DOCSLIB.ORG

Review of the Shire of Newstead Heritage Study Precincts & Specific

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Review of the Shire of Newstead Heritage Study Precincts & Specific Shire of Mount Alexander Review of the Shire of Newstead Heritage Study Precincts & Specific Individual Places Vaughan, 1868. Source: Newstead Historical Society. Prepared by: Wendy Jacobs: Architect & Heritage Consultant & Dr David Rowe, Authentic Heritage Services Pty Ltd October 2011 Table of Contents Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY i 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Aims of the Review 1 1.2 Acknowledgments 1 1.3 Project Outcomes 2 1.4 Significance Criteria & Thresholds 4 2.0 Heritage Precincts 2.1 Campbells Creek 8 2.2 Fryerstown 17 2.3 Guildford 28 2.4 Newstead 38 2.5 Vaughan 53 3.0 Specific Individual Places 64 4.0 Recommendations 4.1 Heritage Precincts 72 4.2 Individual Places Outside Precincts (removed from Revised Precincts) 73 4.3 Review of Specific Individual Places 74 5.0 Appendices 5.1 Illustrated List of All Places Within Original Precincts 77 5.2 Illustrated List of Places in the Revised Campbells Creek Precinct 5.3 Illustrated List of Places in the Revised Fryerstown Precinct 5.4 Illustrated List of Places in the Revised Guildford Precinct 5.5 Illustrated List of Places in the Revised Newstead Precincts 5.6 Illustrated List of Places in the Revised Vaughan Precinct 5.7 List of Non Significant Places in the Revised Campbells Creek Precinct 5.8 List of Non Significant Places in the Revised Fryerstown Precinct 5.9 List of Non Significant Places in the Revised Guildford Precinct 5.10 List of Non Significant Places in the Revised Newstead Precinct 5.11 List of Non Significant Places in the Revised Vaughan Precinct 5.12 Revised Heritage Citations Review of the Shire of Newstead Heritage Study & Specific Individual Places 2011 Summary Executive Summary Introduction Wendy Jacobs, Architect and Heritage Consultant, and Dr David Rowe, Authentic Heritage Services, were commissioned by the Mount Alexander Shire Council in June 2011 to undertake a review of the heritage precincts and specific individual places identified in the Heritage Study of Newstead Stage 2 (May 2004). A draft of the Review was provided to the Mount Alexander Shire in July 2011. Aims of the Review The principal aims of the Review have been to: Identify (through fieldwork) all non-significant places in the 5 heritage precincts: Campbells Creek; Fryerstown; Guildford; Newstead; and Vaughan. Provide lists of all non-significant places in the 5 heritage precincts. Review submissions received by Council in relation to heritage citations and where necessary, undertake additional research and verify and/or correct the assessments provided in the Stage 2 Study. The secondary aims of the Review have been to: Review the boundaries of the 5 heritage precincts. Where necessary, refresh the supporting documentation and statements of significance for the 5 heritage precincts. It has not been the purpose of the Review to completely re-evaluate the 5 heritage precincts, but to provide limited updated information in support of their heritage values. This Review has also not involved a re-evaluation of proposed heritage precinct policies for the Mount Alexander Planning Scheme, although some limited additional policy recommendations are provided to support the refreshed statements of significance of the precincts. Recommendations Heritage Precincts It is recommended that heritage overlays be applied to the five (5) revised heritage precincts at Campbells Creek, Fryerstown, Guildford, Newstead and Vaughan as outlined in this Review. It is recommended that the significance status for each of the following places be amended in each of the precincts: Campbells Creek . 51 Main Road – dwelling at rear of site adjacent to railway line (contributory significance). Wendy Jacobs: Architect & Heritage Consultant & Dr David Rowe: Authentic Heritage Services Pty Ltd i Review of the Shire of Newstead Heritage Study & Specific Individual Places 2011 Summary . Main Road – Avenue of Honour (local significance) (between 113 Main Rd east side & 92 Main Rd west side, & 120 Midland Hwy east side & 127 Midland Hwy west side). Fryerstown . 