HERITAGE IMPACT STATEMENT - City of Yarra · LOVELL CH EN 1 1.0 Introduction This Heritage Impact...

HERITAGE IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT OF THE

FORMER K G LUKE FACTORY COMPLEX

26-56 Queens Parade, Fitzroy North

Prepared for

Tim Gurner, Gurner™

May 2016

L O V E L L C H E N 1

1.0 Introduction

This Heritage Impact Statement has been prepared for Tim Gurner of GurnerTM and relates to a planning

application for the redevelopment of the former K G Luke Pty Ltd factory complex located at Nos 26-56

Queens Parade, Fitzroy North (Figure 1). It accompanies a permit application to City of Yarra for the

redevelopment of the factory complex into apartments, in which the existing Queens Parade façade is to

be retained and a new stepped development is proposed around a central court. The site is partially

included in the Schedule to the Heritage Overlay of the Yarra Planning Scheme

Reference has been made to the architectural drawings prepared by Koichi Takada architects with plot

date 05 May 2016 and annotated Revision M:

A010 Site Plan

A011 Survey Plan

A012 Existing Plan

A013 Demolition Plan

A098-A099 basement level plans

A100 Ground Floor Level

A101-A115 Level 01-Level15

A200-A204 Proposed Elevations

A205-A207 Existing Elevation

A208 Heritage Faced alterations

A300-A312 Sections

A400 typical Apartment detail Plans

A401-A402 Typical Façade Details 1

A403 Heritage Façade detail

A550-A559 Shadow Diagrams

2.0 Heritage controls and listings

The subject site is partially included in the North Fitzroy Precinct which is identified as HO327 in the

Schedule to the Heritage Overlay to the Yarra Planning Scheme (Figure 2). No additional controls apply

in the precinct. An Incorporated Plan is in place which provides planning permit exemptions for the site

(Lovell Chen, July 2014). It is noted, and further outlined and explained below, that Council’s

documentation appears to include a mapping error.

2.1 Planning History

2.1.1 Heritage studies

The subject property and the North Fitzroy Precinct have been identified in a number of previous

heritage studies and reviews. The following relevant studies are listed as reference documents under

Clause 22.02 of the Yarra Planning Scheme:

City of Yarra Review of Heritage Overlay Areas (Butler and Associates, 2007)

City of Yarra Heritage Review (Allom Lovell, 1998)

Yarra - Fitzroy Urban Conservation Study Review (Allom Lovell & Associates, 1992)

North Fitzroy Conservation Study (Jacob Lewis Vines Architects, 1978)

The following studies also provide assessments of the site but are not listed as reference documents:

City of Yarra Review of Heritage Overlay Areas (Ian Wight and Heritage Strategies, Lorraine

Huddle, Gabriel Moylan, Big Picture Software, 2001)

Northern Suburbs Factory Study (Vines and Churchward, 1992)

The relevant sections of these heritage studies are discussed in more detail below.

2 L O V E L L C H E N

Figure 1 Locality plan with subject property indicated by the star

Source: www.melway.com.au

Figure 2 Detail, Yarra Planning Scheme Map No. 02HO, with the subject site indicated

Source: Planning Schemes online; no works are proposed on the small island site across

the laneway to the west of the site.

2.1.2 Planning Scheme Amendments

The Fitzroy North Precinct was included in the study area of the 1978 North Fitzroy Conservation Study.

However, the southern section of Queens Parade which includes the subject site, was not included in

http://www.melway.com.au/


the conservation area proposed at the time.1 The subject site was also included in the study area

considered by the City of Yarra Heritage Review (Allom Lovell, 1998) which assessed the heritage places

of the newly formed City of Yarra. This review drew upon previous conservation studies, including the

Yarra - Fitzroy Urban Conservation Study Review (Allom Lovell & Associates, 1992), and also undertook

additional survey work. The 1998 Review did not include the subject property in the extent of the

precinct map, nor did it individually identify the building.2

The existing North Fitzroy heritage overlay precinct, HO327, was created c.2000. In 2002, the City of

Yarra sought Planning Scheme Amendment C43. The Amendment was primarily concerned with

identifying contributory elements within existing Heritage Overlay areas, while also reviewing the

statement of significance for each of the existing heritage areas.

The Amendment was based on the 2001 report, City of Yarra Review of Heritage Overlay Areas that was

based in turn on the 1998 City of Yarra Heritage Review. Only minor boundary changes to existing

Heritage Overlay areas were proposed and typically no extra research was carried out. Material

presented to the Panel identified the western sections of the subject site as being ‘significant but not of

precinct significance’ to HO327. The Panel recommended that Amendment C43 be abandoned in its

proposed form and made a number of recommendations towards actions that would allow the

Amendment to be reintroduced.

Council’s current citation for the North Fitzroy Precinct (HO327) was produced as part of the City of

Yarra Review of Heritage Overlay Areas (Butler and Associates, 2007). The Study provided two identical

(apart from addresses) individual statements of significance for both No. 26 Queens Parade, Fitzroy

North, and Nos 28-58 Queens Parade, Fitzroy North (part). These identified the former K G. Luke

electro-plate manufacturers factory buildings at Nos 26 and 28-56 Queens Parade (part) as being

historically and architecturally significant to the City of Yarra as ‘an unusual large Moderne

factory/warehouse with a very intact façade of architectural merit especially in its parapet profile’ (part

26-58, bricks painted)’.

The Panel to Amendment C85 supported a new citation for the North Fitzroy Precinct and a heritage

database that included the subject buildings at No. 26 and part of Nos 28-56 Queens Parade. The

current mapping for the Heritage Overlay was adopted at that time although this does not appear to

have been altered from the earlier arrangement.

Current City of Yarra Heritage Overlay mapping of HO327 extends across a broad section of North

Fitzroy. It includes only the western portion of the subject site within the North Fitzroy Precinct (Figure

2) comprising all of No. 26 but only one of the adjacent buildings (addressed collectively as Nos 28-42).

Specifically, the building at Nos 28-30 is included while the building at No 42 is excluded. Together,

these encompass the single continuous façade, identified in the City of Yarra Review of Heritage Overlay

Areas and described as being of ‘architectural merit’. This partial inclusion appears to be an error. The

Panel report for Amendments C43 noted inaccuracies in identification of contributory sites/elements in

the City of Yarra‘s heritage overlay areas, arising principally from an inaccurate cadastral map base as

supplied by Department of Sustainability and Environment. This may have resulted in the inaccurate

mapping of significant fabric on the subject site.

Heritage Victoria Hermes mapping reproduced at Figure 3 shows the extent of the current mapping. As

noted above, it includes a sawtooth-roofed building at No 26 but only part of the adjacent building at

Nos 28-42 and only half of the ornamental parapet to Queens Parade.

