PLANNING PANELS VICTORIA Greater Bendigo Amendment C234 Heritage Overlay HO 915 Subject site: 40 Harley Street Strathdale Nanga Gnulle Expert Heritage Report Prepared for Jing Ying Pty Ltd (Submitter 12) By Robyn Riddett Director Anthemion Consultancies POB18183 Collins Street East Melbourne 8003 Tel. +61 3 9495 6389 Email: [email protected] May 2018 Nanga Gnulle, 40 Harley Street, Strathdale 1.0 Introduction 1. I have been asked by Paul Bowe of Terraco on behalf of Jing Ying Pty Ltd (Submitter 12), the owner of the above property, to prepare a statement of expert evidence which addresses the heritage aspects relating to the proposed inclusion of part of the broader place in a Heritage Overlay. The inclusion of the Alistair Knox house in the Heritage Overlay is not opposed and therefore this evidence is in respect of the proposed heritage curtilage. 2. Amendment C234, proposes to include in the Schedule to the Heritage Overlay (HO915) the dwelling and a surrounding curtilage at 40 Harley Street, Strathdale. “Nanga Gnulle”, mud brick and reclaimed materials house. External paint controls are proposed and the place would be subject to an Incorporated Plan under Clause 43.01-2 i.e. Greater Bendigo Heritage Incorporated Plan – Permit Exemptions, August 2015. 3. The Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme Amendment C234 Explanatory Report states, inter alia, The main dwelling, constructed of mud brick and reclaimed materials is considered of heritage significance for its association with architect Alistair Knox, and use of recycled materials which provide a unique architectural style. The overlay is proposed to be applied to the dwelling and a 5 metre curtilage around it (approximately 650m2). (p.1.) 1.2 Reference Materials 4. I have read: Planning Panels Victoria. Guide to Expert Evidence. Victoria. Department of Environment. Land, Water and Planning. Applying the Heritage Overlay. Planning Practice Note 1. January, 2018. Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme Amendment C234 Explanatory Report. Greater Bendigo Planning Scheme Amendment C234 – Map 24 proposed HO915 Greater Bendigo. HO915 Revision Plan over aerial image labelled Draft for Panel Discussion. Built Heritage Pty Ltd. Nanga Gnulle Proposed Heritage Citation City of Greater Bendigo research and assessment February / March 2017 http://dsewebapps.dse.vic.gov.au/Shared/ATSAttachment2.nsf/(attachmentopen)/0AC EF1BAC231ACF1CA2581CB0014C91B/$File/Greater+Bendigo+C234+Built+Environmen t+Citation+40+Harley+St+Strathdale+Exhibition+Gazetted.PDF. Trust Advocate. A Blog by the National Trust of Australia (Victoria). The City of Bendigo progress heritage listing for Nanga Gnulle. Published on 4 December, 2017. http://www.trustadvocate.org.au/the-city-of-bendigo-progress-heritage-listing-for- nanga-gnulle/ Accessed 13/05/2018. National Trust of Australia (Victoria). Letter to Planning Department City of Greater Bendigo, dated 21 December 2016 objecting to the permit application for subdivision. 40 Harley Street. Garden Observations: notes and observations taken from a walk around the existing gardens 40 Harley Street, Strathdale on Friday June 16, 2017. Unauthored but presumed to be by Council’s Heritage Advisor or Council’s Arborist. Anthemion Consultancies 1 Nanga Gnulle, PPV Statement of Evidence 40 Harley Street, Strathdale Context Pty Ltd. Letter to Ms. Trudy Rickard Heritage Advisor City of Bendigo, dated 7 July, 2017. Numerous newspaper articles from the Bendigo Advertiser. Williams, Wendy. Historic Nanga Gnulle: Time to Say Goodbye. Article and video. October 17 2013 - 4:18pm. https://www.bendigoadvertiser.com.au/story/1847789/historic-nanga-gnulle-time-to- say-goodbye/ Accessed 13/05/2018, 5. I have undertaken an inspection of the site. 1.3 Qualifications and Expertise 6. I am a director of Anthemion Consultancies and am also an architectural historian, an interior designer and a heritage consultant. I am a graduate architect member of the Royal Australian Institute of Architects, was a Deputy Chair of the Institute’s (Victorian Chapter) Heritage Committee and a member of the AIA Awards Jury in the Conservation Section for the years 2000-01. I was at Lovell Chen, architects and heritage consultants for approximately 18 years and most of that time as an associate director. Within that practice and presently my responsibilities include the co-ordination and preparation of conservation management plans, heritage assessments, preparation of expert evidence, development of site interpretation and the restoration of historic interiors. 