Statement of Evidence and Report to Planning Panel Melbourne Planning Scheme Amendment C258 City of Melbourne Heritage Review July 2018 Prepared by Prepared for City of Melbourne Statement of Qualifications and Experience, and Declaration Authorship of this report This statement of evidence has been prepared by Ms Anita Brady, Associate Director of Lovell Chen Pty Ltd, Architects and Heritage Consultants, Level 5, 176 Wellington Parade, East Melbourne, assisted by Ms Libby Blamey, Senior Associate also of Lovell Chen. The views expressed in the statement are those of Ms Anita Brady. Qualifications and Experience I hold a Masters of Arts (Public History) from Monash University, and a Bachelor of Arts (Hons) from the University of Melbourne. I have been involved in cultural heritage practice and management for over 20 years in both the public and private sectors. This experience includes heritage appraisals of properties and assessments of impacts on heritage places, and strategic planning and policy development for heritage places. While employed at Heritage Victoria for four years, I was the principal author of the Victorian Heritage Strategy (May 2000), and Secretary to the Heritage Council’s Policy and Protocols Committee. I have also published on cultural heritage matters. I have been employed by Lovell Chen (formerly Allom Lovell & Associates) since June 2001, and was made Associate Director in July 2005. I am responsible for leading multi-disciplinary teams with expertise in architecture, history and planning. During this time, I have undertaken numerous heritage assessments of properties, authored reports on heritage matters for planning panels, prepared expert witness statements, and given evidence before planning appeals tribunals. I have also managed a number of municipal heritage studies, gaps studies and reviews for local Government authorities, including for the municipalities of Boroondara, Yarra, Yarra Ranges, Greater Bendigo, Port Phillip and Melbourne. I have additionally been involved in the preparation of conservation management plans, analyses and reports, for places as diverse as the Records Office, Melbourne; Capital Performing Arts Centre, Bendigo; Beehive Building, Bendigo; No 3 Treasury Place, Melbourne; Beaurepaire Centre, Melbourne University; No 2 Goods Shed, Melbourne Docklands; Swing Bridge, Sale; Catani Gardens, St Kilda; Port of Fremantle; Cascades Convict Female Factory, Hobart; and Point Nepean Quarantine Station. I have contributed to master plans for Victoria Park, Abbotsford, and Commonwealth land at Point Nepean; and undertaken heritage appraisals of residential buildings, industrial sites and institutional complexes across Melbourne. I have managed a national heritage assessment and review of Australia Post properties; was responsible for preparation of the Yarra Planning Scheme Clause 43.01-2 Incorporated Plan, Planning Permit Exemptions July 2014. Instructions My instructions were included in correspondence from Brigid Ryan, Legal Counsel for the City of Melbourne, dated 26 June 2018. Lovell Chen involvement leading up to instructions Section 2.0 of this statement provides a detailed overview of my involvement and that of Lovell Chen in the heritage work which is subject to Amendment C258. I was responsible for managing the project at Lovell Chen, including participating in the policies review and writing; the property gradings review and conversion; preparation of the statements of significance; and the (external and internal) community and stakeholder consultation and engagement. I was also responsible for reviewing all written outputs; and was the author of the two methodology reports referred to in this statement of evidence. Note that the Clause 22.04 and Clause 22.05 heritage policies which are subject to this Amendment, are revised and updated from the May 2016 version of the policies, which is the date of the latest policies into which I and Lovell Chen had input. LOVELL CHEN i Summary of my opinion The precinct statements of significance, including the assessed levels of significance of the precincts; the changes made to the statements following receipt of submissions; and the changes recommended in this statement to the ‘panel version’ of the statements, continue to be supported. The revised local heritage policies at Clause 22.04 and Clause 22.05 also continue to be supported, subject to the matters identified here which require further clarification and consideration. The review of the property gradings and conversion to the new gradings system, including the methodology which underpins the review, is additionally supported, including the approach which involved review of some 4,800 properties of ‘C’ and ‘D’ grading. Declaration I adopt this statement and no