous use in the precinct e.g. Melbourne Water Works, Metropolitan Gas Co., Melbourne Hydraulic Co. etc. · The form of the public streets, and privately owned right-of-ways and arcades, including: Driver Lane, Lynch Place, Arcade Alley and Caledonian Lane; Post Office Lane, Angelo Lane, Staughton Place, Buckley Place, Albion Alley; Hub Arcade, Royal Arcade, The Causeway, Union Lane, Sugden Place; Balcome Place, Block Place, Block Court, Block Arcade, Brown Alley Carson Place, Howey Place, Presgrave Place, Capitol Arcade; Centre Place and Centre Way, Flinders Way, Manchester Lane, Monahans Place; Rothsay Lane, Lingham Lane, Degraves Street, Degraves Place, Royson Place, Scott Alley, Cocker Alley, Carson Place, Empire Arcade, Equitable Place. · Early tenancy signs. · The skyline silhouette of contributory buildings in all streets. · The street trees in Collins Street. · Archaeological sites identified in the Melbourne CAD Archaeological Zoning Plan
Key attributes of the precinct character of the Retail Core Precinct Key attributes of the precinct character include: · Buildings of consistent scale and a maximum height of 40m. (measured from the footpath at the centre of the site). · Architectural complexity within a highly ordered and respectful streetscape form. · A large number of contributory buildings and a generally high level of external intactness. · Generally small allotment frontages except for the Myer Emporium. · A strong public interface at the ground floor level. · A very high level of north-south pedestrian interconnection via a complex network of lanes and arcades. · A large number of small tenancies at ground and upper levels. · The skyline silhouettes of contributory elements. · The prominence of the landmark Post Office, Flinders Street Station clock tower and the Melbourne Town Hall. · The view to the Shrine of Remembrance.
Precinct Objectives for the Retail Core, Additional to the Objectives Common to All Heritage Overlay Precincts as Noted in Clause 22.XX. · To retain the key attributes of consistent scale, height, architectural quality and contributory building fabric. · To retain the outstanding vista to the Shrine of Remembrance from public areas within the Precinct. · To retain the vista to the Flinders Street Railway Station clock from public areas within Flinders Street. · To retain the skyline silhouettes to the Post Office and the Melbourne Town Hall from any position within public areas in the precinct and the skyline silhouette of contributory elements in all streets. · To retain and not exceed the 40 metre height limit · To retain the open footpath without street verandahs in Collins Street. · To ensure development will not have an adverse impact upon street trees in Collins Street. · To ensure that new development retains a public interface at the ground floor level.
Performance Standards for Development are included in Section 19 of this Document
General Objectives, Precinct Objectives and Application Requirements are at Clause 22.XX
Retail Core HO16
47 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 132 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne. 18 Performance Standards for Precincts Subject to Heritage Overlay, Outside the Capital City Zone HO1 to HO6 inclusive.
The following Performance Standards apply in the Precincts subject to Heritage Overlay outside the Capital City Zone. Detailed performance measures have been developed to guide development. For a particular Performance Standard, compliance with the relevant performance measures will achieve compliance with the Performance Standard. Summary of Performance Standards Outside the Capital City Zone PS01 Significant parts of the Heritage Precinct should be retained
PS02 Alterations to buildings and structures within the Heritage Precinct should be in harmony with the cultural heritage significance of the HO and should not dominate the contributory component parts
PS03 The height and setback of an addition should result in a form that maintains the prominence of the graded building on the site and the prominence of any adjoining graded buildings.
PS04 The form of an addition should maintain the prominence of the graded building on the site and the prominence of any adjoining graded buildings.
PS05 New Buildings should not dominate the contributory component parts to the Heritage Overlay. Heights, setbacks and form should be guided by the adjoining graded buildings and where these are absent by the common form of graded buildings in the streetscape.
PS06 Works abutting laneways should not dominate the contributory component parts to the Heritage Overlay. Heights, setbacks and form should be guided by the adjoining graded laneway buildings and where these are absent by the common contributory lanescape form.
PS07 A fence or a building should define the boundary between the property and the street or laneway, in all locations.
PS08 Vehicle access, carparking and garaging should be concealed from the principal street frontage.
PS09 To ensure that works within the public realm do not diminish cultural heritage significance of the heritage precinct and are compatible with the character of the heritage precinct
PS10 Works adjacent to and within parklands should be compatible with the character of the heritage precinct.
PS11 Subdivision is to be compatible with the pattern within the heritage precinct.
PS12 Retain archaeological evidence of cultural heritage significance or properly record as appropriate.
18.01 RETENTION OF CONTRIBUTORY BUILDINGS, STRUCTURES AND PARTS
18.01-1 Objective for retention of contributory buildings, structures or parts:
To ensure the retention of contributory buildings, structures and parts, to the cultural heritage significance of the heritage precinct, as listed in the “Statement of Significance” for each HO precinct under “Contributory Parts to the Cultural Significance”, in this incorporated document.
18.01-2 Performance Standard PS01
Significant parts of the Heritage Precinct should be retained.
48 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 133 of 217Document Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
In determining what is significant it is policy that the demolition or removal of contributory buildings, structures or parts is assessed against the following performance measures, as relevant:
· Significant parts of streets and roads on public land should be retained. · Significant parts of laneways should be retained in level 1 and level 2 lanescapes. · Plants on public land should be retained where these contribute to the cultural significance of the Heritage Overlay. · The whole of significant parts of buildings and structures of grade ‘A’ and ‘B’ should be retained whether visible or not visible from the public domain. · Significant parts of buildings and structures of grade ‘C’ and ‘D’ should be retained in whole or part as follows: > For single dwellings, the whole of the front two rooms in depth including the roof and chimneys, whether visible or not visible from the public domain. > For multiple dwellings including “flats”, the whole of the front two rooms in depth including the roof, or one complete roof segment in depth, whichever is the greater, whether visible or not visible from the public domain. > For warehouses, industrial and commercial buildings, the street façade with one complete structural bay in depth including the roof; or the street façade with 9 metres in depth including the roof, whichever is the greater, whether visible or not visible from the public domain. · On corner sites and in a park setting, in addition to the retention noted above, significant parts of buildings and structures of grade ‘C’ and ‘D’ should be retained as follows: > Where visible from the streetscape viewing zone. > Where visible from an intersecting lane. > Where prominent in the park setting. · In a level 1 or level 2 laneway , significant parts of buildings and structures of grade ‘C’ and ‘D’ should be retained as follows: > Where these abut the laneway, to the depth of the whole structure > Contributory parts visible above a 12 degrees sightline, taken at a height of 1.7m above the natural ground level, on the opposite side of the lane, from any position within the laneway viewing zone.
18.02 ALTERATIONS TO EXISTING BUILDINGS
18.02-1 Objectives for alterations to existing buildings
To ensure that alterations to existing graded buildings, structures and other contributory parts to the heritage precinct do not diminish cultural heritage significance of the place and the heritage precinct; and
To ensure that alterations to existing ungraded buildings and other non contributory parts, are compatible with the character of the contributory parts of the heritage precinct, including adjoining contributory buildings, and contributory open spaces, streetscapes and lanescapes.
18.02-2 Performance Standard PS02
Alterations to buildings and structures within the Heritage Precinct should be in harmony with the cultural heritage significance of the HO and should not dominate the contributory component parts. In determining what alterations are appropriate it is policy that works are assessed against the following performance measures, as relevant: · Alteration to the fabric of significant parts is unlikely to be supported for: > the whole of buildings and structures of grade ‘A’ and ‘B’; > and for ‘C’ and ‘D’ grade buildings and structures, in the locations where retention is required in PS01. · Alterations to the fabric of parts of a graded structure which are not significant, should be in harmony with the significant parts of the structure where these are visible from, the streetscape viewing zone, and from within the laneway viewing zone of a level 1 or level 2 lanescape. · Alterations to an ungraded existing structure, which are visible from the streetscape viewing zone or a level 1 or level 2 lane, including the external shape, façade pattern,
49 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 134 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
materials and colours of an alteration; should be in harmony with adjoining graded buildings, the contributory parts of the streetscape and with the character of the heritage precinct. · Reinstatement of missing original elements is encouraged where there is evidence of the previous, significant form for: > the whole of ‘A’ and ‘B’ grade buildings and structures; > and for ‘C’ and ‘D’ grade buildings and structures, in the locations where retention is required in PS01. · Where there is no evidence of the previous significant form, reinstatement should be a modern interpretation of the anticipated form. Conjectural reconstruction is not encouraged. · Sandblasting of render, masonry or timber surfaces and painting previously unpainted surfaces, alters original fabric and is unlikely to be supported.
18.03 ADDITIONS TO EXISTING BUILDINGS
18.03-1 Objective for the additions to existing buildings
To ensure that additions are compatible with the character of the contributory parts of the heritage precinct including contributory buildings and structures adjoining the site, and contributory open spaces, streetscapes and lanescapes. 18.03-2 Performance Standard PS03
The height and setback of an addition should result in a form that maintains the prominence of the graded building on the site and the prominence of any adjoining graded buildings. In determining whether an addition affects the prominence of a graded building, it is policy that the height and setback of additions to existing buildings be assessed against the following performance measures, as relevant: · Setback the addition consistent with the retention requirements in PS01. · By adjustment of height and setback, additions which are taller than the existing façade height (to AHD) should: > achieve full concealment within the streetscape viewing zone for buildings of grade ‘A’ and ‘B’ anywhere in the municipality; > achieve full concealment within the streetscape viewing zone in a level 1 streetscape; > achieve substantive concealment within the streetscape viewing zone in level 2 streetscapes; > achieve partial concealment within the streetscape viewing zone in level 3 streetscapes. · Visibility of higher parts in relation to nearby streets. Higher parts should not have a deleterious effect on graded buildings in adjacent streets. Apply the grading and streetscape relevant in the adjacent street. (See figure illustration in Definitions, section 20) · The height of additions visible from lanes (not including buildings immediately abutting the lanes) should: > achieve full concealment within the laneway viewing zone for buildings of grade ‘A’ and ‘B’ anywhere in the municipality, > achieve full concealment above a 12 degrees sightline, taken at a height of 1.7m above the natural ground level, on the opposite side of the lane, from any position within the laneway viewing zone, for all buildings in a level 1 lanescape, > not diminish the prominence of existing contributory buildings within the laneway viewing zone in a level 2 lanescape. · The height of additions abutting lanes in level 1 and level 2 lanescapes should: > have a maximum wall height which is equivalent to the typical wall height for contributory buildings on the property boundary, in the lanescape, > not diminish the prominence of existing contributory structures within the lanescape. · Avoid damage to root systems and the canopy of significant landscape elements on adjacent public land, by the adoption of appropriate siting and scale for works on the subject site.
50 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 135 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
18.03-3 Objective for the form of additions to existing buildings
To ensure that additions are compatible with the character of the contributory parts of the heritage precinct including contributory buildings and structures adjoining the site, and contributory open spaces, streetscapes and lanescapes.
18.03-4 Performance Standard PS04
The form of an addition should maintain the prominence of the graded building on the site and the prominence of any adjoining graded buildings. In determining whether the form of an addition affects the prominence of a graded building, it is policy that additions to existing buildings be assessed against the following performance measures, as relevant: · For graded Buildings, the external shape, bulk, façade pattern, materials and colours of an addition to an existing graded building should be in harmony with the existing building, adjoining graded buildings, the contributory components of the streetscape and with the character of the Heritage Overlay, within the streetscape viewing zone and the laneway viewing zone. Outside these zones guidance on form is not provided. · For ungraded buildings, the external shape, bulk, façade pattern, perception of storey height, materials and colours of an addition to an ungraded existing building should be in harmony with adjoining graded buildings, the contributory components of the streetscape and with the character of the Heritage Overlay within the streetscape viewing zone and the laneway viewing zone. Additions that are a reproduction of the appearance of graded buildings are unlikely to be supported. Outside these zones guidance on form is not provided. · Additions which are taller than the existing structure should not overhang the retained portions of a graded structure. · The site coverage at the rear should be moderated to be similar to adjoining properties, where rear open space is noted as a part of the character in the “Statements of Significance” in Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne. · A fence or a building should define the boundary between the property and the street or laneway.
18.04 NEW BUILDINGS
18.04-1 Objective for New Buildings
To ensure that new buildings are compatible with the character of the heritage precinct, including adjoining contributory buildings and structures, and contributory open spaces, streetscapes and lanescapes.
18.04-2 Performance Standard PS05
New Buildings should not dominate the contributory component parts to the Heritage Overlay. Heights, setbacks and form should be guided by the adjoining graded buildings and where these are absent by the common form of graded buildings in the streetscape. In determining the setback, it is policy that new buildings be assessed against the following performance measures, as relevant: · Front setbacks where there is an adjoining graded building: > Set the street facing building façade no further forward than the adjoining graded buildings and close to this alignment. > Adjust the setback to avoid disturbance to adjoining graded buildings where facade features return on side elevations. > Where the front setbacks of adjoining graded buildings do not match, adopt the greater setback, unless a greater setback is disruptive to the common streetscape form. · Front setbacks where there is no adjoining graded building. Adopt the common front setback for graded buildings in the street. Where there are no adjoining graded buildings and few graded buildings in the street, adopt a setback which is common in the precinct. · Side setbacks should be similar to the existing where these are a feature of the streetscape.
51 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 136 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
· Avoid damage to root systems and the canopy of significant landscape elements on adjacent public land, by the adoption of appropriate siting and scale for works on the subject site.
In determining the façade height, it is policy that new buildings be assessed against the following performance measures, as relevant: · New building façade height should not result in a form that would diminish the prominence of the adjoining graded buildings. · Façade Height for a new building in a level 1 or level 2 streetscape; or in a level 3 streetscape where the site adjoins an ‘A’ or ‘B’ grade building: > The façade height for the new building should be no higher than the façade height of the graded building at the adjoining, side property boundary. Where the façade heights of adjoining graded buildings do not match, adopt the lower height, or stagger the new façade height to reflect both adjoining graded buildings. > Where the façade height of the adjoining graded building is atypically tall for the street, or no graded buildings adjoin: the new facade height should be the common façade height for graded buildings in the street. The common façade height for graded buildings takes into account a minimum of 15 allotments on either side of the site for the same side of the street. > The new façade height should not be substantially smaller than that for adjoining graded buildings. · Facade height of a new building in a level 3 streetscape. > Where the adjoining graded buildings are the same height (plus or minus 350mm), adopt this height for the façade of the new building. > Where the façade height of adjoining graded buildings varies by more than 350mm, the façade height for a new building should not exceed the façade height for the graded building by more than 20%. > Where there is a graded building on one side, adopt the façade height of the graded building at the side boundary. > Where there are no adjoining graded buildings, the façade height for a new building should not exceed the common façade height for graded buildings in the street by more than 20%. > Where there are no adjoining graded buildings and few graded buildings in the street, the façade height for a new building should not exceed the common façade height for graded buildings in the precinct by more than 20%. · Measuring point for façade height > On a relatively flat site (where the fall is less than 1 in 30), the AHD measuring point for the new façade height is on the footpath at the abutting side boundary. > On a sloping site (where the fall exceeds 1 in 30), the AHD measuring point for the new façade height is on the footpath at the centre of the site. In determining the height of parts which are taller than the façade of a new building (excluding the roof), it is policy that works be assessed against the following performance measures, as relevant: · Setback parts which are higher, at least 5 metres from the facade. · Visibility of higher parts from the streetscape viewing zone: > Full concealment is required within a level 1 streetscape. > Substantive concealment of higher parts is required within a level 2 streetscape. > Partial concealment of higher rear parts is required within a level 3 streetscape. · Visibility of higher parts in relation to nearby streets. Higher parts should not have a deleterious effect on graded buildings in adjacent streets. Apply the grading and streetscape relevant in the adjacent street. (See illustration in Definitions, section 20) · Visibility of higher parts from the laneway viewing zone (not including buildings immediately abutting the lanes). Taller parts of new buildings visible from lanes: > Full concealment is required within the laneway viewing zone for buildings graded ‘A’ or ‘B’ anywhere in the municipality, > Full concealment is required above a 12 degrees sightline, taken at a height of 1.7m above the natural ground level, on the opposite side of the lane, from any position within the laneway viewing zone, for all buildings in a level 1 lanescape, > Partial concealment is required above a 12 degrees sightline, taken at a height of 1.7m above the natural ground level, on the opposite side of the lane, from any position within the laneway viewing zone, for all buildings in a in a level 2 lanescape.
52 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 137 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
> Should not diminish the prominence of existing contributory buildings within the laneway viewing zone In determining the form of a new building it is policy that works be assessed against the following performance measures, as relevant: · the external shape, bulk, façade pattern, perception of storey height, materials and colours of a new building should be in harmony with adjoining graded buildings, the contributory components of the streetscape and with the character of the Heritage Overlay, within the streetscape viewing zone and the laneway viewing zone. Outside these zones guidance on form is not provided. Within the streetscape vi ewing zone and the laneway viewing zone, the external shape, bulk, façade pattern, perception of storey height, materials and colours of a new building should be in harmony with the adjacent graded buildings, the contributory components of the streetscape and lanescape, and with the Heritage Overlay. · New buildings and works should reflect their date of construction. · Reproduction of the appearance of graded buildings is unlikely to be supported.
18.05 WORKS ABUTTING LANEWAYS - NEW BUILDINGS AND ADDITONS TO EXISTING BUILDINGS
18.05-1 Objective for works abutting laneways
To ensure that works abutting laneways are consistent with the character of the contributory parts to the laneway and the abutting contributory sites.
18.05-2 Performance Standard PS06 Works abutting laneways should not dominate the contributory component parts to the Heritage Overlay. Heights, setbacks and form should be guided by the adjoining graded laneway buildings and where these are absent by the common contributory lanescape form. In determining the height, position and site coverage of works abutting a level 1 or 2 laneway (excluding the roof), it is policy that works be assessed against the following performance measures, as relevant: · Height of buildings abutting lanes in level 1 and level 2 lanescapes should: > Have a maximum wall height which is equivalent to the common wall height for contributory buildings on the property boundary in the laneway. > Not diminish the prominence of existing contributory buildings within the lanescape. · The site coverage at the rear should be moderated to be similar to adjacent properties where rear open space is noted as a part of the character of the heritage precinct as described in the “Statement of Significance” in Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne. · Avoid damage to root systems and the canopy of significant landscape elements on adjacent public land, by the adoption of appropriate siting and scale for works on the subject site.
18.06 DEFINITION OF THE PROPERTY BOUNDARY
18.06-1 Objective for definition of the property boundary
To ensure that the boundary between private property and a street or laneway is defined in a manner consistent with the contributory character of the Heritage Overlay. 18.06-2 Performance Standard PS07
A fence or a building should define the boundary between the property and the street or laneway, in all locations. In determining appropriate definition it is policy that the following performance measures apply: · Front fences should generally be between 1000mm and 1400mm in height and visually permeable. · The height and materials of side and rear fences should be consistent with those for contributory buildings in the Heritage Overlay.
53 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 138 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
18.07 LOCATION OF VEHICLE ACCESS, PARKING AND GARAGING
18.07-1 Objective for definition of the property boundary
To ensure that the character of the heritage precinct is not diminished by inappropriately placed vehicle access, carparking and garaging of vehicles. 18.07-2 Performance Standard PS08
Vehicle access, carparking and garaging should be concealed from the principal street frontage. In determining appropriate vehicle access, parking and garaging it is policy that the following performance measures apply, as appropriate: · Vehicle access off the street frontage is unlikely to be supported. This performance measure may prevent accommodation of vehicles on-site in many situations. · Location of vehicle access at the rear of the site is encouraged. Intact significant fabric at the rear of a site might prevent vehicle access and accommodation on-site in some situations. · Carparking or garaging of cars which is visible from the principal street frontage is unlikely to be supported. · Where crossovers are appropriate as assessed above, these should be of minimum width and number. · Crossovers should not affect the health of street trees. · Where vehicle access off level 1 and level 2 laneways is appropriate as assessed above, gates or doors are to be consistent with the character of contributory components of the laneway.
18.08 CIVIC WORKS
18.08-1 Objectives for civic works To ensure the retention of civic assets that contribute to the cultural heritage significance, as listed in the “Statement of Significance” for each HO precinct under “Contributory Parts to the Cultural Significance”, in this incorporated document. and
To ensure that new development within the public realm relates to the heritage precinct, including adjacent contributory buildings and structures, open spaces, streetscapes and lanescapes.
18.08-2 Performance Standard PS09
To ensure that works within the public realm do not diminish cultural heritage significance of the heritage precinct and are compatible with the character of the heritage precinct In determining appropriate building and works which affect civic assets, it is policy that the following performance measures apply, as appropriate: · Retain contributory parts as noted in Performance Standard PS01 · Alteration to, gutters, drains, kerbs, paving, signage and street furniture, which contribute to the cultural heritage significance of the heritage precinct, should be minimised. · Where alterations are required, reinstatement should include as much original fabric as is possible. · New buildings and works to civic assets should be consistent with the cultural heritage significance for the Heritage Overlay. · Avoid damage to root systems and the canopy of significant landscape elements on public land by the adoption of appropriate siting and scale for civic works.
18.09 BUILDINGS AND WORKS ADJACENT TO AND WITHIN PARKLANDS
18.09-1 Objectives for buildings and works adjacent to and within parklands
To ensure that buildings and works within, and visible from parklands do not diminish the cultural heritage significance of the Heritage Precinct.
54 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 139 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
To ensure that new development within the public realm relates to the heritage precinct, including adjacent contributory buildings and structures, open spaces, streetscapes and lanescapes.
18.09-2 Performance Standard PS10
Works adjacent to and within parklands should be compatible with the character of the heritage precinct. In determining appropriate building and works adjacent to and within parklands, it is policy that the following performance measures apply, as appropriate: · Within Parklands: > Retain significant parts as noted in Performance Standard PS01 > Landscape works in parks (paths and other constructed works) should be consistent with the cultural heritage significance of the park. > Landscape elements – alterations to garden beds and planting programs should be consistent with the cultural heritage significance of the park. > Where alteration is appropriate as determined above, reinstatement of the significant form is encouraged. · Within and adjacent to Parklands > The scale, external shape, façade pattern, bulk, materials and colours of new works should not diminish the cultural heritage significance of the parkland. > Avoid damage to root systems and the canopy of significant landscape elements within the parkland, by appropriate siting and scale of works.
18.10 SUBDIVISION
18.10-1 Objective for subdivision
To maintain the pattern of land division where this contributes to the cultural heritage significance of the Heritage Overlay.
18.10-2 Performance Standard PS11
Subdivision are compatible with the pattern within the heritage precinct. In determining appropriate subdivision, it is policy that the following performance measures apply: · Subdivision of land will be unlikely to be supported where subsequent development would diminish cultural heritage significance for the site, the streetscape, lanescape or the precinct.
18.11 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES
18.11-1 Objective for Archaeological Sites
To ensure that the evidence of cultural heritage significance at archaeological sites, is retained or properly recorded.
18.11-2 Performance Standard PS12
Retain archaeological evidence of cultural heritage significance or properly record as appropriate.
At archaeological sites, it is policy that the following performance measures apply: · Aboriginal cultural heritage should not be adversely affected by development. · The evidence contained in archaeological sites should not be adversely affected by development. · Where development is permitted it may be limited by a condition for recording of the archaeological site by an appropriately qualified person.
55 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 140 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne. 19 Performance Standards for Precincts Subject to Heritage Overlay Within the Capital City Zone HO7 to HO16 inclusive. The following Performance Standards apply in the Precincts subject to Heritage Overlay within the Capital City Zone. Detailed performance measures have been developed to guide development. For a particular Performance Standard, compliance with the relevant performance measures will achieve compliance with the Performance Standard. Summary of Performance Standards within the Capital City Zone PS01 CCZ Significant parts of the Heritage Precinct should be retained
PS02 CCZ Alterations to buildings and structures within the Heritage Precinct should be in harmony with the cultural heritage significance of the HO and should not dominate the contributory component parts.
PS03 CCZ The height, setback and form of an addition should result in a development that maintains the prominence of the graded building on the site and the prominence of any adjoining graded buildings.
PS04 CCZ New buildings should not dominate the contributory component parts to the Heritage Overlay. Heights, setbacks and form should be guided by the adjoining graded buildings and where these are absent by the common form of graded buildings in the streetscape or lanescape.
PS05 CCZ Vehicle access should be consistent with the character of the heritage precinct.
PS06 CCZ To ensure that works within the public realm do not diminish the cultural heritage significance of the heritage precinct and are compatible with the character of the heritage precinct.
PS07 CCZ Works adjacent to and within parklands should be compatible with the character of the heritage precinct.
PS08 CCZ Subdivision or amalgamation of sites should not impact upon the cultural heritage significance of the Heritage Overlay precinct
PS09 CCZ Retain archaeological evidence of cultural heritage significance or properly record as appropriate
19.01 RETENTION OF CONTRIBUTORY BUILDINGS, STRUCTURES AND PARTS
19.01-1 Objective for retention of contributory buildings, structures or parts:
To ensure the retention of contributory buildings, structures and parts, to the cultural heritage significance of the heritage precinct, as listed in the “Statement of Significance” for each HO precinct under “Contributory Parts to the Cultural Significance”, in this incorporated document.
19.01-2 Performance Standard PS01 CCZ
Significant parts of the Heritage Precinct should be retained.
In determining what is significant it is policy that the demolition or removal of contributory buildings, structures or parts is assessed against the following performance measures, as relevant:
· Significant parts of streets, roads and laneways on public land should be retained. · Plants on public land should be retained where these contribute to the cultural significance of the Heritage Overlay. · The whole of significant parts of buildings and structures of grade ‘A’ and ‘B’ should be retained whether visible or not visible from the public domain. · Significant parts of buildings and structures of grade ‘C’ and ‘D’ should be retained where visible from the public realm.
56 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 141 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
· Retained portions of buildings should be sufficient to ensure structural independence from any added structure. Facadism is unlikely to be supported.
19.02 ALTERATIONS TO EXISTING BUILDINGS
19.02 -1 Objectives for alterations to existing buildings
To ensure that alterations to existing graded buildings, structures and other contributory parts to the heritage precinct do not diminish cultural heritage significance of the place and the heritage precinct; and
To ensure that alterations to existing ungraded buildings and other non contributory parts, are compatible with the character of the contributory parts of the heritage precinct, including adjoining contributory buildings, and contributory open spaces, streetscapes and lanescapes.
19.02-2 Performance Standard PS02 CCZ
Alterations to buildings and structures within the Heritage Precinct should be in harmony with the cultural heritage significance of the HO and should not dominate the contributory component parts. In determining what alterations are appropriate it is policy that works are assessed against the following performance measures, as relevant: · Alteration to the fabric of significant parts is unlikely to be supported for: > the whole of buildings of grade ‘A’ and ‘B’; > and for ‘C’ and ‘D’ grade buildings, where these are visible from the public realm. · Alterations to the fabric of parts of a graded building which are not significant should be in harmony with the significant parts of the structure where these are visible from the public realm. · Alterations to an ungraded existing buildings which are visible from the public realm, should be in harmony with adjoining graded structures, the contributory parts of the streetscape and with the character of the heritage precinct. · Reinstatement of missing original elements is encouraged where there is evidence of the previous, significant form for: > the whole of ‘A’ and ‘B’ grade structures; > and for ‘C’ and ‘D’ grade structures, where visible from the public realm. · Where there is no evidence of the previous significant form, reinstatement should be a modern interpretation of the anticipated form. Conjectural reconstruction is not encouraged. · Sandblasting of render, masonry or timber surfaces and painting previously unpainted surfaces, alters original fabric and is unlikely to be supported.