13 Heron Street: Treed land comprising the former National School Reserve (contributory significance). Opp. 2 High Street: Stone Bridge abutments and stone creek embankments (contributory significance). Opp. 60 High Street: Stone Bridge abutments (contributory significance). Lot 13, 26 High Street: Mine Dump (contributory significance). Opp. 32 High Street: Perseverance Mine Dump (contributory significance). 2 Market Street: Park, including Eucalyptus & Cypress Trees (contributory significance). Guildford . 1 Ballarat Street: Reserve (formerly part of Russell Square) (contributory significance). Parker Street: John Powell Reserve (formerly Russell Square) (contributory significance. Newstead . 3 Creswick Newstead Road: Dwelling (contributory significance.) . 1 Lyons Street: The Shambles (3 shops) (contributory significance). 23 Lyons Street: Dwelling (contributory significance). 25 Lyons Street: Butcher’s Shop (contributory significance). 3 Tivey Street: Dwelling (contributory significance). 8 Tivey Street: Shed (contributory significance). Vaughan . VN/01, off Greville Street: Vaughan Mineral Springs: (reserve now included in heritage precinct – no change to significance). VN/03, opp. 33 Greville Street: Chinese Burial Ground: (burial ground now included in heritage precinct – no change to significance). VN/05, Fryers Creek, Greville Street: Bridge over Fryers Creek (bridge now included in heritage precinct – no change to significance). VN/13, Tarilta Road: Tarilta Road Bridge (bridge now included in heritage precinct – no change to significance). Although it is outside of the scope of this Review to re-examine the proposed heritage precinct policies for the Mt Alexander Shire Planning Scheme, the following is recommended for the Fryerstown and Vaughan Heritage Precincts: . Consideration be given to more broadly defined policy for future building development. It could include promoting: new buildings of a range of forms and designs, and of contextually modest (single storey) scales that do not impose on or detract from the significant heritage landscape setting and/or neighbouring significant buildings; construction Wendy Jacobs: Architect & Heritage Consultant & Dr David Rowe: Authentic Heritage Services Pty Ltd ii Review of the Shire of Newstead Heritage Study & Specific Individual Places 2011 Summary materials that are not highly reflective within the landscape; recessive garaging and/or carports, and visually permeable residential front fences to 1200-1300 mm heights of designs and construction that are contemporary interpretations of front fencing in the precinct and respond to the designs of the new buildings. Consideration be given to the high archaeological potential of these precincts. As all archaeological sites are protected under the Heritage Act 1995, consent is required from Heritage Victoria to disturb them. Therefore, it is recommended that policy be prepared that reflects this legislation. Consideration could be given to the following: “Where ground disturbance uncovers archaeological evidence of 19th century gold mining and associated building activity, works should cease until notification has been made with and approval given by Heritage Victoria for works to proceed, in accordance with the Victorian Heritage Act 1995.” . Any policy or incorporated document that includes the lists of non- significant places for these places be treated differently given the high archaeological potential of these areas as set out in the statements of significance for the Vaughan and Fryerstown precincts. Exotic trees on public land and road reserves as outlined in the precinct statements of significance be identified as tree controls for each of the heritage overlays in the Schedule to the Heritage Overlay. Individual Places Outside Precincts (removed from Revised Precincts) It is recommended that individual heritage overlays apply to those places of local significance previously located within the heritage precincts (and now excluded from them). These places are: Campbells Creek Precinct . CC/80: 10A Princess. CC/82: 12 Princess Street. CC/85: 24 Princess Street. CC/86: 26 Princess Street. Fryerstown Precinct No change recommended. Guildford Precinct No change recommended. Newstead Precincts . ND/16 Pair of Dwellings: 8 Church Street . Rotunda Park, Pyrenees Highway, including ND/63 Major Mitchell Cairn and ND/64 Band Rotunda. ND/88 Williams House: 3 Wyndham Street. ND/89 Clarke House: 9 Wyndham Street. Wendy Jacobs: Architect & Heritage Consultant & Dr David Rowe: Authentic Heritage Services Pty Ltd iii Review of the Shire of Newstead Heritage Study & Specific Individual Places 2011 Summary Vaughan Precinct No change recommended. Review of Specific Individual Places As a result of the informal exhibition by the Mount Alexander Shire a number of submissions were received by the Mount Alexander Shire. Changes to places were also noted in the years since Stage 1 of the study was undertaken in 1998. 