matters of significance which I regard as relevant have to my knowledge been withheld from the Panel. Anita Brady ii LOVELL CHEN Contents 1.0 Introduction 3 1.1 Community and stakeholder engagement 3 1.2 Heritage Strategy 2013 3 1.3 Discussion paper July 2014 4 1.4 Content of this statement 4 2.0 Chronological overview of project stages 5 3.0 Precinct statements of significance 6 3.1 Introduction 6 3.2 Methodology 7 3.2.1 Precinct citation content 7 3.2.2 Precinct significance 8 3.3 Response to submissions on statements of significance 8 3.3.1 Statements of significance February 2018 8 3.3.2 Additional submissions 10 4.0 Heritage policies review 10 4.1 Introduction 10 4.2 Methodology 11 4.2.1 Visibility of additions and higher rear parts of new buildings 11 4.3 New gradings definitions 21 4.3.1 Significant places 22 4.3.2 Contributory places 22 4.3.3 Non-contributory places 22 4.4 Commentary on the revised and updated policies 22 4.4.1 Definitions 22 5.0 Gradings review 24 5.1 Introduction 24 5.1.1 Scope of gradings review 25 5.1.2 July 2014 discussion paper 25 5.2 Methodology 27 5.2.1 Sampling exercise and outcomes 27 5.2.2 Approach to gradings review 27 5.2.3 Streetscapes 29 5.2.4 Desktop work 29 5.2.5 Excel spreadsheet 30 5.2.6 Internal review 31 5.2.7 Statistics 31 5.3 Response to submissions on gradings review 32 LOVELL CHEN 1 5.3.1 Report to the Future Melbourne (Planning) Committee meeting (20 February 2018) 36 6.0 Concluding comments 36 2 LOVELL CHEN 1.0 Introduction This statement of evidence has been prepared for the City of Melbourne and addresses Melbourne Planning Scheme Amendment C258, with specific reference to the following components of the Amendment as undertaken by Lovell Chen (the scope of these components is elaborated below): • Preparation of statements of significance for precincts outside the CCZ • Review and preparation of revised local heritage policies at Clause 22.04 and Clause 22.05 • Review of property gradings and conversion to new gradings system Some of the content in this statement includes, and in part reproduces, elements of the two Methodology Reports which document and outline the approach to the work undertaken, specifically: • City of Melbourne Heritage Review: Local Heritage Policies and Precinct Statements of Significance Methodology Report, Lovell Chen, September 2015 updated May 2016 (Attachment 1 to this statement and generally referred to below as the ‘Heritage Review Methodology Report’); note that this report includes (as appendices) the current and revised local heritage policies and the new precinct statements of significance (as of May 2016); Appendix E of the report is not included in Attachment 1 (this is referred to below under ‘Community and stakeholder engagement’) • City of Melbourne Heritage Gradings Review Methodology Report, Lovell Chen, October 2015 (Attachment 2 to this statement and generally referred to below as the ‘Gradings Review Methodology Report’) Note also that some clarifications or corrections to the Amendment documentation are identified in this statement. 1.1 Community and stakeholder engagement Community and targeted stakeholder consultation and engagement was undertaken in relation to the project components. Capire Consulting Group facilitated the majority of the consultation, which was undertaken in a variety of formats. Capire’s report, ‘Summary of engagement findings’, October 2015, was included in the Heritage Review Methodology Report as Appendix E.1 Community consultation and engagement was held in the period March and April 2015. It included six community workshops held in relation to the heritage precincts in Kensington, Parkville, North and West Melbourne, South Yarra, East Melbourne and Jolimont, and Carlton. These workshops were preceded by short walks in the precincts, lead by Anita Brady. The consultation also included two workshops with ‘internal’ (Council) stakeholders, being City of Melbourne officers and Heritage Advisors, including a review of the draft revised local heritage policies. An external community workshop which focused on the heritage policies was also held.2 In addition the draft heritage policies, and policy issues, were canvassed with external stakeholders including representatives from the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning, the National Trust and the Melbourne Heritage Action Group. 1.2 Heritage Strategy 2013 The City of Melbourne Heritage Strategy 20133 set out a plan to continue the identification and protection of the municipality’s heritage over the next 15 years; and set in train a program of heritage reviews. The Strategy acknowledged some shortcomings with the City’s older heritage studies, including the lack of statements of significance for the most significant places, and gaps