Statement of Heritage Evidence - City of Melbourne€¦ · Lovell for MELBOURNE CITY COUNCIL...

STATEMENT OF EVIDENCE AND

REPORT TO PLANNING PANEL

MELBOURNE PLANNING SCHEME

AMENDMENT C245

QUEEN VICTORIA MARKET PRECINCT RENEWAL

Statement of heritage evidence

prepared by Peter Lovell for

MELBOURNE CITY COUNCIL

Instructed by

ASHURST AUSTRALIA

April 2016

L O V E L L C H E N 1

Statement of Qualifications and Experience, and Declaration

Authorship

This statement has been prepared by Mr Peter Haynes Lovell, Director of Lovell Chen Pty Ltd, Architects

and Heritage Consultants, Level 5, 176 Wellington Parade, East Melbourne, assisted by Anita Brady,

Associate Director.

The views expressed in the statement are those of Mr Peter Lovell.

Qualifications and Experience

I have a Bachelor of Building degree from Melbourne University and have been director of the above

practice, which I established with Richard Allom in 1981. Over the past 32 years I have worked in the

field of building conservation and have been involved in, and responsible for, a wide range of

conservation related projects. These projects include the preparation of conservation/heritage studies

for the Borough of Queenscliffe, the former City of South Melbourne, the former City of Fitzroy and the

former City of Port Melbourne. In addition, I have acted as heritage advisor to the Borough of

Queenscliffe and the former City of South Melbourne. In the area of conservation management

planning I have been responsible for the preparation of a wide range of conservation analyses and plans

including those for the Melbourne Town Hall and Administration Building, the State Library and

Museum, the Supreme Court of Victoria, Werribee Park, the Regent Theatre, the Bendigo Post Office,

Flinders Street Station, the Old Melbourne Observatory and the Mt Buffalo Chalet. I have been

responsible for the preparation of strategic planning reports for Government House, Canberra, the

Melbourne Town Hall and the Supreme Court of Victoria.

In the area of building conservation works I have been involved in and directly responsible for the

investigation, design and documentation of a wide range of projects including the ANZ Gothic Bank at

380 Collins Street, the Collingwood, Melbourne and Fitzroy Town Halls, the Athenaeum and Regent

Theatres, Parliament House, Melbourne, Government Houses in Canberra and Perth, and the Supreme

Court of Victoria Court of Appeal.

I am a member of long standing of the National Trust of Australia (Victoria) and Australia ICOMOS

(International Council on Monuments and Sites). I am also an honorary fellow of the Royal Australian

Institute of Architects.

Over the past twenty years I have appeared frequently before the former Historic Buildings Council, now

the Victorian Heritage Council, and the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal in relation to matters

relating to conservation, adaptation and redevelopment of historic places.

Expertise to make the report

The specific expertise which I bring to this matter is in the area of the assessment of the impact of

development work in a heritage context. This expertise is primarily derived from my experience in

researching and assessing heritage places for the application of heritage controls at both a local and

state level, in the formulation and review of guidelines for the implementation of such controls, in the

application of heritage controls to projects undertaken by Lovell Chen and other architects and in the

testing of those controls by way of Victorian Heritage Council and Victorian Civil and Administrative

Tribunal review.

Previous involvement

In April 2015 my office prepared a Review of Heritage Issues report for the City of Melbourne. This

report commented on issues associated with the development of precinct built form controls for the

area surrounding the QVM. In particular the report addressed the findings on heritage contained in the

draft Queen Victoria Market Renewal Precinct Built Form Controls Review and Recommendations report

by Jones & Whitehead, for the City of Melbourne (April 2015).

Some material from the Review of Heritage Issues report is incorporated into this statement.


It is noted that since the April 2015 report was prepared there have been some changes to the statutory

heritage arrangements in the area subject to Amendment C245, following the gazettal of Amendment

C198 on 15 October 2015. This included changes to the mapping of the relevant heritage overlay (HO)

precinct, the QVM Precinct (HO7); introduction of a new precinct statement of significance; and changes

to building gradings. There has also been an amendment to the mapping of the site-specific HO for the

QVM (HO496) to make this consistent with the extent of registration of the site as included in the

Victorian Heritage Register (VHR). The current statutory heritage arrangements are set out in this

evidence statement.

I also note that Lovell Chen (then Allom Lovell & Associates) prepared the QVM Conservation

Management Plan (CMP) in 2003 (updated November 2011) and more recently prepared the following

documents, as part of a VHR amendment process:

Assessment of Cultural Heritage Significance and Conservation Recommendations for the Old

Melbourne Cemetery at Queen Victoria Market prepared for the City of Melbourne, Lovell

Chen, March 2011;

Submission to the Heritage Council of Victoria in relation to the proposed amendment to the

registration of the Queen Victoria Market, Lovell Chen, February 2012.

While these documents are relevant in the consideration of future works which occur on the QVM site,

the primary reference document for the consideration of such works is the current VHR citation. In this

regard, other than as a source of background historical information, the CMP and associated reports

have not been further referenced in this statement.

Instructions

This statement addresses the heritage issues and considerations arising from Melbourne Planning

Scheme Amendment C245.

My instructions on this matter comprised a memorandum from Ashurst Australia, dated 24 August

2015, which requested that I analyse and address in this statement:

the heritage context of the QVM Precinct and its surrounding area;

whether the controls proposed by Amendment C245 are the appropriate controls to apply in

the context of the heritage character of the QVM, including consideration of the heritage

significance of the buildings and items that are listed on the Victorian Heritage Register, and

the heritage overlays that the area is subject to;

whether any amendments should be made to the proposed controls to address heritage

concerns; and

whether any other broader heritage issues need to be addressed.

I subsequently received additional instructions in March 2016, which requested that I principally focus

on the proposed Development Plan Overlay 11 (DPO11) in this statement.

References

The brief of documents received from Ashurst Australia was comprehensive and contained information

which I have reviewed and addressed as relevant in the preparation of this statement. This information

included, but was not limited to:

Report to the Future Melbourne Planning Committee and accompanying attachments, May

2015

Aerial and cadastral maps for the QVM Precinct including block plans

Copies of current planning controls

Queen Victoria Market Precinct Renewal Strategic Brief, February 2015

Queen Victoria Market Precinct Renewal Draft Master Plan

Godden McKay Logan Heritage Consultants Report (Stages 1 and 2), April and August 2013


Panel Report Melbourne Planning Scheme Amendment C61 (Queen Victoria Market Precinct

Built Form Review), 2006

Panel Report Melbourne Planning Scheme Amendment C196 (City North Structure Plan),

October 2013

Panel Report Melbourne Planning Scheme Amendment C198 (City North Heritage Review) and

Supplementary Report, July 2014

Explanatory Report for Amendment C245, together with the exhibited documents

Submissions with regard to Amendment C245

Summary of Submissions prepared by Melbourne City Council, and Council’s response to key

issues raised in submissions

Report to the Future Melbourne Committee regarding the outcomes of the public exhibition of

C245

QVM Master Plan (finalised)

Information prepared in support of the application for National Heritage Listing of the QVM

(including documentation prepared by Context Pty Ltd, 2014-2015)

Declaration

In submitting this report I declare that I have made all the inquiries that I believe are desirable and

appropriate and that no matters of significance which I regard as relevant have to my knowledge been

withheld from the Panel.

Peter Lovell


Introduction

1. I have been asked by Ashurst Australia on behalf of the Melbourne City Council to provide expert

heritage evidence in relation to the heritage issues and considerations associated with proposed

Amendment C245 to the Melbourne Planning Scheme.

2. The amendment seeks to introduce new precinct controls to facilitate redevelopment in the area

of the QVM Precinct, being the land bounded by Victoria Street, Therry Street, Elizabeth Street,

A’Beckett Street, William Street and Peel Street, Melbourne (see Figure 1). Amendment C245

does not propose any changes to the existing heritage overlay controls that apply within the

precinct.

Figure 1 Amendment C245 QVM Precinct (outlined in red)

Source: Melbourne Planning Scheme Amendment C245 Explanatory Report

3. While sharing the same name, the extent of the Amendment C245 QVM Precinct differs to, and is

greater than, the QVM Precinct which is included in the Schedule to the Heritage Overlay (HO7).

To avoid confusion, the latter is generally referred to below as the QVM Heritage Overlay

Precinct.

4. Amendment C245 derives from the QVM Precinct Renewal Master Plan (Masterplan), prepared

by Melbourne City Council; and a review of the current controls as outlined in the Queen Victoria

Market Renewal Precinct Built Form Controls Review and Recommendations report (Jones &

Whitehead, for the City of Melbourne, April 2015).

5. My evidence focusses on the proposed new DPO11, which applies to a discrete area within the

QVM Precinct (Figure 2). In my evidence I comment on the heritage issues arising from the

requirements of DPO11 and the building forms contemplated in the DPO and Precinct Framework

Plan.


6. Preparation of this statement has not involved any historical research or investigation, but relies

on that undertaken in previous work and included in previous reports, such as the QVM CMP,

prepared by Lovell Chen for Queen Victoria Market Pty Ltd (April 2003, updated November

2011).

Figure 2 Amendment C245 proposed new zones; area subject to DP011; and the reduced DD014

Source: Melbourne Planning Scheme Amendment C245 Explanatory Report

Amendment C245

7. Amendment C245 proposes to1:

Rezone the majority of QVM and the Queen Street extension from Capital City Zone to

Public Use Zone

Rezone the proposed new public open space (the current at-grade QVM carpark) from

Capital City Zone to Public Park and Recreation Zone

Apply a new Schedule to the Development Plan Overlay (DPO11), which incorporates a

vision and design requirements (including the development envelope of street frontage

heights and upper level setbacks) for development of land adjacent to the QVM (south and

east of the market).