38 places were reviewed. These reviewed citations are included as Appendix 5.12. As a result of the field work 4 citations have been revised and it is recommended that 22 new citations be prepared. A concern of some submitters was the condition of building fabric. While these concerns are acknowledged, attempts were made to clarify that these issues are generally outside the recognized heritage assessment process. This is supported in the Australia ICOMOS Burra Charter and particularly the Guidelines to the Burra Charter on Cultural Significance. Economic and condition
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Electronic Gaming Machines Strategy 2015-2020
    Electronic Gaming Machines Strategy 2015-2020 Version: 1.1 Date approved: 22 December 2015 Reviewed: 15 January 2019 Responsible Department: Planning Related policies: Nil 1 Purpose ................................................................................................................. 3 2 Definitions ............................................................................................................. 3 3 Acronyms .............................................................................................................. 5 4 Scope .................................................................................................................... 5 5 Executive Summary ............................................................................................. 5 6 Gambling and EGMs in the City of Casey ........................................................... 6 7 City of Casey Position on Electronic Gaming Machines ................................... 7 7.1 Advocacy & Partnerships ....................................................................................... 7 7.2 Local Economy ....................................................................................................... 8 7.3 Consultation & Information Provision ...................................................................... 9 7.4 Community Wellbeing ............................................................................................ 9 7.5 Planning Assessment ..........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 7.5. Final Outcomes of 2020 General Valuation
    Council Meeting Agenda 24/08/2020 7.5 Final outcomes of 2020 General Valuation Abstract This report provides detailed information in relation to the 2020 general valuation of all rateable property and recommends a Council resolution to receive the 1 January 2020 General Valuation in accordance with section 7AF of the Valuation of Land Act 1960. The overall movement in property valuations is as follows: Site Value Capital Improved Net Annual Value Value 2019 Valuations $82,606,592,900 $112,931,834,000 $5,713,810,200 2020 Valuations $86,992,773,300 $116,769,664,000 $5,904,236,100 Change $4,386,180,400 $3,837,830,000 $190,425,800 % Difference 5.31% 3.40% 3.33% The level of value date is 1 January 2020 and the new valuation came into effect from 1 July 2020 and is being used for apportioning rates for the 2020/21 financial year. The general valuation impacts the distribution of rating liability across the municipality. It does not provide Council with any additional revenue. The distribution of rates is affected each general valuation by the movement in the various property classes. The important point from an equity consideration is that all properties must be valued at a common date (i.e. 1 January 2020), so that all are affected by the same market. Large shifts in an individual property’s rate liability only occurs when there are large movements either in the value of a property category (e.g. residential, office, shops, industrial) or the value of certain locations, which are outside the general movements in value across all categories or locations.
    [Show full text]
  • Community Profile Newstead 3462