7. I am also a Past President of Australia ICOMOS (International Council on Monuments and Sites), previously the Secretary, of the ICOMOS International Scientific Committee on Risk Preparedness (ICORP) and presently the Treasurer; past Secretary-General of the ICOMOS Scientific Council; inaugural convenor of Blue Shield Australia and past member of the Board, and past Board member of Blue Shield (The Hague) and current Board member (Secretary) of AusHeritage. I am also a member of the Local Government Advisory Committee which is a committee of the Victorian Heritage Council. I have been a heritage adviser in Monash and Bayside and am presently a member of the Yarra Heritage Panel. In the past I have been a long-standing councillor of the National Trust of Australia (Vic.). 8. I have provided expert witness statements on similar matters on numerous occasions at Heritage Victoria, VCAT, the Building Appeals Board, independent panels and other similar forums on behalf of councils, objectors and developers. My Curriculum vitæ is appended. 1.3 Summary of Opinions 9. The only element of any heritage significance which has been found on the site is the Alistair Knox mud-brick dwelling and a Heritage Overlay over the dwelling is not being challenged. 10. The heritage imperative is to retain the dwelling and to provide an adequate setting for it. A heritage curtilage which generally follows my suggestions, based on the reasons set out below, would be appropriate to retain an appropriate setting for the dwelling. 11. There is no justification to extend any heritage curtilage further to cover any other part of the garden or any outbuildings or structures. 2.0 My Response to the Proposed Heritage Overlay 12. In summary, Council’s reasons for including the place in a Heritage Overlay are derived from the place citation prepared by Built Heritage, and are principally: It is a rare surviving example of a mud brick and reclaimed residence designed by Alastair Knox, built in 1973-74. Anthemion Consultancies 2 Nanga Gnulle, PPV Statement of Evidence 40 Harley Street, Strathdale The reclaimed building materials were salvaged from various structures in the Bendigo area and have the potential to yield information that contributes to an understanding of the region’s rich history. The house has a distinctive aesthetic style associated with the self-building subculture, characterised by use of reclaimed or scratch built (mud brick) materials. It is one of the earlier built dwellings of the era, which is important in exhibiting particular aesthetic characteristics of this dwelling style. The house is significant as an excellent and notably intact example of the work of Alistair Knox, residential architect, who specialised in mudbrick construction, reclaimed materials use, and self-building construction. This is one of two examples in the Greater Bendigo area, and notably the earliest, largest and best example in the municipality. (Explanatory Report, p.2) 13. Under “What is significant?” the Built Heritage citation states: Built in 1973-74 to a design by Alistair Knox, Nanga Gnulle at 40 Harley Street, Strathdale, is a split-level timber and mudbrick house incorporating skillion roofs clad in corrugated steel, clerestory windows and reclaimed brick chimneys. The house was designed to incorporate a vast amount of material that owners Rob & Peg Green salvaged from demolished structures around Bendigo, including (but not limited to) huge timber members from a railway bridge, handmade bricks and items from the ANA Hall. The significant fabric is defined as the exterior of the entire house (including verandah, carport and brick paving), with a nominal curtilage (minimum five metres to all sides) to preserve its immediate setting. The mudbrick outbuildings, of relatively recent date and far more conventional in their expression, are not considered to be significant. Although of some interest, the brick shed and landscaping (with which Alistair Knox had no involvement) are similarly not considered to be crucial to an understanding of the cultural significance of the house. [Emphasis added.] 14. Under “Why is it Significant?” the Built Heritage citation states, inter alia, viz.: While the property has associations with its use for wedding receptions, this is not deemed to equate with social significance at the local level, as such associations are typical of any local wedding reception venue. 15. In relation to the broader garden, the Context report acknowledges that the place has aesthetic qualities, viz.: While there is a defined sense of place, and an aesthetic value to Nanga Gnulle gardens, this aesthetic value is not the aesthetic value defined in HERCON Criteria used for assessment of heritage values. Rather, it is an aesthetic amenity value. The hard landscaping and built elements have been well executed, with quality materials, and are attractive and inviting but do not have any design interest beyond that of a large residential garden. Similar design elements, planting, features