19.03 ADDITIONS TO EXISTING BUILDINGS
19.03-1 Objective for the additions to existing buildings
To ensure that additions are compatible with the character of the contributory parts of the heritage precinct including contributory buildings and structures adjoining the site, and contributory open spaces, streetscapes and lanescapes. 19.03-2 Performance Standard PS03 CCZ
The height, setback and form of an addition should result in a development that maintains the prominence of the graded building on the site and the prominence of any adjoining graded buildings. In determining whether an addition affects the prominence of a graded building, it is policy that the height and setback of additions to existing buildings be assessed against the following performance measures, as relevant: · Setback the addition consistent with the retention requirements in Performance Standard PS01 CCZ. · Additions should not overhang retained portions of graded buildings. · The height of the addition should not diminish the prominence of the graded building or adjoining graded buildings.
57 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 142 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
· Moderate height to have regard to the objectives for Parliament House and the two view zones for St. Pauls Cathedral. · The height of an addition should not have a detrimental effect on graded structures in adjacent streets and lanes, and adjacent Heritage Overlays. · Where visible within the public domain, the external shape, bulk, façade pattern, materials and colours of an addition to an existing graded building should be in harmony with the existing building, adjoining graded buildings, the contributory components of the streetscape and with the precinct. · Where visible within the public domain, the external shape, bulk, façade pattern, materials and colours of an addition to an ungraded existing building should be in harmony with adjoining graded buildings, the contributory components of the streetscape and with the precinct. · Form of Additions. Additions that are a reproduction of the appearance of graded buildings are discouraged. · Avoid damage to root systems and the canopy of significant landscape elements on adjacent public land by the adoption of appropriate siting and scale for works on the subject site.
19.04 NEW BUILDINGS
19.04 -1 Objective for New Buildings
To ensure that new buildings are compatible with the character of the heritage precinct, including adjoining contributory buildings and structures, and contributory open spaces, streetscapes and lanescapes.
19.04-2 Performance Standard PS04 CCZ
New buildings should not dominate the contributory component parts to the Heritage Overlay. Heights, setbacks and form should be guided by the adjoining graded buildings and where these are absent by the common form of graded buildings in the streetscape or lanescape. In determining the façade height, overall height, setback and form, it is policy that new buildings be assessed against the following performance measures, as relevant: · The new building should set be on the property boundary. · New building façade height should not result in a form that would diminish the prominence of the adjoining graded buildings. Generally the façade height should be no taller than that for any adjoining graded building. · Avoid damage to root systems and the canopy of significant landscape elements on adjacent public land, by the adoption of appropriate siting and scale for works on the subject site. · Setback parts which are higher than the façade height, at least 5 metres from the facade. · In precincts where the objective is to retain a similar precinct scale, further modification may be required to height and setback of parts which are taller that the façade height. · Moderate height to have regard to the objectives for Parliament House and the two view zones for St. Pauls Cathedral. · The height of an addition should not have a detrimental effect on graded structures in adjacent streets and lanes, and adjacent Heritage Overlays. · Where visible within the public domain, the external shape, bulk, façade pattern, materials and colours of a new building should be in harmony with adjoining graded buildings, the contributory components of the streetscape and with the precinct. · New buildings and works should reflect their date of construction. · Reproduction of the appearance of graded buildings is unlikely to be supported.
19.05 VEHICLE ACCESS
19.05 -1 Objective for vehicle access
To ensure that the character of the heritage precinct is not diminished by inappropriately placed vehicle access. 19.05-2 Performance Standard PS05 CCZ
Vehicle access should be consistent with the character of the heritage precinct. In determining appropriate vehicle access, parking and garaging it is policy that the following
58 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 143 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
performance measures apply, as appropriate: · Vehicle access off the principal street frontage is unlikely to be supported · Where crossovers are appropriate as assessed above, these should be of minimum width and number. · Crossovers should not affect the health of street trees. · Heritage matters may prevent inclusion of vehicle access at some sites.
19.06 CIVIC WORKS
19.06 -1 Objectives for civic works To ensure the retention of civic assets that contribute to the cultural heritage significance, as listed in the “Statement of Significance” for each HO precinct under “Contributory Parts to the Cultural Significance”, in this incorporated document. and
To ensure that new development within the public realm relates to the heritage precinct, including adjacent contributory buildings and structures, open spaces, streetscapes and lanescapes.
19.06-2 Performance Standard PS06 CCZ
To ensure that works within the public realm do not diminish the cultural heritage significance of the heritage prec inct and are compatible with the character of the heritage precinct. In determining appropriate building and works which affect civic assets, it is policy that the following performance measures apply, as appropriate: · Retain contributory parts as noted in Performance standard PS01 CCZ · Alteration to, gutters, drains, kerbs, paving, signage and street furniture, which contribute to the cultural heritage significance of the heritage precinct, should be minimised. · Where alterations are required, reinstatement should include as much original fabric as is possible. · New buildings and works to civic assets should be consistent with the cultural heritage significance for the Heritage Overlay. · Avoid damage to root systems and the canopy of significant landscape elements on public land by the adoption of appropriate siting and scale for civic works.
19.07 BUILDINGS AND WORKS ADJACENT TO AND WITHIN PARKLANDS
19.07-1 Objectives for buildings and works adjacent to and within parklands
To ensure that buildings and works within, and visible from parklands do not diminish the cultural heritage significance of the Heritage Precinct.
To ensure that new development within the public realm relates to the heritage precinct, including adjacent contributory buildings and structures, open spaces, streetscapes and lanescapes.
19.07-2 Performance Standard PS07 CCZ
Works adjacent to and within parklands should be compatible with the character of the heritage precinct. In determining appropriate building and works adjacent to and within parklands, it is policy that the following performance measures apply, as appropriate: · Within Parklands: > Retain significant parts as noted in Performance Standard PS01 CCZ > Landscape works in parks (paths and other constructed works) should be consistent with the cultural heritage significance of the park. > Landscape elements – alterations to garden beds and planting programs should be consistent with the cultural heritage significance of the park. > Where alteration is appropriate as determined above, reinstatement of the significant form is encouraged. · Within and adjacent to Parklands > The scale, external shape, façade pattern, bulk, materials and colours of new works should not diminish the cultural heritage significance of the parkland.
59 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 144 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
> Avoid damage to root systems and the canopy of significant landscape elements within the parkland, by appropriate siting and scale of works.
19.08 SUBDIVISION AND AMALGAMATION OF SITES
19.08-1 Objective for subdivision and amalgamation
To maintain the pattern of land division where this contributes to the cultural heritage significance of the Heritage Overlay.
19.08-2 Performance Standard PS08 CCZ
Subdivision or amalgamation of sites should not impact upon the cultural heritage significance of the Heritage Overlay precinct. In determining appropriate subdivision or amalgamation, it is policy that the following performance measures apply: · Subdivision or amalgamation of land will be unlikely to be supported where subsequent development would diminish cultural heritage significance for the site or sites, the streetscape, lanescape or the precinct.
19.09 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES
19.09-1 Objective for Archaeological Sites
To ensure that the evidence of cultural heritage significance at archaeological sites, is retained or properly recorded.
19.09-2 Performance Standard PS09 CCZ
Retain archaeological evidence of cultural heritage significance or properly record as appropriate.
At archaeological sites, it is policy that the following performance measures apply: · The register CBD Archaeological Zoning Plan is consulted. · AAV Archaeological Sites Register and Aboriginal Historic Places Register is consulted · Aboriginal cultural heritage should not be adversely affected by development. · The evidence contained in archaeological sites should not be adversely affected by development. · Where development is permitted it may be limited by a condition for recording of the archaeological site by an appropriately qualified person.
60 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 145 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne. 20 Definitions used in the Performance Standards
Words highlighted in bold have definitions elsewhere in this section
Addition New elements which have structural capacity in whole or in part and which are independent of the existing structure, for example addition of a room. Some additions will also be defined as alterations, for example a new verandah.
Alteration Any change to the fabric of an existing building including removal or attachment of elements which depend on the existing structure for support. For example, painting, change to surface treatments, rendering, removal or formation of openings, etc. For example, installation of new windows or skylights, removal and replacement of rendered elements. Some alterations will also be defined as additions, for example a new verandah.
AHD Australian Height Datum
Civic Works Works on public land including: > Paved surfaces, gutters, kerbs, channels, drains, street signs, light standards, sewer vents, and other services components that contribute to the significance of the Heritage Overlay; and > Fences on public land which contribute to the significance of the Heritage Overlay.
Concealment, including full, substantive and partial concealment Where indicated, compliance with a level of concealment is required within the streetscape viewing zone . The following parameters apply: > Interruption to views by graded buildings on the site and/or adjacent graded buildings within the streetscape viewing zone may also be taken into account. > The viewing height is 1.7m. above footpath AHD, and the viewing position is at the property line on the opposite side of the road. > A sight line from directly opposite the site will provide an indication of the level of concealment. Sight lines may also be required from other positions within the viewing zone. Concealment Full The whole of the proposed development is concealed by the existing graded building, the facade walls of a new building, or by adjacent graded buildings.
Full Concealment
61 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 146 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
Concealment Substantive There is substantive concealment of the propos ed development by the existing graded building, the facade walls of a new building, or by adjacent graded buildings. Substantive concealment is achieved when the perceived building height of the proposed development does not exceed the facade height by more than 10%.
Substantive Concealment
Concealment Partial There is partial concealment of the proposed development by the existing graded building, the facade walls of a new building, or by adjacent graded buildings. Partial concealment is achieved when the perceived building height of the proposed development does not exceed the facade height by more than 20%. Where there are few graded buildings in the street partial concealment of higher rear parts to a new building will be achieved when the pe rceived building height of the proposed development does not exceed the facade height by more than 30%.
Partial Concealment
62 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 147 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
Concealment Partial for higher rear parts of a new buildings in a level 3 streetscape, where there are few graded buildings in the street. Where there are few graded buildings in the street, partial concealment of higher rear parts to a new building will be achieved when the perceived building height of the proposed development does not exceed the facade height by more than 30%.
Contributory, contributory parts, contributory component parts, contributory elements, contributory sites. Items which contribute to the cultural heritage significance of the Heritage Place . See separate list in the ‘Statement of Significance’ for each Heritage Overlay Precinct under ‘Contributing Parts to the Cultural Significance’. Corner Locations A corner location includes sites located at a street intersection, or street/laneway intersection. Cultural Heritage Significance Aesthetic, historic, scientific, social or spiritual value for past, present or future generations. All graded places contribute to the Cultural Heritage Significance of the Heritage Overlay and are identified as significant. Contributory parts to the Cultural Heritage Significance are identified in the Statement of Significance for each HO precinct. Development Includes roofed and unroofed construction, additions and alterations to existing buildings, sunshading devices, fencing, services and equipment, paving, excavation, civic works (roads, footpaths etc), signs, landscape works, works which might have an impact on plants which contribute to the Heritage Overlay, actions which might have an impact on Aboriginal and archaeological sites and as defined in the general provisions of the Melbourne Planning Scheme. Facade The Facade is the external face of the enclosed portions of a building. The following parameters apply: > For the purposes of determining the height and setback of the façade, verandahs, terraces, porches and decorative embellishments are not included. > Facades must be substantially closed to be considered as a concealing element.
Façade Height and Setback
Grade, grading – A, B, C, D All graded places contribute to the Cultural Heritage Significance of the Heritage Overlay and are identified as significant. Where graded places are within the primary period of significance for the precinct, they are important as part of a collection within the context of the precinct.
63 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 148 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
‘A’ graded places have individual cultural heritage significance at the national, state or metropolitan level. ‘B’ graded places have individual cultural heritage significance at the metropolitan or municipal level; or have cultural heritage significance at the local level associated with an unusually high level of integrity. ‘C’ graded places have cultural heritage significance at the local level. C graded places are representative examples of a style, type, use or period and have substantial integrity when viewed from within the public realm, or are individually significant places with a lower level of integrity. ‘D’ graded places have cultural heritage significance at the local level. D graded places are, representative examples of a style, type, use or period, with either substantial or reduced integrity when viewed from within the public realm; or are individually significant places with substantially reduced integrity. D graded places may also include common and simple structures with substantial integrity.
Graded place, building or structures Any heritage place graded ‘A’, ‘B’, ‘C’ or ‘D’ in the City of Melbourne Heritage Places Inventory, or the Central Activities District Conservation Study.
Heritage Place The whole of the area shown on the Heritage Overly map and described in the Statement of Significance for the precinct, eg H01 the Carlton Precinct Heritage Place. Individual contributory sites within the precinct are also a heritage place. These are listed in the City of Melbourne Heritage Places Inventory, or the Central Activities District Conservation Study.
Lanescape - Levels 1, 2 and 3 Note that a review of laneway definitions and levels is recommended to take into account changes over 20 years and to respond the provisions of this incorporated document. Currently laneways have the same definitions as streetscapes. A review of laneways across the municipality across the municipality will be required. All level 1 and level 2 laneways are to be mapped and have a Data Sheet that will note the contributory elements in the laneways. Lane and Laneway A lane is generally a narrow public space, primarily used for services and vehicle access. Laneways share the paved space with pedestrians. Some lanes will include a small proportion of properties where there is no other principal street frontage. Small accessways which have a large proportion of properties where there is no other principal address are streets. Significant parts of a Lane or Laneway include: > paved surfaces, street signs light standards, sewer vents, and other services components which contribute to the significance of the Heritage Overlay; > fences, buildings and outbuildings abutting the laneway, which contribute to the significance of the Heritage Overlay. These elements might be on allotments which do not have an individual heritage place grading; > open spaces at the rear of allotments, particularly where similar open space allocations are adjacent and where these combine to produce a large space which allows views to contributory building fabric. > visible rear wings with a high level of integrity, particularly where these are part of a similar repeating form. > early painted or affixed signs; or early signs embodied in the fabric of a structure, where these are within the primary period of significance for the Heritage overlay
64 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 149 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
Laneway Viewing Zone
The plan area and vertical view zone of the laneway, where the performance standards are applied. The plan area of the Laneway Viewing Zone is comprised of the laneway land abutting the subject site and the laneway land for 10 metres on either side. The vertical view zone of the laneway is defined by > The viewing height at 1.7m. above the ground level AHD, on the opposite side of the lane; and > Elements visible above 13 degrees from horizontal; and The form of graded buildings on the site and the two adjoining sites on each side, including rear toilets, stables and outbuildings etc, may be taken into account in assessing concealment. A sight line from directly opposite the site will provide an indication of the level of visibility. Sight lines will also be required from other positions within the viewing zone.
Laneway viewing zone - Plan Area
Laneway viewing zone – Vertical View Zone
65 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 150 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
Perceived Building Height and Perceived Height The perceived building height precisely measures how high the proposed development would appear to be in relation to the façade height and location, when viewed from the opposite side of the road. In determining the perceived building height the following parameters apply: > the viewing point is 1.7metres above natural ground level AHD, at the property boundary on the opposite side of the road, > sight lines are drawn from the viewing point to > the natural ground AHD at the footpath in front of the façade, > to the façade height and > to the top of the proposed development including the roof and services. The perceived building height for the proposed works is measured at the façade position, from the footpath AHD in front of the facade, to the sight line for the proposed development. At or near corner locations, the perceived building height is measured for both streets.
Perceived Building Height of Proposed Works
Precinct The place where the Statement of Significance applies for the relevant Heritage Overlay. Boundaries are defined on the Heritage Overlay map.
Primary Period of Significance The period of time which is most important for the cultural significance of the Heritage Overlay. The primary period of significance is noted in the Statement of Significance
Road, Roadway, or Street A street, roadway or road is a public space which provides primary access and the principal address to abutting properties. Usually vehicle and pedestrian use occurs in designated zones. Vehicle access at the principal street, roadway or road is rare in heritage precincts in the City of Melbourne. Significant parts of a street or road include: > paved surfaces, street signs, street furniture, light standards, sewer vents, and other services components which contribute to the significance of the Heritage Overlay > footpaths and landscaped spaces within the reservation, > fences which contribute to the significance of the Heritage Overlay, > open spaces at the front and side of allotments, > contributory buildings and structures,
66 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 151 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
> contributory street trees and plantings. > early painted or affixed signs; or early signs embodied in the fabric of a structure, where these are within the primary period of significance for the Heritage overlay
Roof In almost all cases, building elements which are less than 45 degrees above the horizontal plane will be considered to be roof. Building elements which are more than 45 degrees above the horizontal plane will be considered to be walls.
Setback The distance from the property boundary to the façade of a building or to works. The front setback to a building façade does not include verandahs, arcades and porches, which commonly project forward of the setback alignment.
Front Setback
Significant parts For a structure: all original built elements, including but not limited to, walls, structural supports, roof, chimneys, windows and doors, glazing, decorative elements, signs, fences, paving and outbuildings. Later added elements may also be significant and contribute to the cultural heritage significance of the, for heritage place. For example an extra room, or paving to a pathway added soon after construction and within the primary period of significance for the Heritage Overlay.
Street See Road
Streetscape levels 1, 2 and 3 Note that a site review of streetscape levels is recommended to take account changes over the past 20 years and to equate with the following definitions. Level 1 streetscapes have state or regional significance beyond the precinct, providing an outstanding demonstration of primary aspects of the cultural significance of the heritage precinct. In the built setting, they are collections of buildings from the primary period of significance which have a high level of integrity. In the landscape setting, the original design will be clear through the layout and either mature original plantings or continuity of like plantings. Level 2 streetscapes have local significance within the precinct, providing a typical demonstration of the primary aspects of the cultural significance of the heritage precinct. Although there may be some non contributory works, the majority of components have high integrity. Level 3 street scapes contain a low proportion of components from the primary period of significance, or there is a high proportion of contributory components with a low level of integrity. All streetscapes make a contribution to the heritage precinct.
67 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 152 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
Streetscape Viewing Zone The area of the street or road where the performance standards are applied. There are four settings: Streetscape Viewing Zone - At Standard Sites –The public land, in front of the subject site plus the three allotments on each side including any intersecting laneway, for the full width of the street.
Streetscape viewing zone – Standard Sites
Streetscape Viewing Zone - At Corner Sites – In each street, the public land in front of the subject site plus the three allotments on each side including any intersecting laneway, for the full width of the streets.
Streetscape viewing zone – Corner Sites
68 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 153 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
Streetscape Viewing Zone - Sites at the termination of ‘T’ intersections – The public land in front of the subject site plus three allotments on each side including any intersecting laneway, for the full width of the street;: and all the public land in the intersecting street for a distance of 25 metres.
Streetscape viewing zone – ‘T’ intersection Sites
Streetscape Viewing Zone - At sites where development affects adjacent streets –The public land aligned with the subject site plus the three allotments on each side including any laneway.
Streetscape viewing zone – Where development affects adjacent streets
69 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 154 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
Viewing Height A point 1.7 metres above the AHD for the natural ground.
Walls Substantially vertical building elements which enclose or define a space. Elements which are 45 degrees or more above the horizontal plane are generally treated as walls
Policy References Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne The City of Melbourne Heritage Places Inventory East Melbourne & Jolimont Conservation Study 1985 Parkville Conservation Study 1985 North & West Melbourne Conservation Study 1985 and 1993 Flemington & Kensington Conservation Study 1985 Carlton, North Carlton and Princes Hill Conservation Studies 1994 and 1985 South Yarra Conservation Study 1985 South Melbourne Conservation Study 1985 and 1998 Harbour, Railway, Industrial Conservation Study 1985 Central Activities District Conservation Study, 1985 City of Melbourne Heritage Study Significant Street Trees and Individual Significant Trees. Not yet prepared. City of Melbourne Heritage Study Laneway survey and grading review. Not yet prepared. City of Melbourne Heritage Study Streetscape survey and grading review. Not yet prepared.
70 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 155 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne. Appendix A
Background History for the Development of the Heritage
Overlay Precincts. Background history on each Heritage Overlay precinct can be obtained from several sources. Principal among them is the history commissioned by the City of Melbourne - Miles Lewis, Melbourne, the City, Its History and Development, Melb, 1994, and Swanson R, Melbourne’s Historic Public Gardens, A Management Guide, 1984. The Heritage Studies for each area outside the Capital City Zone also provide useful information is most instances. A list of reference publications is given Appendix C of the City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project, - A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy, December 2004 2004. The concise background information given here for each Heritage Precinct has been extracted from these secondary sources. Consult those documents for references.
Areas Outside the Central City Zone
Carlton
Hoddle’s Plan of Melbourne of 1842 indicates “Grassy forest land principally timbered with Eucalyptus, Casuarina, Mimosa “ in the region of Carlton. The region was grouped with other lands north of Victoria Street and generally referred to as “North Melbourne”. Its easterly extent was “Newtown” (Fitzroy) which had been subdivided and sold in the late 1830s. Land in this region was withheld from sale following the declaration of the 1841 extended Town Reserve north of Victoria Street to Brunswick Street, pending the determination of the location of parks, sites for institutions and the major entrances to the city.
In January 1844, the Corporation of Melbourne petitioned the Governor Charles La Trobe to grant land of around 500 acres in each of two parcels, one in the vicinity of North Melbourne (in this case including what would later become Carlton) and the other in the vicinity of South Melbourne. Eventually after input from the government in N.S.W. and the Council, an area of 2560 acres north of the city was put aside for recreation and the public advantage in September 1850. Part of this land included Carlton. La Trobe asked the Council for a definite area to be laid out and on November 4th 1850 and, promised that he would facilitate the final determination of the approaches to the city from the north and the north-west. The broad form of the land to be assigned for Princes Park. The University of Melbourne, Carlton gardens and the Melbourne General Cemetery appears to have been determined by La Trobe after 1851 and before he left Melbourne in 1854.
Kearney’s map of 1855 indicates the formation of Royal Parade, the form of The University of Melbourne, and Carlton Gardens as a large park touching the north east corner of the city grid. Subdivision of land for private development in and around these features commenced in the 1850s
The first sales of land were south of Grattan Street in 1852. Hoddle’s plan for the land north of the 1837 Town Reserve beyond Victoria Street, directly connected the skewed city grid with the magnetic north alignment of the State survey, forming triangles of land at the junction of the skewed grid. Hoddle included two aligned London-square style parks to the 1852 plan, at Argyle Square and Lincoln Square, connected by the short section of Pelham Street and terminating at the Carlton Gardens. Development proceeded soon after the sales. East of Swantson Street, along the higher land in Grattan Street and around the squares, development was residential, including high quality homes. West of Swanston Street and south of Pelham Street, the mixed uses already well established in the north of the city grid, including manufacturing, industry and brewing were extended. Barry (University) Square, set aside in 1860, added to the amenity already anticipated by Hoddle’s inclusion of two aligned London Style parks to the 1852 plan, at Argyle Square and Lincoln Square. Pelham Street connected all these squares terminating at the Carlton Gardens. Drummond Street also attracted high quality construction, both in early development and in through upgrades to facades in the 1870s and 1880s.
Argyle Square, with its mature elms set in grass, in formal diagonal planting, displays the 1850s style initially developed at the Fitzroy Gardens (subsequently altered to its current more serpentine form). Lincoln and Barry Squares also have important avenue and individual planting with high heritage value. Barry Square includes the formal design style exhibited at Argyle Square.
In Drummond Street, there is strong consistency in the built form. Row houses are more usually two storeys, generally include verandahs, often in the standard two storey cast iron format, with rendered masonry buildings more common although face brick is also used. Some stone buildings survive from development in the 1850s and 1860s, albeit sometimes with Victorian façades. Parapets, often with embellishments and a concealed roof
71 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 156 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne. are more common than exposed pitched roofs. Front gardens are common. The row form is dominant with abutment to the side boundaries of allotments and a strong definition of the property boundary. Contributory buildings usually have the higher portion at the front of the allotment, a slightly lower rear wing behind and usually a very small rear yard with access to a rear lane, sometimes wide enough to encourage vehicle access. A few landmark residential buildings from the nineteenth century have a three-storey form; otherwise, churches, schools and public buildings are the landmark structures in an otherwise generally tall, two storey built form.
Elsewhere in the precinct there is less uniformity in the residential form. Almost all contributory buildings are of single or two storeys, have a row form and abut the side boundaries of allot ments. There is strong definition of the property boundary. Contributory buildings usually have the higher portion at the front of the allotment, a slightly lower rear wing behind and usually a very small rear yard with pedestrian access to a small rear lane. Churches, schools and public buildings are the landmark structures in an otherwise low scale built form. The parks with their formal tree layouts, simple paths and grass surfaces strongly reinforce the mid-nineteenth century character of the precinct. Rathdowne Street, the Carlton Gardens and the Royal Exhibition Building dominate the precinct.
There has been considerable redevelopment in the mixed-use industrial regions and around Barry (University) Square. Allotments along Rathdowne Street facing Carlton Gardens also attracted somewhat intrusive redevelopment in the 1970s.
North of Grattan Street to Neill Street the subdivision from the early 1860s, including the small London-square style parks at Murchison and Macarthur Squares. This plan introduces a more definite 45 degrees connection with the Heidelberg Road through the purposefully wide Neill Street. Flemington Road and Sydney Road (Royal Parade) are the primary access points to Melbourne from the north and west of the state. The entrance from the east was set in the late 1830s as Wellington Parade and its continuation as Bridge Road leading to Hawthorn; but the entrance from the northeast was blocked by the early suburban division of Fitzroy. The north-eastern road to Heidelberg had to divert to Smith Street until Neill Street provided this more direct connection.
Allotments closest to the parks and the University sold first. Early buildings had a smaller scale and simpler form than the tall houses of the boom period in the 1880s. Bluestone, plentiful by the end of the 1850s and more reliable than the locally produced bricks, was sometimes used here, as was timber for the less substantial dwellings. Rapid population growth and development across Melbourne in the 1870s and 1880s saw substantial additions to some of these early structures and even new “Victorian” facades, particularly in Drummond Street. Vacant land was filled in and less substantial structures removed for new development, made more uniform by the application of the Melbourne Building Act across Carlton in 1872, after which timber construction close to the property boundary was precluded.
By the 1890s, the majority of Carlton had been developed as a residential zone, serviced by shops with attached residences in Lygon and Elgin Streets. A fine grain subdivision pattern had occurred within the crown allotments, with lanes created to service the collection of night soil, very few of which were wide enough to provide rear access for stables. Churches had been constructed, often on prominent corner sites granted by the government and the new Education Department schools serviced the residential community.
Where development soon after subdivision has survived, it shows a simpler form, and greater diversity in scale and materials within the orderly subdivision pattern. Carlton Street and the development around Murchison and Macarthur Squares illustrate this. A mixture of bluestone, face brick and rendered buildings is found here, with a few rare timber structures. Verandahs are sometimes but not always used. Front gardens occur randomly. Almost all buildings are of single or two storeys, have a row form and abut the side boundaries of allotments. There is strong definition of the property boundary. Contributory buildings usually have the higher portion at the front of the allotment, a slightly lower rear wing behind and usually a very small rear yard with pedestrian access to a small rear lane. Churches, schools and public buildings are the landmark structures in an otherwise low scale built form. The parks, with their formal tree layouts, simple paths and grass surfaces strongly reinforce the elegant order of the precinct.
Slightly later development shows greater uniformity. Cardigan Street north of Faraday Street illustrates this. The row houses are more usually two storeys, generally include verandahs, often in the standard two storey cast iron format, with rendered masonry buildings more common although face brick is also used (note particularly Barkly Street). Stone is unlikely to be used and there are no timber structures (after 1872). Parapets, often with embellishments and a concealed roof are more common than exposed pitched roofs. Front gardens are not common, except in the north-eastern portion of the precinct, where single storey development is also more common. The row form is dominant with abutment to the side boundaries of allotments and a strong definition of the property boundary. Contributory buildings usually have the higher portion at the front of the allotment, a slightly lower rear wing behind and usually a very small rear yard with pedestrian access to a small rear lane. The shopping precincts are fine rows of typical nineteenth century
72 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 157 of 217Document Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne. shop-and-dwellings. Frequently these had verandahs over the footpath, some of which survive. A few landmark commercial buildings from the nineteenth century have a three-storey form; otherwise, churches, schools and public buildings are the landmark structures in an otherwise generally two storey built form.