    Mount Alexander Shire Council Local Community Planning Project Community Profile Newstead 3462 Image by Leigh Kinrade 1 INTRODUCTION Mount Alexander Shire Council has been funded over three years until May 2014, through the State Government’s Department of Planning and Community Development, to undertake the Mount Alexander Shire Local Community Planning Project (LCPP). The project aims to support local community engagement across the Shire to enable communities to articulate their needs and aspirations through the development of local community-based Action Plans. In September 2011, Council announced that Newstead would be one of three townships to participate in the first round of planning. This document has been formulated to provide some background information about Newstead and a starting point for discussion. ABOUT MOUNT ALEXANDER SHIRE The original inhabitants of the Mount Alexander area were the Jaara Jaara Aboriginal people. European settlement dates from the late 1830s, with land used mainly for pastoral purposes, particularly sheep grazing. Population was minimal until the 1850s, spurred by gold mining from 1851, the construction of the railway line, and the establishment of several townships. Rapid growth took place into the late 1800s before declining as gold supplies waned and mines were closed. Relatively stable between the 1950’s and the 1980’s, the population increased from about 12,700 in 1981 to 16,600 in 2006. The 1 preliminary Estimated Resident Population for 2010 is 18,421 . Mount Alexander Shire (MAS, the Shire) forms part of the Loddon Mallee Region (the Region), which encompasses ten municipalities and covers nearly 59,000km 2 in size, or approximately 26 percent of the land area of the State of Victoria.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2012/2013
    Mount Alexander Shire Council ANNUAL REPORT 2012/2013 Mount Alexander Shire Council Annual Report 2012/2013 1 Contents COUNCIL’S VISION, MISSION AND VALUES 2 Code of Conduct 68 A SNAPSHOT OF MOUNT ALEXANDER SHIRE 3 Council Plan 2009 - 2013 68 MAYOR’S MESSAGE 4 Citizenship Ceremonies 69 CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER’S MESSAGE 5 Risk Management 69 YOUR COUNCIL 6 Freedom of Information 70 Council elections 7 Protected Disclosures Act 2012 70 Elected Representatives 7 Publicly Available Documents 71 Ward Map 10 Audit and Risk Advisory Committee 72 FLOOD WORKS 11 STATUTORY REPORTING 73 DELIVERING ON OUR COMMITMENTS 13 Best Value 74 Strengthening our community 14 Victorian Local Government Indicators 75 Partnering for better services 25 OUR ORGANISATION 79 Ensuring a prosperous and diverse local 40 Our Structure 79 economy Our Services 81 Planning for a sustainable future 44 Our Organisation 84 HOW WE DELIVER SERVICES 52 Our Staffing Profile 85 Council Plan Commitments 53 Equal Employment Opportunity 85 Introduction to the Performance Statement 56 Financial Performance Summary 86 Certification of the Performance Statement 62 FINANCIAL REPORT 88 Community Satisfaction Survey 65 GOVERNANCE 66 Council Meetings 67 Councillor Briefings 67 Disclosure of Interests and Conflicts of Interest 67 Councillor Remuneration 68 Mount Alexander Shire Council Annual Report 2012/2013 1 Council’s vision, mission and values The Council Plan adopted in 2009 was guided by the following Vision, Mission and Values: VISION A strong, engaged community creating a dynamic future together. MISSION Leadership in the provision of community infrastructure and services. FARINESS VALUES We respect and understand the needs of our community and balance these in our decision making.
    [Show full text]
  • 20120622 Newstead Database
    Shire of Mount Alexander Heritage Study of the Shire of Newstead STAGE 2 Section 3 Heritage Citations: Volume 4 Sandon to Yapeen Wendy Jacobs, Phil Taylor, Robyn Ballinger, Vicki Johnson & Dr David Rowe May 2004 Revised June 2012 .. Table of Contents Page Section 1: The Report Executive Summary i 1.0 Introduction to the Study 1.1 The Study Team 1 1.2 Sections 1 1.3 Acknowledgments 2 1.4 Consultants Brief 2 1.5 The Study Area 3 1.6 Terminology 5 2.0 Methodology 2.1 Stage 1 6 2.2 Stage 2 6 3.0 Scope of Works & Assessment 3.1 Thematic Environmental History 9 3.2 Heritage Places 11 3.2.1 Individual Heritage Places 12 3.2.2 Rural Areas 12 3.2.3 Archaeological Sites 12 3.2.4 Mining Sites 13 3.3 Heritage Precincts 3.3.1 Precinct Evaluation Criteria 19 3.3.2 Campbells Creek Heritage Precinct 21 3.3.3 Fryerstown Heritage Precinct 32 3.3.4 Guildford Heritage Precinct 43 3.3.5 Newstead Heritage Precinct 53 3.3.6 Vaughan Heritage Precinct 68 4.0 Assessment of Significance 4.1 Basis of Assessment Criteria 78 4.2 The Australia ICOMOS Burra Charter (November 1999) 78 4.3 Assessment Criteria utilised in this Study 80 4.4 Levels of Significance 80 5.0 Heritage Program 5.1 Introduction 81 5.2 Heritage Program Recommendations 81 5.2.1 Statutory Registers 81 5.2.2 Mount Alexander Shire Policy review and implementation 82 5.2.3 Recommended Planning Scheme Amendment Process 84 5.2.4 Additional Planning Issues to be considered by Council 86 5.2.5 Council Heritage Incentives 86 5.2.6 Public Awareness Program 87 6.0 Appendices 6.01 The Project Brief 6.02 The