1 Jacob Lewis Vines Architects, 1978, North Fitzroy Conservation Study, Volume 1 p 26

2 Allom Lovell and Associates, 1998, City of Yarra Heritage Review – Volume 3 Heritage Overlay Precincts, p 106

and Volume 2 Heritage Overlay Building Citations


Figure 3 Hermes mapping showing extent of HO327 in pink; blue shading indicates the building

which appears to have been omitted from the extent of the overlay; no works are

proposed on the small island site across the laneway to the west of the site.

Source: Heritage Victoria Hermes Database

Figure 4 Aerial photograph showing 47 metres of facade considered by the Panel to Amendment

C20

Source: Nearmap

The subject site was considered as part of Amendment C20 (2003), prepared by Yarra City Council in

response to a request from Urbis Pty Ltd who were acting on behalf of Urban Property Corporation

(North Fitzroy) Pty Ltd.3 The Amendment was related to the rezoning of several properties located in

North Fitzroy, and also included a planning permit application for redevelopment at Nos 26-58 Queens

Parade. In summary, the works proposed demolition of all of the existing buildings to allow for the

construction of 172 dwellings from one to five storeys. Only the existing art deco façades for a width of

approximately 47 metres (Figure 4) were to be retained. That is, the facades of Nos 26 & 28-42 Queens

3 Yarra Planning Scheme Amendment C20 Permit Application No PL02/0239 Explanatory Report, p 2


Parade were to be retained in their entirety. The Panel accepted that fabric other than the façades at

Nos 26-42 was of little importance.

2.2 Significance

2.2.1 Building gradings

As noted above, the subject property has been graded in several different studies and reviews. The

1992 Northern Suburbs Factory Study identified the site as being of local significance,4 and the City of

Yarra Review of Heritage Overlay Areas, 2001 identified the site as a place within a heritage precinct

which is ‘Significant but not of Precinct Significance’.5

The current and most recent citation for the place is from the City of Yarra Review of Heritage Overlay

Areas (Butler and Associates, 2007). This study identifies Nos 26 and 28-52 Queens Parade as each

being of ‘individual significance’.6 The adjacent properties, Nos 22-24 Queens Parade are identified as

‘contributory’ buildings in the 2007 study. To the east (but within the subject site) a modest interwar

shop at Nos 54-56 Queens Parade is not included in the extent of the precinct.

Clause 22.02 of the Yarra Planning Scheme provides the following grading definitions:

Individually significant: The place is a heritage place in its own right. Within a

Heritage Overlay applying to an area each individually significant place is also

Contributory.

Contributory: The place is a contributory element within a larger heritage place. A

contributory element should include a building, building groups and works, as well

as building or landscape parts such as chimneys, verandahs, wall openings,

rooflines and pavings.7

2.2.2 Statements of significance

Precinct Significance

City of Yarra’s current citation for the North Fitzroy Precinct (HO327) was produced as part of the City of

Yarra Review of Heritage Overlay Areas (Butler and Associates, 2007). This heritage citation relates to

the North Fitzroy Precinct as is indicated in Figure 2. The 2007 study outlines two sub-areas in the North

Fitzroy Precinct. Nos 26-56 Queens Parade is located in the sub-area A, - ‘South of Holden Street’. The

statement of significance provided for this sub-area notes the following:

What is significant?

Early subdivision

The south section of North Fitzroy (south of Holden Street) was retained in Crown

ownership until 1865, as part of the Melbourne township reserve. This was a ring

of land extending 5 miles from Hoddle‘s original Melbourne town plan that was set

aside in 1844 for orderly development in government planned subdivisions.

…

4 Gary Vines, 1992, Northern Factory Study, p 376

5 Ian Wight and Heritage Strategies, Lorraine Huddle, Gabriel Moylan, Big Picture Software, 2001, City of Yarra

Review of Heritage Overlay Areas, page unknown

6 Graeme Butler and Associates, 2007, City of Yarra Review of Heritage Precincts – Appendix 8, pp 749-750

7 Yarra Planning Scheme, 22/10/2015, ‘Clause 22.02 Development guidelines for sites subject to the Heritage

Overlay’, pp 1-2


The future suburb was bordered by a road to Heidelberg and the Plenty districts

(later Queen‘s Parade) that ran diagonally to Hoddle‘s survey grid through the

North Fitzroy‘s Crown reserve. It was proclaimed in 1850 as one of Melbourne‘s 3

chain (60 metre) government roads, now called Hoddle boulevards‘.

…

Distinguished naturalist and engineer, Clement Hodgkinson, as Victorian Assistant-

Commissioner of Crown Lands and Survey 1861-74, was responsible for the

government subdivisions of Carlton (south of Princes St, 1860), North Carlton,

North Fitzroy and Clifton Hill (1865-9), Hotham Hill (1866), South Parkville and

North Parkville (1868-9). Under his supervision, suburban planning employed the

cost-efficient grid system used by Hoddle. A model town design in the area by

Hodgkinson‘s predecessor. Andrew Clarke (the designer of St Vincent‘s Place, South

Melbourne), is thought to have inspired the curved streets of Alfred and Rushall

Crescents in North Fitzroy, although both streets were laid out under Hodgkinson.

Edinburgh Gardens

Lacking a public recreation reserve, the new Fitzroy Council was temporarily

granted 7 acres in 1858 bounded by Reilly Street (Alexandra Parade), Queens

Parade and Smith St. The 1858 reserve was for a future Anglican parish church and

the Collingwood (later the Metropolitan) Gas Company which commenced

production in 1861. In 1862, Fitzroy Council requested an oval-shaped 50 acre

public reserve flanking the Yan Yean tramway (St. George‘s Road). The oval reserve

was laid out under Hodgkinson and extended south in 1863, as a squared-off

addition to the reserve to the line of Freeman St, to provide the Prince of Wales

Cricket Club an extra playing ground. In 1882-3, Edinburgh Gardens was

permanently granted to the Council and planting of its avenues commenced.

Land sales and development - Sale of North Fitzroy‘s ¼ - ½ acre allotments

commenced in 1865, extending west from Rushall Crescent. Further east, lots

between Brunswick and Nicholson Street were sold between 1867 and 1875.

Settlement increased after 1869 when horse-drawn omnibuses began running from

North Fitzroy along Nicholson St and Queen‘s Parade to the city. Development

concentrated around the established quarry route (Nicholson Street) and the road

to the Yan Yean Reservoir (St. George‘s Road).

St. Brigid‘s Catholic Church in Nicholson Street was commenced in 1869 and the

Methodist Church, further north, in 1874. In the pre-Boom years (before 1883) this

was North Fitzroy‘s most established area, characterised by modestly scaled brick

and wood houses, shops, hotels, and commercial premises, the latter prevailing on

main routes such as Rae, Reid, Brunswick Sts and St Georges Rd.

Suburban development was rare east of St Georges Road prior to the Boom, but in

1869 philanthropist George Coppin created the Old Actor‘s Association village

overlooking Merri Creek close to Northcote, later the site of the Old Colonists‘

Association (HO218). Nearby land was granted to the Licensed Victuallers‘

Association for asylum homes and a school (site of Fitzroy Secondary School since

1915).