Require a development plan, and any permit issued for the use, subdivision or

development of the land to be consistent with the QVM Precinct Framework Plan.

1 As per Melbourne Planning Scheme Amendment C245 Explanatory Report.


Delete existing schedule 14 to the Design and Development Overlay (DDO14) from the

QVM and land to which DPO11 applies, to contract the area covered by DDO14.

Amend the existing schedule 14 to DDO14, which will apply only to the contracted area, to

introduce revised built form controls for new development.

Amend the Built Environment and Heritage within the Hoddle Grid Policy (Clause 21.12) to

delete an existing policy statement relating to the existing DDO14, and amend Figure 6:

Hoddle Grid to show the QVM and to extend the area of the QVM Precinct (to which this

amendment applies).

Amend the existing clause 22.02 Sunlight to Public Spaces to include a provision that

development should not overshadow Flagstaff Gardens between 11am and 2pm on 21

June.

Current Melbourne Heritage Policy Review

8. While not yet subject of an exhibited amendment, it is also relevant to note the progress of the

City of Melbourne's Local Heritage Policy Review. Council has commenced the second stage of

community consultation on the Local Heritage Policy Review, undertaken by Lovell Chen. Draft

amended heritage policies for the Capital City Zone at Clause 22.04, and the area outside the CCZ

at Clause 22.05, have been made available for community comment via Council's Participate

Melbourne web page (http://participate.melbourne.vic.gov.au/local-heritage, viewed 28 March

2016). A new grading system is proposed to be introduced, replacing the current alphabetical

system with significant, contributory and non-contributory heritage places. Proposed gradings

for places both within and outside the CCZ are also part of the community consultation and

included in a draft Heritage Inventory provided for information only. At the time of writing, the

amendment has yet to be endorsed by Council.

Heritage controls and listings

9. In considering the proposal to apply a DPO to the QVM Precinct, it is relevant to identify the

current statutory heritage controls which apply to the area, with specific reference to the area

subject to the proposed DPO11.

Queen Victoria Market (VHR 0734 and HO496)

10. The southern component of the QVM is included in the area subject to the proposed DPO11.

11. QVM, 65-159 Victoria Street, West Melbourne, is included in the Victorian Heritage Register

(VHR) and accordingly is subject to the provisions of the Heritage Act 1995 (Vic). Permits are

normally required from Heritage Victoria for works and development to the market area, as

included in the VHR. The VHR citation for QVM is included at Annexure A; the following

information is reproduced from the Victorian Heritage Database listing.

12. The land and buildings included in the VHR are illustrated at Figure 3. The controls apply to the

land area, exteriors and interiors of the buildings, the John Batman Memorial, and to any

archaeological remains or artefacts. The ‘Extent of Registration’ is described as follows:

1. All the land marked L1 on Diagram 734 held by the Executive Director being all of

Crown Allotments 5, 6, and 7, Section F Parish of Melbourne North, Township of

Melbourne at West Melbourne.

2. All of the buildings marked as follows on Diagram 734 held by the Executive

Director:

B1 Meat Market

B2 Shops at 507-523 Elizabeth Street

B3 Dairy Hall

http://participate.melbourne.vic.gov.au/local-heritage


B4 Shops at 65-81 Victoria Street (between Elizabeth and Queen Streets)

B5 Shops at 83- 159 Victoria Street (between Queen and Peel Streets)

B6 Shed A

B7 Shed B

B8 Shed C

B9 Shed D

B10 Shed E

B11 Shed F

B12 Shed H

B13 Shed I

B14 Sheds K and L

B15 Shed M

B16 Franklin Street Stores at 154-190 Franklin Street

F1 John Batman Memorial

13. The ‘Statement of Significance’ is as follows:

What is significant?

The Queen Victoria Market comprises two separate blocks: a western rectangular

block bound by Franklin, Peel, Victoria and Queen Streets, known as the Upper

Market; and the eastern triangular block bound by Queen, Victoria, Elizabeth and

Therry Streets, known as the Lower Market. The market began operating in 1859,

and progressively acquired the Old Melbourne Cemetery site to allow for its

expansion.

The Market comprises the Meat Market (1869), Sheds A-F (1878), Sheds H and I

(1878), Sheds K and L (1923), Elizabeth Street Stores, Victoria Street Shops (1887,

1891, and 1923), Dairy Produce Hall (1928), Franklin Street Stores (1929-1930), M

Shed (1936), John Batman Memorial (1881), and the site of the Old Melbourne

Cemetery (1837-1917).

In 1837, ten acres of land bound by Peel, Fulton, Queen and Franklin Streets were

set aside for the purposes of establishing a cemetery for the growing township of

Melbourne; the Melbourne Cemetery was officially gazetted in 1839. The cemetery

site was surveyed by Robert Hoddle, and divided into seven sections: Presbyterian,

Episcopalian, Roman Catholic, Wesleyan, Jewish, Independent, and the Society of

Friends. The Society of Friends' (Quaker) section was soon divided in half, to

accommodate a section for Aboriginal burials. Concerns about the cemetery's

proximity to the increasingly populated areas of the city, led to its closure in 1854,

following the opening in the previous year of the Melbourne General Cemetery in

Carlton. Despite the closure those who had claims on family plots continued to be

interred in the Cemetery until 1917. An estimated 8,000 to 10,000 people were

buried at the site from 1837 to 1917.

In March 1859, the Melbourne Town Council was granted the eastern triangular

block for use as a market. The earliest surviving building is the wholesale Meat

Market building. In 1874 it also began operating as a meat and produce retail


market, and Sheds H and I were built for use by fruit and vegetable growers. The

market was granted permission to take over some of the cemetery land under

legislation in 1877, and following the exhumation of 45 burials, Sheds A-F were

constructed in 1878. The market was officially opened as the 'Queen Victoria

Market' in March of that same year. Sheds A-E were open on all sides with each

divided by a service roadway, and Shed F was constructed with a brick wall on its

southern side which divided the market from the remainder of the cemetery.

Two-storey terrace shop buildings constructed along Elizabeth and Victoria Streets

in 1884 and 1887 respectively, provided a 'public' face to the market. Additional

shops were also constructed on Victoria Street between 1890 and 1905.

Legislation in 1917 provided for the remainder of the cemetery land to be acquired

for market purposes. The final burial took place in 1917, and as part of the

transition from cemetery to market, 914 bodies are known to have been exhumed

and relocated from 1920 to 1922.

Developments from this time included the construction of Sheds K and L in the

Upper Market in 1923 and in the Lower Market the Dairy Produce Hall in 1928

which provided dairy producers with dedicated accommodation. On the Upper

Market site, the Market Square development of 1929-1930 provided storage for

market traders and merchants in two rows of sixty brick stores. This development,

of which only the Franklin Street Stores survive, enclosed the market site along

Franklin Street, and resulted in the market taking over the last of the former

cemetery land. Shed M was constructed in 1936 on the Upper Market site.

The John Batman Memorial, in the north-east of the carpark, was erected by public

subscription in 1881. While no longer in its original location, the memorial

recognises John Batman who was buried in the cemetery in 1839, with his remains

relocated to Fawkner Cemetery in 1922.

In more recent years some of the buildings have been renovated to accommodate

the changing needs of market stall holders and shoppers.

The Queen Victoria Market is on the traditional land of the Kulin Nation.

How is it significant?

The Queen Victoria Market is of historical, archaeological, social, architectural and

aesthetic significance to the State of Victoria.

Why is it significant?

The Queen Victoria Market is of historical significance as one of the great

nineteenth century markets of Victoria and the only one surviving from a group of

important central markets built by the corporation of the City of Melbourne. It is

also of historical significance for remaining in operation from the 1870s.

The Queen Victoria Market is of historical significance as the site of Melbourne's

first official cemetery, which was in use between 1837 and 1854, and intermittently

from 1854 until its final closure in 1917.

The former cemetery site is of archaeological significance because it contains an

estimated 6,500 to 9,000 burials. The site has the potential to yield information

about the early population of Melbourne, including the Aboriginal and European

communities, and their burial practices and customs.


The Queen Victoria Market is of social significance for its ongoing role and

continued popularity as a fresh meat and vegetable market, shopping and meeting

place for Victorians and visitors alike.

The Queen Victoria Market is of architectural significance for its remarkably intact

collection of purpose built nineteenth and early twentieth century market

buildings, which demonstrate the largely utilitarian style adopted for historic

market places.

The Elizabeth Street and Victoria Street terraces are of aesthetic significance for

their distinctive demonstration of an attempt to create a more appealing 'public'

street frontage and increase revenue by enclosing the market and concealing the

stalls behind a row of nineteenth century shops.

14. The QVM, including the southern component, is also the subject of a site specific HO (HO496),

which reflects the VHR extent, as indicated in Figure 4.

Figure 3 Extent of land (‘L’) and buildings (‘B’) included in the Victorian Heritage Register


Figure 4 Map showing HO496, the site-specific HO for the QVM which reflects the VHR extent

Source: Planning Schemes Online

Figure 5 Map showing the extent of the Queen Victoria Market Heritage Overlay Precinct (HO7)

Source: Planning Schemes Online


Queen Victoria Market Heritage Overlay Precinct (HO7)

15. The QVM Heritage Overlay Precinct, HO7 (Figure 5), was formalised in the mid-1980s, as one of

ten heritage precincts identified in the Capital City Zone (CCZ). As such the heritage precinct is

subject to the heritage provisions of the Planning and Environment Act 1987. External controls

apply within the precinct, including paint controls, but no internal or tree controls.