The University of Melbourne, Melbourne General Cemetery and Princes Park. Princes Park was set aside by the government in the 1840s but not permanently reserved and vested in the City of Melbourne until 1864. Considerable debate about how improvements to the city parks were to be funded continued through the 1850s and 1860s. Joint management with the government as the senior partner ensued in 1873 and remained until 1917 when the City of Melbourne took over all the parks within Carlton as committee of management. Melbourne General Cemetery was set aside in 1853, to replace the then full cemetery at the current site of Victoria Market. The design and plantings, attributed to the then Director of the Botanic Gardens, Baron Ferdinand von Mueller, continued the open spaces of Princes Park and the northern portion of the University reserve.
The University of Melbourne was established by Gov. La Trobe in 1853 and building commenced in 1854. In 1866 generous portions of land were set aside for residential colleges bounding College Crescent and the land between the colleges and the University set aside for recreation. (The university oval and sports area). The university’s expansion has left of legacy of many structures of cultural heritage value, set within an open landscape character. Some mature trees also survive.
Together, the Melbourne General Cemetery, The University of Melbourne. Princes Park, Royal Parade, College Crescent and Cemetery Road East and West have an open landscape form. They are an essential element in La Trobe’s plan for a ring of park and public facilities around the centre of Melbourne.
Carlton was fully developed by the end of the nineteenth century. Industry concentrated south of Pelham Street., west of Cardigan Street.; shopping strips in Elgin and Lygon Streets, with some institutions including churches at the city end of Lygon Street and residential uses elsewhere. Continuing development occurred in the industrial/commercial areas, particularly between the wars. However a preference for the garden suburbs in Hawthorn, Camberwell, Brighton and the like, now served by the excellent metropolitan railway, saw the residential areas of Carlton fall from favour in the early twentieth century. As a consequence there was little change to the building form until the Housing Commission sought to clear what was considered substandard housing in the 1950s. Returning to favour in the late 1960s, there has been a steady refurbishment of building stock. The quantity of reasonably intact building fabric, and contributory landscape elements and civic works remains high.
East Melbourne
Hoddle’s Plan of Melbourne of 1837, just two years after European settlement, indicates “Grassy hill [and] forest“ in the region of East Melbourne, already with a “proposed “ road, through what would later become the Fitzroy Gardens, to connect with Smith Street and the Heidelberg Road. Capt. Lonsdale’s “Government House” and the ”Proposed Government Paddocks” adjoining are shown in the position of Yarra Park and Jolimont, with Wellington Parade departing from the south west corner of the skewed city grid, aligned to magnetic east.
Just five years later, Hoddle’s 1842 plan shows Lt. Gov. La Trobe’s purchase of 125 acres facing Wellington Parade next to the former “Government House” and surrounded by the proposed Government Paddock. There is a description of the Yarra Park land as “open forest honeycombed level Land with spots of Trap Rock and Stones” and north of Wellington Parade is a block plan for the survey of whole of the land, except for an area along Spring Street and a huge reservation for Victoria Parade. This plan shows a clear intention to provide some land for residential development immediately to east of the city grid early in the European settlement of Melbourne.
However a decision to proceed was hampered by the lack of a decision on the location for the seat of government. Hoddle’s 1842 grid plan for East Melbourne also had topography issues. A creek traversed the site from north to south and the landform was steep on each side –hardly ideal for building development on the western side. A new subdivision plan was developed with a major park incorporated in the western sector covering the steep land on either side of the creek. This was in place by 1848, but no auctions ensued until 1852. The government did grant some land in advance of this. In 1850 Bishop Perry, who had been living on La Trobe’s land in Wellington Parade, selected a large site, facing the proposed park in Clarendon Street for the Bishop’s house and for the Anglican Cathedral for Melbourne. The house commenced construction soon after, but the cathedral did not eventuate, the site on the corner of Swanston and Flinders Street eventually being adopted in preference.
The government appointed missionary Langhorne recorded an Aboriginal population of around 700 in a circuit of 30 miles (48 km) around Melbourne, divided into 3 tribes – the Waworong, Bonurong and Watowrong. The Yarra River, including Yarra Park and its extensive area of associated wetlands, contained important food
73 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 158 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne. resources, including eels, fish and game, and supported a higher Aboriginal population than in other parts of the region which would become Melbourne.
In 1837, 895 acres of land was set aside south east of Yarra Park for an Aboriginal Mission. The reserved Mission land was bounded by the River Yarra, Punt Road, Williams Road and High Street. But this proposal was short lived. By 1839, this land had been subdivided for sale and the Mission was transferred to the west side of Punt Road, close to the south bank of the river and opposite Yarra Park. The Aboriginal mission commenced here in January 1837 but by July 1839 had also closed. Some indigenous trees – Hoddle’s “open forest”, which predate European settlement survive in Yarra Park.
In 1854, La Trobe left the colony with instructions to Sir Henry Palmer for his land to be subdivided. Some streets were named after La Trobe’s children and the suburb was named after La Trobe’s house “Jolimont”. This land was close to the city, elevated above the Flinders Street ponds and surrounded by parklands. It was highly sought after. Fine buildings were constructed here, some in the 1860s and many in the 1870s. It was substantially developed by 1890. This area has similar characteristics to the development on the hill in precinct 1, with greater uniformity in scale. The best housing occupied the perimeter streets, generally two storey in scale, and smaller housing occupied the inner streets, generally at single storey scale.
A portion of the subdivision of La Trobe’s land plan was developed as the innovative Jolimont Square, with houses facing a private central park off Wellington Parade. This parcel survives at the Deaf Society site, complete with square and some early trees.
In December 1851, just after separation from New South Wales, La Trobe selected the site at the top of Bourke Street for the Legislative Assembly chamber. The development of East Melbourne could now go ahead. The government kept many sites around Eastern Hill for churches and institutions. Some of the developments on these lands survive at St Peter’s, St. Patrick’s, Cathedral College and the former Baptist church. In and around these, high quality houses were constructed on the large allotments. The subdivision was gracious – wide streets, a major park, and smaller London-square style parks. The site was also healthily located on high ground, was close to the seat of government and had the sanction of the Bishop. - A recipe for high quality for development. The land was released for sale int o the booming economy of the gold rush market in 1852 and the allotments were eagerly sought. Residential development followed at a steady pace and was almost complete by 1890.
The most desirable areas were developed first, particularly around the parks and along the major boulevards of Wellington Parade and Victoria Parade. The Melbourne Building Act applied from the outset and as a consequence there were few timber buildings constructed. Stone was used in the 1850s and 1860s, to be replaced by face brick and render as the predominant building materials.
Some development from the 1850s and 1860s, constructed soon after subdivision, has survived, concentrated on the higher ground near Wellington Parade, Clarendon Street and Albert Street. These buildings generally reflect the high status of their site and their early date, through the provision of gardens. These early buildings have different architectural forms but are connected through their generally elegant proportions and use of stone.
The properties built along on the north of Wellington Parade in the 1850s looked south across a large expanse of Crown Land enveloping La Trobe’s own parcel of 125 acres. This was largely taken up by the Richmond Police Paddock, also known as Barkly Park, and later named Yarra Park, although a portion on the north bank of the river opposite the Botanic Gardens had also been used for accommodation of animals associated with the Acclimatisation Society.
The development of East Melbourne proceeded over five decades in the nineteenth century and into the early twentieth century. High quality initial building resulted in few redeveloped sites. Buildings from different decades are interspersed across the precinct, resulting in diversity in scale and materials within the orderly subdivision pattern. Generally constant built features include the incorporation of front gardens, front verandahs sometimes but not always used and strong definition of the property boundary with a fence building or verandah. On the higher ground, most buildings are of two storeys with a few, rare three storey buildings. On the lower ground there is a mixture of single and two-storey development, again with a rare taller building. Some buildings have a row form and abut the side boundaries of allotments; others are freestanding and sit in a garden setting. Contributory buildings usually have the higher portion at the front of the allotment, a slightly lower rear wing behind and a reasonable rear yard that is relatively large for inner urban areas. Sometimes the rear yards included gardens in the nineteenth century. Most properties have access to a rear lane, often of sufficient size to permit stables. Churches, schools and public buildings are the landmark structures in an otherwise low scale built form. The parks, with their formal tree layouts, simple paths and grass surfaces strongly reinforce the elegant order of the precinct.
74 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 159 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
Parks are a key feature of East Melbourne. Town Clerk Fitzgibbon provided a list of parks and lands intended for ornamental purposes in Melbourne in 1856.
Royal Park, Princes Park, South Park, Batman’s Hill, Carlton gardens, Fitzroy Square, Flinders Street Lagoons, Richmond Police Paddock, Studley Park, Lincoln Square, Argyle Square, Victoria Parade, Wellington Parade.
Four of these are in East Melbourne – Fitzroy Square (Gardens), Richmond Police Paddock (Yarra Park), Wellington Parade and Victoria Parade. The latter are the major boulevards planned as the easterly entrances to the city. Both alignments are included on Hoddle’s 1837 Plan for Melbourne and were subsequently developed with a large central park space and a road on each side. The central park in Wellington Parade appears to be developed first. The Cox Plan of Melbourne of 1860s shows plantations in Wellington Parade and centre plantations at the western end of Victoria Parade. This line cut through the Wellington Parade park and affected land on the southeast corner of the East Melbourne grid.
After some initially meagre efforts by the Council, the Fitzroy Gardens were developed by the Colonial Government, in a formal avenue design, featuring a rockery along the creek bed. It would provide an impressive setting for the parliamentary precinct and government offices. The basic plan was laid out by 1862 and much of the planting undertaken, probably to the design of Clement Hodgkinson. Improvements continued over the next three decades and major thinning was undertaken in the 1880s and 1890s. Many of the Eucalyptus species from the 1860s plantings were removed at this time. Guilfoyle instituted a more open form with decorative floral emphasis in the 1890s. The gardens were mature at their transfer to the City of Melbourne in 1917.
Darling Square is a simple cross planting of trees on a grass surface, typical of the park plantings from the 1860s. Powlett Reserve incorporated sporting facilities, which limited its plantings. It includes more exotic plantings such as palms in a character that reflects the turn of the twentieth century.
East Melbourne was substantially developed by 1890, and fully developed by the beginning of the First World War – fully residential with residential service buildings, except for the brewery in Victoria Parade and the Institutions. As for other inner city residential areas, a preference for the garden suburbs in Hawthorn, Camberwell, Brighton and the like, now served by the excellent metropolitan railway, saw the residential areas of East Melbourne fall from favour in the early twentieth century, though not to the same extent as Carlton. In the 1920s and 1930s boarding houses took over some of the larger homes and some sites were redeveloped for quite good quality flats. There was little change to the building form of houses. In the post World War 2 boom, many large blocks along Albert Street and Victoria Parade, close to the commercial hub of the city, were redeveloped for commercial use, in some cases by government. Encroachments east of the Fitzroy gardens began with the Mercy Hospital but were halted by the introduction of Urban Conservation Controls in 1983. Returning to favour as a high status residential location in the late 1960s, there has been a steady refurbishment of building stock. Many buildings have high individual significance and the quantity of intact building fabric is very high. For East Melbourne the close relationship with the Fitzroy Gardens, the small parks, and the boulevards has remained. Civic works contribute to the precinct.
East Melbourne was planned as a complete suburb in the 1840s. No other place in Melbourne provides a better example of La Trobe’s intentions for a city ringed by parks and punctuated by impressive boulevards; and residential precincts with high urban amenity. East Melbourne is the most intact residential area in the City of Melbourne area from the 1850s.
Substantial portions of the contributory fabric of the place survive to enable cultural significance to be interpreted.
Yarra Park was reserved and vested in the City in 1864, but further encroachments to La Trobe’s ring of parklands occurred. To the east at the corner of Hoddle Street and Wellington Parade South, a portion of land similar in size to La Trobe’s 125 acres, was subdivided out of the Police Paddock for housing in 1881. Development is consistent here and characterised by row houses, usually of two storeys, generally including a verandahs, often in the standard two storey cast iron format, with rendered masonry buildings more common although face brick is also used. Parapets often with embellishments and a concealed roof and exposed pitched roofs are both used. Front gardens are common. The row form is dominant with abutment to the side boundaries of allotments and a strong definition of the property boundary. Contributory buildings usually have the higher portion at the front of the allotment, a slightly lower rear wing behind and usually a rear yard with access to a lane, wide enough for stables.
The major encroachment into Yarra Park are the private and later public railways. In 1858, the Melbourne and Suburban railway Company was granted a large portion of intended parklands at the Richmond Police Paddock and the Flinders Street Lagoons, for the construction of a terminal Station and track to the southeast. Sporting facilities had already begun their development, with 10 acres set aside for the Melbourne Cricket
75 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 160 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
Ground in 1853. The track cut the park in half, its elevated form physically and visually separating the two sections. Sporting facilities developed on both sides and were the focus for the Melbourne Olympic Games in 1956. The railway again encroached in 1901 with the construction of the direct line from Princes Bridge to Clifton Hill, bypassing a large loop for the Whittlesea and Heidelberg (now Epping and Hurstbridge) lines. This line cut through the Wellington Parade park and affected land on the southeast corner of the East Melbourne grid. The rail yards grew relentlessly wider and Flinders Street Lagoons were engulfed. In 190*, the course of the river was substantially changed, by removing the meander opposite the Botanic Gardens. A large chunk of Yarra Park was cut off and became part of the river and the lagoon here became part of the Botanic gardens lake. The South Eastern freeway intruded into the park in the early 1970s and a final swathe was cut from Yarra Park and Jolimont when Hoddle Street was widened in the early 1980s.
Yarra Park today is characterised by mature trees in a grassed landscape. It is an intensively managed park although it included some tree avenues of significance and some pre 1835 indigenous trees. Sporting facilities are set in this landscape and are concentrated south of the railway line.
For Jolimont, the close relationship with Yarra Park and the Wellington Parade Boulevard remains. Although subject to encroachments, substantial portions of the contributory fabric and spaces of Yarra Park and Jolimont survive to enable cultural significance to be interpreted.
Kensington and the Flour Mills Within a decade or so of the European settlement of Melbourne, the western fringe of the settlement had been turned from a picturesque scene of wooded hills, meadows, marshes and ponds to a polluted wasteland. The Moonee Moonee Chain of Ponds and Lake Lonsdale, were originally a series of lagoons fed by floodwaters and described in Fawkner’s Journal as “a beauty spot like an Englishman’s park”. The effluent from Melbourne streets and drains, and the encroachment of slaughterhouses, boiling down works, brickyards, tanneries and rubbish dumps soon made it a wasteland not fit for proper habitation. However, it was also the most convenient place for the establishment of Melbourne’s Port and Railways in the mid 1850s. The Geelong line skirting the north edge of Batman’s Swamp, and the Murray River line followed the west bank of Moonee Ponds Creek. As the port spread downstream, it was linked to the railways. By the 1880s Coode Canal and the Victoria Dock were constructed, consolidating the industrial focus of the west.
When wheat and wool production grew from domestic to international export industries, the logical place for the mills and stores was on sidings near the railways and port. Melbourne’s initial milling district was in the south west quarter of the city, close to the Melbourne Pool. Much of the industrial development around Flemington Banks was made possible by the draining of the chain of ponds and Batman’s Swamp in the 1870s and the construction of the railway canal in the 1880s.
In the 1880s several new mills were built on the trunk railways including James Gillespie’s Kensington Roller Flour Mill of 1886-7 (the largest mill in the colony - 25 sacks per hour). This fully modern roller mill was designed by Twentyman and Askew, who also designed Gillespie’s Kensington House around the same time. Kimpton’s Eclipse Hungarian Roller Flour mills of 1887 was also design of Twentyman & Askew, and located 100 metres from Gillespie’s. Thomas Brunton’s Australian Flour Mills were erected in North Melbourne as part of that firm’s expansion out of the city in 1893-4. It was fitted with the latest Hungarian Gantz plant, but upgraded with a Simon plant in 1913. This long-standing mill was taken over by N.B Love of the Weston Food group in 1950s.
Brokhoff biscuits located further south, was also built around 1890 with the intervening space filled with various stores and warehouses serving to milling and baking trade. James Minifie & Co (former head miller at Dight’s Falls Mill and Kempton’s) built his own Victoria Roller Flour Mill in 1906-7 in South Kensington. The innovative concrete silos designed by Edward Giles Stone were built beside the mill in 1910-11. This mill closed in 1969 and produced ‘O-So-Lite’ packaged flour and cake mixes.
Kimpton’s original mill was burnt out and rebuilt in 1904 and became known as the Kimpton No. 1 Mill. It closed in 1971. The Gillespie mill was bought by Kimpton in 1904 following the liquidation of Gillespie’s Victorian interests, becoming Kimpton No. 2 Mill. It was refitted in 1913, closed in 1976 and demolished in 1982. Sophisticated brick silos and blending bins were added to the complex in 1910, and new concrete silos in 1927 and 1939. A silo fire and explosion in 1967 caused the injuries to five men, one of whom later died from the burns.
The Kimpton No. 3 mill was built in 1927 on the corner of Elizabeth and Arden St. (now converted to offices). Stables in the front were replaced with a laboratory in 1935, which came to play an important role in the development of cereal chemistry in Australia. A stock feed plant for the ‘Barastock’ range was added 1938, south of Arden St. A merger of three prominent milling firms created Kimpton Minifie McLennan Pty Ltd in the 1960s, which was bought out by Allied Mills in 1981, then Goodman Fielder. As a result, a new mill was erected north of the silos in the 1990s.
76 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 161 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
These three – Kimpton, Gillespie and Brunton, were credited with the introduction of roller milling in Victoria, a move which led to the development of the export flour trade as one of the country’s major overseas earners.
The role of the wool stores in the district was also considerable from the 1890s. Goldsborough, Younghusband, New Zealand Loan & Mercantile, Naughton’s and the Victorian Producers Cooperative established stores along the rail sidings and beside Moonee Ponds Creek.
The multi-storey brick mills and their associated stores, silos, offices and maintenance buildings, are located along the main railways and while separated by tracks and the Moonee Ponds Creek (and now City Link) are historically and economically linked. They have a distinct building form, which creates a significant urban industrial streetscape.
Associated with the flour mills are large brick wool stores, which co-located to take advantage of the shared rail sidings; and nearby is workers’ housing in South Kensington and North and West Melbourne which provided the labour force to keep the mills and warehouses functioning. A pedestrian railway overpass connects the residential precinct with the industrial zone.
The West Melbourne and Kensington Milling Precincts are the only relatively intact and operational industrial areas in the City of Melbourne
South Kensington is the area west of the Moonee Ponds Creek and south of Macaulay and Epsom Roads. It was vacant land, even when the railway was put through. However, the booming 1880s saw major development in the region, including industry and accompanying housing with a strip of shops to service the community. South Kensington was subdivided in the mid 1880s and by 1890, was a thriving suburb. Its streets are oriented to meet the alignment of Epsom Road at 90 degrees. In the southern block, a distinctive character arises from the resulting oblique intersections with Macaulay Road. After a lull in development in the 1890s, there was a spurt of development in the early twentieth century.
The region is characterised by more open space in private land than the earlier suburbs in the City of Melbourne. Front gardens and rear open space are a common feature. Lanes are an important feature of the suburb, wide enough to enable construction of rear access and stables. Buildings are predominantly single storey, with some of two-stories, usually on the more desirable sites. Many buildings are constructed in timber and these tend to be free standing or setback at least on one side. Roof surfaces are generally a prominent feature and verandahs are a common element. Buildings are usually tallest at the front, with a lower rear wing where this exists. Often the timber buildings are narrow and small. Despite relatively standard inner urban allotment sizes, the small houses result in lower site coverage and more prominent rear open space.
Masonry is more common south of Kensington Road. Whilst some buildings are row houses, constructed to the side property boundary, many also include side setbacks. Some properties are constructed over double blocks. This is notable on the rise in Wolseley Street, where the better quality housing is located. Parapeted facades and concealed pitched roof surfaces also occur here. Stables are associated with some properties.
The shopping strip is generally two storey and typical of late nineteenth and early twentieth century commercial precincts.
There are few buildings that are individually significant in Kensington. Most contributory structures are typical buildings for their date and style. Accordingly, the vast majority are graded “C” and “D”. Constructed over a relatively short period, and with few intrusions, together they illustrate a nineteenth century living place for generally industrial workers and their families. The cultural heritage significance is greater than the sum of the sometimes humble individual parts.
North and West Melbourne When Hoddle positioned the 1837 Melbourne Town Reserve on the north of the river, he was accommodating a skewed city grid, already generally positioned to give maximum access to the river frontage by surveyor Russell. Hoddle was bound by the Darling Rules to make a 3 mile by 1 mile Town Reserve, in which only small allotments were released for shops, houses etc, leaving space for town expansion. Batman’s Hill was an expedient position from which to mark the Town Reserve. Following magnetic north one mile from here, just caught the skewed grid within the Town Reserve. With Hoddle’s delineation two miles east and one mile west, the grid was centrally placed in the Town Reserve, an equal quantity of land was left for expansion to the east and west. Hoddle’s Plan 1842 notes “undulating forest land” north west of the grid. North and West Melbourne were half in and half out of the Town Reserve.
In 1837 at the time of the first land sales, the population of Melbourne was around 800. In 1839 when La Trobe arrived it was 3,511, but by the end of 1841 it was 20,416. Expansion of Town allotments was needed to accommodate the growing community. The grid could not be readily extended to the east where Collingwood and Fitzroy had been sold for “cultivation allotments” in 1837, outside the Town Reserve. Hoddle had surveyed
77 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 162 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne. the land to the south in South Yarra in 1839 but development was severely restricted here by the lack of a suitable bridge crossing and never proceeded. Extension of the grid to the west was impractical due to the swampy land, leaving only the north and the northwest as reasonably large areas suitable for development within the Town Reserve.
Inevitably, North and West Melbourne would become extensions to the central city function – a consistent influence on development of these regions to the present day.
North and West Melbourne is a town planning hub with four inputs: · The skewed city grid alignment extended northwest to Dudley and Therry Streets. · The magnetic north alignment of the streets beyond the east west alignment of the Town reserve at Victoria Street. · The radial alignment at the boundary of the western swamp around Spencer, Adderley, Hawke and Dudley streets · The north western boulevard entry to the city - Flemington Road - reflecting a preferred travel direction to the hinterland between the crossing to Moonee Ponds Creek and the city.
Wide road reservations characterise all sub precincts. With few open spaces and a closely developed footprint, the open streets make a substantial contribution to the urban form. The intersection of the four different subdivision orientations, combined with the sometimes dramatic changes in level, create the formal but irregular public spaces which give North and West Melbourne their distinctive character.
Flemington Road roughly follows an early track to Geelong through North Melbourne, with a crossing at the “ford on the Salt River” at around the position of Arden Street. Approval for the clearance to a width of ninety nine feet in 1851 established the enduring form of the boulevard and formed the northerly limit of the region. Beyond, a large area of crown land had been set aside as a major component of the northern parklands for the city. Initially, Royal Park was intended as a park for the new suburb of North Melbourne, rapidly growing in response to the gold rush. The government’s intentions for North Melbourne are clear in the c1855 plan for the northern portions along Flemington Road. Here, either surveyor Hodgkinson or Clarke designed a suburb which addressed Royal Park and created elaborate London-square style circuses and squares. This would be a high status residential area, similar to East Melbourne. Expediency and perhaps the proximate industry to the west and south saw all but the Canning Street Square lost in a bid to recoup more revenue.
Notwithstanding, North Melbourne began as a primarily residential location, servicing the urgent need for accommodation during the gold rush. By 1890, it had become the most densely populated region in the city. North of Victoria Street, the 1852 Hoddle subdivision (aligned with the State grid on magnetic north) forms the core of North Melbourne. It has a street pattern similar to and contemporary with the subdivision south of Grattan Street in Carlton. Queensberry Street draws these two subdivisions together. West of Peel Street, the development was substantially residential. The subdivision and release of “Hotham Hill” north of Canning Street, in the 1860s and 1870s had little industry. Responding to the more favoured location on the hill, close to Royal Park and further from the noxious West Melbourne swamp, this area developed as very respectable housing on reasonable sized allotments.
Amongst the residential areas, reserves for churches were provided for the Presbyterian, Church of England, Wesleyan and Roman Catholic faiths as well as reserves for a market, Police, Court House, Town Hall and Mechanics Institute. Many of the streets were 30 metres wide although small allotments were provided for very small row housing on narrower streets, concentrated around Lothian, Baillie and Provost Streets.
The first land sales in what was then the Bourke Ward of the Melbourne Town Corporation were held by Tennant and Co in September 1852. The Melbourne Building Act, passed in 1849 and proclaimed in 1850, applied within the 1837 Town Reserve. The consistent and more substantial housing in the blocks between Peel Street and King Street reflects this. Relatively early building survives here, including many examples from the 1860s. In contrast the Building Act did not initially apply in North Melbourne, outside the 1837 Town Reserve north of Victoria Street. In part this situation responded to an urgent need to accommodate the rapid rise in population during the gold rush. Cheaper timber houses were erected here initially, particularly in the 1850s. Few of these survive, many being redeveloped in the nineteenth century for housing or later for small industry. For more substantial buildings, stone was often used in the 1850s. Examples survive within the Town Reserve in West Melbourne and at a small number of sites in North Melbourne.
A fine shopping precinct developed around Errol and Victoria Streets near the new Town Hall (1875), extending a little into Queensberry Street. This area had not redeveloped and missed the clearance of street verandahs to make Melbourne a” modern city” for the 1956 Olympic Games. It is a shopping precinct of very high integrity and outstanding heritage significance, characterised by: masonry construction with face brick or render finishes; two storey rows of shop/residences, often of tall proportions; prominent parapets; occupation of the front and side boundaries; often intact timber shopfront windows; and often street verandahs. Buildings are usually tallest at the front, with a lower rear wing, small but important rear light courts and access to a rear lane.
78 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 163 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
By the time the Melbourne Building Act was extended to the whole of the municipality, the more common construction for all building types was face brick or render.
The North Melbourne Benevolent Asylum was a landmark building dominating the region through its open landscape form and the immensity of the impressive structure, located on axis with Victoria Street. This was demolished in 1911, the alignment of Victoria Street reinstated and the whole block redeveloped primarily for housing in a consistent, generally single storey scale, using typical 1920s materials and forms. It is unusual for the adaptation of architectural forms associated with free standing houses in the then preferred garden suburbs, to a tightly settled, inner urban situation.
By the end of the nineteenth century. The central core of North Melbourne and Hotham Hill was firmly established as housing. Broadly speaking, the more desirable locations were in the north and centre. Industry related to transport, agricultural implement works, food production and distribution, formed a fringing crescent around the core to the east, south and west. The amount of overlap between residential and industrial areas increased in the twentieth century, particularly in West Melbourne and in the western sector of the 1852 central core. Although there are some buildings of individual significance, most contributory structures in North and West Melbourne are typical buildings for their date and style. Accordingly, the vast majority are graded “C” and “D”. Grouped together, they illustrate a diverse nineteenth century living and working place, with its focus on servicing the centre of Melbourne. The significance is greater than the sum of the sometimes humble individual parts.