Transport

When cable tram routes along Queen‘s Parade, Nicholson Street and St. Georges

Road commenced construction in 1883, North Fitzroy landowners began

subdividing their allotments. On the Nicholson Street tram route, owners of the


1850s stone quarries and the 1839 farm allotments north of Holden St, followed

suit.

When tram services began in 1887 many new houses were ready for sale or under

construction. North Fitzroy emerged as a late-Victorian commuter suburb with

local shopping strips along the cable tram routes, the commercial strip of St

Georges Road extending east and west along Scotchmer Street. Convenience shops

were built on pedestrian street corners as households multiplied. The Inner Circle

Railway running via Royal Park, North Carlton, Nicholson St, and Clifton Hill was

completed in 1888 with a spur line dividing the Edinburgh Gardens into two, and

terminating at the ‘Fitzroy‘ station, Queen‘s Parade. A new rail link direct to the

city (the Clifton Hill to Princes Bridge line) opened in 1901 and saw Edwardian

buildings filling out the suburban streets east of St. Georges Road and the

revitalising of the main shopping strips. Public transport continued to support

North Fitzroy as a commuter suburb during the 1920s with the opening of Rushall

railway station and the electrification and extension of the St Georges Rd and

Nicholson St tramways.

North Fitzroy‘s suburban development, especially east of St George‘s Road to

Rushall Crescent, was far from complete when the Boom collapsed in 1893.

However its good access to public transport led to a rapid recovery. A number of

small factories were built in or near the 19th century commercial strip of

Scotchmer St, the best architectural examples being of the late 1930s.

Main development era, south of Holden St

The main development period evident in the heritage overlay south of Holden St is

that of the Victorian era with a substantial contribution from the Edwardian-period.

There is also a contribution from some well-preserved inter-war buildings and

individually significant places of all eras.

Contributory elements, south of Holden St

The North Fitzroy Heritage Overlay Area (south of Holden St) contributory elements

include (but not exclusively) generally detached and attached Victorian-era and

Edwardian-era houses having:

Pitched gabled or hipped roofs, with some façade parapets, many elaborate;

One storey wall heights but with many two storey house rows,

Rectilinear floor plans, with many bayed room projections on the plans of large

houses;

Face brick (red, bichrome and polychrome) or stucco walls, some weatherboard;

Corrugated iron and slate roof cladding, some Marseilles pattern terracotta tiles;

Chimneys of either stucco finish (with moulded caps) or of face brickwork with

corbelled or cemented capping courses;

Post-supported verandah elements facing the street, set out on two levels as required

with cast-iron and timber detailing, and many curved verandah wing-walls;

Less than 40% of the street wall face comprised with openings such as windows and

doors; and

Front gardens, originally bordered by timber or iron picket front fences of around 1m

height; often set between brick or cemented pillars and curved brick garden wing

walls.

Face brick (typically red) privies set on rear lanes, with some stables and lofts to the

larger houses;

Shops and residences sited on corners with display windows and zero boundary

setbacks


Contributory elements also include attached Victorian and Edwardian-era shops,

and residences over, with

Façade parapets and pitched roofs behind,

Two storey wall heights,

Post-supported street verandahs as shown on the MMBW Detail Plans,

No front or side setbacks; also

Timber framed display windows and entry recesses.

Contributory elements also include:

Well preserved buildings from the pre Second War era, that are visually related to the

dominant scale, siting and form of the area;

Service buildings, like pre WW2 electric substations;

The distinctive suburban plan, enhanced by curving street forms, and defined by

boulevards; Edinburgh Gardens as a Victorian-era residential circus, and for the other

garden, boulevard and median reserves (such as Queens Parade), with mature exotic

and formally arranged planting;

Mature street tree plantings (such as plane and elm tree rows, Queensland brush box);

The provision of public and church reserves in the town plan, including the Inner Circle

Railway reserve;

The rectilinear Victorian-era allotment plans and street layout with wide main streets,

rear service lanes, all counter posed with circular parkland reserves, major angled

streets and boulevards;

The dominance of spires and towers of public buildings, churches and some large

houses in the skyline; and

Public infrastructure, expressive of the Victorian and Edwardian-eras such as

bluestone pitched road paving, crossings, stone kerbs, and channels, and asphalt

paved footpaths.

How is it significant?

HO327 North Fitzroy Heritage Overlay Area (south of Holden St) is aesthetically and

historically significant to the City of Yarra (National Estate Register [NER] Criteria

E1, A4)

Why is it significant

The Government planned section of Fitzroy North (south of Holden St) is

significant:

As a demonstration of the earliest stages in the development of North Fitzroy,

commencing with the 1850s Yan Yean tramway and the quarry route of Nicholson St,

the establishment of North Fitzroy‘s first churches and its pre-Boom suburban mixture

of small residential and commercial buildings coinciding with provision of horse drawn

public transport;

For its late 19th century buildings that represent rapid growth and change in the

character of the relatively remote suburb to an established residential and business

area with a range of commercial and institutional buildings serving the wider

population of North Fitzroy;

For the aesthetic value of its suburban planning, with the combination of curving

streets and garden reserves, and the vistas created by the intersections of standard

rectilinear subdivision with the strong diagonals formed by St Georges Road and

Queens Parade, the exceptionally wide streets and crescents, the triangular garden

reserves, and focal views to buildings and parkland. This aesthetic is underscored by


the built form seen in the construction of commercial and institutional buildings to the

property alignment along a number of streets and on corners;

The generous public domain, with street plantings of historic elms and 20th century

plane trees;

For its low rise streetscapes of intact Victorian and Edwardian buildings one and two-

storey terrace and villa housing;

For the range of Victorian and Edwardian-era building form and finish, from the

modestly decorated timber cottages and stuccoed Italianate style houses, simply

designed corner hotels and shops, to the rich variety of decorative buildings including

an extraordinary concentration of decorative bichrome and polychrome brickwork and

flamboyantly decorated Italianate residential and commercial terraces, banks and

hotels, interspersed very occasionally with dominating narrow spire and tower

elements of religious, commercial and institutional buildings.