    [Show full text]
  • Public Charities
    lSSL . VICTORIA. PUBLIC CHARITIES. REPORT OF INSPECTOR FOR THE HALF-YEAR ENDED 301'H .JUNE 1881, · AND ROUGH DRAFT OF PROPOSED AMENDING BILL; TOGETHER WITH ADDITIONAL REPORTS. PRESENTED TO BOTH HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT BY HIS EXCELLENCY'S COMMAND. 15~ ~utbotifl! : JOHN FERRES, GOVER~MENT PRINTEU1. MELBOURNE. No 23 . ,. Al'Pl!OXJMATE COST OF REPORTS. ... £ 8, ll• Propafa.tion, &c.-Not given. E'rintlng (V25 copces) 85 10 0 . PUBLIC ·CHARITIES OF .VICTORIA, '/' Inspector's Office, Treasury, 25th July 1881. Sm, . I do myself. the honor• to submit a half-y~r's Report of my ~ork. as Inspector of; .Public Charities. : $ince my appointment· to that position I have inspected the following charities :-'·· ' .. .. :-' . · ·HospitalS'.-Melbourne, Alfred, . Homreopathic, Inglewood, Creswick, Dayl'esford, Clunes, Amherst, Maryborough, Maldon, Dunolly, St. Aruaud's, Kilmore, Heathcote; Bendigo, Castlemaine, Ovens, Ballarat, :-· ··, Mooroopna; and Wangaratta. · J:$enmmlerit' Asy(ums.-Melbourne, Bendigo, Castlemaine, Ballarat; Ovens,. ' and the Home of the Immigrants' Aid Society in Melbourne. Other Institutions.-· Melbourne Blind Asylum, Ballanit Orphan Asylum, . Ballarat Refuge. Also the accounts of the following societies :- ·;," · Clunes, · Creswick~ Ballarat Clothing, Daylesford, Eaglehawk, Kilmore, 1 · Maldon, St. Arnaud, Maryborough, Talbot, and Buninyong. , Of the.'benevolent· ·societi~s it will suffice to say generally that they are doing ' .I l ' . good work in a most ·economical manner, and that, with one or two exceptions, the a~co~nts are well' kept. My reports upon the i~stitutions inspected will appropriately constitute appendices to this Report. The. Royal Commission, .in recommending the appointment of an Inspector of Public Charities, said, " What appears to be desirable is that the :whole management of _each ch~1jty, shol!-ld p~ P,erioqically investiga:teq, an? .a regular audit at the same time r'n.~~e o_n·he~alf, not _of_ ~h~.,~~bscribers, .~ut of the State, and.
    [Show full text]
  • Supplementary Budget Estimates 2010-11 (October 2010)
    Senate Finance and Public Administration Standing Committee ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS ON NOTICE SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES HEARINGS PRIME MINISTER AND CABINET PORTFOLIO Department/Agency: Department of Regional Australia, Regional Development and Local Government Outcome: 1 Topic: RLCIP $550 million Senator: BERNARDI Question reference number: 20c Type of question: Hansard F&PA page 54, Tuesday 19 October 2010 Date set by the committee for the return of answer: 3 December 2010 Ms Foster—Yes. As I think one of the other officers said, in this series of programs there are 5,000 projects. Senator BERNARDI—Yes. But are there hundreds of them that have been renegotiated? Ms Foster—Senator, I would have to take that on notice....... Senator BERNARDI—If you can tell me which ones have been renegotiated, I would be interested in that too. How does the department assess the value or the merit of the infrastructure projects that are put forward to it? Number of pages: 41 Answer: In assessing projects in all RLCIP Programs, the Department considered the nature of the project, the level of community support for the project, Council’s ability to complete the project on time and within budget, and whether the project would be sustainable. Where the Department believed there were risks with the viability of the proponent or project that required further consideration, an Independent Viability Assessment (IVA) was undertaken by a qualified external consultant engaged by the Department. The findings of the IVA are considered in the project analysis. Under the RLCIP-SP $550 million program, 137 projects were originally funded with 12 requiring variation to their Funding Agreement.