The residential core within Hotham Hill is characterised by; wider allotments; usually a front garden setback, defined with a fence; row housing occupying the side boundaries; a mixture of timber (rare) and masonry construction with face brick or render finishes; single or two storey forms, often juxtaposed; both prominent pitched roof forms and roof areas concealed by parapets; occupation of the front and side boundaries; verandahs as a common element; and reasonable integrity. Buildings are usually tallest at the front, with a lower rear wing, rear gardens and access to a rear lane often wide enough for provision of stables.
The residential core outside Hotham Hill is characterised by; few front garden setbacks; row housing occupying the side boundaries, masonry construction with face brick or render finishes; single or two storey forms, the latter more common; both prominent pitched roof forms and roof areas concealed by parapets; occupation of the front and side boundaries; verandahs as a common element; and reasonable integrity. Buildings are usually tallest at the front, with a lower rear wing, small but important light court, small rear yard and access to a small rear lane unlikely to be sufficiently wide for stables access. Corner hotels, often of early date, are prominent in the precinct.
Survival of early buildings is greater in West Melbourne in the blocks between Peel and King Street.
By the end of the Second World War, with the exception of Hotham Hill, North and West Melbourne had become a mixture of residential and industrial uses. The houses were now more likely used by people working in the closely located industry. Expanding industry and the lack of an adequate sewerage until the end of the nineteenth century saw North Melbourne fall from favour as a desirable residential address, probably earlier than in places like Carlton and Fitzroy. An appreciation for the location returned in the 1970s and has recently consolidated with industry leaving and a return to the more dense residential use that existed before 1890.
The fringing industrial zone to the south and west. In the 1840s and 1850s, the central city grid was extended to meet the Flagstaff hill and the Cemetery (in place by 1842 and now Victoria Market). At the boundary with the western swamp, the streets took a radial turn. This area became West Melbourne. Mixed uses from the western end of the city extended into this area including small scale manufacturing encouraged by proximity to the port at the western end of the city, military uses and a substantial quantity of housing. The better quality housing developed around Flagstaff gardens and survives in Dudley Street and Capel Street (Sub-precinct 1). Industries like timber-milling located to the west, a short trip to the port down King or Spencer Streets.
Early development north of the city grid centred on the intersection of Royal Parade and Flemington Road at the Hay, Corn and Horse Market in the area between Grattan and Story Street in Parkville. To the south was the General Market at the site of the current Dental Hospital. These markets played an important role in the early development of Melbourne and influenced the associated activities that developed in the eastern sector of North Melbourne, related to transport, provisioning and the manufacture and supply of farming implements. Peel Street is a major thoroughfare, providing the most direct connection of the markets with the port. La Trobe granted land at Newmarket in 1851 for the cattle market consolidating the agricultural /food distribution connection for North Melbourne. The Victoria Market, developed at the General Cemetery site in Victoria Street after 1854, enhanced this further. Flour mills and the Metropolitan Meat Market consolidated the food-related activities.
79 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 164 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
East of Peel Street, the development included more non-residential uses connected with transport and the markets. Similar development occurred in the 1855 subdivision up to Flemington Road opposite the Parkville markets. West of Dryburgh Street and at its southern end, the land sloped away toward the swamp. The construction of the main country railways to Geelong and Bendigo in the 1850s saw the lines skirt the north and east edge of the swamps and focus railway facilities near North and West Melbourne. Industries strongly dependent on transport were encouraged, including the timber trade and other dry bulk goods such as coal and cement. Flour milling developed around Laurens Street and became a major industry with a direct rail connection.
The fringes of North and West Melbourne grew as a mixed area of residential, commercial and industrial uses from the outset, uses which have often been in tension. Small, sometimes sub-standard workers’ housing was built among the factories that provided employment. Manufacturers connected to the markets expanded in the late nineteenth century, often absorbing the adjacent housing. With the local impact of Sands & McDougall at the north end of Spencer Street, a printing, publishing and paper goods district was established in West Melbourne by the end of the nineteenth century. The city’s west end manufacturing progressively expanded north, into the curving blocks between Adderley and King Street.
The markets continued to exert an influence on the suburb. Both the agricultural implement makers and horse and carriage businesses were located here for the proximity of the horse and hay markets as well as the other livestock sales at the pig market and Newmarket. Meat sales initially at Victoria Market and then the Metropolitan Meat Market cemented the agricultural links. All these goods had to be carted encouraged a strong transport industry, based on horses into the twentieth century, then continuing through motor transport, particularly in evidence west of Elizabeth Street.
The fringing industrial area is characterised by diverse mixture of residential and industrial sites. Variation in the scale of adjoining sites is a feature of the precinct, with a generally high proportion of land coverage. It includes industrial buildings with a form specific to their function, generally of one tall storey or two storeys, occupying the whole of the often relatively small sites –around the equivalent of 3 to 10 residential sites. There are no contributory industrial buildings over four storeys in height. A few contributory industrial buildings are taller. Interspersed are residential buildings with characteristics similar to houses in the central area.
Parkville Wedge records the nature of the land N.10W, about 3 miles from the Falls (at the end of Queen Street) in his notebook on September 3rd, 1835. He passed over ground “of excellent quality and fine grass” where “ the gum and other trees” were “a large size”, but that few were useful for building purposes. This is a description of Royal Park before the 1835 settlement. By January 1844, Melbourne was a developing town. The Corporation of Melbourne petitioned the Lt. Gov. Charles La Trobe to grant land of around 500 acres in each of two parcels for parks; one in the vicinity of North Melbourne and the other in the vicinity of South Melbourne. “North Melbourne” included all the lands north of Victoria Street at this time. Eventually after input from the government in N.S.W. and the Council, an area of 2560 acres north of the city was put aside for recreation and the public advantage in September 1850, the precise positions were not determined. La Trobe asked the Council for a definite area to be laid out and on November 4th 1850 and promised that he would facilitate the final determination of the approaches to the city form the north and the north-west. Flemington Road roughly follows an early track to Geelong through North Melbourne, with a crossing at the “ford on the Salt River” at around the position of Arden Street. Approval for the clearance to a width of ninety nine feet in 1851 established the enduring form of the boulevard and formed the southerly limit of Parkville.
The position for Royal Parade (previously Sydney Road) is not determined until the late 1840s or early 1850s. It traverses the parks and connects the centre of the grid via Elizabeth Street, to the one-mile survey grid beyond the 1840 boundary of the “North Melbourne Parish” at Sydney Road (now the suburb of Brunswick). La Trobe approved the reservation for Princes Park in 1854. Parkville is defined and framed by these impressive boulevards and by Royal Park and Princes Park.
Fencing to the area that became Royal Park occurred from 1854 to 1857 and a drive was formed inside the boundaries. At this time, there are reports of a well-grassed landscape with thick shrub in parts. Bourke and Wills were encamped here with their camels, and departed from the Park in 1860, close to the drive to the zoo (Marconi Crescent) and Macarthur Road. In 1862, following appeals form the Acclimatisation Society the whole of the park excluding the Model Farm was reserved for zoological purposes – some 550 acres - but not as a permanent reservation. The Town Clerk objected on the 24th April 1862 in a letter, which makes the intentions of La Trobe and the Council for the parks in the new City of Melbourne clear.
In lodging this protest I am to state that the sole object of the City Council is to protect the sanitary interests of the citizens and the public. The Council has exerted itself to the utmost to obtain and secure the reservation of ample spaces in and adjacent the City, for the purposes of health and recreation, and the foresight and public spirit of the Local Government has induced it almost to exceed
80 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 165 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
the council’s demands: but the Council has deeply regretted that the wisdom and liberality of the Government have in some instances been rendered abortive by subsequent alienations of portions of the most beautiful reserves.
The whole of the park was not permanently reserved for zoological purposes. A central area of 50 acres 26 perches was fenced and animals were transferred to here with the remnants of Bourke and Wills sheds. Internal roads were formed and these were fenced off, leaving separate paddocks. Gradually the indigenous trees were removed to make way for playing fields and plantings of exotic trees began. However the government continued to use the park to solve problems elsewhere. A powder magazine was constructed near Flemington Road and this required a military presence. Later this was moved to the north of the park. At Federation, and again during each World War, the park was used as a large military camp and subsequently, temporary residential accommodation.
Royal Park has provided the setting for many government sponsored activities. It is a very large tract of land and was not developed in the English City-park style which occurred elsewhere in central Melbourne. The zoo is a central feature containing several structures of scientific and/or architectural significance. Lacking a park master plan until the 1980s, its topography and remnant indigenous vegetation provide the best reference to the natural landscape in the Melbourne Region. It is likely to be one of the best sites for the interpretation of Aboriginal heritage in the City of Melbourne.
Through traffic along Macarthur Drive and the tall buildings associated with the Royal Children’s Hospital are intrusive elements. Outstanding views to the distant central city, a sense of isolation, indigenous vegetation and the Melbourne Zoo are features of the park.
West Parkville sits at the base of the Royal Park hill. It meets Flemington Road at the crossing to the Moonee Ponds Creek. This was a stopping place on the way to the gold diggings in Ballarat. Some streets were laid out at an early date. Southgate Street, the south portion of Manningham Street and Church Street are marked on Kearney’s 1855 Map, with a reservation for a Church of England Church. But this land was not alienated until much later in 1868. The allotments were large.
This land was on the perimeter of the Town Reserve, much further from the centre than the land available in Carlton, North Melbourne and South Parkville. Development here was slow. The railway line put through in 1883-4 severed the two parts of the precinct and did not significantly contribute to development to the north.
The sub-precinct is characterised by nineteenth century housing, divers in it size, scale and type of construction. The built form is characterised by: row houses of single or two storeys; verandahs as a common feature; rendered masonry or face brick and some timber construction; exposed pitched roof form are more commonly a facade feature; small front gardens are common with a strong definition of the property boundary on all sides. Contributory buildings usually have the higher portion at the front of the allotment, a slightly lower rear wing behind and usually a medium sized rear yard.
In 1868, considerable controversy surrounded the proposed alienation of parkland at North Parkville for a narrow subdivision bounding Royal Parade. To ensure an open landscape outcome for the development, the Government required that only one villa residence could be built on each block and that this must be of stone or brick; or that where a terrace of house were to be constructed, the design must be for two levels and must be approved by the Board of Land and Works. All the large allotments had a view to either Royal Park or Princes Park A central lane (Mile Lane) serviced the rear. Most building activity occurred in the 1880s. There was pause during the 1890s depression and continuing construction in the new century...
Almost all the lots are large - generally 1.5 X 4 chains(30m X 80m) – and have a view to either Royal Park or Princes Park. The majority of the development was for substantial villas in a garden setting. The smaller allotments on the curve at the north and the south ends were developed as good quality row-houses.
The contributory elements in North Parkville are characterised by: villas set in landscaped grounds or row houses of two storeys; verandahs are a common feature; rendered masonry or face brick; parapets, often with embellishments and a concealed roof or an exposed pitched roof form may be a facade feature; the property boundary is defined on all boundaries. Contributory buildings usually have the higher portion at the front of the allotment, a slightly lower rear wing behind and a large rear garden, with access to a wide rear lane. Stables and substantial outbuildings on Mile Lane are a feature of the sub-precinct.
The large allotment sizes and the proximity to the University made redevelopment attractive in the 1960s. Many villas were removed at this time and in some cases much taller buildings were erected. Notwithstanding some of the intended mansion houses and terrace rows survive. The size of houses and the open landscape character on large allotments sets North Parkville apart from the slightly earlier South Parkville.
81 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 166 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
Early development in the Parkville region centred on the intersection of the boulevards at the Hay, Corn and Horse Market in the area between Grattan and Story Street. To the south was the General Market at the site of the current Dental Hospital. The Farmers Association had land to the north. A manure depot for nightsoil was located to the west, a pound was established between Story and Morrah Streets and to the west was a Corporation stone yard. After La Trobe initially resisted the removal of these market and municipal sites from the lands to be reserved for parks and recreation, specific use market reserves were eventually created in 1856. The markets played an important role in the early development of Melbourne and influenced the associated industries that developed in North Melbourne.
In the late 1860s the government sought to generate revenue by the sale of land. Two sites were found in Parkville. The removal of the Hay, Corn and Horse Market had left a small parcel of land which was subdivided into standard residential allotments in 1868. Several of the roads associated with the market were retained as part of the subdivision. This became South Parkville, occupying a neat triangle that extended to Park Street – appropriately named, as properties here would face Royal Park. Beyond to the north was a creek within the park reservation.
In 1875, the creek was contained in a drain and additional allotments formed on either side of a triangular park (Ievers Reserve), facing Park Drive and the new Gatehouse Street. Additional parkland was alienated to enable this, amidst some controversy.
In 1879 reserves for a school and a hospital between Morrah and Story Streets (the site of the previous pound) were replaced by further residential allotments. South Parkville was now fully subdivided. Development of row housing was steady up to the depression of the 1890s and continued on the vacant allotments in the early twentieth century. It was largely complete by the end of the First World War. Very little redevelopment of sites has occurred.
There are three distinct character areas in South Parkville, each directly related to the pattern of subdivision. All have high integrity. The 1868 area, north of Morrah Street and east of Park Street, developed soon after subdivision, with generally two storey houses on moderate-sized allotments, serviced by rear lanes and wide streets. The 1875 –1879 area west of Park street and centred on Ievers Reserve, developed primarily in the late 1870s and 1880s on generally larger allotments (except at the north end of Park Street; with Gatehouse Street properties facing the park . The majority of houses are two-storey, with some single storey, generally on the smaller sites. And the post 1879 area between Morrah and Story Streets, east of Park Street, developed in the 1880s on allotments generally a little smaller than those in the 1868 area. A mixture of large and small houses is found here, reflecting the relative desirability of the particular sites.
The built form is characterised by: a strong consistency in the type of construction; row houses of single or two storeys; verandahs as a common feature, often in the standard two storey cast iron format; rendered masonry or face brick and little stone; parapets, often with embellishments and a concealed roof or an exposed pitched roof form may be a facade feature; front gardens are common with a strong definition of the property boundary on all sides. Contributory buildings usually have the higher portion at the front of the allotment, a slightly lower rear wing behind and usually a medium sized rear yard with access to a rear lane, sometimes wide enough to enable construction of stables. Laneways, contributory outbuildings along them and generally open rear yards sometimes with gardens; make a strong contribution to the character of the area.
University High School is a tall landmark three-storey form; otherwise, churches, schools and public in an otherwise generally tall, two storey built form.
South Yarra Topography set the position of Melbourne on the north side of the river. The reservation of land for the Aborigines on the south side, prevented early subdivision and sale for private development. La Trobe’s arrival in 1839 and the implementation of a plan for a city ringed by parkland in the 1840s secured South Yarra as primarily open space.
Charles Grimes, surveyor general in Sydney, mounted an expedition to the Port Phillip region in 1803. He travelled up the river to the location of the Royal Botanic Gardens and reported evidence of flooding on the south of the river. Although Grimes’ reports on Port Phillip were favourable, no permanent European settlement ensued until 1835. Both Batman and Fawkner for the private Tasmanian expedition and Russell and Hoddle for the New South Wales colonial government selected land on the north of the river for the new settlement, avoiding the swampy land to the south and giving the greatest access to the river. Hoddle’s 1837 Melbourne Town Reserve of three miles by one mile was entirely on the north bank. The focus of development was firmly on the north bank, leaving no clear plan for the south. Brickmakers, farmers, pastoralists, quarrymen and timber-getters moved in temporarily.
82 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 167 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
The Yarra River, including Yarra Park and its extensive area of associated wetlands, contained important food resources, including eels, fish and game, and supported a higher Aboriginal population than in other parts of the region which would become Melbourne. The extensive swamps and billabongs around the major bend in the river at the Royal Botanic Gardens were a particularly important food source. Perhaps in part this explains the location of an Aboriginal Mission Reserve near here. Initially, 895 acres of land was set aside for this purpose, east of the position of Punt Road, as shown on Hoddle’s 1837 Plan. But in 1839 this land was subdivided into large, river frontage, “cultivation” allotments. The Mission reserve was transferred to the west side of Punt Road. The Aboriginal mission commenced in January 1837with the arrival of Langhorne, in South Yarra at the Mission house located outside the 1837 Reserve, near the river between Anderson and Walsh Street. By July 1839, it had also closed.
Surveyor Nutt prepared a plan for twenty one cultivation allotments south of the river, each around ten acres, in 1840. However, the government had grown wary of the rampant development arising from the haphazard redivision of “cultivation” allotments outside the 1837 Melbourne Town Reserve at Collingwood and Richmond. In April 1840 land outside the Town Reserve was made into the parishes of North Melbourne (up to Brunswick Street) and South Melbourne. Economic depression and the government’s resolve for more orderly development held back sales of land here.
In 1841, La Trobe began the process which lead to the majority of South Yarra being set aside as parkland, by setting aside a portion of Nutt’s subdivision for a future Government House. He chose the best land, high on the hill and looking towards the city. Although La Trobe had also set aside land for a Botanic Garden at Batman’s Hill in 1842, the public were more inclined to a reservation on the south, away from the noxious vapours emanating from the West Melbourne swamp. The site was moved and by 1846 a start on the colony’s first formal park had been made at the current Botanic Gardens site adding the Government House reserve.
By the end of the 1840s all of the land up to St. Kilda Road and Prince’s bridge was set aside for public purposes. In the following decades the Botanic Gardens grew in size to the north (with the realignment of the river) and the west and the land was gradually developed as landscaped park. The Domain had been a useful place for functions that could not be accommodated elsewhere, including a Wireless Station; stables for Burke and Wills camels; an alpaca enclosure connected with the Zoo; and an Immigrants home. It was also used as temporary accommodation for the 40th regiment of the British Army, who had come to Victoria to repel a predicted Russian attack in the 1850s and subsequently embroiled in Eureka. Victoria Barracks on the opposite side of St.Kilda Road was built as permanent accommodation commencing in 1854. By this time, a wide reservation had been made for the southern entrance to the city and plans for an impressive boulevard were underway. After Hoddle surveyed the river in 1841, the position of Princes Bridge was finally committed by construction in 1846, following investigation of the soil condition. For many decades it would be the only bridge crossing. It continues to be the city gateway.
The imposing form of Victoria Barracks facing St. Kilda Road is indicative of the government’s intentions for the public buildings in the city. Its defensive form at the rear was intended to act as a lookout and fort at the city edge, anticipating attack across the marshes of South and Port Melbourne.
In the 1870s Government House was commenced within its Reserve, with a stupendous house encircled by outstanding gardens. Guilfoyle took over the landscape development of The Domain, Government House reserves and the Botanic Gardens in 1873 and much of the existing planting in relates to his influence. The Domain did not take its current form until the end of the First World War, with the completion of the widening and straightening of the River upstream of Princes Bridge from 1898 to 1904, the creation of Alexandra Avenue; filling of the lagoons near Princes Bridge to create Alexandra Gardens; the creation of the Queen Victoria gardens in 1907; and the removal of the Immigrants Home in 1914. Various memorials, institutions and public facilities have been added to the region, the most important are the Melbourne Observatory, the National Herbarium, the Shrine of Remembrance after the First World War and the Sydney Myer Music Bowl in 1959. All survive, although the Observatory is no longer in use for its designed purpose.
The parklands south of the river include intensively managed gardens of scientific and aesthetic value; and broad spaces characterised by mature trees in grassed landscape. They provide a setting for monuments and institutions important to the cultural development of the community. Their form develops from 1846 and is largely complete by the First World War. In the context of imposed landscapes which themselves have outstanding cultural values, some remnants of pre European settlement vegetation remain including Eucalyptus camaldulensis and Bursaria spinosa.
The public lands of South Yarra have been a focus for recreation for the Melbourne community since 1846.
North of Toorak Road, South Yarra is a patchwork of reservations and small subdivisions, lacking the order of the suburbs developed by the government on the north of the Town Reserve in the 1850s. Its western boundary is defined by the major southern entry to the city, St Kilda Road; its southern boundary by Commercial Road. The extensive reservation of South Yarra for parklands and institutions north of Domain
83 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 168 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
Road, left only 13 of Nutt’s original 22 allotments, all north of Toorak Road. Nutt made provision for Toorak Road, Domain Road, Anderson Street, Close Street and Domain Street to these nine and ten acre allotments, sold in 1846 and 1849. Whilst some remained as “country” properties on substantial grounds for several decades, they were redeveloped in private schemes over the next eight decades for town housing. This is in contrast with the orderly subdivision into town allotments in the surveys prepared for sale in the 1850s in Carlton, North Melbourne and East Melbourne. As a consequence, the built up area of South Yarra is a series of unrelated subdivisions, loosely drawn together by the boundaries of the original Nutt allotments. Most subdivisions were in place by the end of the nineteenth century and are connected by nineteenth century development. The notable exception is Marne Street, where in the late 1920s and up to 1949, flamboyant development often in the form of flats. This provides an outstanding illustration of this twentieth century building type. St Leonard’s and Fairlie Courts is are mid twentieth century subdivisions.
In the early 1850s, Nutt’s eastern allotments had been subdivided along Punt road and the southern portion of Walsh Street was created with medium housing allotments for villas. Mona Place and Tivoli Place created off Punt Road. Park Street was created in the 1850s and row allotments formed for substantial homes on the west side with very small allotments for workers housing in St Martins Lane, and Little Park Street. By 1855 there was substantial housing development along Domain Road, Domain Street and Toorak Road up to Park Street, and along the new Millswyn Street. Hope Street was put through in the 1870s, Leopold Street, Airlie Street and the continuation of Walsh Street in the 1880s. Lanes incorporated as a feature of the subdivision west of Airlie Street, west of Leopold Street and west of Park Street. By the end of the century, South Yarra contained a diverse range of residential development from the smallest cottage, through row housing small and large, gentleman’s villas and a few substantial mansions set in gracious grounds. Their dates of construction ranged through all the decades from the 1840s and all the styles used through that time. (See section 4.3 south Yarra Conservation Study). Small service precincts developed around the 1854 Botanical Hotel in Domain road and later along St. Kilda Road.
In a precinct (except in Marne Street, St Leonards Close and Fairlie Court) notable for its diversity in style some common features stand out: · Inclusion of front gardens, sized to be commensurate with the allotment – bigger front gardens on large allotments and smaller front gardens on small allotments; · Inclusion of side gardens on larger allotments. · Definition of the property boundary with a fence, verandah or building. · Verandahs as a common element. · Generally a construction date before the First world War · Single storey or two-storey construction. · Generally brick construction, often rendered. Some stone buildings particularly form the 1850s and 1860s. · Taller elements at the front of allotments lower rear wings behind and a modest rear open space. · A mixture of prominent roof elements and concealment of roof surfaces by parapets.
In contrast the consistency within each of Marne Street, St Leonards Close and Fairlie Court is particularly high with the following common elements: · Strong landscape emphasis. · Inclusion of front, side and rear gardens, · Discrete on-site provision of carparking. · Subtle definition of the front property boundary with a small fence or landscaping · Diversity of forms. · Two storey construction generally. Three-storey construction is also common in Marne Street. · Generally brick construction, often rendered.
Outside Nutt’s survey, Melbourne Grammar received a substantial grant adjoining St. Kilda Road in 1855, on land previously reserved. The remaining land to the south was subdivided in town allotments and sold in 1864 and 1865 to form Bromby, Adams and Arnold Streets. .
South Yarra has always been a fashionable residential address. As a consequence there have been more phases of redevelopment than elsewhere in the City of Melbourne. The integrity of sites is accordingly lower than in suburbs of similar date.
Fawkner Park is part of the large area of land on the south of the river, set aside in the 1840s whilst the final position of parks and entrances to the city was determined. St. Kilda Road eventually was assigned a position similar to Royal Parade, traversing park on each side – Albert Park on the west, The Domain and Fawkner Park on the east. Within this broad landscape region, the government made provision for churches and institutions. Bordering Fawkner Park on the west side of Punt Road, a thin strip of land was set aside for this purpose. The Church of England, Methodists and Presbyterians developed land here. The Catholic and
84 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 169 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
Independent Churches did not develop and sold their allocation of land after 1865. A thin strip of nineteenth century housing survives here facing Punt Road and Pasley Street.
Between 1854 and 1870 benevolent and community institutions were allocated the remaining reserved lands south to the Municipal boundary at High Street, and all remain at these sites. The Masonic Charitable Institute (Freemasons Homes), the Alfred hospital, the Royal Victorian Institute for the Blind, the Victorian School for deaf Children, and Wesley Grammar School (College). The latter three created impressive structures in a substantial open landscape zone facing St. Kilda Road. In 1864, in a revenue raising exercise, the government sold off the western strip of Fawkner Park in large allotments for single homes. The houses that followed to the north repeated the pattern of large front gardens and impressive buildings created by Wesley, Deaf Society and Blind Institute.
This area is characterised by the open space of Fawkner Park incorporating sporting facilities into a landscape of mature trees in a grassed landscape and the institutions in a strong landscape setting; with small sectors of small-scale row housing from the nineteenth century along Punt Road. The high rise development along St. Kilda Road intrudes on the landscape setting.
Areas Within the Central City Zone
Bank Place The City block bounded by Collins, Queen, Little Collins and William Street was among the first blocks sold, in the Melbourne sales of 1837. Hoddle’s survey for a township grid, provided for 1 ½ chain main roads and ½ chain wide service lanes (the “little” streets) and individual blocks for sale of a little less than half an acre (0.2 hectares). Except on the corners, the allotments had access to the major street and the Lane. The Government released little other land in the Town Reserve until the late 1840s. The generously sized town allotments were quickly redivided for resale in private schemes. A few subdivisions created new through roads, connecting the major street and the lane, and provided opportunities for new frontages rather than secondary lane access. Bank Place, subdivided around 1850, is one if these.
Located on higher ground and close to the shipping dock on the Yarra, Collins Street West is within the focus for the early development of the town. Most of Melbourne’s buildings in 1838 were located in the blocks between King and Elizabeth streets and south of Bourke Street.6 By the 1850s the commercial and financial district had gravitated to this part of Collins Street, under the influence of the dock, the Western Market and Customs House.
Four banks were in Collins Street, near Bank Place in 1850, but Bank Place is believed to take its name from the Bank of Australasia on the Collins Street Corner. By this time other professional and business uses were also established for the area, in particular legal chambers at Temple Court, just west of Bank Place. This section of Little Collins Street had become known as Chancery Lane reflecting the use as professional offices. The row of terrace houses at nos. 425-433 Lt. Collins St. (built pre-1851 for owner Moses Benjamin), became known as “Chancery Lane Law Buildings” by mid-1850s. This group continued to retain rear yards, some with sheds and stables into the 1870s and 80s, but by the turn of the century had all become two storey, and were extended over the rear yards with occupants including solicitors.
A building was on the site of the Mitre Tavern (5 Bank Place) by 1839 relating to a Collins Street frontage. The first listing for the Mitre Tavern is not until 1867 when the first publican was Henry Thompson. By 1877 the Mitre Tavern was described as having 2 & 3 storeys & outbuildings. It was extended at the rear in 1888 and known as the Mitre Hotel in 1905. A two-storey cement rendered brick hotel on a bluestone base has existed since 1868 but has been altered a number of times, most significantly in the 1920s when it was given its current medieval revival appearance in the English domestic manner. It was a favourite meeting place of the T Square Club, an informal group of architects and artists, and continues as a popular venue for the financial and legal people in this part of the city, with the lunch and evening crowds continuing to spill out into the lane.
Several impressive buildings were constructed in Bank Place in the boom of the 1880s including the Imperial Insurance Company building (12 Bank Place) of 1884-85 (by architects were A. L. Smith and A. E. Johnson, and builders William Morton and John Peacock). The building features porticos topped by ball finials and urns with rusticated columns, an elaborate cornice and first floor window decoration. The fenced basement lightcourt is reminiscent of a London terrace and very rare in Melbourne.7 The Imperial Insurance Company sold the property to the National Mutual Life Company in 1903. Sir Rupert Clarke moved into the building in 1910 and purchased it in 1913.