As one of Melbourne‘s early residential commuter suburbs served by train and cable

tram services linking it to the city by 1888, with extensive Boom era terrace buildings

and closely built row housing within this sub-area providing evidence of the effects of

public transport on early development;

As essentially a well preserved Boom-era suburb that, despite the abrupt economic

collapse of the early 1890s, continued developing during the Great Depression years

and into the first decades of the 20th century due to the amenity of its planning,

parkland, local schools and shops and extensive public transport. This yielded both the

generous frontages and sizes of the post-Depression villa houses and the row house

forms and narrow frontages of the Boom era;

For its traditional Victorian-era residential character, evoked by the formal

presentation of the decorated façade to the street with its small ornamental front

garden, low front fence, pedestrian gateway and front path, with the functional

necessities of delivering coal, removal of nightsoil and occasional stabling provided by

the back lanes;

For landmark buildings and sites that formed key meeting places in the area during the

main development era of the 1860s to the 1930s, including religious institutions,

schools, monasteries and churches, and the buildings associated with charitable

bodies such as the Salvation Army, Church of Christ Bible School, and the temperance

movement. Also the former Nth Fitzroy Police Station, the former Licensed Victualler‘s

School and Asylum site and complexes such as the Old Colonists Homes;

For the asphalt footpaths, pitched lanes, gutters and lane crossovers and mature

street and individual plantings (such as mature elms, planes, palms, and Kurrajongs)

that reinforce the unified character of the dense, relatively low-rise residential

development;

The 19th century landscape of Edinburgh Gardens and its representation of Fitzroy‘s

cultural history in its plantings, memorials, recreation sports club grounds and pavilion

buildings, plus the Inner Circle Railway reserve as a cultural landscape strip across the

north of the area;

For the outstanding Victorian and Edwardian-era streetscapes such as those

surrounding the Edinburgh Gardens (Alfred Crescent, St Georges Road, Brunswick and

Freeman Streets) that include a rich collection of Victorian-era Gothic and Italianate

style buildings interspersed with fine buildings from the Edwardian period;

For the important views and vistas within the area, including those of the Edinburgh

Gardens, its mature trees and historic structures, as seen from many parts of the

Heritage Overlay Area, and views obtained from Edinburgh Gardens to the many

significant buildings at its curtilage and the city skyline, the vista from the elevated

position of the Cricket Club grandstand toward the upper façades of buildings in

Freeman and Brunswick Streets, and the Brunswick Street vistas (south to the spire of

St Patrick‘s Cathedral, and north to St Luke‘s spire)


For the contribution of well-preserved inter-war buildings, particularly the small intact

inter-war houses where the building design has adapted to the prevailing built

character of the area in siting, scale, decorative quality and stylistic variety.

Individual significance

The City of Yarra Review of Heritage Overlay Areas (Butler and associates, 2007) provides identical

statements of significance (apart from addresses) for both 26 Queens Parade, Fitzroy North, and 28-58

Queens Parade, Fitzroy North (part). Both sites are identified as K G Luke Pty Ltd, electro plate

manufacturers. The statement of significance notes:

What is significant?

The former K.G. Luke Pty Ltd. electro plate manufacturers factory complex (part) at

26 Queens Parade, Fitzroy North was created in 1938 for Kenneth G. Luke and has

historical associations with K.G. Luke Pty Ltd. (see also 28-58 Queens Pde)

In 1921 Kenneth Luke became a partner in a small metal-spinning and silverware

business at Carlton. By 1925 he was its proprietor and an employer of seven. These

employees were still with him thirty years later, with 650 others, making an ever-

increasing range of products: silverware, stainless-steel surgical equipment, plated

goods and glass-washing machines. In 1929 he bought a larger factory in Queen's

Parade, Fitzroy (since redeveloped), doubled his staff and introduced new lines. At

the outbreak of World War 2 production was again stepped up and Luke became

an honorary adviser to the Department of Supply and Shipping. Luke went on to

achieve many major public roles. In 1938-55 he was president of the Carlton

Football Club. A delegate (from 1935) to the Victorian Football League, he was its

vice-president (1946-55) and president (1956-71). With post-war growth

generating record crowds, he consolidated central administration and

professionalised the game for players.

The place has a fair integrity to its creation date.

Fabric from the creation date at the K.G. Luke Pty Ltd. electro plate manufacturers

factory, former (part) is locally significant within the City of Yarra, compared to

other similar places from a similar era.

How is it significant?

The K.G. Luke Pty Ltd. electro plate manufacturers factory, former (part) at 26

Queens Parade, Fitzroy North is historically and architecturally significant to the

locality of Fitzroy North and the City of Yarra.

Why is it significant?

The K.G. Luke Pty Ltd. electro plate manufacturers factory, former (part) is

significant as:

An unusual large ‘Art Deco’ (or Moderne style) factory/warehouse that has a very

intact façade of architectural merit especially in its parapet profile’ (part 26-58,

bricks painted).

This (factory) was co-located on the spur railway line through the Edinburgh

Gardens and the Queens Pde `Fitzroy' rail station which was a lucrative goods

L O V E L L C H E N 1 1

railway line from 1891 to 1980, serving this and other interwar industries nearby'

(Wight 2001).8

The Northern Suburbs Factory Study (Vines and Churchward, 1992) provided the following statement of

significance for the place:

Significance: Of local significance as a prominent local landmark with an unusual

façade treatment. Also of interest as an example of the transport related

industries which were concentrated along Heidelberg Road from the early

twentieth century.9

3.0 Brief history

The following provides a brief development summary for the western section of the former K G Luke

site. Today, three buildings in this section of the site occupy a 47 metre frontage to Queens Parade. For

the purposes of the following, these are described as Nos 26, 28-30 & No.42 Queens Parade. No 26 is

the westernmost building with a sawtooth roof and a relatively plain castellated façade to the street.

Nos 28-30 have a pair of hipped roofs and incorporate the western sections of the notable façade

described in the statement of significance reproduced above. On some occasions, this is simply

described as No.30 Queens Parade. No.42 is the easternmost building within the group under a single

hipped roof and incorporating the eastern half of the decorative façade noted above.

3.1 Timeline

1928-29

Kenneth Luke acquired the site at No.28-30 Queens Parade for his company K G Luke Pty Ltd.

Rate books note that the site retained a ‘brick + iron store’ with a Nett Annual Value (NAV) of

£80.

1936-37

K G Luke acquired a brick house of 6 rooms at No.26 Queens Parade from Bird and Tait. The

building was situated on land of 19’7’’ (5.97m) x 100’ (26.88m). The house and land had a

NAV of £70.

In the same year, K G Luke also acquired the vacant land on the adjacent site at No. 42

Queens Parade from Mary McLennan who also owned the house at No. 44. The land area

was 54’ (16.46 m) x 200’ (60.96 m).

1937-38

K G Luke partially demolished the brick and iron store at No. 30 and built a brick factory. The

Public Record Office Victoria (PROV) retains drawings of these works and has attributed a

1933 date to the design. However, Council’s rates records suggest that the works did not

occur until c. 1937.

An addition to the east on land at No. 42 was undertaken as separate programme of works in

the same year. This has also been dated to 1937 by the PROV which is consistent with

information in the rate books.

At this time, the NAV of the K G Luke site at Nos 26-42 Queens Parade increased from £267 to

£450.

8 Graeme Butler and Associates, 2007, City of Yarra Review of Heritage Precincts – Appendix 7, pp 436- 442

9 Gary Vines, 1992, Northern Factory Study, p 376


1938-39

K G Luke expanded his factory to the west, to encompass the land at No. 26. Rate books from

this time note the NAV increasing to £530.