16. The heritage precinct incorporates the market proper, including land and buildings within the

VHR extent; together with sections of Queen and Therry streets, and development adjoining

these and Franklin Street. The property at the north-east corner of Victoria and Elizabeth streets,

separated from the rest of HO7 by Elizabeth Street, is also included in the precinct.

17. The proposed DPO11 will apply to the southern half of the QVM Heritage Overlay Precinct,

including land and properties on the south side of Therry Street and east side of Queen Street.

The affected properties which are included in the QVM Precinct (DPO11), are listed at Table 1.

Table 1 Table of properties included in HO7, which are affected by DPO11.

Address VHR VHI HO City North Heritage Review

2013 Statements of

Significance

Warehouse, Rear 128-130

Franklin Street, Melbourne

N/A H7822-2006 HO7 C graded

Level 2 streetscape

Former Gordon and Gotch

warehouse, 132-142 Franklin

Street, Melbourne

N/A H7822-2003

and H7822-

2004

HO7 D graded

Level 3 streetscape

Warehouses, 160-176 Franklin

Street, Melbourne

H0734 N/A HO7 and

HO496

C graded

Level 2 streetscape

Warehouses, 180-196 Franklin

Street, Melbourne

H0734 N/A HO7 and

HO496

C graded

Level 2 streetscape

Queen Street, Melbourne –

Sheds H-I

H0734 N/A HO7 and

HO496

A graded

Level 1 streetscape

Shop, 422-428 Queen Street,

Melbourne


Level 2 streetscape

Warehouse, 432-438 Queen

Street, Melbourne

N/A N/A HO7 C graded

Level 2 streetscape


Melbourne

N/A H7822-2001 HO7 D graded

Level 2 streetscape


Melbourne

N/A H7822-2000 HO7 D graded

Level 2 streetscape

Shops (part of Munro’s Corner),

452-454 Queen Street,

Melbourne

N/A Part H7822-

1999

HO7 C graded

Level 2 streetscape


Address VHR VHI HO City North Heritage Review

2013 Statements of

Significance

93-141 Therry Street,

Melbourne


Level 2 streetscape

Munro’s Corner, 143-151

Therry Street, Melbourne

N/A Part H7822-

1999

HO7 C graded

Level 2 streetscape

Queen Street and Franklin

Street roundabout

N/A H7822-2181 HO7 –

north

section

only

Ungraded

Franklin Street and William

Street triangular carpark

N/A N/A N/A Ungraded

VHR: Victorian Heritage Register; VHI: Victorian Heritage Inventory; HO: Heritage Overlay.

18. The statement of significance for the precinct was recently updated as part of Amendment C198.

The full citation for the precinct is included at Annexure B, and is taken from the City North

Heritage Review (RBA Architects, 2013), a reference document at Clause 22.04 Heritage Places

Within the Capital City Zone. The statements of significance from the City North Heritage Review

are also listed as an Incorporated Document to the Melbourne Planning Scheme.

19. The statement, as included in Clause 22.04, is as follows:

What is Significant?

The Queen Victoria Market precinct is of historic and social significance as

Melbourne's premier market in operation for over 130 years (since the late 1870s),

with origins dating back to 1859. It is the last surviving 19th century market

established by the City of Melbourne, and has been an important hub of social life

in the city. The Meat Hall, the oldest extant building, was constructed in 1869. It is

one of the earliest, purpose-built market complexes in Australia, with its single

span roof only the second of its type when erected. The market has evolved

throughout its history in line with changing requirements, with several phases of

expansion.

The Queen Victoria Market precinct is of aesthetic significance as a fine example of

a Victorian era market which retains much of its original 19th century fabric intact.

Its present configuration is largely that which was established by the end of the

Interwar period. Architecturally, there is a mixture of utilitarian buildings – the

sheds – and more elaborate brick buildings, with the most exuberant being the

1884 façade of the Meat Hall, by noted architect William Salway. The later but

more intact Dairy Produce Hall (1929) features a distinctive Georgian Revival style

to the upper part of the façade in combination with Art Deco style to the lower part

(canopy, tiling and shop fronts).The groups of shops to Victoria and Elizabeth

Streets are rare examples of such extensive, intact rows of Victorian period

commercial buildings, as are the Interwar period shops2 to Franklin Street.

Key Attributes

2 The reference to ‘shops’ is understood to refer to the Franklin Street ‘stores’.


The historic character of the precinct as a retail area.

The generally simple, low-scale and remarkably intact example of a

utilitarian form from the period of its construction. Taken as a whole, the

Market and its component buildings are substantially intact in its 1923

form.3

The visual dominance of the Queen Victoria Market in the surrounding

area.

20. The above statement is extracted from a fuller statement included in the relevant incorporated

document, the City North Heritage Review. The Review statement is as follows:

Significance


The land and all the buildings located on the Queen Victoria Market site and bound

by Peel Street (west), Victoria Parade (north), Elizabeth Street (east), as well as

Therry and Franklin Streets (south). This includes the meat and dairy halls,

substation to Therry Street, all the sheds (A-F and H-M), the shops to Elizabeth

Street (nos 507-523) and Victoria Street (nos 65-159) and the stores to Franklin

Street (nos 160-196).

In addition, several adjacent and nearby shops:

the east side of Elizabeth Street between Therry and Victoria Streets (nos

510-16);

east side of Queen Street between Franklin and Therry Streets (nos 422-

460);

the south side of Therry Street between Queen and Elizabeth Streets (nos

93-141); and

two earlier, 19th century warehouses in Franklin Street (nos 126-130 and

132-140).

How is it Significant?

The Queen Victoria Market precinct is of historic, social and aesthetic significance

to the City of Melbourne.

Why is it Significant?

The Queen Victoria Market precinct is of historic and social significance as

Melbourne's premier market in operation for over 130 years (since the late 1870s),

with origins dating back to 1859. It is the last surviving 19th century market

established by the City of Melbourne, and has been an important hub of social life

in the city. The Meat Hall, the oldest extant building, was constructed in 1869. It is

one of the earliest, purpose-built market complexes in Australia, with its single

span roof only the second of its type when erected. The market has evolved

throughout its history in line with changing requirements, with several phases of

expansion. (AHC Criteria A4, B2 and G1)

The Queen Victoria Market precinct is of aesthetic significance as a fine example of

a Victorian era market which retains much of its original 19th century fabric intact.

3 The basis of the 1923 date is unclear as both the Dairy Hall and the Franklin Street stores date from after this date.


Its present configuration is largely that which was established by the end of the

Interwar period. Architecturally, there is a mixture of utilitarian buildings – the

sheds – and more elaborate brick buildings, with the most exuberant being the

1884 façade of the Meat Hall, by noted architect William Salway. The later but

more intact Dairy Produce Hall (1929) features a distinctive Georgian Revival style

to the upper part of the façade in combination with Art Deco style to the lower part

(canopy, tiling and shop fronts).The groups of shops to Victoria and Elizabeth

Streets are rare examples of such extensive, intact rows of Victorian period

commercial buildings, as are the Interwar period shops to Franklin Street. (AHC

Criteria E1)

Victorian Heritage Inventory

21. The QVM was formerly included in the Victorian Heritage Inventory (VHI), place ID 8719. The

latter is an inventory of known historical archaeological places, subject to the Heritage Act 1995.

However, it has been ‘delisted’ from the VHI and is identified as such in the Victorian Heritage

Database. Other properties located within the area of the proposed DPO11 are also included in

the VHI. These are listed above in Table 1.

22. The VHI listing normally requires that a ‘consent’ be obtained from Heritage Victoria for any

subsurface works or other activities which may affect the archaeology of the property.

National Heritage List Nomination

23. The QVM has been nominated to the National Heritage List (NHL), under the provisions of the

Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act).

24. In June 2015 the Minister for the Environment announced that the market had been added to

the Finalised Priority Assessment List for assessment. The Australian Heritage Council will

undertake an assessment of the place for inclusion in the NHL.

25. Context Pty Ltd undertook a NHL assessment of the QVM, with the final report completed in

September 2015.4 The extent of the nomination is the market itself, mirroring the extent of the

VHR listing for the place.

Proposed DPO Schedule 11

26. Proposed Schedule 11 to the Development Plan Overlay sets out the following requirements.

Those of most relevance to the heritage considerations are highlighted/bolded:

Any permit issued for the use, subdivision or development of the land must be consistent with

the Queen Victoria Market Precinct Framework Plan 2015 at Figure 1 [reproduced below at

Figure 6], the Vision in Clause 3.0 of this Schedule and must achieve all of the following design

requirements:

New development should not cast a shadow across the proposed public open space in

Figure 1 between 11am and 2pm on 21 June, unless the Responsible Authority considers

the overshadowing will not significantly prejudice the amenity of the proposed public open

space area.

New development should not cast any additional shadows across Flagstaff Gardens

between 11am and 2pm on 22 September.

Podiums fronting Therry Street and Queen Street north of Franklin Street should have a

minimum podium height of 10 metres and must have a maximum podium height of 20

metres.

4 Context Pty Ltd, Queen Victoria Market National Heritage List Assessment, Vols 1-3, prepared for Queen Victoria Market

Pty Ltd, September 2015.


Podiums fronting other streets should have a minimum podium height of 20 metres and

must have a maximum podium height of 40 metres.

All building podiums should:

o be oriented to complement the street system and constructed to the street

edge.

o be of a scale that provides an appropriate level of street enclosure having regard

to the width of the street.

o complement adjoining building podiums.

o include high quality treatments to side walls where visible above adjoining

buildings.

o be of a height, siting and detailing that does not adversely affect the heritage

significance of the Queen Victoria Market or any adjoining heritage building(s).

o be designed to internalise above ground car parking behind active uses such as

dwellings or offices to ensure a visual relationship between occupants of upper

floors and pedestrians to improve surveillance of the public realm.

o be able to mitigate wind impacts at street level in accordance with the wind

amelioration design standards of this Schedule.