    [Show full text]
  • Mount Alexander Shire Council Investigation and Design of Flood Mitigation Treatments Castlemaine and Campbells Creek, Vic 3450
    ® Cardno Victoria Pty Ltd | ABN 47 106 610 913 Level 4, 501 Swanston Street Melbourne VIC 3000 Tel: 03 8415 7777 Fax: 03 8415 7788 Web: www.cardno.com.au © Cardno Limited All Rights Reserved. This document is produced by Cardno Limited solely for the benefit of and use by the client in accordance with the terms of the retainer. Cardno Limited does not and shall not assume any responsibility or liability whatsoever to any third party arising out of any use or reliance by third party on the content of this document. MOUNT ALEXANDER SHIRE COUNCIL INVESTIGATION AND DESIGN OF FLOOD MITIGATION TREATMENTS CASTLEMAINE AND CAMPBELLS CREEK, VIC 3450 SCHEDULE OF DRAWINGS SCHEDULE OF DRAWINGS WALKER STREET DRAWING No. DESCRIPTION DRAWING No. DESCRIPTION V160234W-CI-3052 DETAILED DESIGN ELIZABETH STREET TYPICAL SECTIONS - SHEET 3 OF 5 GINGELL STREET V160234W-CI-3053 DETAILED DESIGN ELIZABETH STREET TYPICAL SECTIONS - SHEET 4 OF 5 NORTH GINGELL STREET LEVEE V160234W-CI-3054 DETAILED DESIGN ELIZABETH STREET TYPICAL SECTIONS - SHEET 5 of 5 DETAILED DESIGN V160234W-CI-3100 DETAILED DESIGN ELIZABETH STREET LEVEE LONGITUDINAL SECTIONS GENERAL V160234W-CI-3150 DETAILED DESIGN ELIZABETH STREET LEVEE CROSS SECTIONS NORTH - SHEET 1 OF 3 V160234W-GN-1000 CIVIL SITEWORKS LOCALITY PLAN AND DRAWING REGISTER V160234W-CI-3151 DETAILED DESIGN ELIZABETH STREET LEVEE CROSS SECTIONS NORTH - SHEET 2 OF 3 CIVIL V160234W-CI-3152 DETAILED DESIGN ELIZABETH STREET LEVEE CROSS SECTIONS NORTH - SHEET 3 OF 3 BAKERS CREEK KENNEDY STREET V160234W-CI-3155 DETAILED DESIGN ELIZABETH STREET LEVEE CROSS SECTIONS SOUTH GINGELL V160234W-CI-3180 DETAILED DESIGN ELIZABETH STREET FOOTPATH LONG SECTIONS AND LOCALITY PLAN V160234W-CI-1000 CIVIL SITEWORKS GENERAL NOTES V160234W-CI-3200 DETAILED DESIGN ELIZABETH STREET DRAINAGE LONGITUDINAL SECTIONS CARAVAN PARK LEVEE FOREST STREET V160234W-CI-1001 CIVIL SITEWORKS OVERALL LOCALITY PLAN V160234W-CI-3210 DETAILED DESIGN ELIZABETH STREET DRAINAGE PIT SCHEDULE & PIT DETAILS V160234W-CI-1010 CIVIL SITEWORKS GINGELL STREET LEVEE OVERALL LAYOUT PLAN CAMPBELLS BARKER ST.
    [Show full text]
  • Heritage Study of the Shire of Newstead
    Shire of Mount Alexander Heritage Study of the Shire of Newstead STAGE 2 Section 3 Heritage Citations: Volume 2 Campbelltown to Muckleford South Wendy Jacobs, Phil Taylor, Robyn Ballinger, Vicki Johnson & Dr David Rowe May 2004 Revised June 2012 .. Table of Contents Page Section 1: The Report Executive Summary i 1.0 Introduction to the Study 1.1 The Study Team 1 1.2 Sections 1 1.3 Acknowledgments 2 1.4 Consultants Brief 2 1.5 The Study Area 3 1.6 Terminology 5 2.0 Methodology 2.1 Stage 1 6 2.2 Stage 2 6 3.0 Scope of Works & Assessment 3.1 Thematic Environmental History 9 3.2 Heritage Places 11 3.2.1 Individual Heritage Places 12 3.2.2 Rural Areas 12 3.2.3 Archaeological Sites 12 3.2.4 Mining Sites 13 3.3 Heritage Precincts 3.3.1 Precinct Evaluation Criteria 19 3.3.2 Campbells Creek Heritage Precinct 21 3.3.3 Fryerstown Heritage Precinct 32 3.3.4 Guildford Heritage Precinct 43 3.3.5 Newstead Heritage Precinct 53 3.3.6 Vaughan Heritage Precinct 68 4.0 Assessment of Significance 4.1 Basis of Assessment Criteria 78 4.2 The Australia ICOMOS Burra Charter (November 1999) 78 4.3 Assessment Criteria utilised in this Study 80 4.4 Levels of Significance 80 5.0 Heritage Program 5.1 Introduction 81 5.2 Heritage Program Recommendations 81 5.2.1 Statutory Registers 81 5.2.2 Mount Alexander Shire Policy review and implementation 82 5.2.3 Recommended Planning Scheme Amendment Process 84 5.2.4 Additional Planning Issues to be considered by Council 86 5.2.5 Council Heritage Incentives 86 5.2.6 Public Awareness Program 87 6.0 Appendices 6.01 The Project
    [Show full text]
  • SCG Victorian Councils Post Amalgamation