K G Luke acquired No.44 (Occasionally described as No.50), which included a brick house with

6 rooms and had a NAV of £120. It continued to be leased to a tenant until at least 194410

and was not re-developed until c. 1965.

1945

An aerial photograph of the site dating from 1945 (Figure 5) shows the western section of the

site in, more or less, their current form. It is not possible to determine the appearance of

parapets to Queens Parade from this image.

1965

Drawings prepared by Meldrum and Partners Architects and dated 12/03/1965. Figure 8

show the buildings at Nos 28-44 in, more or less their current state. The works describe the

modern factory building constructed at No 44. However, they indicate that the elaborate

parapet at Nos 28-42 had been constructed by this time.

Figure 5 1931 aerial photograph of subject site with addresses indicated shows the undeveloped

land at Nos 26 and 42, an open yard at No. 28 and single storey brick store (with two

storey iron building to rear) at No. 30.

Source: Land Victoria

10 City of Fitzroy, 1928 - 1944 rate book entries


Figure 6 Uncredited drawing, Proposed additions & alterations to existing offices & factory for

Messrs K.G Luke Pty Ltd, 30 Queens Parade, Fitzroy, c.1937; showing conversion of original

building on the site into a two story building

Source: Public Record Office of Victoria, VPRS 16127 P2 Unit 5


Figure 7 Uncredited drawing, Proposed additions to existing offices & factory for Messrs K.G Luke

Pty Ltd, 30 Queens Parade, Fitzroy, 1937; showing extension to the east of early building

on the site

Source: PROV VPRS 16127 P2 Unit 9


Figure 8 Meldrum and Partners Architects, 12/03/1965, K G Luke Group Industries Pty Ltd,

Alterations and additions to factory Queens Parade North Fitzroy; shows development of

the site at No.42 Queens Parade

Source: PROV VPRS 10150 PO Unit 162


4.0 Description

Queens Parade is a broad arterial thoroughfare providing access from the inner northern suburbs of

Carlton, Fitzroy and Collingwood to Ivanhoe and Heidelberg to the northeast. The Parade is 60 metres

in width and notable for long stands of mature trees. It forms the eastern boundary of Fitzroy North, an

area noted for polite Victorian and Edwardian terraces and villas.

The subject site extends over a large triangular allotment to the north of Queens Parade (Figure 10). It

retains a group of one- and two-storey manufacturing and warehousing buildings to the Parade with an

ad hoc collection of warehouse and factory spaces to their rear. The western section of the Queens

Parade frontage was constructed in a number of stages through the late 1930s (Figure 11 to Figure 13).

These elements abut a row of single- and two-storey Victorian villas and semi-detached pairs at 8-24

Queens Parade. The eastern sections of the Queens Parade frontage developed over subsequent

decades. These incorporate a substantial administration building from c. 1965 and a large car park

which abuts a modest interwar shop on the adjacent site at Nos 54-56 Queens Parade. The shop was

not associated with the former K G Luke enterprise but is included in the subject development site. A

modern five-storey residential development has been constructed further to the east at No. 58 Queens

Parade (Figure 14). Rear sections of the subject site abut the rear of buildings to Brunswick Street to the

east and Coleman Street to the north. Built form in these streets generally comprises early single-storey

dwellings. The transitions between industrial and residential forms are typically mediated by rights-of-

way. A building at Nos 496-500 Brunswick Street, immediately to the north-east of the subject site, rises

to five storeys.

Figure 9 Aerial photomap, 1945 with approximate extent of subject site indicated, the western

section of the site had been fully developed by this time

Source: Land Victoria

As noted above, production buildings in the western section of the Queens Road frontage are

reasonably generic warehouse forms distinguished only by unusual parapet arrangements. These take

the form of castellated devices at No.26 and hexagonal decorative devices to the parapet at Nos 28-42.

These hexagonal elements derive from a relatively recent programme of works. The lower sections of

both buildings combine brick and rendered surface although brick work has been bagged in some areas.

Pilasters rising through both levels divide the façade into an irregular arrangement of bays. The

windows are typically steel-framed with central hoppers and brick sills although some recent aluminium


windows have been introduced in some areas. A range of later works have been undertaken, including

the creation of new openings for vehicle and pedestrian access, cladding of windows in decking material

for security purposes and the installation of air conditioners. The variety of colours and textures

afforded by the early materiality has been substantially lost by prominent pink overpainting.

The building immediately to the east of this early group is a reasonably undistinguished factory built for

K G Luke in c.1965. It is located outside of the HO area. Further to the east, a straightforward interwar

shop at Nos 54-56 Queens Parade is located to the east of the former K G Luke site. It forms part of the

subject development site.

Various outbuildings are located at the rear of this building, including a saw-tooth factory building of

corrugated sheet metal, a flat roofed brick outbuilding with an asbestos sheet clad extension. All of

which are of no particular interest from a heritage point of view and have been altered and refitted

internally in an ad hoc manner over the life of the factory.

Figure 10 Aerial photograph with subject site at 26-56 Queens Parade indicated

Source: Nearmap


Figure 11 26-30 Queens Parade, Fitzroy North, looking from the east

Figure 12 Queens Parade elevation with four building programmes indicated


Figure 13 Western sections of site, showing 1938 addition at No. 26 (indicated in red) and adjacent

properties at Nos 22-24 Queens Parade (indicated in yellow)

Figure 14 Early shop at Nos 54-56 Queens Parade (part of subject site) and recent development at

58 Queens Parade


5.0 Proposal

The scheme proposes total demolition of all existing built form on the site apart from the facades at Nos

26-42 and part of the adjacent west-facing boundary wall noted above. New built form of varying

heights would be constructed around the perimeter of the site forming a podium to a central tower of

sixteen storeys. Built form on adjacent sites typically comprises modest dwellings located within HO327.

However, new built form has been scaled to manage impacts on the character or significance of these

buildings. New built form in the western sections of the site, adjacent to the dwellings at Nos 22-24

Queens Parade would adopt a three storeys height. It would rise in a graduated manner to eleven

storeys plus rooftop plant room towards the centre of the Queens Road frontage - outside of the

Heritage Overlay area - but would reduce in height to three storeys along the sensitive interface with

dwellings at Nos 22-24 Queens Parade. Built form would be set back 4.67 metres along part of this

interface. A four-storey volume at a modest setback would address the rear of buildings at Nos 478-594

Brunswick Street across an undeveloped site and a bluestone laneway to the north-west of the site.

Building height in this area would vary from four storeys in the vicinity of the Brunswick Street dwellings

to eight storeys in the vicinity of taller modern apartment buildings to the north of the site (Nos 596-500

Brunswick Street and 19-8-20 Grace Lane). Built form in the north-eastern sections would address the

rear of Nos 8-24 Coleman Street. It would generally be of three storeys with an additional level at a

setback of 7.7m from the site boundary. Further to the south, the new building would rise to nine

storeys in areas adjacent to No. 58 Queens Parade. This part of the proposed building is located outside

of the Heritage Overlay area.