Tower setbacks must be at least:

o Towers facing New Franklin Street – 10 metres behind the northern masonry

facades of the existing sheds5 (but may cantilever over the rear half of the existing sheds);

o Towers fronting the former alignment of Franklin Street - 6 metres from front of podium;

o Towers fronting all other streets – 10 metres from front of podium;

o Side and rear boundaries – 10 metres from side and rear boundaries.

Towers should be setback a minimum of 24 metres from an existing or likely future tower

on an adjoining site(s), and must be set back a minimum of 10 metres. Towers should be

designed and spaced to:

o equitably distribute access to an outlook, sunlight between towers and to ensure

adequate sun penetration at street level.

o ensure habitable room windows do not directly face one another and that

consideration has been given to the development potential of adjoining lots.

o ensure sunlight, good daylight and privacy and an outlook from habitable rooms

for both existing and proposed development can be provided.

o encourage the reasonable sharing of access to daylight and an outlook, and the

mitigation of wind effects.

o ensure towers do not appear as a continuous wall at street level.

New development adjoining the proposed public open space shown on Figure 1

[reproduced below] and the frontages of Therry Street, Queen Street, the southern side of

the New Franklin Street and Peel Street should be designed to be generally acceptable for

short term stationary wind exposure (where the peak gust speed during the hourly average

with a probability of exceedence of 0.1% in any 22.5o wind direction sector must not

exceed 13ms-1).

New development adjoining all other public spaces should be designed to be generally

acceptable for walking (where the peak gust speed during the hourly average with a

5 Note: While the DPO schedule refers to these buildings as ‘sheds’, they are more generally known as ‘stores’, including in

the VHR statement of significance for the QVM. In the following comments, they are referred to as market stores. This

also differentiates them from the historic market sheds in the market proper, to the north of the car park.


probability of exceedence of 0.1% in any 22.5o wind direction sector must not exceed

16ms-1).

Buildings to be occupied by a residential use should be designed to limit internal noise

levels in habitable rooms to a maximum of 45dB in accordance with relevant Australian

Standards for acoustic control.

Buildings and works should incorporate at least one mid-block publicly accessible

pedestrian link where the length of a street block exceeds 100 metres. For street blocks

exceeding 200 metres in length, two mid-block publicly accessible pedestrian links should

be provided. New publicly accessible pedestrian links should be located to connect to the

area’s pedestrian network and enhance the pedestrian permeability of the public realm,

generally as shown on Figure 1 to this Schedule.

Where consistent with the heritage significance of existing buildings, continuous weather

protection should be provided to the footpaths of Therry Street, Queen Street, Peel

Street and to the southern side of the New Franklin Street to promote pedestrian

amenity and provide protection from rain, wind and sun.

An active frontage should be provided to the ground level of buildings fronting Therry

Street, Queen Street, the southern side of New Franklin Street and Peel Street, comprising:

o At least 5 metres or 80% of the street frontage (whichever is the greater) as an

entry or display window to a shop and/or a food and drink premises, or

o At least 5 metres or 80% of the street frontage (whichever is the greater) as other

uses, customer service areas and activities, which provide pedestrian interest and

interaction.

o Vehicular ingress and egress to new development (excluding loading and

unloading facilities) should not be constructed within a frontage to Therry Street,

Queen Street, Peel Street or the southern side of the New Franklin Street, where

vehicle access via an alternative frontage is possible.

For the purposes of this Schedule, "podium height" is the vertical distance between the

footpath or natural surface level at the centre of the site frontage and the highest point

of the podium, with the exception of architectural features and building services.

27. Proposed Schedule 11 to the Development Plan Overlay also identifies requirements for a

development plan. The points of most relevance to the heritage considerations are

highlighted/bolded:

A development plan must be generally in accordance with the QVM Precinct Framework Plan

2015 at Figure 1 [reproduced below at Figure 6].

A development plan must be consistent with the following Vision:

Development contributes to the Melbourne CBD’s distinctive character by reinforcing the

distinction between the Hoddle Grid and adjoining areas whilst not adversely affecting

the heritage significance of the Queen Victoria Market.

Use and development contributes to safe and activated streets and public spaces via

appropriately scaled podiums that incorporate ground floor uses that foster interaction

with the street and uses at upper levels that achieve passive surveillance of public spaces.

Use and development defines and activates the Queen Victoria Market’s edge as a

special place by creating a taller built form around, and oriented towards, the Queen

Victoria Market, which does not overwhelm the public domain and does not adversely

affect its heritage significance.

Solar access to the proposed public open space shown on Figure 1 to this Schedule is

protected.

Development is configured and designed to minimise negative amenity impacts of shadows

on the Flagstaff Gardens.

Public spaces are protected from adverse wind impacts so they are comfortable to use for

outdoor cafes, window shopping and walking.


Development respects the future development potential of adjacent sites including access,

privacy, sunlight, daylight and an outlook from habitable interiors and allow for an

equitable spread of development potential on these sites.

Development achieves a high standard of architectural quality and provides a high level of

amenity for building occupants.

Existing numbers of car parks associated with the Queen Victoria Market are relocated and

maintained to service the ongoing viability of the Queen Victoria Market.

A development plan must include the following:

A comprehensive Site and Context Analysis Plan that identifies, among other things, the

key attributes of the land, its context, and its relationship with existing and proposed use

and development on adjacent land.

A development concept plan that includes among other things, indicative:

o Building heights and setbacks;

o Elevations and cross sections;

o Building materials and treatments;

o Shadow diagrams for the hours between 9am and 3pm at the Equinox (22

September);

o Shadow diagrams for the hours between 11:00am and 2pm at the Winter Solstice

(21 June) demonstrating any shadow impacts on the proposed public open space;

and

o The alignment of existing and new roads and pedestrian links.

A wind effects assessment that demonstrates that wind impacts will not adversely affect

the amenity of the public realm.

An Integrated Transport Plan which assesses the transport, traffic, pedestrian and bicycle

access needs of development.

An Environmental Sustainable Design and Water Sensitive Urban Design Assessment that

outlines the initiatives to be included in future development.

A Heritage Impact Statement that demonstrates that the significance of the Queen

Victoria Market will not be adversely affected by new development.6

A Staging Plan, where the land is to be developed in stages, which demonstrates interface

treatments with adjoining land.

A planning report that demonstrates how the development plan is consistent with the

design requirements and Vision of this Schedule.

Indicative waste storage and collection points.

A road management plan which provides details of the alignment, design and finish to new

public roads as illustrated on Figure 1 to this Schedule.

An acoustic assessment demonstrating how noise sensitive uses will be protected from

impacts from noise generating uses in the area.

The existing 720 car parking spaces associated with the Queen Victoria Market located

within the proposed public open space and New Franklin Street should be relocated to

Parcels A and/or D on Figure 1.

Where dwellings are proposed on land owned or controlled by the City of Melbourne,

consideration should be given to incorporating affordable housing.

A new community facility that may include a Victoria visitor centre, Queen Victoria

Market management facilities, public amenities, Queen Victoria Market-related

education facilities, and retail and hospitality uses should be located within Parcel C on

Figure 1 [Figure 6 in this statement].

6 It is noted that this dot point limits the consideration to the Queen Victoria Market and not the Heritage Overlay Precinct


Figure 6 Figure 1: QVM Precinct Framework Plan 2015

Source: Amendment C245 Schedule 11 to the DPO

Figure 7 Proposed extent of DPO11

Source: Participate Melbourne Amendment C245 information


Comments on heritage issues and considerations

28. This section of the statement addresses the proposed DPO11 Schedule requirements; the QVM,

including its setting and context, with reference also to its heritage values (as per the VHR

statement of significance and the National Heritage values identified in the recent NHL

nomination); the QVM Heritage Overlay Precinct (HO7); and other heritage properties included in

the area subject to the proposed DPO11.

Proposed DPO11 Schedule requirements

29. The proposed DPO11 Schedule requirements, as reproduced above, are relevant to the heritage

considerations in a number of areas. The key points or issues for consideration are summarised

and commented on below. In addressing the requirements they are considered, as relevant, in

the context of the four discrete areas affected (refer Figure 8): (1.) Therry and Queen streets

(north of Franklin), (2.) Queen Street (Market Square), (3.) Franklin Street east (north side) and

(4.) New Franklin Street.

Figure 8 Proposed DPO11 showing the four discrete heritage contexts

Podiums (height and design)

30. The proposed DPO11 Schedule requirements in relation to podiums are as follows:

Podiums fronting Therry Street and Queen Street north of Franklin Street should have a

minimum podium height of 10 metres and must have a maximum podium height of 20

metres.

Podiums fronting other streets should have a minimum podium height of 20 metres and

must have a maximum podium height of 40 metres.

All building podiums should:

o be oriented to complement the street system and constructed to the street edge.


o be of a scale that provides an appropriate level of street enclosure having regard

to the width of the street.

o complement adjoining building podiums.

o include high quality treatments to side walls where visible above adjoining

buildings.

o be of a height, siting and detailing that does not adversely affect the heritage

significance of the QVM or any adjoining heritage building(s).

For the purposes of this Schedule, "podium height" is the vertical distance between the

footpath or natural surface level at the centre of the site frontage and the highest point of

the podium, with the exception of architectural features and building services.

31. The Proposed Public Open Space between Peel and Queen streets is flanked to the east by

Development Parcel C, which features a 10 to 20 metre high podium. The north and western

boundaries of Development Parcels A and B similarly feature a 10 to 20 metre high podium.

32. The western, southern and eastern flanks of Development Parcel D show a planned 20 to 40

metre high podium, while the northern flank shows areas where building heights will be matched

with existing heights and existing QVM buildings will be retained.