6 Lewis Miles, Melbourne The City’s History and Development pp15-17 7 Johnson Joseph A centenary of the Melbourne Savage Club 1894-1994 and a history of the Yorick Club 1868 - 1966 Melbourne Savage Club Melbourne 1994
85 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 170 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
In 1923 the Melbourne Savage Club, established 1894 by a group of 18 professional musicians, amateur players and music lovers, purchased the property from Clarke. Previously they had leased rooms in the Block Arcade and the Victoria building in Queens Walk. Part of the Building was taken over for the Charter House, with a second entrance portico identical to that of the Savage Club. Artists Fred McCubbin, Tom Roberts and Arthur Streeton from the Heidelberg School were members of the Savage Club, as well as political figures Sir Robert Menzies and Joseph Lyons. The building was remodelled internally at several stages and includes significant interiors (staircase, ground floor social room with stage and grand fireplaces, dark timber detailing and furniture and fittings and the “punkahs” which ventilate the dining room on the second floor).
In the first decade of the twentieth century a minor boom hit the district with new buildings including Bank House, 18 Bank Place, as well as adjacent offices in Collins and Little Collins Streets. 11 Bank Place was originally a three-storey office building constructed in c.1903, an additional two floors being added in 1925-26. The initial design was by Nahum Barnett. It is an impressive example of Romanesque design and a vital element of the Bank Place precinct. 18 Bank Place is a six-storey office building constructed in 1906 to a design by Turnbridge and Turnbridge and complementary in its use, age and form to the character of Bank Place.
The London & Lancashire Building (400 Collins Street) built in 1865 and extended an additional three storeys in 1940 and the Bank of Australasia of 1875 (394-6 Collins Street) abut the north side of the Bank Place Building, although they are not visible An elegant example of mannerly street architecture, originally of three storeys, in the Italian Renaissance style. Temple Court (422 Collins Street) abuts the rear of buildings on the south side of Bank Place. It is a reinforced concrete office building constructed in 1924 to replace an earlier Temple Court (the original centre for barristers in 19th century Melbourne) and so continues the traditional function of the precinct. It was designed by architects Grainger Little Barlow and Hawkings and is built to the then maximum height limit of 132 feet (40 metres). It is a substantial and impressively detailed example of the classical revival in modern architecture in Melbourne in the 1920s.
Normanby Chambers (430 Little Collins Street) is a four-storey office building constructed in 1883 for Henry Box & Son or M H Davies and was largely occupied by solicitors. Located on the opposite side Little Collins Street and placed to look down Bank Place, it features fine detailing and closes off the vista to the north from Bank Place. An additional storey was added c.1910-19, and further alterations/additions 1936.
The southwest corner of Bank Place and Little Collins Street is occupied by Stalbridge Chambers (435 Little Collins Street). Built in 1890-01, Stalbridge Chambers is externally perhaps the best of the many richly decorated, similarly styled Boom-era designs from the architects, Twentyman & Askew. As the product of an owner builder (R C Brown) the building epitomizes the speculative nature of the time and, with its combination of hotel, shops and offices, offers an early example of multi-use development. Stalbridge Chambers also has an important role at the entry point to the significant Bank Place precinct and by contrast in scale and ornament, stands out in the surrounding streetscape.
By the 1920s, the physical character and function of the Bank Place precinct had been firmly established.
The Mitre Tavern - 5 Bank Pl., Savage Club - 12 Bank Pl., Bank House - 11 Bank Pl., Charter House - 4 Bank Pl., 18 Bank Place, Stalbridge Chambers 435 Little Collins St, Normanby Chambers 430 Little Collins St., Temple Court - 422 Collins St. and London and Lancas hire Building - 400 Collins St..
Bourke Hill The top end of Bourke Street was confirmed as a terminal view from the city grid once the site for Parliament House had been chosen by Gov. La Trobe in 1851. La Trobe’s direct involvement in the planning of Melbourne in the 1840s and 1850s was pivotal to the resulting urban form of the metropolis. Coincident with La Trobe’s decision for the placement of the civic precinct for the State, was the commencement of colonial self government for Victoria and a period of considerable wealth arising from the gold rush boom. Victoria now had a place for a civic precinct, independence and sufficient money to construct an impressive landmark for the new settlement.
The character of Bourke Street was set soon after the first land sales in the city grid in 1837. Demand for land, and the very large size of lots, led almost immediately to unplanned private re-division. Frontages were reduced and lanes inserted between the main and little streets to provide addition small allotment frontages. As a result, blocks as narrow as 12 feet (3.6metres) wide, proliferated both on the lanes and in the major streets in residential quarters, like Bourke Street East
Prior to the 1850s, the eastern end of the grid was the preferred residential location in the grid. Collins Street, with its views to the south was the premier location. To the north, further from the source of water at the river, land was less desirable for housing and fringe industrial activities concentrated here. Bourke Street Hill,
86 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 171 of 217Document Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne. between the salubrious Collins Street and the more industrial north, became a respectable residential district with small-scale buildings.
By the 1850s the east end of Bourke and Collins Streets had become places for lively public gatherings, political debate and demonstrations as well as leisure activities. The gas lit Eastern Market was a popular venue which drew crowds, and was the catalyst for a range of entertainment. The 1872 Eastern Arcade, on the site of the short-lived Haymarket Theatre, (west of the Eastern Market outside the precinct) was also a draw- card. The mingling of parliamentarians and government staffers in the nearby hotels and entertainment venues spilled out onto the streets.
Several theatres located close to the draw card of the Eastern Market (at the Southern Cross site). Surviving are the former Palace Theatre at no 20-30, built in 1916 (replacing an earlier theatre) Her Majesty’s, outside the precinct around the corner in Exhibition Street and the Princess Theatre in Spring Street. Later cultural competition came from cinemas west of Exhibition Street.
Crossley Lane takes its name from Ada Crossley (1874-1929), the Australian contralto who was one of the finest oratorio & recital singers of her time. It was renamed along with Liverpool Lane, perhaps in a vain attempt to remove the doubtful reputation of the area, from their original Romeo Lane and Juliet Terrace, respectively. In the 1860s, the new suburban areas of Carlton and North Melbourne became available. The more tightly developed city grid became a less desirable residential address. To the north was a region known for its prostitutes, criminals and cheap lodgings. The Shakespeare Hotel (from the late 1860s), just around the corner Exhibition Street, illustrates this phase, its painted advertising for “Rooms at 3p” still visible on a side wall.
The 1856 single storey Imperial Hotel and shops at 2-18 Bourke Street were extended in the 1860s and despite alterations, provide an important contemporary 19th century cont ext to Parliament House. At the rear along Turnbull Alley they retain a jigsaw of brick and bluestone building fragments reflecting original and early outbuildings, including toilets with night soil access doors to the lane.
A number of two and three storey buildings of the shop-and-residence type survive from the Victorian period to provide the principal streetscape character. The earlier Crossley buildings (1848-53) reinforce their scale. The distinguished landscape painter, Eugene von Guerard, lived in number 56 in 1857 and 1858). Later contributory buildings include: three two-storey shops at no 68-70 as part of an original terrace of eight constructed in 1860; the Leonard Terry bank on the corner of Exhibition Street; a pair of two-storey shops at no. 72-74 constructed in 1860 as part of a terrace of eight but subsequently remodelled in its external decoration; no.86 Bourke Street, a three-storey classical revival shop building constructed in c.1925 in conservative modern design which respects the low-scale building elements of Bourke Hill; shop row at no. 19- 21, built in c.1901; a two-storey brick shop at 33-35 of 1872 with rendered facade in neo-classical detail and original timber mullioned shop windows; possibly an extension of earlier shop and house on the site from 1840's and used as a Post Office from 1899 to1969; the row of two-storey shops at no.39-43, built in c.1905; a small shop group at no. 51 –53 from the 1880s and at nos. 75 – 77 a three storey shop row also from the 1880s.
One of the most distinctive twentieth century developments is the range of restaurants which can be traced back to mid century origins as part of the beginnings of a European style cafe culture in Melbourne. They illustrate the influence of non Anglo-Saxon migrants on Melbourne’s eating and social patterns.
Florentino's at No. 78-80 is the last intact example of the numerous wine cafes and bohemian haunts which dotted this end of the city including The Society, Molina's, Mario's and The Latin. It includes Napier Waller- inspired murals to the interior. It also reflects the tastes and early history of Samuel Wynn, one of Australia's more renowned wine makers and the nature of early wine selling in Melbourne. As the Society Restaurant, 23 Bourke Street was one of the earliest of Melbourne's restaurants with a cosmopolitan flavour - in this case essentially Italian. The building was erected for G W Hall, in 1900-01, to the design of William Salway, in a free Romanesque revival style, contributing to similarly inspired contemporary structures in the streetscape.
Pelegrini’s, at 66 Bourke Street, while by no means the oldest Italian cafe in Melbourne, was nevertheless established in an area already famous for its Italian cafes and restaurants and is among the first of Melbourne's cafes to feature an espresso coffee machine. Its 1950s décor reflects the “modern” image for Melbourne inspired by the 1956 Olympic Games.
While the top of Collins Street gained status as a salubrious neighbourhood for gentlemen’s residences and respectable business, and Little Bourke and Little Lonsdale, became the seedy districts; Bourke Hill was somewhere in between. The public and philanthropic interests in social reform are clearly seen in the Salvation Army Temple at 90 Bourke Street (built as the Young Men's Christian Association 1890 and sold to the Salvation Army in 1894 for their Southern Territorial Headquarters) and Gordon House, built 1883-4 in nearby Little Bourke Street by a syndicate led by philanthropist and politician George Coppin, to provide family
87 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 172 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne. accommodation for the respectable poor. Both were intended to raise the status of the poor. They help to convey an understanding of the wide social mix that was the character of the precinct in the late nineteenth century. Now with its red brickwork painted, the four-storey Salvation Army building, erected in 1890 to designs by Billing & Son, in association with Oakden Addison & Kemp, is a distinctive example of boom style Classicism in Melbourne, complete with French Renaissance mansard roof. The interior auditorium is of note as is the entrance lobby and iron gates. The first Australian feature film was made here in the roof top facility at the turn of the twentieth century.
The lanes off Bourke Street fostered the small factories and businesses that made the CBD one of the largest employment districts in the state, well into the 20th Century. In Crossly Street the jewel traders and tailors rubbed shoulders in the 1940s. Sapphire House survives as a continuing reminder. Peters American Delicacy Company (Later Peters Ice cream) was established in Meyers Place. Lang Lane, behind the Federal Coffee Palace became the site of the Victorian Railways Unity Hall in 1935, and Hilliers Soda fountain had a long tenancy. The arts influence from the theatres has been a constant theme, supporting the restaurants and the early cafes. The Hill of Content book shop and publishing house has had premises here over a very long period.
Collins Street East In the late 1830s and the 1840s, Collins Street East was a low density residential area. The commercial centre of Melbourne had been focussed well to the west, near the Customs House and docks. After the gold rush, not only was there a rapid increase in development pressure, but the construction of Parliament House (and other new public buildings such as the Town Hall and GPO) moved the focus of Melbourne away from the docks. The retail zone of the city was drawn to the centre, and the west end of town took on a more mercantile and industrial character. The desirable nature of the eastern precinct for residential use was set by its geography - away from the noxious industries in the west, set high on a hill, and close to clean fresh water upstream. A distinctive, elegant residential character was reinforced by the co-location of some of Melbourne’s early churches.
The site for Melbourne's original Church of Scotland congregation was granted in Collins Street in 1839. The Presbyterian Church of Victoria took over the site when it was formed in 1859 (uniting the Church of Scotland, the Free Church and the United Presbyterian Church). It also inherited an earlier building on the site. The present Scots Church was designed by the prominent Melbourne architectural firm, Reed and Barnes, and built in 1873--74. Scots Church in the late 1870s and early 1880s was home to a fashionable, distinguished and progressive congregation led initially by the Rev. Peter Menzies then by his more famous (if controversial) successor, the Rev. Charles Strong. Dame Nellie Melba, whose father David Mitchell built the church, sang in its choir. Scots Church has long been the principal Presbyterian Church in the City of Melbourne, and has been a base for Scottish tradition and culture.
A small chapel stood on the site of St Michael's Congregational Church from 1841 following the arrival of the Rev William Wakefield in 1838. The Congregational denomination was introduced to the colony by early settlers. Tasmanian merchant and pastoralist Henry Hopkins had asked the Colonial Missionary Society in England for a pastor for the infant settlement of Port Phillip in the 1830s. The present building was designed by the prominent architects Reed and Barnes between 1863 and 1866. The foundation stone was laid by Henry Hopkins on 22 November 1866 and the building was constructed by John Young. The Independents or Congregationalists were amongst the most experimental of the non conformist protestant group. The interior adopted a semi-circular form to strengthen the inclusion of the congregation in the service. The use of polychrome brick and the Lombardic Romanesque style to the design of Reed and Barnes was distinctively different from the standard gothic revival of the Church of England. Reed was also involved when the Collins Street Baptist Church of 1845 was substantially altered and extended in 1861-2.
By the 1850s the “top end” of Collins Street had consolidated its status as a salubrious neighbourhood for gentlemen’s residences and respectable business. Few buildings survive from this period. (Le Louvre at number 74, is a remodelled 1855 house.)
The Melbourne Mechanics Institute, founded in 1839 grew into new premises by the gold rush period and in 1856 the Athenaeum Theatre, Gallery and Lending Library were constructed next to the Town Hall in a suitably edifying classical style. Perhaps the most exclusive of Melbourne’s institutions, the Melbourne Club, was founded in 1838 as the domain of Victoria’s squattocracy. Initially providing city accommodation for country people it soon took on a role as the preserve of Victoria’s wealthiest and most influential citizens. The move to this site reflects the growing fortunes and status of the club and its desire to be in the most suitable location. Prominent architect Leonard Terry, was commissioned to design the new building in 1858-9 - a conservative classical building which resembles its contemporary London equivalents, Charles Barry's, Traveller's and Reform Clubs. The Club includes the last private garden within the 1837 Hoddle grid, including a notable London plane tree. Other clubs also made their homes in Collins Street, including the Alexandra Club, and Athenaeum Club.
88 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 173 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
In the 1880s, the economic boom saw many sites in Collins Street redeveloped. Several professional chambers were constructed and a medical precinct developed. Surviving examples include numbers 68, 86-8, 96-8, Melville House (52-4), Portland House (8), Martin & Pleasance (176) and Grosvenor Chambers (5-9). This last group is famed for the studios of several illustrious Australian artists, including Tom Roberts, Arthur Streeton, Charles Condor, Sir John Longstaff, Charles Summers and Albert Tucker. There is perhaps no other building in Victoria which has such close associations with so many important artists and with such a pivotal movement in Australian Art. Collins Street East had strong connections between the artists and Melbourne society. The four purpose designed artists studios (some of which survive), in Grosvenor Chambers, demonstrates the value placed on cultural pursuits in Collins Street East in the late nineteenth century.
Other artists’ studios were provided in the Austral Buildings (115) Designed in 1890 by the notable architect Nahum Barnet in the English "Queen Anne" style for Alexander McKinley, publisher of Melbourne Punch. They were constructed in 1891 as shops and professional offices and include three surviving artists' studios on the top (4th) floor.
The cultural role of the street was further enhanced by the several venues for lectures, concerts and exhibitions. These included the Athenaeum, the Auditorium Building of 1913, the Assembly Hall of 1915, and the Theosophical Society. The Town Hall itself was a major performance venue. The Regent and Plaza Picture Theatres were constructed in 1929, opposite the Town Hall and Athenaeum, in order to capture the existing audiences for the new popular entertainment of cinema.
Georges exemplified the status of Collins Street as the venue for Melbourne’s social set. The building was built for the Equitable Cooperative Society to the design of Grainger & D'Ebro and completed in 1884. Following a disastrous fire and rebuilding, it was occupied by drapers George and George in 1889, extending the well established retail district in the core, east of Swanston Street. Bankrupted in 1907, the store reopened as Georges in 1908. From the 1930s it became more exclusive, catering for Melbourne high society. The small shops along Collins Street complemented Georges by providing exclusive ranges of generally imported European fashion. Le Louvre played a significant role promoting high fashion, and helped to establish Melbourne as the fashion capital of Australia.
The street has also gained distinction from its trees. Mayor James Garehouse planted the first of a number of trees supplied by the Minister for Lands in May 1875, each about 3.6 metres high and surrounded by an iron guard to prevent destruction by horses.
In the twentieth century the scale of buildings grew, but the character and uses remained remarkable consistent. There was a gradual reduction in residential use as doctors gave up combined town houses and surgeries for consulting rooms. Residential uses continued in the form of Alcaston House. The Collins Street doctors were increasingly housed in new multi-tenanted buildings, exhibiting new architectural styles but carefully designed to harmonise with the elegant character of the street. Victor Horsley Chambers of 1920-2, Harley House of 1924 and Francis House of 1929 reflect this period.
Through the nineteenth century the height of buildings had been naturally limited by construction technology and capacity of lifts. In the and early twentieth century, engineering developments in steel framing, reinforced concrete and lift propulsion, set the scene for much taller buildings. Largely in response to concerns about fire safety, in 1908 maximum building heights were set at 110 feet (33.5 metres) in the wide streets and 66 feet (20 metres) in the Little Streets. In 1912 this was revised to 132 feet (40 metres) in the wide streets. This building regulation had a profound effect on the form of Melbourne. In prestigious Collins Street, it produced consistent height and a distinctive sense of place.
In 1956 the proponents for the ICI building outside the CBD applied for a modification to the maximum height. In part they argued that an open undercroft and substantial garden at ground level would provide a higher level of amenity than full site coverage at the 132 feet height. The modification was granted, opening the door for taller schemes elsewhere.
Within a short time the open undercrofts and open site space exhibited at the ICI were removed and new buildings exceeding the 132 feet limit over the whole of the site proliferated. Wind effects and loss of sun light at street level diminished amenity within the city grid. The loss of buildings within the elegant pre 1956 streetscapes galvanised community action, leading to the formation of the “Collins Street Defence Movement”. The State Government introduced heritage controls in the early 1980s over some inner city precincts, including Collins Street East.
Flinders Lane The Flinders Lane precinct extends from Queen Street to Spring Street. East of Swanston Street are many low scale, single-tenant industrial and warehousing buildings. To the centre and the west are six to eight storey buildings which house activities at the periphery of the retail core, often in a multi tenant setting. A few warehouses survive at the western end.
89 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 174 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
Hoddle’s 1837 plan for Melbourne envisages that within the grid, service access would be from the secondary ‘little' streets, leaving the major streets unencumbered by secondary buildings and vehicles. As the town developed and the government continued to restrict the quantity of land released for sale, the ‘little’ streets became principal addresses, meeting the need for smaller scale lots for residences, factories, warehouses and businesses.
With land prices much higher on the principal streets, the service lanes became main frontages and subdivision provided additional, smaller lanes for access to the rear of premises in the major and ‘little’ streets. In some cases these lanes would themselves become the frontages to even smaller lots, and so the process continued, resulting in a fine-grained pattern of public and private spaces.
A Flinders Lane location was ideal for the firms requiring access to the main dock at Queens Wharf, the first railway connections at the Hobson’s Bay terminal at Flinders Street, and/or the later country terminal at Spencer Street. The heavier goods and bonded stores located closest to the wharves and the Customs House in the west. With no release of suburban land in the town reserve between 1841 and 1852, residential development dominated at the east end of the grid. A few survivors of the early development (129-31 Flinders Lane), give a glimpse of the 1850s of the eastern quarter. Then it was a sparsely built corner of Melbourne with a few houses within large gardens, flanked by a few large industrial establishments such as the malthouse, small workers housing and a few smaller factories.
With the 1850 gold rush came a dramatic increase in population, a commensurate increase in demand for goods. The release of desirable land for housing in Carlton, East Melbourne and North Melbourne and the increase in land prices in the city saw redevelopment of residential land in the prime locations like Flinders Lane for commercial uses. With the rapid rise in population came a ready workforce. New railways could take workers to the central city, and the developing wharves could handle the raw materials and finished goods. Bonded stores and warehouses held their position at the west end of the grid, but the east end of Flinders Lane was ideally located to make use of its transport advantages as a manufacturing centre. As the eastern end of the grid was abandoned for residential use, the rag trade moved in, serving the local retail market and trade with the hinterland and other states. The soft goods trade focussed on the eastern edge of town, in part for its association with the fashion boutiques and Haute Couture ‘Paris’ end of Collins Street. One of the oldest surviving buildings in this part of the City is the Tomasetti building at 277 Flinders Lane, erected in 1853 as a five storey bluestone warehouse by William Degraves & Co., merchants and millers. It was later refaced, leaving the bulk of the early store substantially intact.
By the 1880s, the east end of Flinders Lane was densely built up, with the rag trade and soft goods well established, particularly in the section between Swanston and Exhibition Streets. By the 1970s just a few businesses remained, hanging on among the office, cafe and residential conversions. The survival of the small- scale buildings that developed has ensured the continuation of a diversity of use and activity which has become rare elsewhere in the city.
In the central section of Flinders Lane, between Elizabeth and Swanston Streets, Flinders Lane developed an adjunct to the retail core soon after settlement. This function was strengthened by increased pedestrian through traffic generated by the proximity of the suburban rail terminus in 1859. From the 1880s retail outlets predominated, presenting display windows to the streets with wholesale offices, warehousing and offices above. By the first decades of the twentieth century, the buildings here reached 6-8 storeys, with considerable architectural pretension, showcase windows to the ground and basement floors and several arcades extending the retail frontage further.
Whereas in the eastern end of the Flinders Lane precinct, the small lanes continue to have a service function, in this section the secondary lanes became the pedestrian arcades filled with small shops, linking Collins and Bourke Street to the station. Amongst the many interesting buildings are the Majorca Building at 258 Flinders Lane was designed by Harry A. Norris and built in 1928/29, This office building has a Spanish mission influence facade with tall arched openings with blue terracotta and copper panels beneath the windows which frames the view up Degraves Street. Many of the types of uses from the early twentieth century continue in the retail core at upper floors. The survival of the small-scale buildings which developed over 120 years, has resulted in a distinctive character for the retail quarter of the central city.
Warehouses predominated at the western end of the city up to the 1870s, serving shipping agents, trans- shipping goods to markets beyond Melbourne. 8
8 Surviving factories/warehouses in the east end of Flinders Lane include: 31-35, 37-45, 49-53, 87-89, 91-93, 95-101, 103-105, 107-109, 121-123, 125-127, 129-131, 133-135, 141-143, 145-149, 161-163, 165, 167-173, and 179-181. These are predominantly within the date range of 1900-1925 with a handful on either side.
90 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 175 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
Flinders Street In 1837, Hoddle followed the Darling Regulations for the survey of towns, placing a grid where it would maximise access to the river. This provided for a port and fresh water along Flinders Street on the north bank of the Yarra River. The southern edge of the town grid was set back sufficient to ensure buildings could be founded on sound ground beyond the reach of floods, and to enable sufficient wharf apron for landing and storing imported goods. There was little usable lane on the south side of Flinders Street. An essentially single- sided development resulted, with expansive views to the north side from the open space to the south and the development of a prominent streetscape. East of the Princes Bridge, the north bank of the river was initially put aside for parkland, however the connection with the river was somewhat eroded over time by of the reallocation of park for transport routes.
Ships were moored in the natural turning basin below the Queen Street Falls before any survey or streets had been created. Hoddle formalised this with space for a wharf outside the Customs House. Queens Wharf became the focus for shipping agents, ships chandlers, and public houses which clustered around the Customs House facing the wharves across Flinders Street. Upstream the water was fresh, encouraging housing at the eastern end of the grid.
Retail and commercial activity logically developed on the flat land between the eastern residences and the supply at the ports in the west. Flinders Street was hub of retail activity, strengthened by the adjoining location of the new suburban railway terminus in the 1850s. Commuters and travellers were accommodated within this block at hotels and later in club like premises for commercial travellers. Department stores located where the highest pedestrian traffic was concentrated. The Mutual Store (256 Flinders Street) was originally established in 1872 and the present building resulted from a major reconstruction in 1891 to a design by the architect Reed Smart and Tappin. The Mutual Store was one of several large variety warehouses in Flinders Street that developed the mail-order business from the earliest dock-side warehouses. A major competitor was the nearby Ball and Welch (designed by the same architects).
264 Flinders Street is a four-storey office and arcade built in 1906 for E E Smith. The design by architect Nahum Barnet to capitalised on the pedestrian traffic generated by the growing use of Flinders Street Station, it is an interesting neo-Baroque design that complements the adjacent Mutual Store building.
Arcades extended the retail space at ground level, with the offices above these. The 1880s saw an intensification of the retail outlets on the blocks facing the station, further accentuated with the construction of the Flinders Street Station buildings 1905-10. The city now emptied out each evening when the office workers and shoppers took trains and cable trams home to the burgeoning suburbs. What better place to locate the medium for the dissemination of information – a newspaper. The Herald and Weekly Times located in east, replacing the residential zone in the 1920s.
A small parish church was located on the Swanston and Flinders Street intersection early in the development of Melbourne, replacing Hay market. Initially the Anglican Church had intended the Cathedral for the city to be located in East Melbourne facing the Fitzroy Gardens. However the high profile of the Flinders Street site was strengthened by the selection of this location for the principal river crossing (due to ground conditions) to the south, prompting the cathedral location to be changed. Internationally renowned architect William Butterfield was commissioned to design the cathedral which commenced in 1880. He changing the liturgically accepted cathedral orientation to acknowledged the gateway location with the ‘western front’ facing south to Flinders Street and in doing so created an enduring landmark for the city.
In the first decades of the twentieth century, new buildings grew taller, commonly reaching 6-8 or more storeys, with considerable architectural pretension. The ground floors continued to serve retail functions, while upper levels provided increasingly larger spaces for offices. Several corners are punctuated by 2-3 story hotels of considerable age – the Duke of Wellington (1850), Young & Jackson’s (1855, and Harvest Home (1851). Development of lifts in the late nineteenth century and fire resistant construction after the First World War saw increasing heights to the 132 height limit, prescribed to enable effective fire-fighting in 1916. The SEC Building reached the 132 feet limit height in the 1930s.
The precinct has retained much of the development up to the 1930s and provides a distinctive boundary to the city, intimately linked with its history and development
Guildford Lane Although part of the initial 1837 subdivision and the early land sales, the northern part of the CBD remained largely undeveloped for the first decade of the new Port Phillip settlement. Sutherland Street, running north south had been formed by 1850, but the block had few buildings by this time and even included a cattle yard on the northwest corner of Lonsdale and Latrobe Streets. After the gold rush however, the pressure to accommodate and service ever increasing numbers of gold-seeking immigrants, saw a dramatic increase in
91 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 176 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne. development of the northern city blocks. Hoddle’s grid plan of the city with 10 chain street blocks divided into 1/4 acre allotments, with frontages to the main streets and service lanes (the little streets) at the rear, was far too generous to house this new population. La Trobe’s decision to withhold land from sale within the central area exacerbated the land shortage and saw private subdivision into ever-smaller tenements. Much of the re- subdivision was ad hoc and resulted in a maze of irregular and unconnected laneways. However, the block bounded by Little Lonsdale, Queen, Elizabeth and Latrobe Streets appears to have been more systematically planned.
The gold rush resulted in many dense developments of small tenements, including in this precinct around Guildford Lane In 1900 the MMBW map of the buildings in Melbourne shows Guild Lane, then named Little Lonsdale Street, bounded by many small houses with rear yards and outhouses facing Flanagan Lane and McLean Alley. Intermixed are buildings taking up the whole allotments – probably with an industrial or warehouse use. Similar residential precincts with very small houses were located in the internal lanes and streets south of Latrobe Street in the blocks between Spring and Russell Street and south of Lonsdale Street around Tavistock Place.