6.0 Assessment of heritage impact

6.1 Heritage policy framework

In considering the heritage impact of the proposed redevelopment, reference has been made to the

relevant heritage policies included in the Yarra Planning Scheme. These include:

Clause 21.05 ‘Built Form’

Clause 22.02 ‘Development Guidelines for Sites Subject to the Heritage Overlay’

Clause 43.01 ‘Heritage Overlay’

The relevant sections of the document ‘Incorporated Plan under the provisions of Clause 43.01 Heritage

Overlay – Planning permit exemptions, July 2014’ (Lovell Chen), listed as a reference document in

Schedule to Clause 81 of the Yarra Planning Scheme, have also been considered.

The Heritage Overlay, Clause 43.01

Clause 43.01 notes that prior to deciding on an application, the responsible authority must consider:

The State Planning Policy Framework and the Local Planning Policy Framework, including the Municipal Strategic Statement and local planning policies.

The significance of the heritage place and whether the proposal will

adversely affect the natural or cultural significance of the place.

Any applicable statement of significance, heritage study and any

applicable conservation policy.

Whether the location, bulk, form or appearance of the proposed building

will adversely affect the significance of the heritage place.

Whether the location, bulk, form and appearance of the proposed building

is in keeping with the character and appearance of adjacent buildings and

the heritage place. Whether the demolition, removal or external

alteration will adversely affect the significance of the heritage place.


Whether the proposed works will adversely affect the significance,

character or appearance of the heritage place.

Whether the proposed subdivision will adversely affect the significance of

the heritage place.

Whether the proposed subdivision may result in development which will

adversely affect the significance, character or appearance of the heritage

place.

...

Clause 22.02 Development guidelines for sites subject to the Heritage Overlay

In addition, Clause 22.02-5.1 notes:

Full Demolition or Removal of a Building

(It is policy to) Generally encourage the retention of a building in a heritage place

unless:

The building is identified as being not contributory.

The building is identified as a contributory building, and

o new evidence has become available to demonstrate that the

building does not possess the level of heritage significance

attributed to it in the incorporated document, City of Yarra

Review of Heritage Overlay Areas 2007 Appendix 8, Revised

September 2014 and

o The building does not form part of a group of similar buildings.

Note: the poor condition of a heritage place should not, in itself, be a reason for

permitting demolition.

…

An application for demolition is to be accompanied by an application for new

development.

Removal of Part of a Heritage Place or Contributory Elements

(It is policy to) Encourage the removal of inappropriate alterations, additions and

works that detract from the cultural significance of the place.

Generally discourage the demolition of part of an individually significant or

contributory building or removal of contributory elements unless:

That part of the heritage place has been changed beyond recognition of its

original or subsequent contributory character(s).

For a contributory building:

o that part is not visible from the street frontage (other than a

laneway), abutting park or public open space, and the main

building form including roof form is maintained; or


o the removal of the part would not adversely affect the contribution

of the building to the heritage place …

Council policies at Clause 22.02-5.7 note the following in relation to New Development, Alterations or

Additions

22.02-5.7.1 General

Encourage the design of new development and alterations and additions to a

heritage place or a contributory element to a heritage place to:

Respect the pattern, rhythm, orientation to the street, spatial

characteristics, fenestration, roof form, materials and heritage character

of the surrounding historic streetscape.

Be articulated and massed to correspond with the prevailing building form

of the heritage place or contributory elements to the heritage place. Be

visually recessive and not dominate the heritage place.

Be distinguishable from the original historic fabric.

Not remove, cover, damage or change original historic fabric.

Not obscure views of principle façades.

Consider the architectural integrity and context of the heritage place or

contributory element.

Encourage setbacks from the principal street frontage to be similar to those of

adjoining contributory buildings; where there are differing adjoining setbacks, the

greater setback will apply.

Encourage similar façade heights to the adjoining contributory elements in the

street. Where there are differing façade heights, the design should adopt the

lesser height.

Minimise the visibility of new additions by:

Locating ground level additions and any higher elements towards the rear

of the site.

Encouraging ground level additions to contributory buildings to be sited

within the ‘envelope’ created by projected sight lines (see Figure 1)

Encouraging upper level additions to heritage places to be sited within the

‘envelope’ created by projected sight lines (for Contributory buildings

refer to Figure 2 and for individually significant buildings refer to Figure 3).

Encouraging additions to individually significant places to, as far as

possible, be concealed by existing heritage fabric when viewed from the

front street and to read as secondary elements when viewed from any

other adjoining street.

Discourage elements which detract from the heritage fabric or are not

contemporary with the era of the building such as unroofed or open upper level


decks or balconies, reflective glass, glass balustrades and pedestrian entrance

canopies




canopies.

Encouraging additions to individually significant places to, as far as possible, be

concealed by existing heritage fabric when viewed from the front street and to

read as secondary elements when viewed from any other adjoining street.




canopies.


Clause 22.02-5.7.2 provides specific guidance for new works on industrial sites

Industrial, Commercial and Retail Heritage Place or Contributory Elements

Encourage new upper level additions and works to:

Respect the scale and form of the existing heritage place or contributory

elements to the heritage place by being set back from the lower built form

elements. Each higher element should be set further back from lower

heritage built forms.

Incorporate treatments which make them less apparent.

Clause 22.10–3.3 provides advice for sites abutting HO areas. The guidelines encourage a response

which has regard to their presence. They note:


The height of new development abutting land in a Heritage Overlay should:

Adopt a façade height to the street frontage which is no higher than the

adjacent building within the Heritage Overlay;

Design and site taller structures so that they do not visually dominate

surrounding heritage buildings.

6.2 Assessment of heritage impacts

Significance

As noted at Section 2.1 above, the City of Yarra Review of Heritage Overlay Areas, Appendix 8 identifies

the two sites at Nos 26 and 28-56 Queens Parade (part) as each being of ‘individual significance’.11 The

use of the term, (part) in reference to Nos 28-52 reflects the fact that neither Nos 44-52 nor Nos 54-56

Queens Parade have ever been identified as significant buildings. According to Council’s current

citation, the two identified sites are significant as ‘unusual large `Art Deco' (or Moderne style)

factory/warehouses’ that have ‘a very intact façade of architectural merit especially in its parapet

profile’. In the case of No. 28-52 Queens Parade (part), the reference to parapet detailing relates to an

unusual arrangement of hexagonal elements of varying sizes to the upper facade (Figure 8, Figure 11,

Figure 12). However, drawings held at the PROV (Figure 6, Figure 7) suggest that these unusual

elements do not date from the original construction of the building.