Comment

Therry and Queen streets (north of Franklin)

33. Where existing buildings are to be replaced, the introduction of defined podium heights, in

combination with setbacks to taller building components, is a means of mediating between

higher and lower scale development. Less so than tower height, the street wall/podium height

combined with the tower setback are the key considerations which most directly impact on the

heritage interfaces and relationship of new development with streetscapes and streetscape

scale.

34. The minimum podium height of 10 metres responds directly to the existing streetscape scale in

this area of the proposed DPO11 and the heritage precinct (HO7) context. It relates to the typical

tall single level market buildings and the existing, heritage graded two and three level buildings

on the south side of Therry Street (Figure 9). Considered in isolation it is a height which accords

with existing heritage controls.

35. The maximum podium height of 20 metres or effectively six levels, moves above the existing

heritage built form and presents as a height which more directly addresses the intention to

mediate between the lower street wall and potential tower development behind. As related to

the south side of Therry Street the height is such that it will generate a form which contrasts with

the QVM site opposite (Figure 10). From a scale perspective such a scale transition from one side

of the street to the other is in my assessment acceptable in a central city context and not one

that will result in buildings which dominate or overwhelm the QVM opposite.

36. Where development occurs on the south side of Therry Street, potentially adjacent to graded

buildings, the contrast in height between the existing largely two storey built form and a 20

metre podium will be more pronounced. Such a contrast in the central city context is not

unusual and in my assessment could generate an acceptable response, recognising that the

management of detailed design will be critical in achieving a successful outcome.

37. In this regard a key heritage consideration will be the treatment of the podium façade or street

wall and the exposed flanking walls. In addressing this issue, the DPO11 Schedule requires that

the new building podiums should have a ‘siting and detailing that does not adversely affect the

heritage significance of the QVM or any adjoining heritage building(s)’. This approach is

supported under the key design considerations, which include consideration of articulation and

materiality, the balance of solid wall to openings, and the use of verandahs and awnings.


Importantly, the rhythm and proportion of the frontages and ‘grain’ of adjoining historic

commercial buildings should be respected.

38. Such considerations align with the relevant heritage policy for the applicable heritage overlay

area and provide for a workable interface between the DPO and that policy.

Figure 9 Munro’s Store buildings located on the south side of Therry Street (93-141); graded C in a

level 2 streetscape

Source: Lovell Chen

Figure 10 View looking towards the Dairy Hall on the north side of Therry Street

Source: Lovell Chen


39. In delivering such an outcome in Therry Street, including to the Queen Street corner (Figure 11),

the manner in which the podium levels achieve a scale and intimacy, which maintains the sense

of the market atmosphere and character of the street, is important. Critically, the most

sensitivity will be within the first 10 metre rise of the podium wall, an area where in Therry Street

in particular, verandahs are encouraged. The critical sensitivity with regard to the street wall is

the delivery of a treatment which responds to the pedestrian exposure and experience in the

street, and proximity to the market opposite. Tying together opposing sides of the street, by way

of a commonality in the design response at ground level, such as the use of verandahs, will be

important both in heritage and urban design terms.

Figure 11 The Mercat Cross Hotel (Munro’s corner) on the corner of Queen and Therry streets;

graded C in a level 2 streetscape

Source: Lovell Chen

Figure 12 Buildings on the east side of Queen Street between Therry and Franklin streets; variously

graded C and D in a level 2 streetscape

Source: Lovell Chen


40. In Queen Street, on the east side south of the Therry Street corner, the immediate interface

sensitivity with the market opposite diminishes from a heritage perspective. Notwithstanding, I

believe that it is desirable to maintain the minimum and maximum podium heights as proposed

along this section of the street to manage the transition from taller built form located within this

block (Figure 12).

41. As related to this issue I note that the former James McEwan & Co warehouse at 501-503

Elizabeth Street (Figure 13), on the south-west corner of Therry and Elizabeth streets is not

included in the proposed DPO and would be subject to the controls applicable under DDO14. The

subject site is in my assessment a critical site in the contemplation of the QVM interface with

Therry Street and notwithstanding that it is not included in the heritage precinct HO7, should be

included in the area covered by the DPO. At present it is included in HO1125, the Elizabeth Street

heritage overlay precinct, the ascribed significance of which is unrelated to the market.

Figure 13 View looking west up Therry Street with B2 graded 501-503 Elizabeth Street to the left

Source: Lovell Chen

42. In arriving at the 20 metre height as a maximum podium height in this location it is a height

which presents as well scaled to its context. In a contextual sense it is a height which relates to

the traditional taller built form constructed on the perimeter of the central city area in both the

late nineteenth and early twentieth century. It is low enough to manage the interface with tall

two storey buildings which predominate in Therry Street in particular and also to achieve a

successful transition across the street to the market site. It is a height which if delivered in a

well-designed building can deliver an outcome whereby the new podium form will relate well to

the heritage context and pedestrian scale. As already noted, with regard to its purpose it

presents as a height which will achieve the desired mediation between the immediate

streetscape and potential tower development behind.

43. In this regard a podium height which exceeds 20 metres has the potential to increasingly divorce

the new form from its surrounds. The podium would tend to dominate in the lower scale heritage

environment and no longer be viewed as a pedestrian scaled form. It would be a height which

would move outside that which might be comfortably accommodated within the context of

relevant heritage policy.


44. In considering this issue a relevant example in a related context is the development which has

occurred around the former Covent Garden Market in London. In this case the one and two

storey market structures are in part enclosed by five and six level development. At street level

the arcading of the market is directly referenced in the new work, while the solidity of the upper

levels is broken with the introduction of an open loggia arrangement. A significantly taller

structure would begin to overwhelm the lower scale of the original market buildings.

Figure 14 Former Covent Garden Market as interfacing with the back of the Royal Opera House.

Source: Lovell Chen, 2015

Figure 15 View towards the former Covent Garden Market as approached down James Street


Queen Street (Market Square)

45. Development Parcel C on the west side of Queen Street, within the existing road reserve,

provides for development of between 10 and 20 metres in height (Figure 16 & Figure 17). The

area is located outside the VHR registered QVM site but within the heritage overlay area.

46. As limited to the consideration of height, the proposed minimum and maximum heights accord

with those proposed for podiums on the east side of Queen Street and in this regard present as

consistent with the potential height of street wall in the immediate area. In this case the podium

height is also the maximum height for development on the site as a whole.

47. Recognising that development on the existing road reserve is not an outcome which existing

heritage overlay controls contemplate, the location of Parcel C has no direct interface with the

QVM buildings or with graded buildings within the overlay area. A development on this site

would however be strongly visible from within the market, and from the surrounding streets and

proposed public open space, and management of height will be important. It will effectively

create a new built edge condition to the historic market, a change which parallels, as related to

visual impact, the introduction of New Franklin Street through the southern half of the market

area. Such changes will alter the reading of the traditional market area and need to be

approached with care.

48. While a sensitively designed development at the proposed maximum height could deliver an

outcome which would not diminish the significance of the heritage place, a lower form of up to

13 metres (4 storeys) is likely to sit more comfortably as a transition building between the

existing market buildings and the taller development to the south and east contemplated by the

DPO. In this regard it is relevant that the policy within the QVM Conservation Management Plan

notes that the preferred development height on the perimeter of the existing car park is 1 to 2

storeys, with scope for taller forms of up to 4 storeys within the site.7 If adopted, a lesser height

than that currently proposed might be treated as discretionary rather than mandatory.

Figure 16 View looking towards the Parcel C land in Queen Street

Source: Lovell Chen

7 Lovell Chen, Queen Victoria Market, Elizabeth Street Melbourne, Conservation Management Plan, 2011, p.117.


Figure 17 Another view looking towards the Parcel C land in Queen Street

Source: Lovell Chen

Figure 18 Franklin Street, east of Queen Street with 132 Franklin Street (D graded in a level 2

streetscape) on the right.

Source: Lovell Chen


Franklin Street east (north side)

49. The proposed DPO includes a small section of the north side of Franklin Street, east of Queen

Street, with a planned 20 to 40 metre high podium. This area is located within the heritage

overlay area (Figure 18). As related to height this section of Franklin Street has been the subject

of significant development. It is an area which has no heritage sensitivity as related to the QVM

and, with the south side of the street, increasingly presents as part of the central city core.

Accordingly, the proposed podium heights in my assessment are acceptable having regard to

heritage overlay provisions and the potential interface with graded buildings.

50. In forming this view an issue arises with regard to the interface between the 10-20 podium height

on Queen Street, north of Franklin Street and the 20-40 metre podium height in Franklin Street.

Understanding that from an urban design perspective there may be a desire to mirror the height

of development on the opposite corner of Franklin and Queen streets (Melbourne Terrace, Figure

19) my assessment is that from a heritage perspective it would be preferred to retain the lower

podium height on the northern corner site (422 Queen Street) that are currently proposed by

DPO11 should the existing graded building be replaced. A taller podium on this corner would in

my assessment present as dominant in the context of the market area to the north and west.

Figure 19 Melbourne Terrace, on the south-east corner of Franklin and Queen streets

New Franklin Street

51. Within the new Franklin Street precinct the western, southern and eastern edges are depicted

with a planned 20 to 40 metre high podium. On the northern edge in the area occupied by the

Franklin Street stores buildings (Figure 20 & Figure 21 ), heights are to match the existing built

form. Under the proposed controls the ability to partially cantilever over the rear half of the

market stores is also noted.