In the twentieth century, with many better options for residential amenity outside the city, industry took over the residential sites in the precinct. By the 1920s the transformation was complete. Brick buildings which complied with the fire control and light provisions which followed the Melbourne Building Act of 1849, lead to a remarkably uniform physical outcome. The printing and associated industries located here, where the small premises were ideally suited to their small businesses servicing the central city and the legal precinct. The narrow lanes were no impediment to the small-scale functions of this group.
Guildford Lane appears to have missed the 1920s wave of city redevelopment, when financial institutions, large office blocks and larger warehouses and factories transformed both the east and west of the CBD grid. Possibly the early 1850s three street subdivision within the Hoddle block; and the resulting small depth to adjacent properties facing the main streets, ensured smaller premises which precluded large amalgamations of the small lots within. As a result, there may be archaeological evidence of the post 1850 housing surviving below the existing buildings in the precinct.
The east west orientation of the lanes places them the in shadow for most of the year. In contrast almost all lanes in the CBD run north south between the main and little streets with only small east-west branches running off them. In combinat ion with the tortuous entry to Flanagan Lane and McLean Alley, and the relationship of the height of buildings to the width of the street, the precinct has a distinctive character, unique in the city.
Little Bourke Street Private subdivision of the city allotments sold by the government proliferated in the 1840s and 1850s. The ‘Little’ streets intended as service access, quickly became frontages and the demand for small scale accommodation was satisfied by the creation of new lanes. In the less desirable fringe areas to the northwest and north east of the centre, the ‘little’ streets and lanes became densely packed with houses, shops and factories. Smaller side lanes and alleys had to be provided to service the ever-shrinking lots.
The east end of Little Bourke Street appears to have already taken on an unsavoury reputation by the early 1840s when bawdy houses, unlicensed public houses and shanties erected without permits, were commonly reported. The intensification of development was generally unregulated, with back-to back houses, cottages and workshops fitted in any available spaces, ramshackle extensions added on in corrugated iron, timber, canvas and any other available material and in the poorest areas, with large numbers of people occupying the same house or room.
The Building Act of 1850 attempted to control the problem of fires spreading among the timber buildings and other unsanitary activities such as cesspits discharging into yards, but still buildings or additions to buildings were often erected without permits and the regulations had no control over the decay by neglect of existing buildings.
The respectable influence of the construction of Parliament House on the eastern hill facing down Bourke Street, did not extend into the ’Little’ streets. There was an unusual disparity between the salubrious nature of the main streets and the squalor barely hidden down the side lanes.
The greatest influx of immigrants, and the beginnings of the Chinese population in Melbourne, came with the gold rushes from 1851. Most Chinese came from Kwantung province in the south of China, arriving with the intention of only staying long enough in the gold fields to return home wealthy. However, they began to drift back to Melbourne and established themselves as market gardeners and merchants. By about 1855 the Little Bourke Street Chinese enclave had begun to take shape with merchants using the precinct as a base to supply other Chinese on the goldfields.
92 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 177 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
The Chinese population in Victoria was around 25,000 in 1871. It declined in the following 20 years to between 4,000 and 5,000. Many of those remaining gravitated to Melbourne where 30% of the Chinese in Victoria lived in 1891.It appears to have been in this period that much of the building stock was renewed. Two to four storey commercial buildings with shop-fronts replaced the former single story residences and workshops. These were erected in the common styles of the period without reference to the occupying Chinese population, and generally by Anglo-Celtic builders and entrepreneurs. Some key buildings which gained stronger cultural connections to the Chinese community by association were the Num Pon Soon Chinese Club House, Sum Kum Lee merchant house and the Chinese Mission Church. The Chung Wah Cafe in Heffernan Lane took over a cook shop in 1913 run by Wing Chin and Quon Che On, becoming a Melbourne institution by the Second World War and introducing many Melbournians to Chinese cuisine.
The precinct’s industry and commerce was varied, with retailers, herbalists, importers, wholesalers, and manufacturers, but a special manufacturing industry seems to have developed from the many Chinese cabinet makers who were located here.
A Parliamentary joint committee in 1913 reported on the condition of slums in Melbourne, including a significant number in the Central Business District. Efforts were subsequently made to clear up these slums by demolishing the buildings and forcing their occupants into alternative accommodation. The Little Bourke Street and Little Lonsdale Street Districts had suffered from neglect by landlords. This was exacerbated by civic improvements which saw the streets raised and repaved, leaving the old houses sitting in a depression filled with their own waste. Excavations in Little Lonsdale Street have shown a layer of black sewage marking the late nineteenth century phase prior to the connection to the metropolitan sewerage system.
By the 1930s The Age was able to express satisfaction that the area that had been ‘the heart of slumdom’ in the nineteenth century had become a fine business district. Australian writers seem to have taken perverse pleasure in describing depravations of the quarter, but rarely recognised the social and economic inequities that caused the poverty of the slums. By the mid twentieth century the Chinese quarter was waning as the surviving population aged. However, migration following the repeal of the White Australia Policy saw a reinvigorated Chinese population.
The building forms have now begun to take on an applied oriental character. ‘Chinatown’ is a 1970s nomenclature associated with construction of ‘orientalised’ street furniture and the arches over the street. The establishment of the Museum of Chinese Australian History has consolidated the status of the precinct as a social, historical and cultural entity.
Hardware Street The Melbourne’s generous street grid by Hoddle was perhaps devised with a large, prosperous, commercial and residential city in mind, but it did not accommodate demand for the large numbers of small houses; and the small industries and businesses that were needed to make the city function. As a result, private subdivision commenced soon after 1837. In part this must have been predicted, as evidenced in the inflated prices at early sales and the speculators amongst the first purchasers.
Initially the blocks on the fringe of the commercial district became the workers suburbs – particularly north of Bourke Street and west of Elizabeth Street. Industry, warehousing and commerce tended to focus on the west, close to the port and docks and later to the transport provided by the railway. Small-scale residential tenements were interspersed amongst factories and warehouses, typically two-roomed cottages of stone, brick or wood, roofed in split shingles.
Following the substantial increase in population which came with the gold rush of the 1850s, the central Melbourne grid filled and there was pressure for residential and commercial redevelopment. Proeschel’s 1850 map of the Hardware Street precinct, shows jus t two lanes in the block north of Little Bourke Street and only a short lane to the south; but by 1855, Keaney’s map shows most of the twelve of the north south lanes which survive today in existence.
By the 1880s most of the small houses had been forced out of the middle city blocks between William and Russell Streets. Residential pockets persisted into the twentieth century in the northeast and North West of Melbourne’s grid, but on the whole, the main streets and many of the “Little” streets were built up with commercial premises, shops, warehouses, offices and factories.
By the 1860s the character of the Hardware Street precinct was established (although south of Little Bourke Street, Hardware Street itself was yet to come). Many warehouses and factories, were connected to the horse and transport trade. Kirk’s Horse Bazaar, a sprawling complex of stables and sales rings, ran between Bourke and Little Bourke Streets, Kirk’s Lane (formerly Vengeance Lane) marks its former western extremity. Saddlers, carriage builders, harness factories, and, when the horse was no longer useful, Cockbill the knacker
93 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 178 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne. congregated around the bazaar. Row-houses survived along some of the innermost laneways, but most had succumbed in the 1880s to more warehouses including the distinctive groups of multistorey nineteenth century warehouses as 55, 60 and 63-67 Hardware Street, Marks Buildings and Spicers & Detmold in Niagara Lane.
The 1900 MMWB Plan for Melbourne reveals only a few sites with a residential form in the Hardware Street Precinct, with most allotments now fully covered. The generally narrow frontage had remained. There were many separate premises with independent business activities.
By the 1960s the commercial uses of the area had waned and back-lane buildings were in a hiatus. Low rents encouraged artists and other fringe users to take warehouse spaces for studios and living spaces. Mirka Mora initially “camped” in one Rankins Lane warehouse, while the Niagara Lane Gallery became the focus of new young artists in Melbourne.
The north south orientation enables the potential for direct sun to the lanes for short periods each day, throughout of the year, in contrast to the gloom of the Guildford Lane Precinct. The frequency of lanes intersecting Little Bourke Street and the active frontages within them, combined with the reasonably consistent height of buildings, narrow width of individual frontages and the pedestrian scale of the narrow streets has lead to a precinct with a distinctive, active, pedestrian oriented character, unique in the city.
Queen Victoria Market The provision of a public market place has been a statutory requirement of the Melbourne Corporation since its initial establishment as the Board of Market Commissioners under the 1839 Act of New South Wales. With the incorporation of the Council in 1842, this requirement was transferred from the commissioners.9
Melbourne residents petitioned the Police Magistrate in 1839 for the creation of a market. Lonsdale had instructed that the survey provide for a Market Square, provided in the block bounded by Collins St. William St. Flinders Lane and Market Street. Subsequently the Market Commission was established in 1841 and four sites were selected for markets, The Western Market site (corner Market, Collins and William Streets) was to be the general market, opening on 15 December 1841.Progressively developed from about 1847, the Western Market eventually was built up with open sheds and two story Italianate buildings around its perimeter.
In December 1844 the residents of the east end of the town petitioned for their own market which was eventually proclaimed on an existing public reserve on the corner of Little Collins and Exhibition Streets nearby a female penitentiary. Initially used unofficially as a hay and corn market, the site was formally proclaimed on 1 August 1846, expanded to the goal site in 1855 and had new shedding in 1860. By the 1880s it too had handsome buildings around the perimeter and had become well established as a venue for public meetings, political debate, sideshows, entertainment and more lowly pursuits where more than a hundred gaslights attracted Melbournians like moths, particularly for the Saturday night Paddy’s Market.
The beginnings of the Victoria Market go back to market gardeners petitioning Parliament in 1857 for a new vegetable market in Victoria streets to relieve congestion at the Eastern Market. As a result, 2.4 acres were made available in 1859 and a shed and fence erected, but market gardeners did not use it. Rather, Council used it instead as a horse, cattle, pig and hay market until it was permanently reserved in 1867. It became known as the Lower Market. In 1869 the animal market was moved and a substantial brick building was erected facing Elizabeth Street for the wholesale (meat carcass) trade and was given the official name of Meat Market. Wholesale butchers moved to the North Melbourne Metropolitan Meat Market in 1880, and the Lower Market became a retail meat and fish market. In 1878 at a similar time to the Upper Market opening, three sheds were erected on the Lower market (G, H and I) for retail fruit and vegetables and other traders. A narrow triangular strip was also added to the Elizabeth Street frontage, at a time when a number of Melbourne streets were being realigned, allowing for the addition of the present meat market facade to be erected in 1884 with the centrepiece of farm animals beneath a high arched pediment. The two-storey shops in Elizabeth Street were also added at the same time, while those facing Victoria Street were built three years later. The Dairy Produce Hall, with its main entrance facing Therry Street was added in 1928, displaying the greater concern for hygiene in its tiled and marble covered surfaces and stainless steel trim.
Although there was some brief wholesale function, the Lower Market soon became purely a retail outlet with a wide range of foodstuffs and ancillary businesses in the adjoining shops.
The Upper Market was created over forty years by a series of diversions from other uses. Most of the block between Peel and Queen Streets was Melbourne’s Old Cemetery, opened in 1837. It replaced the1836 burial site on Flagstaff (or Burial) Hill. More than 10,000 people had been buried in the Melbourne Cemetery before Council recommended it be closed due to lack of space. In 1854, a year after the Melbourne General Cemetery
9 3 Victorian No. 18. Act 6 Victoria No. 7 of 1842
94 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 179 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne. at Carlton had been opened; it closed for burials except for existing family vaults or previously purchased allotments. . The site was also used for new burials briefly in 1864-7. The last burial was in1917.
A small reserve of Crown land to the north of the Cemetery had been used for an orderly room or drill hall for volunteer militia and part reserved for a state school. Negotiations between the Council and Education Department saw a swap of land for the school, and with the Defence Department for the drill hall. In 1875 the Council’s land (bounded on the north by Victoria Street and south by Fulton Street with Cobden Street dividing it into two) had been reserved as the first part of the Upper Market. In 1903 the orderly room block on the Peel Street corner also became part of the market. The Melbourne General Market Site Act of 1877 approved the appropriation of additional land to expand the market including part of the cemetery, principally the sections for Jews, Aborigines and the Society of Friends, and most of the Fulton Street and Cobden Street roadways. The act required the Council to remove the human remains to the Carlton Cemetery. It did this with haste, along with one of the old entrance lodges, although recent archaeological work has demonstrated that the exhumations were far from complete. The Upper Market then remained as an area of 4 1/2 acres north of the line at the end of Therry Street. The cemetery remained south of the alignment of Therry Street until 1917.
In 1877 the Council let contracts for the erection of six substantial market sheds to allow the transfer of the fruit and vegetable growers from the Eastern Market. Five sheds (A to E) were open-sided and the sixth (F) included a line of brick stores which formed the southern wall of the market and cut off the view to the cemetery to the south. The market was then officially opened on 20 March 1878, the Mayor John Pigdon formally unlocking the gates, announced the name “Queen Victoria Market” and treated the guests and growers to a breakfast in one of the new sheds.
The early sheds have timber posts set on bluestone blocks, which carry the 48 foot span of the roof trusses on timber shear heads or corbels. The posts are at approximately 17 foot spacing and at every few posts the roof height changes to accommodate the slope of the site - rising slowly to the west. The sheds were extended to the Queen Street boundary in 1903, and Shed A and B were extended to Peel Street in 1905 following a further swap of land with the Defence Department and the second move of the drill hall.
A wide range of stall-holders established at Victoria Market, including some who bought and resold at the Eastern and Western Markets as well. Shed F was used for dairy produce for many years and became known as the butter shed, the Victoria Street shops were permanently occupied by a variety of traders who serviced the needs of the market users.
The market remained much the same for the first forty years but by the First World War there was a need for expansion. Both the growers and Parliament had been considering the need for a new market - particularly one served by a rail connection, but rather than build on a new site (South Melbourne had been suggested) the Parliamentary Standing Committee and the 1915 Royal Commission on Fruit Vegetables and Jam recommended the enlargement of the existing market. This resulted in the Melbourne General Markets Act of 1917, which allowed for the resumption of more of the cemetery land, so that all the sheds could be extended to Peel Street. This was done by 1922 when wider verandahs were also built over the Peel Street and Queen Street footpaths. A roofed central north-south roadway was finished in 1927 giving the sheds their final form. Religious groups and the Soldiers Memorial Union opposed the resumption of the remaining southern portion of the cemetery.
Council was again responsible for re-interring the burials. However, of an estimated 8000, only 529 could be identified by name including some family vaults. One hundred others were identified as the graves of Melbourne’s pioneers and were relocated to a special section at the new Fawkner Cemetery along with a granite memorial commemorating the early pioneers. The removal of graves did not commence until 1920 and ended in 1922. The additional grant brought the area of the Upper Market to 15 acres and the whole market to 17.5 acres.
The 1922 shed extensions were followed by two new sheds (K and L) south of the existing sheds. These were larger and separated by an east west roadway, and with a high cantilevered roof giver far better coverage of the stalls. The council also decided that it would concentrate the wholesale functions of the other markets at this time. Initially the growers were placed in the Lower Market, but this proved insufficient for their numbers and required 60 brick stores to be built on the south end of the market down to Franklin Street. These were completed in 1929-30 and provided an open market square between the rows of stores, which could be locked up with a fence across the ends and ornamental gates on the Peel and Queen Street entrances.
The remaining space was filled in 1936 when the narrow Shed M was built for pea and bean merchants alongside Shed L and then two more sheds N and O for growers. This allowed all of the Western Market stall holders to relocate along with a group of wholesalers with private premises near the Western Markets, 14 members of the Chines e Fruit Merchants’ Association who had stores in Little Bourke Street East, and other merchants who had stalls elsewhere in the Victoria Market. As a result all the new accommodation was soon filled.
95 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 180 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
The market however, was still insufficient to meet the full wholesaling capacity and trade spilled out into adjoining streets. Some of the nearby terrace houses, and shops were gutted and fitted with roller doors and nearby warehouses were used to provide storage space. The Council began investigating alternatives in 1948 leading to the granting of 50 acres in Footscray Road in 1956 for a new, purely wholesale market and its eventual construction in 1969 of the new market following protracted battles between the Council, Government and the growers and agents interests. In the 1970s most of the later Queen Victoria Market buildings, in the southern section were demolished.
A variety of buildings around the market, served market users including the Bank of New South Wales at 375 Queen Street and various hotels. The wide section of Elizabeth Street in front of the market came to play the role of transport and meeting point. Buildings opposite provided additional retail space. This area later took the name Victoria Square. In surrounding streets market related commercial buildings were erected and many existing houses were converted for market uses.
Retail Core The first land sales and early development in Melbourne focussed around the wharf and Custom’s House to the west of the centre of the grid. As the population increased, retail activity moved east to the central zone, close to the supply at the port and to demand from the residential areas to the north and east. Topographically ideal, the precinct provided an even grade, particularly suitable for high volumes of pedestrians.
With the 1850s gold rush came a substantial commercial boom. The country town character was swept aside in a major rebuilding. Impressive new buildings were constructed for some of the main retail outlets. One of the oldest surviving buildings in this part of the city is at 274-278 Bourke Street, built in 1859, with a later facade.
Road and rail transport links would further strengthen the middle city blocks as the retail and commercial core. In 1842 the first bridge over the river was built in Swanston Street and determined that road as the main north- south thoroughfare. Flinders Street Station added further to the through pedestrian traffic in the central zone through the second half of the nineteenth century.
Elizabeth and Swanston Streets defined the prime retail zone through the location of the Town Hall in the east and the General Post Office in the west. The Post Office, originally established on its site in 1841, was completely rebuilt to reflect the growing wealth and status of the city from 1859, and progressively enlarged up to 1907. As the principle provider for communication in the nineteenth and much of the twentieth centuries, it played a significant role in the development of Melbourne’s commercial and mercantile life, as well as providing an important social focus for the town. Similarly, the Town Hall provided a civic centre and a symbol of municipal governance in the west.
Architectural style and innovation in design, materials and building engineering, were hallmarks of many of the buildings erected in this precinct over several decades. As the centre for the major retailers and head offices of many companies, the buildings were expected to demonstrate the commercial pre-eminence of their owners. The diversity of styles including the Boom period, classical revivals, art nouveau, commercial gothic, modern, art deco and the Chicago Styles, display individual brilliance within a highly structured streetscape approach.
A prominent component of the physical form of the precinct is the density of lanes and arcades providing intimate and protected shopping venues. These set Melbourne’s retail centre apart from other Australian capital cities. The shape of Melbourne’s grid resulted in subdivision into long thin parcels orient ed north-south. The logical mechanism for an increase in commercial ‘frontage’ was the creation of north-south access-ways. Perhaps the variable weather conditions in Melbourne were an inducement to develop protected shopping spaces rather than by setting aside new streets.
Arcade development begins in the 1850s. Amongst the early examples was the Queens Arcade constructed in 1853 to run from Lonsdale Street through to Little Bourke Street. As a speculative venture, the Queen's Arcade was a failure and was closed in under fifteen years and subsequently demolished. However, Melburnians eventually took to the idea of the arcade, particularly once the pressure on land had led to the intensive development of the commercial centre.
The Royal Arcade, which extends from Bourke Street through to Little Collins Street, was erected in 1869 for Messrs. Staughton and Spensley to the design of architect Charles Webb. Consisting of 29 shops of various trades, it set a new standard for inner city shopping arcades.
Some north south travel was achieved through single stores. One of the most famous of the emporia in the precinct was Cole’s Book Arcade, built for Edward William Cole (1832-1918) who was described as 'the most amazing bookseller in the history of Australian publishing'. In 1873 he opened the first Cole's Book Arcade and eventually moved in 1883 to its Bourke Street home. Running from Collins to Bourke Street, the Book Arcade was a social and intellectual gathering point.
96 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 181 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
The Block Arcade was developed by financier Benjamin Fink with the Collins Street section completed in February 1892. It was extended into Elizabeth Street the following year. Both sections were designed by the architectural firm Twentyman and Askew. The Block Arcade became an essential element in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century activity known as “doing The Block” - an expression referring to the habit of promenading along the Collins Street block between Swanston and Elizabeth Streets. The Block was the place to be seen and thos e who frequented the popular thoroughfare, its shops and tea houses were often recorded by caricaturists in the city's social pages.
Arcades connecting Bourke and Collins Streets or to Elizabeth and Swanston Streets, became integral parts of most of the major commercial buildings erected in the precinct, including the Centreway (1913) Capitol Arcade (1924), The Cathedral Arcade in the Nicholas Building (1924), Block Court (1930), Manchester Unity Arcade (1932) and the Century Arcade (1938-40). Small retail premises were incorporated into the ground floor, sometimes in combination with an impressive entry foyer to the upper floors.
On the north side of Bourke Streets there are no arcades and north-south lanes. Large department stores provided the through access here. In the twentieth century (and in particular the period between the two world wars) the Bourke and Collins Street retail precinct grew to dominate retailing in Melbourne. Large Department stores located here including the Myer Emporium and Buckley and Nunn and lesser specialist and variety stores including the Leviathan Clothing Store, London Stores, Mutual Stores, Centre Way and a range of smaller buildings. Buckley and Nunn’s Emporium, built in 1910-1912 and designed by noted architectural firm of Bates, Peebles and Smart, was Melbourne’s longest operating retail establishment. The first store opened on the site in 1852, and continued trading until 1981.
The work of many important architects is represented in the precinct. The City of Melbourne Building (112-118 Elizabeth Street) is a four-storey brick building designed by W.H. Ellerker and E.G. Kilburn in 1888 for the short lived City of Melbourne Building Society, chaired at one time by Alfred Deakin. The eclectic design with classical and Baroque elements illustrates the high levels of elaboration at the height of the 1880s Boom. In the twentieth century there were many important works including the Centreway Building (259 Collins Street) designed by noted architects H W and F B Tompkins and built in 1911-12 in the conservative Edwardian Baroque and notable as one of the first steel-framed commercial buildings in Melbourne. More flamboyant art- nouveau decorative features are in evidence in this precinct including several early twentieth century buildings in Elizabeth Street.
In 1912-13 the first of the major emporiums was built in Bourke Street – The Leviathan Clothing Store. It was followed by London Stores on the Corner of Bourke and Elizabeth Streets, built in 1925 to a design by the architec ts H W and F B Tompkins. A reinforced concrete and steel emporium built to the Melbourne height limit of 132 feet (40 metres). The building is one of the major emporiums built in Bourke Street in the period 1910-30 and epitomised by Sydney Myer’s major department store.
The Myer Emporium holds a unique place in Melbourne's social and retail business history. The department store occupies two sites between Bourke amalgamated by the energetic Sidney Myer from 1911. The complex of buildings was mainly constructed in stages during the 1920s and 1930s to designs by the leading commercial architects of the time, H W & F B Tompkins. In 1929 it was described as one of the largest merchandising enterprises in the British Empire.
The Coles’ Store in Bourke Street was completed in 1929 and extended in 1939. It was designed by noted architect Harry Norris and is one of the most exuberant and colourful interwar buildings in the city.
Several commercial buildings in Swanston Street exhibited distinctive styles and or innovative structural features including Capitol House, (109-117 Swanston Street) built in 1921-24; architect, Walter Burley Griffin in association with the architectural firm of Peck and Kempter produced a distinctive style with stunning light effects to the unusual interiors at the Capitol Building. Innovative engineering was used here by the principal builder (Sir) John Monash's Reinforced Concrete and Monier Pipe Construction Company; and an innovative functional arrangement which included a combination of commercial retail, office and entertainment functions.
The Nicholas Building, situated on the corner of Swanston Street and Flinders Lane, was built by F E Shillabeer & Sons in 1926 to a design by the architect Harry Norris for the Aspro king. The building contained eight floors of office accommodation, with shopping arcades on the first and ground floors and retail accommodation in the large basement. Combining retail and commercial activity is the Manchester Unity Building on the corner of Swanston and Collins Streets. Built in 1933 to the 132-ft. limit height to a design by Architect Marcus Barlow in concrete encased steel and clad in buff coloured terracotta faience.
Distinctive, low scale streetscapes have developed in each of the streets of the retail core - Bourke, Collins, Little Collins, Elizabeth and Swanston Streets. Tightly connected and abutting the adjoining Flinders Lane and
97 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts ProjectPage Incorporated 182 of Document217 Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne.
Flinders Street precinct, this central region of Melbourne is the most extensive collection of pre Second World War building stock in the city grid.
Lewis M, Melbourne, the City its History and Development, Melbourne, 1994 Swanson R, Melbourne’s Historic Public Gardens, A Management Guide, 1984 The City of Melbourne Heritage Places Inventory East Melbourne & Jolimont Conservation Study 1985 Parkville Conservation Study 1985 North & West Melbourne Conservation Study 1985 and 1993 Flemington & Kensington Conservation Study 1985 Carlton, North Carlton and Princes Hill Conservation Studies 1994 and 1985 South Yarra Conservation Study 1985 South Melbourne Conservation Study 1985 and 1998 Harbour, Railway, Industrial Conservation Study 1985 Central Activities District Conservation Study, 1985 City of Melbourne Heritage Study Significant Street Trees and Individual Significant Trees. Not yet prepared. City of Melbourne Heritage Study Laneway survey and grading review. Not yet prepared. City of Melbourne Heritage Study Streetscape survey and grading review. Not yet prepared.
98 Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd December 2004 . Page 183 of 217
Appendix B
Recommended Clause 22.XX
22.04 HERITAGE PRECINCTS
This policy applies to all precincts subject to a Heritage Overlay within the City of Melbourne.
22.04-1 Policy Basis The Municipal Strategic Statement (at Clause 21.05) identifies Melbourne’s heritage features as being amongst its greatest assets. Melbourne is recognised as a high quality, multifaceted and culturally rich city. “Cultural heritage” is an extremely important component of the urban form and sense of place, which characterise Melbourne. The identification, assessment, and citation of heritage places have been undertaken over decades, as part of an ongoing heritage conservation process and their recognition and protection have been a crucial component of planning in central Melbourne since 1982. Heritage precinct areas are a significant part of Melbourne’s attraction as a place in which to live, visit, do business and invest. They are also important for cultural and sociological reasons, providing a distinctive historical character and a sense of continuity. Much of Melbourne’s visual form is provided by collections of buildings, which, while not always of high individual significance, together form precincts which have cultural heritage significance. This policy sets out the objectives, application requirements and decision guidelines for those heritage precincts which have been identified as part of the cultural heritage of Melbourne. The policy is to be read in conjunction with the documents: Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne and the Melbourne Heritage Places Inventory which are both Incorporated Documents at Clause 81. The Incorporated Documents set out: · A Framework for the Development of Melbourne, · Statements of significance for each of sixteen precincts, · Performance Standards and associated performance measures, to guide applicants and decision makers, · Definitions, and · Background information on precincts.
22.04-2 Objectives
Objectives Common to all Heritage Precincts
· To conserve and enhance precincts of identified cultural heritage significance. · To ensure that the s ignificant portions of the contributory parts of the precinct are retained. · To guide the consideration of the impact of development on the cultural heritage significance of the precinct and its contributing component parts. · To encourage development which s hall respect the significant cultural heritage context and which shall not dominate the individual significant parts, the streetscape or the precinct as a whole. · To encourage development which is related to the contributing component parts of the Heritage Place. · To encourage development which is in harmony with the existing character, scale, form and appearance of the contributing component parts precinct. · To encourage development which makes a positive contribution to the existing character and appearance of the precinct. · To promote the identification, protection and management of Aboriginal cultural heritage. · To promote the identification, protection and management of archaeological sites.