    Analysis of Victorian Councils Post Amalgamation September 2019 spence-consulting.com Spence Consulting 2 Analysis of Victorian Councils Post Amalgamation Analysis by Gavin Mahoney, September 2019 It’s been over 20 years since the historic Victorian Council amalgamations that saw the sacking of 1600 elected Councillors, the elimination of 210 Councils and the creation of 78 new Councils through an amalgamation process with each new entity being governed by State appointed Commissioners. The Borough of Queenscliffe went through the process unchanged and the Rural City of Benalla and the Shire of Mansfield after initially being amalgamated into the Shire of Delatite came into existence in 2002. A new City of Sunbury was proposed to be created from part of the City of Hume after the 2016 Council elections, but this was abandoned by the Victorian Government in October 2015. The amalgamation process and in particular the sacking of a democratically elected Council was referred to by some as revolutionary whilst regarded as a massacre by others. On the sacking of the Melbourne City Council, Cr Tim Costello, Mayor of St Kilda in 1993 said “ I personally think it’s a drastic and savage thing to sack a democratically elected Council. Before any such move is undertaken, there should be questions asked of what the real point of sacking them is”. Whilst Cr Liana Thompson Mayor of Port Melbourne at the time logically observed that “As an immutable principle, local government should be democratic like other forms of government and, therefore the State Government should not be able to dismiss any local Council without a ratepayers’ referendum.
    [Show full text]
  • Regional Residential Report Shire of Mount Alexander
    Regional Residential Report Shire of Mount Alexander ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This Urban Development Program was undertaken by Spatial Economics Pty Ltd, and commissioned by the Department of Transport, Planning and Local Infrastructure. The Urban Development Program (Mount Alexander) would not have been possible if it were not for the invaluable contribution made by staff from the Shire of Mount Alexander and the Department of Transport, Planning and Local Infrastructure’s Barwon Loddon Mallee Regional Office. Published by the Urban Development Program Department of Transport, Planning and Local Infrastructure 1 Spring Street Melbourne Victoria 3000 Telephone (03) 9223 1783 April 2013 Unless indicated otherwise, this work is made available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia licence. To view a copy of this licence, visit http:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/au Urban Development Program, State of Victoria through the Department of Transport, Planning and Local Infrastructure 2013 Authorised by Matthew Guy, 1 Spring Street Melbourne Victoria 3000. This publication may be of assistance to you but the State of Victoria and its employees do not guarantee that the publication is without flaw of any kind or is wholly appropriate for your particular purposes and therefore disclaims all liability for an error, loss or other consequence which may arise from you relying on any information in this publication. Accessibility If you would like to receive this publication in an accessible format, please telephone (03) 9223
    [Show full text]
  • Preliminary Report
    ELECTORAL REPRESENTATION REVIEW Mount Alexander Shire Council Preliminary Report March 2011 2 Preliminary Report Contents SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS 4 BACKGROUND 5 Legislative basis 5 The VEC and Electoral Representation Reviews 5 Profile of Mount Alexander Shire 5 Current electoral structure 6 The Electoral Representation Review process 6 VEC research 7 THE VEC’S APPROACH 8 Number of councillors 8 Electoral structure 8 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT 10 Public information 10 Advertising 10 Media release 10 Public information session 10 Information brochure and poster 10 Helpline 10 VEC website 11 Guide for Submissions 11 Preliminary Submissions 11 Analysis of Submissions 11 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 13 Number of councillors 13 Electoral structure 15 Current structure 15 Ward boundaries 16 3 Ward names 17 Unsubdivided municipality 17 Recommendation — Option A (Preferred Option) 17 Recommendation — Option B (Alternative Option) 17 NEXT STEPS 18 Where should I send my submission? 18 Public access to submissions 18 Public access to reports 19 APPENDIX ONE: LIST OF PRELIMINARY SUBMITTERS 20 APPENDIX TWO: OPTIONS MAPS 21 Summary of Recommendations The Victorian Electoral Commission (VEC) recommends: Option A (Preferred Option) That the Mount Alexander Shire Council consist of seven councillors, to be elected from one three-councillor ward and four single-councillor wards, with unchanged ward boundaries. Option B (Alternative Option) That the Mount Alexander Shire Council consist of seven councillors, to be elected from an unsubdivided municipality.
    [Show full text]