52. The heritage sensitivities in this area as related to height of development are associated with the

heritage registered stores. The DPO contemplates tall development abutting the stores on the

south side and a 20 to 40 metre high podium abutting the stores at the eastern and western


ends. Given the low scale of the existing buildings, the requirement for Heritage Victoria

approval for any development on the registered land, and the heritage policy as related to HO7,

the expectation is that the maximum podium heights contemplated by the DPO would be

moderated in this area (abutting the stores at the eastern and western ends), consistent with the

design parameters identified in the schedule to the DPO. In preference the maximum height in

the immediate context of the shed ends would be reduced to 20 metres.

53. Recognising also that in the first instance my expectation is that Heritage Victoria would require

the stores to be retained (and I am instructed that Melbourne City Council has confirmed that the

stores are to be retained), any development immediately abutting would need to have regard to

the existing scale and relationship of the stores to the QVM. While the introduction of a new

road through the registered market site would to a degree separate the stores from the main

market activity area, it would be anticipated that there would be a sensitivity to maintaining the

legibility of the link, such as it is, between the two areas. Such legibility would be sensitive to the

proximity of new taller built form hard abutting the stores.

54. With regard to the south façade of the stores building it is noted that there is an attached awning

verandah (Figure 21). This presents as an original element but is not included in the VHR extent

of registration, nor does it fall within the heritage overlay area. Works to remove the verandah

would necessarily require a permit from Heritage Victoria as they would impact on the registered

place. This is a factor which would need to be considered in any proposed development in this

location, and may impact on the proximity of that development to the south face of the stores

building. This is, however, a matter which would be addressed under the detailed approval

considerations contained in the DPO.

55. To the south and on the east and west ends, south of the abuttal with the QVM stores, the area

impacted sits outside the QVM Heritage Overlay Precinct and the heritage sensitivity of the

proposed podium heights is low. In this location the proposed minimum and maximum heights

are acceptable.

Figure 20 The north façade of the Franklin Street stores with the original awning verandah

Source: Lovell Chen


Figure 21 The south façade of the Franklin Street stores with the original awning verandah

Source: Lovell Chen

Setbacks to towers and taller built form

56. The proposed DPO11 Schedule requirements in relation to tower setbacks are as follows:

Tower setbacks must be at least:

o Towers facing New Franklin Street – 10 metres behind the northern masonry facades of the existing stores (but may cantilever over the rear half of the existing stores);

o Towers fronting the former alignment of Franklin Street - 6 metres from front of podium;

o Towers fronting all other streets – 10 metres from front of podium;

o Side and rear boundaries – 10 metres from side and rear boundaries.

Comment

Therry and Queen streets (north of Franklin)

57. The proposed setback of 10 metres on Therry and Queen streets presents as a depth which is

sufficient to ensure that tower elements do not dominate within the immediate streetscape. As

related to the city more generally, such setbacks vary depending upon location and context.

Within heritage precincts, either as new build or where a tower is constructed behind a retained

façade, setbacks typically sit within the 5 to 10 metre range. Greater setbacks recently have been

introduced in the Bourke Hill precinct, but this is related to the generally low scale form of the

precinct as a whole and in particular as related to the views to Parliament House and its generally

lower scale surrounds.

58. In considering the rationale for the proposed setback, the 10 metres presents as a depth of

building which is sufficient to ensure that the foreground structure, whether incorporating

retained fabric or as new build, has a legible three dimensional form which relates to the lower

scale street context. The intention of the setback is not one of attempting to achieve

concealment but rather to ensure that the experience of the place as a pedestrian is one which is


defined by lower scale buildings. While tower elements will be visible in closer and more distant

views they will not overwhelm such that the cultural heritage significance of the market or the

precinct is diminished.

Franklin Street east (north side)

59. As with the proposed podium height of 20-40 metres, the proposed minimum setback of towers

in Franklin Street east is consistent with the provisions of DDO14. In the case of the DPO the 10

metre setback is a mandatory minimum and is directed to ensure:

– an appropriate streetscape scale is achieved.

– the tower’s siting above the podium does not dominate or overwhelm the

public realm when viewed from ground level.

– the tower’s siting does not adversely affect the heritage significance of the

Queen Victoria Market.

60. In establishing the basis for the setback there is no reference to the QVM Heritage Overlay

Precinct HO7.

61. Recognising that the setback of a tall tower in this location might well warrant a setback of 10

metres or more to meet the above objectives, the setback required for a lower structure which

meets the same objectives may be less. Accordingly, from a heritage perspective, and

recognising that this area presents as more within the city core than in the QVM Precinct, it is not

clear that a mandatory 10 metre setback for all towers constructed above a podium in this

location must be a set back 10 metres. For lower towers a lesser setback may be sufficient.

New Franklin Street

62. The tower setbacks in the New Franklin Street area propose a minimum mandatory 6 metre

setback on the former Franklin Street frontage and a minimum mandatory 10 metre setback from

the north masonry façade to the Franklin Street stores located on New Franklin Street. In the

latter case the DPO proposes that a new tower may cantilever over the rear half of the stores.

The minimum mandatory setback of 10 metres is also applicable on related street frontages on

Peel Street and Queen Street.

63. On the former Franklin Street frontage the proposed minimum setback of 6 metres does not give

rise to any specific heritage issues. This is an entirely new frontage on the north side of the street

and while there are sites which are subject to site specific heritage overlays on the south side of

the street, these are not sites where the scale of built form opposite will have an adverse impact.

64. On the Queen Street and Peel Street frontages heritage interface considerations as related to the

assessed significance of the QVM or the Heritage Overlay Precinct HO7 are also limited. In such a

context such considerations in my assessment would not justify a mandatory minimum setback

of 10 metres for towers constructed above a podium. As in the case of Franklin Street east, while

a tall tower may well warrant such a setback, a lower structure may not. In either case there is

not a heritage sensitivity other than at the direct interface with the existing stores building.

65. As with the podium provisions the primary heritage sensitivity in this area is as related to the

Franklin Street stores. Any proposed development on or over the registered land will require

Heritage Victoria approval and on the assumption that the stores are retained in full, such a

proposal would need to demonstrate that there was no adverse impact on the cultural heritage

significance of the place, and/or that a refusal to grant a permit would impact on the reasonable

or economic use of the place.

66. In this context the contemplation of a cantilever outcome in the DPO does not in itself give rise to

a specific heritage concern, recognising that the acceptability or otherwise in the first instance

will be a design issue. It is however an unusual provision to include in a DPO and to a degree


openly contemplates an outcome which could have an adverse heritage impact. Recognising that

the approval of cantilevers over registered places occurs rarely and typically only where strongly

justified on economic and or reasonable use grounds, my assessment is that the cantilever

provision in the DPO is unnecessary. Removal of the provision would not preclude the

exploration of a cantilever design but recognises that the primary consideration of such a

proposal will be the heritage impact.

67. In relation to the setback from the north façade and tower construction behind I note that an

outcome of the DPO is that a cantilevered tower could rise up behind the existing stores with a

setback of 10 metres to the northern face of the cantilevered facade. In such an outcome the

retained stores would present as a single storey podium structure. Dependent upon the

proximity of the soffit of the cantilever to the roof of the stores such an outcome would

potentially overwhelm the stores. Given that the stores are in the order of 21 metres deep and a

10 metres cantilever would project over approximately half their depth a deeper mandatory

setback of 15 metres is in my assessment to be preferred.

Relationship of new development to the QVM

68. As specifically related to heritage the proposed DPO11 Schedule requirements for new

development relating to the QVM are as follows:

Development contributes to the Melbourne CBD’s distinctive character by reinforcing the

distinction between the Hoddle Grid and adjoining areas whilst not adversely affecting the

heritage significance of the QVM.

Use and development defines and activates the QVM’s edge as a special place by creating a

taller built form around, and oriented towards, the QVM, which does not overwhelm the

public domain and does not adversely affect its heritage significance.

A new community facility that may include a Victoria visitor centre, QVM management

facilities, public amenities, QVM-related education facilities, and retail and hospitality uses

should be located within Parcel C on Figure 1 [Figure 6 in this statement].

Comment

The Hoddle Grid and taller built form

69. The DPO provides for significant change in the siting and scale of new built form to the south of

the QVM. This includes the construction of taller buildings in close proximity to the market and

changes to the road alignment and road reserve. The heritage sensitivity is primarily that

associated with maintaining the cultural heritage significance of the market, both as related to

the place itself and its immediate precinct.

70. As related to height and as addressed above, the DPO contemplates a more sharply defined

transition in scale of built form between the Hoddle Grid and the adjoining area. Such a

transition can be observed in other areas of the city, including on Spring Street, on the eastern

edge of the grid and increasingly on Victoria Street, on the northern edge. From a heritage

perspective the appropriateness or otherwise of such a transition is whether or not the change

will adversely impact on the assessed significance of the impacted place or places.

71. With regard to the QVM the assessed significance at a State and local level is not one in which

emphasis has been placed on the low scale surrounds. The focus in both contexts is on the

history and physical form of the market rather than as related to the history and form of its wider

setting. The one direct reference to context is contained in the third dot point to the local

heritage precinct citation which references ‘the visual dominance of the QVM in the surrounding

area’.

72. As addressed in the Queen Victoria Market Renewal Precinct Built From Controls Review and

Recommendations report, it is evident that the existing interface conditions vary and that there


are varying levels of sensitivity with regard to the manner in which the market presents as a

heritage place. In this regard the sensitivities to the west (across Peel Street) and north (across

Victoria Street), differ from those to the east (across Elizabeth Street) and south (across Therry

and Franklin streets). The former are interfaces whereby the market sits in a wider low scale

context extending across North and West Melbourne, whereas the interface to the east and

south is one of the developing central city.

73. In reviewing the market in the context of the surrounding areas, it is evident that the QVM has

historically operated as an island site and it continues to exist operationally and physically quite

independently of its surrounds. While on most of its boundaries there is a heritage context, the

significance of the market is not reliant upon that context.