These drawings indicate that the pre 1965 Queens Parade frontage of the site was developed in three

stages. The first involved the remodelling of a single storey brick store at No.30 that predates the KG

Luke occupancy in 1929. These c. 1937 works increased the height and width of this simple gable-ended

structure to produce a two-storey factory of five irregular bays (Figure 6). The current haphazard façade

arrangement derives, in part, from the arrangement of fabric retained from the earlier building. The

parapet treatment of this building comprised two stepped pedimented forms in a Moderne style.

Soon after completion of this work, Luke acquired the site to the east and constructed a two storey

addition at No. 42 Queens Parade (Figure 7). The addition maintained the use of multi-pane steel

framed windows and was terminated at the eastern end by a narrower entry bay which also adopted

some Moderne styling in the stepped form. As with the earlier work, the parapet was different to what

currently exists and comprised a simple unadorned flat top with a simple pediment on the eastern end.

A third addition was made at the western end of the group after Luke acquired No. 26 Queens Parade in

1938-39. It is not known when the structure on this site was erected and it could date from before or

after the Second World War.

Despite this varied provenance, the factory now presents with a quasi-unified facade as a consequence

of the installation of a continuous decorative parapet treatment. Despite earlier assessments of the

building as retaining ‘a very intact façade of architectural merit especially in its parapet profile’, this

further examination indicates that this is not the case. On inspection the parapet treatment presents as

a quite crude device which has been applied and possibly extended in stages to unify an otherwise

entirely undistinguished extended factory façade. While the date(s) of installation has not been

established, it appears likely that it occurred in the post-war years and prior to 1965.

The parapet treatment notwithstanding, it is also evident that considerable alteration to the façades at

Nos 26-42 has occurred over time. Windows have been changed and new openings for pedestrians and

motor vehicles have been created. Render has been applied to much of the lower building façade which

has subsequently been overpainted. The upper facade is more intact to its early states but has been

diminished by the over-painting of what is assumed to have been unpainted face brickwork.

11 Graeme Butler and Associates, 2007, City of Yarra Review of Heritage Precincts – Appendix 8, pp 749-750


On this basis, the citation is inaccurate. The building facades are neither ‘intact’ nor of any individual

‘architectural merit’. In addition, the building is not typical of the stock found in the North Fitzroy

Precinct (HO327) and it derives no additional significance from association with similar built form.

Accordingly it is evident that the building exhibits a lower level of significance than has been indicated

by Council’s citation. At most it might be assessed as a ‘contributory’ building, albeit not contributory to

the North Fitzroy Precinct, or alternatively ‘ungraded’.

Mapping

This revised assessment notwithstanding, it appears that it was intended that all of the façades at Nos

26-42 Queens Parade would be mapped within, and protected under, HO327. That is, the facades

associated with the three earliest building programmes, noted above, were to be protected. In practice,

facades at Nos 26 and No.28-30 have been mapped while that at No 42 has not. This appears to be a

mapping error.12

For the purposes of the following discussion, it is assumed that Council’s mapping is incorrect and that it

was intended that the Heritage Overlay would extend further to the east to include No.42. (Refer Figure

3). This extent is consistent with the 47 metre extent of building facades considered to be of

importance by the Panel to Amendment C20.

6.2.1 Demolition

As described, it is proposed to demolish all buildings on the site other than the Queens Parade façade to

Nos 26-42 and a section of the adjacent west-facing wall. That part of the site which is outside the

heritage overlay area (the central and eastern portion) is not subject to demolition controls and the

proposed demolition raises no heritage issues. That part of the site within the heritage overlay is subject

to Council’s heritage policy which encourages the retention of ‘contributory’ or ‘significant’ buildings in

a heritage place.

The significance of the site largely derives from the original brick and render facades (since overpainted)

and, to a far lesser degree, the building fabric to the rear. As noted above, new evidence has become

available that demonstrates that the building does not possess the level of heritage significance

attributed to it in the incorporated document, City of Yarra Review of Heritage Overlay Areas 2007

Appendix 8. Consequently, the exercise of some discretion with respect to demolition of early fabric is

considered warranted.

Total demolition of the buildings under the heritage control is not being sought as part of the proposal.

As noted above, it is proposed that the facades at Nos 26-42 would be retained in their entirety, albeit

with some alterations. The parapets would be retained intact as would the general arrangement of

openings. To the rear the former factory areas would be demolished. The factory forms behind the

decorated façade have not been identified as of significance in demonstrating the functioning of the

place. Their removal would not affect the significance of the building to any substantial degree.

As noted above, this office provided expert evidence to the Panel for Amendment C20 (2003), prepared

by Yarra City Council in response to a request from Urbis Pty Ltd. The proposal included demolition of

all built form on the site with the exception of the early facades extending for 47 metres along the

Queens Parade boundary (Nos 26-42). The Panel accepted that the impact of the proposed

development on the heritage place would be negligible. Council had argued for the retention of some

fabric behind the façade. This position was not accepted by the Panel. While this permit has

subsequently expired, it provides a degree of precedence with respect to the extent of retention

proposed by the current scheme.

12 Note. A number of mapping errors were noted by the Panels to Yarra Planning Scheme Amendments C20, C43

and C85.


On this basis, the extent of demolition associated with the current proposal is acceptable subject to the

design of a suitable replacement building.

6.2.2 Additions and alterations

As noted above, some modification of the early facades has already taken place to accommodate the

creation of new openings for vehicles and pedestrians. The facade currently demonstrates a reasonably

ad hoc arrangement of openings and a substantial degree of change from the original designs

reproduced at Figure 6 and Figure 7. It is currently proposed that all of the openings at ground floor

level would be altered to provide one unglazed opening to each bay behind which would be located a

deck area. This would be finished with a low plinth and planter to the street. The work will result in the

loss of some original steel windows and a number of later doors.

At first floor level, fixed (or minimally openable) steel framed windows are to be replaced with new steel

bi-fold windows. The window arrangement and glazing bar treatment will match the appearance of the

existing windows. Behind the windows are located open deck areas with planters located behind the

upstand panel or spandrel beneath the window sills.

As part of the work it is proposed to remove the existing paint finish to reveal the natural render surface

and unpainted brick. It is hoped that the revealed brick and render surfaces have survived in a

satisfactory condition and that the early expression of the building can be reinstated. However,

recognising that the building developed over stages with later openings introduced and bricked up,

presenting with exposed surfaces may not be possible in which case it is proposed that a white wash

finish be applied.

Recognising the evolved nature of the existing façade the proposed works will maintain the industrial

character and overall presentation while accommodating the transformation of the structure behind for

residential use. They are works which will not alter the significance of the façade as determined in

current assessments, albeit that those assessments overstate its importance.

6.2.3 New built form

The current design proposes new built form to the perimeter of the site which rises to towers of 11 and

16 storeys towards the centre of the site. The height and expression of the proposed building have been

designed to mitigate impacts on adjacent built form at key interfaces. In addition, the design will allow

the retained facades to survive as legible independent elements fronting Queens Parade. More broadly,

the building comprises a concrete-framed building with large areas of glazing softened by the

incorporation of steel mesh and planters.