Additional Objectives for Individual Heritage Overlays
Carlton HO 1
. Page 184 of 217
· To ensure that development in the Carlton Gardens and Royal Exhibition Building and the buffer zone around it, has regard to the world heritage significance. · To strengthen the functional and visual connection between Spring Street and the Royal Exhibition Building and Carlton Gardens. · To ensure that development in and around the University of Melbourne, Melbourne General Cemetery and Princes Park has regard to the of the cultural heritage significance of the open landscape setting. · To encourage the retention of open space in rear yards where this contributes to the historic urban form. · To ensure that development in the Victoria Street HO1B sub precinct will maintain and strengthen the prominence of the institutional buildings on the southern allotments, and strengthen the boulevard status of the street. · In the High rise housing sub precinct HO1C, to minimise the impact of the existing intrusive development and to discourage similar development
East Melbourne HO 2 · East Melbourne and the Jolimont sub precinct: · To enhance the status of Wellington Parade as a major historic boulevard into Melbourne. · In Wellington Parade, Wellington Parade South, Jolimont Road, and Clarendon, Grey and Gipps Streets, to minimise the impact of the existing intrusive tall development and to discourage similar development. · To encourage the retention of open space in rear yards where this contributes to the historic urban form.
Parliamentary sub-precinct: · To retain and strengthen the zone as the civic precinct of Melbourne within its park setting. · To retain the outstanding vistas to the Old Treasury and Parliament House from within Spring, Collins and Bourke Streets. · To retain the clear delineation of the city edge to Hoddle’s 1837 grid along Spring Street · To control the height of development within the precinct to ensure that the vistas to, and the prominence of, the several landmark buildings remain. Landmark buildings include Parliament House, Old Treasury building, State Government Offices, Commonwealth Building, St Patrick’s Cathedral, St Peters Church, and Eastern Hill Fire Station. · To retain the skyline silhouettes to all Landmark buildings (noted above) from any position within public areas in the precinct, including parks. · To retain the key attributes of consistent s cale, height, architectural quality within level 1 and 2 streetscapes. · To document the Aboriginal heritage sites and interpret these in the context of the development of Victoria.
Eastern Hill sub-precinct: · To minimise the impact of intrusive tall development on contributory buildings and the Fitzroy Gardens, by limiting height to ensure that the existing contributory buildings remain prominent. · To prevent development which would overshadow the Fitzroy Gardens and the Parliament Gardens at 12 noon at the winter solstice. · To retain the key attributes of consistent scale and low height, within level 1 and 2 streetscapes in the sub precinct. · To control the height of development within the precinct to ensure that the vistas to landmark Eastern Hill Fire Station and its lookout tower remain.
Yarra Park sub -precinct · To encourage connection of the northern and southern portions of Yarra Park by increased pedestrian connection across the railway lines. · To protect indigenous vegetation. · To document the Aboriginal heritage sites and interpret these in the context of the development of Victoria.
Kensington and Flour Milling HO 3 · To facilitate the retention of a viable flour milling industry · In Kensington, west of the railway line, to retain the open landscape character at the rear of residential sites. · To retain contributory stables structures and other original outbuildings in laneways
North and West Melbourne HO 4 · To strengthen the visual connection between the Victoria Market and the North Melbourne residential core.
. Page 185 of 217
· To strengthen the visual connection between the Flagstaff Gardens and the residential buildings in Dudley Street. · To maintain and enhance views to North Melbourne Town hall. · To acknowledge that sub precincts HO4A, HO4B, HO4D and HO4E have a lower proportion of contributory heritage places.
Parkville HO 5 · In South Parkville, to encourage a very high retention of contributory building fabric, the retention of open space in rear gardens and contributing stables and other original outbuildings in laneways. · In North Parkville, to encourage an open landscape setting with substantial front and side setbacks except on sites already developed for row housing. · To ensure that development in and around Princes Park and Royal Park has regard to the cultural heritage significance of the landscape setting. · To document the Aboriginal heritage sites in Royal Park and interpret these in the context of the development of Victoria.
South Yarra HO 6 · To ensure the retention and enhancement of views to Government House tower from the city. · To investigate and interpret the position of Langhorne’s 1837 Mission House at the Aboriginal Mission Reserve and interpret the focus of pre-contact Aboriginal activities along the river. · To ensure that development in and around The Royal Botanic Gardens, The Domain, The Queen Victoria Gardens and The Alexandra Gardens, has regard to the cultural heritage significance of the landscape setting.
Bank Place HO 7 · To retain the key attributes of scale, enclosure, architectural quality and intactness. · To retain the skyline silhouette of contributory structures when viewed from public areas within Bank Place.
Bourke Hill HO 8 · To retain the key attributes of scale, height and contributory building fabric. · To retain the existing skyline silhouettes of contributory buildings when viewed from: > The south side of Exhibition Street at the centre of Bourke Street (See view protection zone on map below.); > Each side of Bourke Street at the property line to buildings on the opposite side of the street; > The north side of Spring Street at the property boundary, for the full width of Bourke Street. · To retain the outstanding vistas to the Old Treasury and Parliament House from within Spring, and Bourke Streets. · To control height in the Bourke Hill and Collins Street Precincts to ensure retention of the dominance of the terminal vista to Parliament House from all public land within the precinct · To prevent intrusions into the open sky around Parliament House when viewed from the south side of Exhibition Street at the centre of Bourke Street · To strengthen the connection between Spring Street and the Royal Exhibition Building and Carlton Gardens. · To retain the open footpath without street verandahs on the north side of Bourke Street.
Collins Street East HO 9 · To retain the key attributes of consistent scale, height, architectural quality and contributory building fabric. · To retain the outstanding vista to the Old Treasury building from within Collins Street. · To retain the outstanding vistas to the Old Treasury and Parliament House from within Spring and Collins Streets. · To strengthen the connection between Spring Street and the Royal Exhibition Building and Carlton Gardens. · To retain the skyline silhouette to the Old Treasury building from any position within public areas in the precinct. · To retain the skyline silhouettes to the Town Hall tower and the spires of Scots church and St Michael’s church; from any position within public areas in the precinct. · To retain and not exceed the 40 metre height limit within the block from Swanston Street to Russell Street. Height to be calculated at the footpath level at the centre of the site. · To diminish the impact of taller development within the blocks from Russell to Spring Streets by setting back any elements which would exceed 40 metres, for a distance of 30 metres from the Collins Street frontage. · To retain the open footpath without street verandahs.
. Page 186 of 217
· To ensure development will not have an adverse impact on street trees. · To ensure that new development retains a public interface at the ground floor level. · To ensure that signage is discrete.
Guildford Lane HO 10 · To retain the key attributes of consistent scale, height, architectural quality and contributory building fabric and civil works. · To protect the archaeological potential for 1850s residential structures below the existing buildings.
Flinders Lane HO 11 · To retain the network of lanes and side lanes, and the built form of abutting contributory structures. · To retain similar height, scale, and frontage width. · To retain the skyline silhouette of contributory structures.
Flinders Street HO 12 · To protect the Skyline silhouette for St Paul’s Cathedral within two view protection zones as shown on the Heritage Overlay map > St Paul’s skyline silhouette protection zone 1. From the south bank of the river in the centre of St. Kilda Road, aligned with the centre of Alexandra Avenue. > St Paul’s skyline silhouette protection zone 2. From Flinders Street Station at the centre of the top of the steps · To limit the maximum height to 40m for the whole of allotments between Exhibition and Elizabeth Streets. · To enhance the relationship between Flinders Street, the river and the early wharves.
Hardware Street HO 13 · To retain the network of public and private lanes and side lanes · To retain the key attributes of similar height, low scale, and contributory fabric to street, lane and side lane frontages. · To control the height and position of development to ensure the retention of existing direct sun to lane and street surfaces between 12 noon and 2 pm Eastern Standard Time at the winter solstice. · To protect the archaeological potential for 1850s residential structures below the existing buildings.
Little Bourke HO 14 · To retain the low scale in Lonsdale and Little Bourke Streets and in the associated lanes. · To retain the network of abutting side lanes
Queen Victoria Market HO 15 · To retain the key attributes of consistent scale, height, architectural quality and contributory building fabric, open spaces and civil works. · To retain the skyline silhouette for market buildings towards the north and west. · To retain the existing level of sunlight penetration to open spaces within the market. · To protect the archaeological potential for burial sites below the existing buildings and paving. · To ensure that development in Victoria Street will maintain and strengthen the boulevard status of the street.
Retail Core HO 16 · To retain the key attributes of consistent scale, height, architectural quality and contributory building fabric. · To retain the outstanding vista to the Shrine of Remembrance from public areas within the Precinct. · To retain the vista to the Flinders Street Railway Station clock from public areas within Flinders Street. · To retain the skyline silhouettes to the Post Office and the Melbourne Town Hall from any position within public areas in the precinct and the skyline silhouette of contributory elements in all streets. · To retain and not exceed the 40metre height limit · To retain the open footpath without street verandahs in Collins Street. · To ensure development will not have an adverse impact upon street trees in Collins Street. · To ensure that new development retains a public interface at the ground floor level.
22.04-3 Application Documentation Requirements In addition to the standard documents required for planning applications, within a Heritage Overlay a planning application must also be accompanied by the following, where applicable: · Existing conditions drawings showing: > the floor plan, roof plan and elevations of any structure on the site;
. Page 187 of 217
> the position of the centre of the trunk of any trees over 300mm diameter on the site; > the position of the trunk and canopy of any trees adjoining on public land. · Outside the Capital City Zone, a site plan showing the building footprint for the two adjoining allotments on each side (ie - five allotments in total). · Accurate street facing façade heights for the two buildings adjoining on each side. · Applications for additions, or higher rear parts to new buildings, visible from the public domain, must include: a plan indicating accurate ground levels to AHD for the site, the footpath adjoining and the footpath opposite the site; and sight-line sections indicating the extent of visibility at the critical viewing points as determined by Council. · All applications for new buildings and additions visible from the public domain, must include façade heights to AHD for the buildings adjoining on each side. · Applications for new buildings must include a streetscape elevation that also shows the two buildings adjoining on each side. · An application for demolition of all or part of a contributory element shall only be considered when accompanied by an application for the development proposed as replacement.
22.04-4 Decisi on Guidelines The following matters shall guide decision making when considering applications within the overlay. Before deciding on an application the responsible authority shall consider as appropriate:
General · The “Statement of Significance” for the Heritage Overlay as contained in the incorporated document at Clause 81. · The individual conservation studies, including grading and streetscape context, and the individual “Building Identification Sheets” which in some cases include information on the age, style, notable features, integrity and condition of the building for some sites. · The City of Melbourne Heritage Places Inventory for places outside the Capital City Zone · The “Performance Standards” and their associated performance measure, as contained in the Incorporated document Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne at Clause 81 · Any applicable City of Melbourne Heritage Study including in relation to laneways, streetscapes, individual trees, street trees, parks and gardens and civil works. · The AAV Archaeological Sites Register and the Aboriginal Historic Places Register.
For Retention of Contributory Buildings, Structures or Parts, including Demolition of all or part of a graded component. Refer to Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne, sections 18.01 and 19.01 · The degree of its significance. Note that all graded structures within a precinct have been determined to be significant. · The character and appearance of the structure or works or contributory component and its contribution to the cultural heritage of the streetscape and the precinct. · Whether the demolition or removal of part of the structure or works contributes to the long-term conservation of the significant fabric of the remaining parts or the precinct. · In the Capital City Zone, whether the demolition or removal is justified for the development of land or the alteration of, or addition to, a structure. · Outside the Capital City Zone, whether the demolition or removal of any part of the structure, works or contributory component contributes to the long-term conservation of significant fabric.
Additions, Alterations, and New Development including Subdivision and Amalgamation and Civil Work, Refer to Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne, sections 18 and 19.
· The impact on the cultural heritage significance of an existing structure, an adjoining structure and the precinct. · The impact on the cultural heritage significance of existing civic works, adjoining civic works and the precinct. · The impact on contributory trees within the site and on adjoining public land. · The impact on the cultural heritage significance of Aboriginal sites · The impact on the cultural heritage significance of Archaeological sites · The contribution of the proposed development to the character and appearance of a building and/or streetscape and/or precinct.
22.04-5 Policy within the Capital City Zone It is policy that:
. Page 188 of 217
· Applications within precincts shall be assessed in accordance with the Statement of Significance and the Performance Standards in the document Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne incorporated at Clause 81. Within that document Performance standards for: > Retention of Contributory Buildings Structures or Parts are found at item 19.01 > Alterations to existing buildings are found at item 19.02 > Additions to existing buildings are found at item 19.03 > New buildings are found at item 19.04 > Vehicle Access are found at item 19.05 > Civic works are found at item 19.06 > Buildings and works adjacent to and within parklands are found at item 19.07 > Subdivision and Amalgamation of Sites are found at item 19.08 > Archaeological sites are found at item 19.09 · Where directed by Council, proposals shall be accompanied by a Heritage Impact Statement, prepared by a recognised expert in the field.
22.04-6 Policy outside the Capital City Zone It is policy that: · Applications within precincts shall be assessed in accordance with the Statement of Significance and the Performance Standards in the document Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne incorporated at Clause 81. Within that document Performance standards for: > Retention of Contributory Buildings Structures or Parts are found at item 18.01 > Alterations to existing buildings are found at item 18.02 > Additions to existing buildings are found at item 18.03 > New buildings are found at item 18.04 > Works abutting laneways are found at 18.05 > Definition of the property boundary are found at 18.06 > Vehicle Access, Parking and Garaging are found at item 18.07 > Civic works are found at item 18.08 > Buildings and works adjacent to and within parklands are found at item 18.09 > Subdivision are found at item 18.10 > Archaeological sites are found at item 18.11
POLICY REFERENCE DOCUMENTS Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne The City of Melbourne Heritage Places Inventory East Melbourne & Jolimont Conservation Study 1985 Parkville Conservation Study 1985 North & West Melbourne Conservation Study 1985 and 1993 Flemington & Kensington Conservation Study 1985 Carlton, North Carlton and Princes Hill Conservation Studies 1994 and 1985 South Yarra Conservation Study 1985 South Melbourne Conservation Study 1985 and 1998 Harbour, Railway, Industrial Conservation Study 1985 Central Activities District Conservation Study, 1985 City of Melbourne Heritage Study Significant Street Trees and Individual Significant Trees. Not yet prepared. City of Melbourne Heritage Study Laneway survey and grading review. Not yet prepared. City of Melbourne Heritage Study Streetscape survey and grading review. Not yet prepared.
Page 189 of 217 Attachment 3 Agenda Item 5.6 Planning and Environment Committee 6 September 2005
HERITAGE PRECINCTS PROJECT – CONSULTATION
Key stakeholders are community groups, the National Trust, City of Melbourne Staff, the City of Melbourne, the Department of Sustainability and Environment and Council’s Heritage Advisory Committee (Membership includes Councillors, Heritage Victoria, National Trust of Australia, Royal Historical Society, The East Melbourne Group Inc, Parkville Association, North & West Melbourne Association, Carlton Residents Association, Kensington Association, Melbourne South Yarra Group Inc).
DATE KEY STAGES AND CONSULTATIONS PHASE I - Consultation on Draft Study 2001 Project Commences April 2001 Resident groups review proposed consultation plan August 2001 Consultant appointed November 2001 Consultant interviews key stakeholders 2002 Consultation continues on progressive drafts. January 2002 Written submissions on elements of draft Study April 2002 Melbourne News ‘Improving Melbourne’s local heritage policy’ published April 2002 First draft of consultants report submitted May 2002 – Written submissions received on consultants draft report and progressive September 2002 drafts. Mid 2002 Consultation with DSE and Heritage Victoria on draft Study. 2003 Consultation continues on progressive drafts. August 2003 Study presented to Council’s Heritage Advisory Committee and Council’s Development Planning Branch for review. 2003 City of Melbourne Parks and Gardens review Study. September 2003 Meeting with consultant to agree on additional work required to finalise Study. 2004 Consultation continues on progressive drafts. August 2004 Submissions received from Council’s Heritage Advisory Committee.
September 2004 Submissions received from Council’s Development Planning Branch. September – Additional work submitted to make draft Study complete. December 2004 PHASE II - Consultation on Completed Study December 2004 Study presented to Council’s Heritage Advisory Committee for review. 2005 March Heritage Advisory Committee Consultation Workshop April Heritage Advisory Committee Consultation Workshop April Study provided to DSE/Heritage Victoria/Planning Systems for review. May Written submissions received from most Heritage Advisory Committee representatives. Page 190 of 217
June Lester Townsend of IUM appointed to hold workshops with key stakeholders, assemble and analyse key issues raised during consultation period and report to Council. June Heritage Advisory Committee Consultation Workshop to examine potential for whole of Committee submission June Meeting held with Heritage Victoria to discuss DSE/HV/Planning Systems feedback. June/July/August Further written submissions received from Heritage Advisory Committee representatives Mid to late July Workshops held with City of Melbourne planners for feedback. Written comments submitted. August 2 Written submission received from Heritage Victoria August 12 Report from Lester Townsend of IUM on study consultation. August 23 Briefing of Councillors at ‘Councillor Forum’ on Project and consultation process. August Distribution of IUM’s report on study consultation to all stakeholders consulted. September 2005 Report to Planning and Environment Committee on results of consultation. PHASE III – Exhibition of an Amendment By end fin year Notification to relevant government authorities and other entities as per 2006 statutory requirements Recurrent notices in local papers of affected areas Notice in Government Gazette Amendment documentation published on City of Melbourne website Frequently asked questions and fact sheet publications Frontline staff briefing Workshops and meetings as necessary Briefings for affected Council divisions including Parks, Urban Design General notification augmented by additional consultation as necessary including direct notification where the proposed amendment affects individual sites.
Page 191 of 217
Attachment 4 Agenda Item 5.6 Planning and Environment Committee 6 September 2005
Heritage Precincts and Policy Review project Report on consultations
Prepared for City of Melbourne by
Lester Townsend Pia Herbert IUM
25 August 2005
Page 192 of 217
Contents
1. Introduction...... 1 1.1Heritage precincts project...... 1 1.2Methodology ...... 2
2. Issues...... 3 2.1Process of heritage management...... 3 2.2Overview of issues...... 4
3. Proposals for alterations to heritage overlay ...... 6
4. Structure and approach ...... 7 4.1Statements of Significance for each Heritage Overlay Precinct ...... 7 4.2Detailed objectives for each precinct...... 9 The precinct objectives...... 9 Relationship of policy and performance standard objectives...... 10 Relationship of objectives and performance standards ...... 10 4.3Performance Standards...... 11 Precinct significance and individual building significance...... 11 Prescription versus performance...... 11 Conflicting standards...... 12 4.4Definitions related to performance standards ...... 12 4.5The language of the standards and policy ...... 16 4.6Need for an incorporated document ...... 16
5. Content ...... 17 Full, substantial and partial concealment...... 17 Particular issues ...... 17
6. Background material...... 18
7. Where to from here ...... 19 Summary of recommendations ...... 19
IUM: #3422945 v2 - SEP05 PE HERITAGE PRECINCTS AND POLICY REVIEW PROJECT ATT 4 Version 6 Page 193 of 217
1. Introduction
1.1 Heritage precincts project The City of Melbourne Heritage Precincts Project is a review of heritage local policy for heritage precincts in the new format Planning Scheme. When the City of Melbourne adopted heritage controls more than twenty years ago, it was one of the first Councils in Australia to do so. It led the way in recording assets and administering heritage provisions in the Planning Scheme. In part the review of heritage local policy for heritage precincts was brought about by changes introduced into planning schemes as part of the Victoria Planning Provisions, in particular the need for a ‘Statement of Significance’ for each Heritage Place. The Heritage Precincts Project study tasks included: · to prepare a Statement of Significance for each heritage precinct · to assess existing Local Policy in the Planning Scheme and make recommendations for change where necessary · to adjust the precinct boundaries, where required · to make recommendations for signposting the Local Policy within the revised Municipal Strategic Statement adopted by Council in 2004
Issues with the current scheme The final report of the consultants of the heritage precincts project – A review of heritage precincts local policy – states: As it presently exists the Melbourne City Council’s preference is to use two local policies (Clause 22.04 and 22.05) plus a Reference Document to implement its MSS objectives and strategies. As discussed … the overall problem with this approach is that the policies are too long, are repetitious of the overlay or the MSS, don’t help in making a decision or are confused as to what they are trying to achieve. Important aspects of the reference document tend to get lost in the translation. The Heritage Precincts Project has set out to address these problems. The consultants have produced the following integrated documents: A new Local Policy (Clause 22.XX) This is to apply to precinct Heritage Overlays, replacing the precinct provisions of the previous Clauses 22.04 and 22.05. Heritage Overlays to individual sites outside a precinct will not be covered by the proposed policy. Clause 22.05 will require amendment by others to cover the individual Heritage Overlays sites. An Incorporated Document Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne This includes a framework for Melbourne, Statements of Significance for each Heritage Overlay Precinct, Performance Standards within and outside the Capital City Zone, definitions and background information for each overlay. Amendment to the Municipal Strategic Statement and insertions in the Planning Scheme to give effect to the Incorporated document and the new Local Policy Draft maps for new Heritage overlay boundaries, including recommendations for two additional HOs within the Capital City Zone and two deleted HOs.. Recommendations for additional work to update the existing Heritage resources. These documents contain the following elements.
Heritage precincts and policy review project – report of consultations Page 1 Page 194 of 217
Material relevant to the application and administration of planning controls: · Proposals for alterations to heritage overlay · Changes to strategies in the MSS · Statements of Significance for each Heritage Overlay Precinct · Detailed objectives for each precinct · Performance Standards within and outside the Capital City Zone · Definitions related to performance standards. Information relevant to justifying the proposed controls or useful as background material: · A framework for Melbourne · Background information for each overlay · Changes to the background sections of the Municipal Strategic Statement.
Purpose of this report This report documents feedback from consultation held to review the material prepared by the consultants.
1.2 Methodology The material prepared by the consultants was circulated for comment to a range of stakeholders. This report is based on: · feedback from workshops with: - the heritage advisory group of Council - Council town planners · written annotations from Council town planners · written submissions from the Heritage Advisory Group and National Trust · notes of meetings and email correspondence between Council staff and Department of Sustainability officers. A range of detailed comments were received in the documentation as well as broader comments from the workshops. This report recommends a number of changes to the material that if adopted would result in a different organisation and expression of the material. In this regard detailed comments on specific issues have not been documented. This material is on file with the City of Melbourne and is available to assist in any redrafting.
Heritage precincts and policy review project – report of consultations Page 2 Page 195 of 217
2. Issues
2.1 Process of heritage management It is useful to consider the feedback on the documents within the overall framework of the task of heritage management. Heritage management has three distinct phases: · Identification – which places are important? · Assessment – how are they significant? · Management – how do we conserve significance?
Identification Identification in Victoria is achieved through the application of the Heritage overlay in the planning scheme. It can be applied to: · individual places · streetscapes · precincts The overlay does not distinguish between these different types of heritage assets and this can make planning tools confusing or ineffective at times.
Assessment This is reported in gradings of buildings and streetscapes and in ‘statements of significance’.
Management This is achieved through the permit process under the planning scheme (or Heritage Victoria for places on the Victorian heritage register). The following diagram shows the general steps in the assessment of heritage issues and the policy and planning scheme support for the decisions that need to be made at each step. It shows how inside the central city there are statements of significance but no guidelines, and outside the central city guidelines but no statements of significance.
Heritage precincts and policy review project – report of consultations Page 3 Page 196 of 217
General assessment process Inside central city Outside central city
Is the site in a This is shown on the Heritage overlay in the Planning Scheme. Heritage Overlay? Some changes to this overlay have been proposed
Gradings listed in reference Gradings listed in incorporated What is the building documents document Heritage Places grading? Inventory
What is the streetscape level?
What buildings are on either side?
What is significant? Policy has statements of No statements of significance significance for precincts
What is being proposed ?
Only broad objectives Only broad objectives Assessment No detailed performance Policy has performance standards standards
2.2 Overview of issues
Overview There was general acceptance of the need to introduce statements of significance for areas out side of the Central City Zone and performance standards for areas within the Central City Zone. New performance standards for issues where there is a gap to current performance standards, such as corner sites, were also welcomed. It was raised that heritage is only a part (albeit and important part) of the planning decision making process, and that the performance standards had been drafted in a way that did not refect this fact. However, the overall response was that the proposals were too complex and would be unworkable in practice.
Fixing what isn’t broken The consultants state:
Heritage precincts and policy review project – report of consultations Page 4 Page 197 of 217
In summary, the existence of a Heritage Overlay alone, does not enable a good heritage outcome as the overlay is dependent on a clear understanding of the “significance, character and appearance” of the heritage place. Unless there is a document or policy to support this overlay then it becomes benign. Inevitably, a benign overlay will be ignored by decision makers leading to decisions based primarily on the zone. Similarly, an overla y which relies on documents or policies which are unclear or unhelpful is also likely to be ignored by the decision maker. Concern was expressed by the Council planners that this was not an accurate representation of the current situation and that defects in the current decision making process and poor outcomes on the ground had not been properly identified.
Issues raised A number of positive features of the work were identified including: · the development of Statements of Significance · performance standards for corner sites · the background material and literature review. However, the general view was that the proposed structure was confusing and difficult to follow. A particular concern was how the proposal related to existing policies and the MSS. Specific concerns covered: · proposed extensions to the Heritage overlay · use of sub-precincts · drafting and content of the Statements of Significance · proposed changes to the definition of building gradings · treatment of graded buildings adjacent to precincts · objectives for each precinct · prescriptive nature of the performace standards · definitions related to performance standards · language of the standards and policy · the performance standards for concealment · issues around works abutting laneways · the performance standards for retention of rear private open spaces · retention of trees · the performance standards related to parklands · the control of civic works.
Heritage precincts and policy review project – report of consultations Page 5 Page 198 of 217
3. Proposals for alterations to heritage overlay
Extensions to the heritage overlay Consultations did not directly address specific changes to heritage overlays. However, Council planning staff expressed a general concern that heritage areas were too extensive across Melbourne. In areas with large terraces heritage controls and residents’ aspiration tended to coincide and maintaining the heritage of streetscapes and buildings was not seen as problematic. However, in areas where the housing stock consists of relatively small workers cottages the demands of modern living and the demands of heritage conservation were often at odds. Recommendation: 1 That no changes be made of precinct boundaries without comprehensive review of heritage issues.
Sub-precincts The material presents some information in terms of sub-precincts. These were seen to add an unnecessary complication. Department of Sustainability and Environment staff have advised: The use of sub-precincts is not supported - if necessary; reduce the larger areas to smaller, more specific areas, each with their own statement of significance. Recommendation: 2 That the use of sub-precincts be avoided.
Heritage precincts and policy review project – report of consultations Page 6 Page 199 of 217
4. Structure and approach
4.1 Statements of Significance for each Heritage Overlay Precinct The need for statements of significance is well recognised. There were a number of concerns raised about the statements.