74. As relevant to the southern boundary interface there are three discrete interface conditions.

75. On Therry Street there is a unique market boundary condition where the street is narrower and

more intimate as compared to other streets around the market. It is a street in which there is an

awareness of both sides contributing to the atmosphere of the market environs. While in many

respects the older buildings on the south side are of limited heritage significance individually,

they are of a comfortable form and scale as related to the market buildings opposite and

contribute to streetscape character.

76. Progressing into Queen Street, while older buildings continue along the east side of the street,

any direct contextual relationship with the market falls away as the market sheds end and the

interface is with the open car park area. The Queen Street buildings contain a range of

commercial operations, similar to those found in the market, but these present as largely

opportunistic uses rather than ones of long standing.

77. Finally, on Franklin Street to the south of the market, the latter’s boundary is defined by the

stores buildings, while the south side of the street comprises a mix of individually significant

buildings and more recent development. There is no strong visual or physical link between the

market and its surrounds at this point and it is very much an interface in which high rise

development is more strongly present. The road, central median and car park area also provide a

substantial break between the market stores and development to the south.

78. Within this context the DPO provides for taller built form closer to the market than is currently

the case. While such a change will alter the physical surrounds to the market the change is not

one which will alter the visual dominance of the market. As a low scale complex extending over

some seven hectares the market will remain dominant within the area. Unlike the Royal

Exhibition Building and surrounding gardens, where there is a buffer zone (the World Heritage

Environs Area) which addresses the height of new development as related to the dome, the

market has no such sensitivity, particularly as related to its central city interface. Accordingly the

DPO requirements with regard to the Hoddle Grid and the management of height of

development, present as able to be met without adversely affecting the significance of the QVM.

Development Parcel C

79. Queen Street as separating the Upper and Lower Markets has for some time operated as a

shared pedestrian and vehicle area. Historically it presents as a street which has operated more

as a service road for the market rather than as a through street for city traffic, and I note that the

section of Queen Street that is north of Therry St was closed as a road by the Queen Victoria

Market Lands Act 1996, and now forms part of the QVM land. This condition is reflected in its

current shared use, by both pedestrians and vehicles. It is a use which is reinforced by the large

island services and toilet block located in the centre of the road (Figure 22 & Figure 23) and in

more recent times, the modification of footpaths and expansion of grassed and paved areas to

manage traffic.


80. The heritage sensitivity arising from the proposition of development in this location is whether or

not it has the potential to diminish the heritage significance of the market and its immediate

surrounds. With regard to the market, the proposed site is to the south of the Upper and Lower

Markets and development will have no direct impact on either their physical or visual

connectivity. A development in this location will present as a distinctive new form, but it is

sufficiently removed to ensure that it does not dominate in relation to the low scale market

buildings to the north.

81. However, as already commented upon above at paragraph 47, a development on this site would

be strongly visible from within the market and surrounds, and management of height will be

important. At up to 20 metres, a sensitively designed development at the proposed maximum

height could deliver an outcome which would not diminish the significance of the heritage place,

although a lower height of up to 13 metres is likely to sit more comfortably as a transition

building between the market buildings and the taller development to the south and east as

contemplated by the DPO.

82. The greater sensitivity is in relation to the Franklin Street stores and the degree to which these

buildings will be increasingly separated from the market proper.

83. On the assumption that development occurs, both development Parcel C and the New Franklin

Street introduce elements which have the potential to increase the isolation of the stores

buildings. While this isolation already exists as a result of the physical separation of the stores

from the main market buildings, the introduction of a new development in Queen Street and the

road may increase the detachment. The implication from a heritage perspective is that the

stores could potentially no longer be understood as a former part of the market.

84. Recognising that the stores reflect a remnant of the last major phase of development of the

market and are considered to be of contributory rather than primary significance, such a change

will have a generally limited impact on the significance of the market as a whole. Desirably,

however, there should be an active program of interpretation associated with development in

the area as a whole, which reinforces the association of these buildings with the market proper.

Such interpretation could be included within a visitor centre which has the potential to strongly

support the heritage values of the market as a whole.

Figure 22 Aerial view of the recently completed market stores area, c. 1931, showing the toilet block

in the centre of Queens Street at bottom left

Source: Melbourne Markets 1841-1979: The Story of the Fruit and Vegetable Markets in

the City of Melbourne, C E Cole, Melbourne, 1980


Figure 23 The existing service block located in the centre of Queens Street

Other DPO11 requirements

85. Other relevant proposed DPO11 Schedule requirements are:

Where consistent with the heritage significance of existing buildings, continuous weather

protection should be provided to the footpaths of Therry Street, Queen Street, Peel Street

and to the southern side of the New Franklin Street to promote pedestrian amenity and

provide protection from rain, wind and sun.

A Heritage Impact Statement that demonstrates that the significance of the QVM will not

be adversely affected by new development

86. Additionally it is proposed that through block links be provided within Parcel D on New Franklin

Street.

Comment

87. The introduction of ‘continuous weather protection’ is generally supported in heritage terms,

although as recognised in the DPO11 requirements, this should be ‘consistent with the heritage

significance of existing buildings’. Issues for consideration include the presence of original

awnings or verandahs which should in preference be retained; the reconstruction or

reinstatement of missing awnings/verandahs to building frontages, where the original form is

known; and as an alternative to the latter, the introduction of contemporary awnings in an

appropriate form and materials, subject to avoiding or minimising impacts on the heritage

buildings.

88. The requirement to prepare a Heritage Impact Statement is supported in heritage terms.

89. With regard to the proposed through block links in Parcel D, these are supported from a heritage

perspective. Two links are proposed: one as existing located centrally between the two stores

buildings and one located at the east end of the eastern stores building. It is understood that the

latter link is intended, amongst other outcomes, to reference the original edge of the Old

Melbourne Cemetery. Such an outcome is desirable from a heritage perspective and should be

considered in the active interpretation of the site as a whole.


Interface of the DPO11 with existing heritage values and controls

90. The following section provides a summary of issues which arise in considering the interface of

DPO11 with the existing heritage values and controls.

National heritage values

91. As noted above, the QVM has been nominated to the National Heritage List (NHL), and is

awaiting assessment by the Australian Heritage Council. The potential National Heritage values,

as identified in the nomination, are summarised below, although it is recognised that these have

not yet been tested and accordingly are not formalised.

92. According to the ‘Final Assessment Report’ which supports the nomination,8 the QVM National

Heritage significance relates to four criteria:

Criterion A: the place has outstanding heritage value to the nation because of the place's

importance in the course, or pattern, of Australia's natural or cultural history

Criterion C: the place has outstanding heritage value to the nation because of the place's

potential to yield information that will contribute to an understanding of Australia's natural

or cultural history

Criterion D: the place has outstanding heritage value to the nation because of the place's

importance in demonstrating the principal characteristics of a class of Australia's natural or

cultural places

Criterion G: the place has outstanding heritage value to the nation because of the place's

strong or special association with a particular community or cultural group for social,

cultural or spiritual reasons

93. A summary statement of the National heritage values is included in the ‘Final Assessment

Report’, which is not reproduced here. However, the values are summarised and paraphrased as

follows:

The QVM of 1876 is a clear and extensive demonstration of the economic and political

processes of marketing and retailing. As a market where a large variety of fresh food is

bought and sold, the QVM has played a major part in sustaining the growing population of

Melbourne from its establishment in 1867, and been a vital contributor to the economic

and political development of the City of Melbourne.

The market's location on the edge of the city and close to the inner suburbs of North and

West Melbourne, Parkville, Carlton, Flemington and Brunswick supported this function.

The location provided easy access from the City's market gardens for the buying and selling

of fresh produce to the rapidly growing city and its suburbs. Unlike earlier Melbourne

markets, the QVM was purpose-built as a grower's market to serve the needs of the

population for fresh food, rather than expressly for the import and export of goods. Today

the market serves many functions but still focusses on fresh produce as a core activity.

The QVM, established by the City of Melbourne Council in 1876, but operating from the

current site as a Meat Market from 1869, and as a Market Reserve from the 1850s,

contributed in fundamental ways to the growth and development of the city. At the time

of its establishment it was considered an essential service for Melbourne and its region,

contributing to the health and subsequent productivity of the population.

The QVM and the City of Melbourne have had a profound influence on each other from the

1840s until the present time. The QVM provided a vital revenue base for the City of

Melbourne and has contributed to the development of local government. From 1841 the

establishment of the ward system of political representation was based on the

8 As prepared by Context Pty Ltd, for Queen Victoria Market Pty Ltd, Volume 3, September 2015.


appointment of Market Commissioners for various parts of the city. The QVM continues

today to be an important part of the City of Melbourne's activities.

The importance of the QVM to the economic development of Melbourne is reflected

through its evolution and growth in the 1880s, 1890s, 1920s, 1930s, and 1980s and is

currently evidenced through major strategic planning for the QVM site by the City of

Melbourne. The QVM also demonstrates wholesale marketing functions that were

consolidated largely on the Old Melbourne Cemetery from the 1930s until relocation of the

wholesale market to Footscray in 1969. The QVM is a rare example of a retail market that

retains evidence of the activity of wholesaling.

The QVM is an outstanding illustration of the importance of a market as both an essential

service and an economic driver in the development of the city. Since the demolition of the

Western and Eastern markets in 1880 and 1962 respectively, it is the only remaining

central city market in Melbourne. It demonstrates its functions through its location,

extent, use, built form and urban spaces as well as through continuing ownership and

management by the City of Melbourne and its agency Queen Victoria Market Pty Ltd.