As noted above, some parts of the subject site are included within HO327 while others are not. These

two conditions are discussed separately below.

New built form within HO327

HO327 extends over the western sections of the subject site. Three sensitive heritage interfaces exist in

area, namely:

Retained façades

Adjacent properties at Nos 8-24 Queens Parade

Rear of properties at Nos 480-494 Brunswick Street

The existing façades at No 26-42 Queens Parade are to be retained and integrated into the new

development behind. At ground and first floor levels the retained façade will conceal balcony areas

which utilise the modified or existing openings. On level 2 there is a variable setback of between 2.275

and 3.5 metres and on level 3, a setback of 3.5 metres. Between levels 4 and 10 the new structure

behind the façade progressively angles back towards the frontage at the eastern end of the south-west

tower block.


Albeit identified as a place which does not contribute to the identified character of the North Fitzroy

precinct, the façade will remain as visually distinctive within the Queens Parade streetscape.

Understanding that the decorative parapet treatment appears to be a later addition, installed to unify a

disparate collection of undistinguished factory buildings, retention of fabric behind the façade is not

considered to be warranted on heritage grounds. Further, given the existing two dimensional nature of

the presentation it also presents as a situation in which a greater setback of the new structure is not

warranted. While at the eastern end of the south-west block the upper levels project out to the street,

the retained façade will remain legible and understood.

To the south-west, new development at the interface of the proposed building and houses at Nos 22-24

Queens Parade will be built to the western boundary. New fabric at the Queens Parade frontage will

rise to three storeys in height - slightly taller than the dwellings at Nos 22-24 but lower in height than

the factory parapets at Nos 28-42 Queens Parade. Above level 2 new fabric in this area will be set back

4.67m from the western boundary reducing its impact in views from Queens Parade. While the new

fabric would be visible in approaches to the site from the south, the transition from two storey dwellings

to the west is sensitive to the context, avoiding an abrupt transition in scale and a situation in which

new built form overwhelms the existing two-storey built form.

To the west, new built form will typically be situated between 30-40 metres from the rear elevations of

these buildings of Nos 480-494 Brunswick Street. New built form will vary from four storeys to eleven

storeys with increasing distance from Brunswick Street. While the upper levels will be visible from some

vantage points in Brunswick Street these will be read as distant and unrelated elements with little

impact on the identified character and significance of the area. Built form to the rear of taller modern

buildings at Nos 496-500 and Nos 14-29 Grace Lane raises no heritage issues.

New built form external to HO327

The central and eastern sections of the former KG Luke site and the modest shop at Nos 54-56 are not

situated within HO327. Nonetheless, Clause 22.10–3.3 requires that consideration be given to the

impact of the works on sites abutting HO areas. The guidelines encourage a response which has regard

to their presence noting:

The height of new development abutting land in a Heritage Overlay should:

o Adopt a façade height to the street frontage which is no higher than the adjacent building within the Heritage Overlay;

o Design and site taller structures so that they do not visually dominate surrounding heritage buildings.

Strictly speaking, the proposed facades to Queens Parade in the eastern sections of the subject site do

not share a street frontage with buildings in HO327. The adjacent building at 58 Queens Parade is a

recent residential development to five storeys in height. No early character survives in the vicinity of

this building and the works raise no concerns.

However, the interface with dwellings at Nos 18-24 Coleman Street is more sensitive. While the

streetscape is somewhat mixed, it retains a number of early-single storey buildings which are included in

HO327. New development to the rear of these buildings will rise to four storeys in height. However,

potential impacts in this area have been mitigated by through a range of mechanisms.

First, the proposed building will not abut these buildings directly. Rather it will be situated across a

laneway at the rear of the Coleman Street dwellings. The building stock in Coleman Street is sited on

narrow blocks and is typically constructed without side setbacks. This layout, in conjunction with the

narrow street width and the modest, four-storey height of the proposed works will provide limited

exposure of the new building as viewed from Coleman Street. Where narrow view corridors allow

glimpses to the new building, the new works would be visible as a recessive element with little impact

on the character or significance of this early streetscape.


New built form as an element seen in the context of HO327

While the current design provides appropriate transitions to the scale found on neighbouring properties

within the heritage overlay area, it will nonetheless form a new landmark element. The new building

generally and its taller elements in particular, will be visible from a wide range of local and more distant

vantage points.

The site is large and already strikes a contrast with the finer grain of North Fitzroy. HO327 and North

Fitzroy more broadly, are valued for Victorian and Edwardian dwellings. However this condition was

extinguished on the subject site when the Victorian residential buildings were progressively demolished

from 1937 onwards. The current proposal does not attempt to recall or to reinstate the original

arrangement or character. The site survives as an atypical manufacturing enclave in an otherwise

largely uniform residential suburb and will continue to exist as an anomaly within the area, reflecting a

different provenance.

In managing the interface with the heritage fabric to the north and west, the proposal has successfully

mediated the various interface conditions through low or mid-rise forms at its perimeter. Further, the

two tower elements are located on the Queens Parade frontage, well removed from any direct interface

low scale heritage buildings.

This design approach is one which, in conjunction with the expansive site, will produce a development

which generates its own urban environment. The tower elements, as part of that environment will

contrast strongly with the low scale surrounds but largely exist outside an area of immediate heritage

sensitivity. Considered in the broader context, the proposed tower elements will change the visual

character of the Queens Parade and the wider area. However, these impacts will be observed at an

urban rather than a personal or pedestrian scale. As such the experience of the associated heritage

place will be maintained, as will its assessed significance.

7.0 Conclusion

As has been described, the proposed redevelopment of this site is to occur on land which in part is not

included within the heritage overlay. The heritage sensitivities which arise in this area are as related to

the interface with the North Fitzroy precinct to the north and the overall scale. The interface

sensitivities have been addressed by way of a stepped design approach whereby taller forms have been

set back from interface boundaries. In the case of tower height, the taller tower form is located well

away from the heritage areas such that there is not direct interface issue. While the tower will present

as a new landmark element, its prominence is does not give rise to any particular heritage concerns.

For that part of the site which falls within the heritage precinct the design approach is one which is

responsive to the precinct context and the impacted heritage building. The new development has taken

into consideration the interface issues and proposes a sympathetic response to built form in the area in

terms of bulk, materials and massing. In the vicinity of the retained facades, new, taller built form is to

be set back from the Queens Parade boundary to allow the retained façade to survive as independent

element within the redeveloped site. While the proposed works will bring about a substantial degree of

change, impacts have been carefully considered such that the significance of the heritage place will be

maintained.

HERITAGE IMPACT STATEMENT - City of Yarra · LOVELL CH EN 1 1.0 Introduction This Heritage Impact...

Documents

Transcript of HERITAGE IMPACT STATEMENT - City of Yarra · LOVELL CH EN 1 1.0 Introduction This Heritage Impact...