Content of Statements of Significance Some participants found the Statements of Significance difficult to use and considered their structure confusing. The Statements present material about what is significant under several different headings: · Historical significance · Architectural significance · Aesthetic significance · Social significance · Contributing parts to the Cultural Significance · Key attributes of the precinct character. There was detailed feedback on how the Statements of Significance might be redrafted. A central concern was that the statements clearly articulated what was significant in an area in a way that provided clear guidance but did not rule out more detailed consideration identifying further significant elements. It was considered that Statements of Significance might be improved if they included: History A brief overview of the history of the precinct. There is generally no need to repeat documentary evidence available elsewhere, but a paragraph setting out the historical context of the precinct will help orient lay users of the scheme. Particular elements What is significant – a list of the particular elements that are significant in the precinct. This might also include a map and description. It would need to align with the current heritage inventory. Importance A one sentence statement on how significant the area is Why is it significant An integrated and ‘pithy’ heritage assessment of why it is significant written without using categories to break up the description. The Statements of Significance also repeat the precinct objectives from the Local Policy. This was seen as unnecessary. Recommendation: 3 That the Statements of Significance be redrafted with sections on: · History of precinct · Particular elements – a list of the particular elements that are significant in the precinct. · Importance · Why it is significant – an integrated and ‘pithy’ heritage assessment. Recommendation: 4 That the redrafted Statements of Significance include relevant material from the existing incorporated Heritage Inventory.
Heritage precincts and policy review project – report of consultations Page 7 Page 200 of 217
The National Trust has submitted that since the city precents were completed it has become the preferred approach to use either a precinct or individual building rather than both in the schedule to the heritage overlay that identifies heritage areas. Recommendation: 5 That the organisation of the Heritage Overlay schedule be reviewed to remove confusion between precinct issues and individual building issues.
Reference to significant elements There is inconsistent reference to particular elements that are significant in a precinct or context. These references include: ‘contributory parts’, ‘contributory component parts’, ‘the character of the heritage precinct’, ‘part of the character’, ‘significance of the Heritage Overlay’ and ‘cultural heritage significance’. It is not clear whether these references are to all the issues of significance described in the statements or just certain issues. For example does a reference to ‘cultural heritage significance’ include architectural significance? Concern has been expressed that about restricting controls to places within the 'primary period of significance', since this excludes places, particularly mid to later 20th century places. These issues could be addressed by redrafted Statements of Significance and consistent reference to those statements. Recommendation: 6 That a consistent way of referring the significance of heritage places be adopted.
Significance listed in definitions The documents detail what is significant in a number of places, for example the definition of laneway states what the significant parts of a lane or laneway are. This potentially confusing. Recommendation: 7 That all references to what is significant be confined to the statements of significance.
Gradings A number of issues were raised about gradings. The areas inside and outside the Central City use slightly different grading systems and grading definitions. Introduction of new grading definitions would require a reassessment of existing gradings. The laneway gradings are based on the material of the laneway construction and do not address the three dimensional issue of ‘lanescape’. Streetscape gradings are not formally incorporated into the scheme, but are best determined from the centrefold map in ‘Urban Conservation Areas – Guidelines for Owners’ dated from about 1984. The performance standards rely on these streetscape gradings and under VPP practice notes this information should be incorporated into the scheme either by being part of the scheme or in an incorporated document. Recommendation: 8 That existing building grading systems and grading definitions be retained. Recommendation: 9 That the laneway grades not be used unless comprehensively reviewed for the complete heritage significance of the lane. Recommendation: 10 That the Statement of Significance map (or list) streetscape gradings if these are to be used in performance standards.
Heritage precincts and policy review project – report of consultations Page 8 Page 201 of 217
Graded buildings adjacent to precincts The National Trust submitted that there are a number of graded buildings that are included in precincts for administrative convenience – for example buildings facing Swanston Street that are part of the Little Bourke Street precinct but have no connection with Chinese heritage. In revising the Statements of Significance this issue needs to be explicitly addressed. Recommendation: 11 That the Statements of Significance address the issue of adjacent graded buildings that have significance different to that of the precinct.
4.2 Detailed objectives for each precinct
The precinct objectives
Strategic objectives The precinct objectives are presented in the proposed Local Planning Policy and in the Statements of Significance. A number of these objectives are similar to proposed strategies in the revised MSS. For example the MSS has the strategy: Protect iconic views, including the views to the: · Shrine of Remembrance along Swanston Street from the State Library. · … The Collins Street east precinct has the objective: To retain the outstanding vista to the Old Treasury Building from within Collins Street. Many of the objectives in the policy might be better included in the MSS. This objective relating to the vista to the Old Treasury Building from within Collins Street will fit with existing statements about views in the MSS. Protecting these views might need an alternative planning scheme tool such as the Design and Development Overlay. In this regard it is important to note that Department of Sustainability and Environment officers have advised … there is no support for DDO's to protect vie w zones; planning does not guarantee a right to a view. The only control in the Scheme which comes close is the Shrine vista and that is of Capital City importance. This is a curious response given that Clause 19.03-2 of the Sate Planning Policy Framework says: Landmarks, views and vistas should be protected and enhanced or, where appropriate created by new additions to the built environment. Concern was expressed at the nature of the objectives and that some did not relate heritage issues. Other were seen as being too far reaching.
Design objectives More detailed objectives for precincts might be better handled by ensuring that the statement of significance addresses the issue identified in the objective. For example, in the Eastern Hill sub-precinct has the objective: To retain the key attributes of consistent scale and low height, within level 1 and 2 streetscapes in the sub-precinct.
Heritage precincts and policy review project – report of consultations Page 9 Page 202 of 217
If the statement of significance identified as a particular element ‘the consistent scale and low height of level 1 and 2 streetscapes’ then the general objective to conserve elements of significance would ensure that this objective was met. Recommendation: 12 That precinct objectives be incorporated as strategies into the Local Area section of the MSS where they are of a strategic nature or identified as particular elements in the statement of significance where they are more detailed.
Relationship of policy and performance standard objectives The performance standards also contain objectives – these overlap with the objectives common to all heritage precincts set out in the policy and the relationship between the objectives in the proposed policy and those in the proposed performance standards is not clear. For example, the policy has the objective: To ensure that the significant portions of the contributory parts of the precinct are retained. while the performance standards for areas outside of the Capital City Zone has the objective: To ensure the retention of contributory buildings, structures and parts, to the cultural heritage significance of the heritage precinct, as listed in the “Statement of Significance” for each HO precinct under “Contributory Parts to the Cultural Significance”, in this incorporated document. Recommendation: 13 That a clear relationship be articulated between the objectives in the policy and the objectives in the performance standards. Ideally the objectives should be the same, or a group of objectives in the performance standards should sit under the objectives of the policy.
Relationship of objectives and performance standards The performance standards document includes a summary of performance standards that repeats some, but not all, of the performance standards presented. The performance standards listed in the summary act more like objectives in the body of the performance standards section. These and some other some performance standards might be better cast as objectives to support more detailed performance standards. For example the performance standard New building facade height should not result in a form that would diminish the prominence of the adjoining graded buildings is followed by three very detailed and prescriptive performance standards. Recasting this performance standard as an objective could provide a clearer policy framework for the detailed performance measures. Recommendation: 14 That an explicit objective be articulated for each performance standard.
Heritage precincts and policy review project – report of consultations Page 10 Page 203 of 217
4.3 Performance Standards
Precinct significance and individual building significance An issue with the way heritage controls are implemented in the VPP is that no distinction is drawn between individual buildings as heritage places, and precincts as heritage places. The purpose of the Heritage Precincts project is to provide a policy basis to address this issues. Generally A and B graded buildings will have sufficient significance of themselves to warrant conservation. The critical issue is providing clear guidance around the management of C and D graded buildings. Individual buildings need to be conserved because of their contribution to the significance of the precinct. New development needs to respect the heritage significance of the precinct. The organisation of the performance standards does not clearly distinguish between: Conservation of buildings · conservation of A and B graded buildings for their worth as individual buildings · conservation of A, B, C and D graded buildings because of their contribution to the significance of the precinct Impacts on A and B graded buildings · the impact of alterations or additions to A and B graded buildings because of the impact on the significance of the building · the impact of alterations or additions to all buildings or the construction of new buildings because of the impact on adjacent or nearby A or B graded buildings Impacts on the precinct · the impact of alterations or additions to all buildings or the construction of new buildings because of the impact on the significance of the precinct. The performance standards are set out under the headings of: · retention of contributory buildings, structures and parts · alterations to existing buildings · additions to existing buildings · new buildings · works abutting laneways (not in central city) · definition of the property boundary · vehicle access (and parking and garaging outside central city) · civic works · buildings and works adjacent to and within parklands · subdivision (and amalgamation in central city) · archaeological sites. These headings are not mutually exclusive and there is overlap between the standards under each heading. For example a new building might also be a building abutting a laneway. Recommendation: 15 That the organisation of the performance standards be reviewed to remove overlap and better distinguish between precinct issues and individual building issues.
Prescription versus performance There was concern that the provisions were overly prescriptive and that it did not allow for the proper assessment of the impact of the proposal. Planners who have experience of similar regimes in other Councils advised that ultimately such prescription was unhelpful and did not always achieve good outcomes. An example of the prescriptive nature of the control is:
Heritage precincts and policy review project – report of consultations Page 11 Page 204 of 217
The height of additions visible from lanes (not including buildings immediately abutting the lanes) should: · achieve full concealment within the laneway viewing zone for buildings of grade ‘A’ and ‘B’ anywhere in the municipality, · achieve full concealment above a 12 degrees sightline, taken at a height of 1.7m above the natural ground level, on the opposite side of the lane, from any position within the laneway viewing zone, for all buildings in a level 1 lanescape, · not diminish the prominence of existing contributory buildings within the laneway viewing zone in a level 2 lanescape. Whether or not Melbourne should adopt a prescriptive is a broad planning scheme governance issue. If a prescriptive approach is desired then it will need to be justified to gain Department of Sustainability and Environment approval for exhibition, and support at a panel hearing if there are submissions against the approach. The study does not present any analysis in support of the prescriptive standards proposed. This does not make them wrong, but it might mean that securing approval of a planning scheme amendment that contains them will be difficult. Department of Sustainability and Environment officers have suggested: Simplify the performance standards and include these within the local policy if necessary. Otherwise they are most suited to guidelines in a reference document. Restructuring the performance standard so that the objective of each standard was clearer would provide a stronger performance based approach. Some of the performance standards do not seem to be directed at a clear policy outcome. For example PSO1 specifies that certain parts of C or D graded warehouses should be retained whether or not it is visible. Despite being named ‘performance standards’ it is difficult to see how the standards proposed are clearly related to a performance-based objective in most instances. Recommendation: 16 That the performance standards be reviewed to ensure they are a justified response to achieving clearly specified objectives.
Conflicting standards Concern was expressed that standards related to the setback of upper levels were misleading because in most instances given the sightlines required under the concealment standards are greater setback would be required. If the performance standards are reordered so that each performance standard is related to a clear objective then these conflicts should become more obvious and the standards can be revised to address the conflict.
4.4 Definitions related to performance standards The use of definitions was seen to introduce a level of complexity that made the documents harder to use and understand. The definitions are a mix of: · definitions · glossary items · statements about the scope of controls · assessment protocols · controls
Heritage precincts and policy review project – report of consultations Page 12 Page 205 of 217
· performance measures · notes · statements of significance · general advice · alternatives to VPP definitions Examples of these are as follows:
Glossary items A glossary entry is provided for AHD: AHD: Australian Height Datum If readers do not know what AHD means it might be better to use the full term in text. It is not clear why levels must be to AHD and not simply to a convenient local datum.
Scope of control Sometimes the definition sets the scope of the control. For example, in the definition civil works fences on public land are only included when they contribute ‘to the significance of the Heritage Overlay’. This is using the definition to set the scope of what the control apply to rather than simply define what is meant. Chapter 9 of Using Victoria’s Planning System ‘What is plain English’ specifically warns against this practice.
Assessment protocols Some of the definitions are assessment protocols for example: Concealment, including full, substantive and partial concealment. Where indicated, compliance with a level of concealment is required within the streetscape viewing zone. The following parameters apply: · Interruption to views by graded buildings on the site and/or adjacent graded buildings within the streetscape viewing zone may also be taken into account. · The viewing height is 1.7m. above footpath AHD, and the viewing position is at the property line on the opposite side of the road. · A sight line from directly opposite the site will provide an indication of the level of concealment. Sight lines may also be required from other positions within the viewing zone. The laneway viewing zone sets out a protocol for assessing visibility. Statements such as ‘Sight lines will also be required from other positions within the viewing zone’ do not sit comfortably in a definit ion. Laneway Viewing Zone The plan area and vertical view zone of the laneway, where the performance standards are applied. The plan area of the Laneway Viewing Zone is comprised of the laneway land abutting the subject site and the laneway land for 10 metres on either side. The vertical view zone of the laneway is defined by · The viewing height at 1.7m. above the ground level AHD, on the opposite side of the lane; and · Elements visible above 13 degrees from horizontal; and · The form of graded buildings on th e site and the two adjoining sites on each side, including rear toilets, stables and outbuildings etc, may be taken into account in assessing concealment.
Heritage precincts and policy review project – report of consultations Page 13 Page 206 of 217
A sight line from directly opposite the site will provide an indication of the level of visibility. Sight lines will also be required from other positions within the viewing zone.
Controls Some definitions introduce performance controls. For example ‘Concealment Partial’ does not define what partial concealment is – which might be something along the lines the of ‘only a minor or unobtrusive part of new works is visible’. Rather it sets out a prescriptive performance standard to be achieved when the performance standards themselves call for partial concealment. It is not clear why this material is a defin ition and not in the performance standards themselves. Concealment Partial There is partial concealment of the proposed development by the existing graded building, the facade walls of a new building, or by adjacent graded buildings. Partial concealment is achieved when the perceived building height of the proposed development does not exceed the facade height by more than 20%. Where there are few graded buildings in the street partial concealment of higher rear parts to a new building will be achieved when the perceived building height of the proposed development does not exceed the facade height by more than 30%.
Partial Concealment
Notes Some definitions are simply notes. Lanescape - Levels 1, 2 and 3 Note that a review of laneway definitions and levels is recommended to take into account changes over 20 years and to respond the provisions of this incorporated document. Currently laneways have the same definitions as streetscapes. A review of laneways across the municipality across the municipality will be required. All level 1 and level 2 laneways are to be mapped and have a Data Sheet that will note the contributory elements in the laneways.
Statements of significance Some definitions refer to significance – for example the definition of road includes:
Heritage precincts and policy review project – report of consultations Page 14 Page 207 of 217
Significant parts of a street or road include: · paved surfaces, street signs, street furniture, light standards, sewer vents, and other services components which contribute to the significance of the Heritage Overlay · footpaths and landscaped spaces within the reservation, · fences which contribute to the significance of the Heritage Overlay, · open spaces at the front and side of allotments, · contributory buildings and structures, · contributory street trees and plantings. · early painted or affixed signs; or early signs embodied in the fabric of a structure, where these are within the primary period of significance for the Heritage overlay
General advice Sometimes the definition is simply advice on how the controls might be interpreted. Roof In almost all cases, building elements which are less than 45 degrees above the horizontal plane will be considered to be roof. Building elements which are more than 45 degrees above the horizontal plane will be considered to be walls.
Alternatives to VPP definitions Setback is defined in the VPP. The definition section introduces an alternative definition. This is confusing. Similar issues also exist for ‘Development’ Proposed definition of Setback The distance from the property boundary to the façade of a building or to works. The front setback to a building façade does not include verandahs, arcades and porches, which commonly project forward of the setback alignment. VPP definition of Setback The minimum distance from any allotment boundary to a building.
Conclusion of definitions The definitions are problematic. Rather than define specific terms they create a series of abstract concepts – ‘partial concealment’, ‘laneway viewing zone’, ‘streetscape viewing zone’ that are ultimately confusing and difficult to understand. Recommendation: 17 That the use of terms requiring reference to a glossary be avoided if possible. Recommendation: 18 That statements about the scope of controls, assessment protocols, controls and performance measures in the definitions be explicitly included with the performance measures. Recommendation: 19 That notes and general advice be removed from the definitions. Recommendation: 20 That the definitions be checked for consistency against VPP definitions and all definitions be deleted or incorporated in the performance standards if possible.
Heritage precincts and policy review project – report of consultations Page 15 Page 208 of 217
4.5 The language of the standards and policy
Drafting conventions The performance standards have not been drafted in a consistent fashion or in accordance with accepted conventions. For example Sandblasting of render, masonry or timber surfaces and painting previously unpainted surfaces, alters original fabric and is unlikely to be supported is not written in the language of a performance standard. It also addresses two separate issues – taking paint off and putting paint on – in the one sentence. It would be better cast as: Original render, masonry or timber surface should not be sandblasted. Previously unpainted surfaces should not be painted. Recommendation: 21 That the language of the performance standards be reviewed to ensure the follow plain English principles and drafting conventions set out in Using Victoria’s Planning System.
Diagrams The diagrams in the definitions all show flat rooved buildings. Incorporating rooves into the diagrams was seen as necessary to clarify how the definitions would work in practice. Recommendation: 22 That the diagrams in the material be reviewed, particularly in relation to showing rooves.
Retention Concern was expressed whether the objectives might be better expressed as ‘To encourage the retention of …’ rather than ‘To retain … ’. This change would reduce the relative weight of heritage concerns. Recommendation: 23 That the language of the objectives be reviewed to ensure they accurately reflect the weight the City of Melbourne wishes to place on heritage issues in the planning system.
4.6 Need for an incorporated document The practice note on reference and incorporated documents sets out the principle that a document that is needed in the exercise of discretion should be incorporated into the planning scheme. This means that Statements of Significance and gradings should be part of the planning scheme itself or part of an incorporated document. If the recommendations in this report are adopted then it seems likely that the revised performance standards can be included in the planning scheme as a Local Planning Policy.
Heritage precincts and policy review project – report of consultations Page 16 Page 209 of 217
5. Content
Full, substantial and partial concealment The approach to concealment and identifying three levels of concealment: · full · substantive · partial is not supported by all participants and there is concern that not all situations have been properly addressed. The issue of concealment was one where a highly prescriptive approach was least favoured by planners. Recommendation: 24 That the performance standards related to concealment be reviewed.
Particular issues
Works abutting laneways Works abutting laneways are a concern to the community. The current laneway grading are not appropriate for use in performance standards.
Retention of rear private open spaces Concern was expressed that taken together the need to preserve rear open spaces and protect laneways would prevent all development in some areas.
Trees Concern was expressed over the range of performance standards addressing trees and tree removal when there is no planning control over tree removal. Standards related to the health of street trees would be better dealt with under a different part of the planning system.
Parklands The performance standards related to parkland heritage were seen as unworkable in practice.
Civic works Concern was expressed over the issue of civic works. When a permit is required for civic works the community response often focuses on issues other than heritage. A better way of handling civic works was seen as desirable particularly as the City of Melbourne has a sophisticated and well-documented set of TechNotes to address civic design issues.
Recommendation in response to particular issues Recommendation: 25 That the performance standards be reviewed as they relate to · works on laneways · retention of rear open spaces · trees · parkland.
Heritage precincts and policy review project – report of consultations Page 17 Page 210 of 217
6. Background material Historic material is presented in: · the MSS · in an overview titled ‘Framework for Melbourne’ that forms part of the incorporated document · in an Appendix in the incorporated document. The additional background material in the MSS makes the MSS wordy. The MSS has been reviewed as part of Amendment C60 and there seems to be little need to alter what is proposed by that amendment. It is useful to have a consolidated history of Melbourne and its precincts but this does not have to be an incorporated document. Recommendation: 26 That background material be drawn together in a reference document.
Heritage precincts and policy review project – report of consultations Page 18 Page 211 of 217
7. Where to from here The consultant report stated: … the [current] policies are too long, are repetitious of the overlay or the MSS, don’t help in making a decision or are confused as to what they are trying to achieve. Important aspects of the reference document tend to get lost in the translation The overall sense from the feedback is that the new proposals, while adding some welcome elements, do nothing to address these current issues. It is clear from the feedback that revision of the material prepared to date is required. It may be useful to split this revision into three phases: · preparation of revised Statements of Significance · developing revised policy/performance standards guidance · review of precinct boundaries.
Summary of recommendations
Recommendation: 1 That no changes be made of precinct boundaries without comprehensive review of heritage issues. Recommendation: 2 That the use of sub-precincts be avoided. Recommendation: 3 That the Statements of Significance be redrafted with sections on: • History of precinct • Particular elements – a list of the particular elements that are significant in the precinct. • Importance • Why it is significant – an integrated and ‘pithy’ heritage assessment. Recommendation: 4 That the redrafted Statements of Significance include relevant material from the existing incorporated Heritage Inventory. Recommendation: 5 That the organisation of the Heritage Overlay schedule be reviewed to remove confusion between precinct issues and individual building issues. Recommendation: 6 That a consistent way of referring the significance of heritage places be adopted. Recommendation: 7 That all references to what is significant be confined to the statements of significance. Recommendation: 8 That existing building grading systems and grading definitions be retained. Recommendation: 9 That the laneway grades not be used unless comprehensively reviewed for the complete heritage significance of the lane. Recommendation: 10 That the Statement of Significance map (or list) streetscape gradings if these are to be used in performance standards. Recommendation: 11 That the Statements of Significance address the issue of adjacent graded buildings that have a significance different to that of the precinct. Recommendation: 12 That precinct objectives be incorporated as strategies into the Local Area section of the MSS where they are of a strategic nature or identified as particular elements in the statement of significance where they are more detailed.
Heritage precincts and policy review project – report of consultations Page 19 Page 212 of 217
Recommendation: 13 That a clear relationship be articulated between the objectives in the policy and the objectives in the performance standards. Ideally the objectives should be the same, or a group of objectives in the performance standards should sit under the objectives of the policy. Recommendation: 14 That an explicit objective be articulated for each performance standard. Recommendation: 15 That the organisation of the performance standards be reviewed to remove overlap and better distinguish between precinct issues and individual building issues. Recommendation: 16 That the performance standards be reviewed to ensure they are a justified response to achieving clearly specified objectives. Recommendation: 17 That the use of terms requiring reference to a glossary be avoided if possible. Recommendation: 18 That statements about the scope of controls, assessment protocols, controls and performance measures in the definitions be explicitly included with the performance measures. Recommendation: 19 That notes and general advice be removed from the definitions. Recommendation: 20 That the definitions be checked for consistency against VPP definitions and all definitions be deleted or incorporated in the performance standards if possible. Recommendation: 21 That the language of the performance standards be reviewed to ensure the follow plain English principles and drafting conventions set out in Using Victoria’s Planning System. Recommendation: 22 That the diagrams in the material be reviewed, particularly in relation to showing rooves. Recommendation: 23 That the language of the objectives be reviewed to ensure they accurately reflect the weight the City of Melbourne wishes to place on heritage issues in the planning system. Recommendation: 24 That the performance standards related to concealment be reviewed. Recommendation: 25 That the performance sta ndards be reviewed as they relate to • works on laneways • retention of rear open spaces • trees • parkland. Recommendation: 26 That background material be drawn together in a reference document.
Heritage precincts and policy review project – report of consultations Page 20 Page 213 of 217 Attachment 5 Agenda Item 5.6 Planning and Environment Committee 6 September 2005 Summary of Key Outcomes from the Meredith Gould and Associates Consultants Study Reports:
1. The submitted Heritage Precincts and Policy Review Study comprise two documents prepared by Consultant Meredith Gould Architects Pty Ltd.
“City of Melbourne, Herita ge Precincts Project, A Review of Heritage Precincts Local Policy, December 2004, Final Report. This is the consultants final study report reviewing the City of Melbourne’s policy on heritage precincts.
City of Melbourne, Heritage Precincts Project, Incorporated Document: Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne, December 2004, Final Report. It is drafted as an Incorporated Document, proposed to form part of the Melbourne Planning Scheme. This document is the product which implements the review recommendations.”
2. Key outcomes as recommended by the consultant and contained in these reports are summarised below :
2.1. production of a new Local Policy to apply to precinct Heritage Overlays. This heritage precincts policy clause sets out the objectives, application requirements and decision making guidelines for those heritage precincts which have been identified as part of the cultural heritage of Melbourne;
2.2. a new Incorporated Document ‘Heritage Precincts in the City of Melbourne’. The consultant has produced an incorporated document which is intended to be a decision making manual which is part of the planning scheme. It should contain the key information required to make decisions about the care of heritage places in heritage precincts. An incorporated document is an external document to the planning scheme but is legally part of the planning scheme.
2.3. The key points to note are:
2.3.1. this document is the proposed tool for decision making and should be read in conjunction with the new Local Policy clause and the existing Incorporated Document ‘Heritage Places Inventory’ which lists those places subject to the Heritage Overlay provisions. The Incorporated Document outlines the essential qualities of Melbourne, identifying its key components, including defining 16 heritage precincts;
2.3.2. having identified the areas of heritage significance, an assessment of the unique values of these different areas is presented. The document articulates clear and succinct statements of significance for six precincts outside the capital city zone (Carlton, East Melbourne, Kensington and Flour Milling, North and West Melbourne, Parkville and South Yarra) and the ten precincts within the capital city zone and clarifies their boundaries; and
2.3.3. finally, management of these significant places is guided by new performance standards for precincts subject to a Heritage Overlay in Melbourne. These standards have been developed to guide development, establishing positive standards and providing clarity for applicants and decision makers. The performance standards also address subdivision and archaeological sites and important landscape components within the City such as civic works, for which guidance was previously not clearly defined. Page 214 of 217
2.3.4. Issues addressed in the performance standards include:
2.3.4.1. a cle ar indication of what fabric is to be retained;
2.3.4.2. a clear indication of where assessment in relation to new works would apply; to replace the current provisions which apply to the whole of the street in which the building has a frontage;
2.3.4.3. replacing the definition of “partial concealment” with a quantitative assessment of the visibility of high rear parts to new and existing buildings;
2.3.4.4. clarity for the height of new buildings in relation to the existing development;
2.3.4.5. clarity in relation to corner sites;
2.3.4.6. setting the circumstances where ‘assessment from adjoining streets would apply’;
2.3.4.7. establishing where heritage issues would apply to works at the rear of a site; and
2.3.4.8. archaeological issues; and
2.4. amendment to the Municipal Strategic Statement and insertions in the Planning Scheme, to give effect to the above new Local Policy and Incorporated Document and draft maps of Heritage Overlay boundaries. These actions are the tools required to change the planning scheme to give effect to policy change.
Figure 1 Meredith Gould and Associates Consultants Study Reports Page 215 of 217 Attachment 6 Agenda Item 5.6 Planning and Environment Committee 6 September 2005 Summary of the Planning Scheme Study and Amendment Process
Planning Scheme Strategic Study Process Amendment Process
Strategic Study identified/issue Amendment request Amendment Adoption scoped (where relevant) by Council
Amendment Approval Consultant engaged Amendment by to undertake Study Preparation Minister for Planning
Consultation during Amendment Study process Exhibition
Submissions Consultation on Received Study Report
Panel Hearing Decision to proceed to (where relevant) Planning Scheme Amendment process (where relevant) Panel Report Page 216 of 217 Agenda Item 5.6 Planning and Environment Committee 6 September 2005
FINANCE ATTAC HMENT
HERITAGE PRECINCTS AND POLICY REVIEW PROJECT
Costs will be associated with the subsequent exhibition of an amendment. These costs can be met from the Development Planning Branch’s 2004/05 Operating Budget.
Joe Groher Manager Financial Services
Page 217 of 217 Agenda Item 5.6 Planning and Environment Committee 6 September 2005
LEGAL ATTACHMENT
HERITAGE PRECINCTS AND POLICY REVIEW PROJECT
The first stage in the Planning Scheme amendment process is that section 9 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (recently amended by the Planning and Environment (General Amendment) Act 2004 provides that the Council must apply to the Minister for authorisation to prepare a planning scheme amendment in a form approved by the Minister and containing the information required by the Minister.
Section 9(3) of the Act provides that the Minister may authorise the preparation of an amendment subject to any conditions including conditions in relation to the giving of notice of the amendment.
Alison Lyon Manager Legal & Governance