The Old Melbourne Cemetery, established in 1837 as a public cemetery, has demonstrable

research value for Australian history and culture as the resting place for virtually the whole

founding population of Melbourne who died prior to the gold rush in the early 1850s.

It comprises a large burial ground of approximately 6,500 burials arranged in eight sections

along religious denominational lines and with a section for Aboriginal community burials.

It thus includes the remains of Melbourne's founding inhabitants across the full range of

their cultural backgrounds.

The Old Melbourne Cemetery has the potential to yield information about the early

population of Melbourne, including diet, living conditions, pathology and material culture.

This potential has been demonstrated by several archaeological excavations in recent

years. The scale and completeness of the below ground evidence is equal to or greater

than other examples of early Colonial burial grounds, including the Old Sydney Burial

Ground and the North Brisbane Burial Grounds, the two most comparable examples.

As well as on-site evidence, much information on burials can also be gathered through

documentary sources, or through a combination of the documentary and physical

evidence. The records of approximately 2200 Anglican burials from 1836-1856 held at St

James Old Cathedral are of value especially when combined with what is known of the

burials as a result of archaeological investigation.

The QVM represents an optimal development of a major metropolitan market and retains

a very high degree of authenticity, including that of ongoing use. As a major metropolitan

produce market, the QVM exhibits all of the key characteristics of markets generally, and is

the most complete example of its type in Australia with virtually all of the critical elements

of a market in evidence and in use. The QVM has an outstanding array of features that

have evolved from 1869 until the present time. The buildings and spaces of the QVM are

extensive, clearly delineated, functional and purpose-built. When compared with other

nineteenth century produce markets still in use such as Fremantle, Haymarket (Sydney)

and Adelaide Central Market, the QVM has a higher integrity and comprises the most

extensive and outstanding range of buildings and urban spaces. These include:

o The Meat Hall of 1869, with its remodelled facade of 1884; and the Dairy Produce

Hall of 1928 are excellent examples of enclosed market halls. The interior of the

Dairy Produce Hall is exceptionally well designed for its purpose and retains a high

degree of integrity in its layout and high quality interior fittings.

o The Upper Market sheds A to F, built between 1878 and 1923 represent the

functional requirements of market trading and they have retained their integrity

of form and structure through a series of extensions in 1891, 1903, and 1922; and

their refurbishment in 1977. These sheds are derived from earlier models

employed in the now demolished Eastern Market, elements of which are now

reconstructed as Sheds H & I in the Lower Market.


o The two blocks of the Elizabeth Street terraces of 1884 by architect William

Salway are an example of Melbourne Town Clerk E G Fitzgibbon's plan to both

maximise the income from the market through the provision of perimeter shops,

and to screen the noise, smells and refuse of the market from the city.

o The lower Victoria Street terraces of 1886 and the Upper Victoria Street shops

built in three stages in 1887, 1890 and 1923 form an extensive built edge between

the market and its surrounding streets, and represent a specific and rare

Australian design response to the interface of the market to the city.

o The Franklin Street Stores of 1930, K & L Shed built in 1923 and the carpark

demonstrate the functions and the site of the former wholesale market that was

consolidated and expanded from the 1930s to 1969.

No other markets in Australia have been identified that retain, to the extent of the QVM,

the different market building typologies including market halls, open sheds and stores. It is

the only market identified in Australia to exhibit the English market town tradition of

extensive perimeter terraced shops with residences.

The Old Melbourne Cemetery site is an outstanding example of an 'early colonial cemetery'

as a result of the anticipated number of burials that remain at the site, and as an example

of an early multi-denominational cemetery representing virtually the entire founding

population of a state capital. The brick cemetery wall located in F Shed contributes to the

understanding of the place during the1870s when the QVM was established.

The market trader and regular market shopper community, value the QVM as a place of

social connection. Community connections are strong, visible and maintained over

generations. This value is embodied primarily in certain intangible attributes of the market

including community, interaction and expressions of cultural diversity which are played out

in the contemporary market spaces.

The QVM is also a key reference point in the identity and sense of self of the market trader

community, developed through the long-term associations that this community holds with

both the physical space, their co-workers and regular customers.

For the Melbourne and wider Australian communities, the QVM is a quintessential symbol

of Melbourne's identity and a landmark demonstrated through strong expressions of its

importance as a key Melbourne locality, its highly valued Victorian and other era buildings.

The service it provides to its communities continues to be strongly voiced through public

forums. The market's landmark qualities are derived from its inner city location, its large

scale, low rise scale in relation to its surroundings, as well as its range of buildings, spaces,

produce and market wares.

The Old Melbourne Cemetery is of social value to the Indigenous, Melbourne and wider

Australian communities as an important commemorative place. This value is embodied in

the cemetery block (that sits under today's market), the John Batman Memorial, the Old

Melbourne Cemetery wall and related historical archives.

The Old Melbourne Cemetery is outstanding in terms of the number of burials, and the

large number of contemporary Melbournians and other Australians who today hold special

connections to the place. For the Indigenous community, the QVM is a rare example of an

early colonial cemetery where both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people were interred

(no other colonial, municipal cemetery has been identified as containing a dedicated

section for Aboriginal community burials).

Comment

94. Recognising that the process of National heritage listing is in an early stage, consideration of any

specific implications arising from the interface of such a listing, should it eventuate, and the

proposed DPO11, is of limited value. Should National listing eventuate it is anticipated that the

sensitivities arising would be similar to those considered in relation to the State listing as

discussed below.


State heritage values and controls

95. The statement of significance for the QVM, as included in the VHR, is reproduced above at

paragraph 13. The statement identifies that the market is of historical, archaeological, social,

architectural and aesthetic significance to the State of Victoria. The significant attributes and

values are summarised below:

Historical significance:

QVM is one of the great nineteenth century markets of Victoria and the only one surviving

from a group of important central markets built by the City of Melbourne.

QVM has remained in operation from the 1870s.

QVM is the site of Melbourne's first official cemetery, in use between 1837 and 1854, and

intermittently from 1854 until its final closure in 1917.

Archaeological significance:

Former cemetery site contains an estimated 6,500 to 9,000 burials.

Has the potential to yield information about the early population of Melbourne, including

the Aboriginal and European communities, and their burial practices and customs.

Social significance:

QVM has an ongoing role and continued popularity as a fresh meat and vegetable market,

shopping and meeting place for Victorians and visitors alike.

Architectural significance:

QVM has a remarkably intact collection of purpose built nineteenth and early twentieth

century market buildings, which demonstrate the largely utilitarian style adopted for

historic market places.

Aesthetic significance:

Elizabeth Street and Victoria Street terraces are significant for their demonstration of an

attempt to create a more appealing 'public' street frontage and increase revenue by

enclosing the market and concealing the stalls behind a row of nineteenth century shops.

Comment

96. The proposed DPO11 has been prepared with an awareness of the significance of the QVM, and

applies both to land and buildings within part of the market footprint.

97. The DPO11 will not impact on or detract from the State heritage values of the QVM. The

historical and social values will be maintained, and the architectural and aesthetic values will not

be affected.

98. The proposed New Franklin Street will be located on the car park site which in turn is associated

with the former cemetery site. The introduction of the roadway may impact on the

archaeological remains in this area but this presents as a manageable activity. I am instructed

that Professor Richard Mackay has been engaged to provide expert evidence in relation to the

potential impacts of the QVM Precinct Renewal project on the former cemetery site. Visually, the

change from car park to roadway will have no additional impact on this sensitive area. The

impact of the roadway, in terms of separating the stores from the market proper, is already

commented on above.

99. Development Parcel C on the east side of the carpark, is identified for construction of a new

community facility. This facility is outside the VHR registered area, and accordingly outside the

site of archaeological significance.


100. The creation of new public open space, in the location of the current car park, will not result in an

adverse impact.

101. Redevelopment contemplated for the area to the south and east of the Franklin Street stores,

including the stores themselves, has the potential to have an impact on the stores building. As

directly related to the registered land and buildings the expectation is that the development

potential will be tempered by the requirement to obtain approval from Heritage Victoria.

Local heritage values and controls

102. The proposed DPO11 will apply to the southern half of the Heritage Overlay Precinct, HO7,

including land and properties on the south side of Therry Street and east side of Queen Street.

The affected properties, as included in the precinct, are listed above at Table 1 and shown at

Figure 24.

Figure 24 Map showing proposed DPO11 area, part of precinct HO7, and affected properties

103. The statement of significance for the precinct is reproduced above at paragraph 19. The

statement identifies the precinct as being of historic, social and aesthetic significance. The

significant attributes and values are summarised below:

Historical and social significance:

QVM is Melbourne's premier market, in operation for over 130 years (since the late 1870s),

with origins dating back to 1859.


It is the last surviving 19th century market established by the City of Melbourne, and has

been an important hub of social life in the city.

It is one of the earliest, purpose-built market complexes in Australia, with its single span

roof only the second of its type when erected.

The market has evolved throughout its history in line with changing requirements, with

several phases of expansion.

Aesthetic significance:

QVM is a fine example of a Victorian era market which retains much of its original 19th

century fabric intact.

Its present configuration is largely as was established by the end of the Interwar period.

Architecturally, there is a mixture of utilitarian buildings and more elaborate brick

buildings.

The groups of shops to Victoria and Elizabeth Streets are rare examples of extensive, intact

rows of Victorian period commercial buildings, as are the Interwar period shops to Franklin

Street.

104. The statement at Clause 22.04 also identifies the ‘Key Attributes’ of the precinct, as follows:

The historic character of the precinct as a retail area

The generally simple, low-scale and remarkably intact example of a utilitarian form

from the period of its construction. Taken as a whole, the Market and its

component buildings are substantially intact in its 1923 form.

The visual dominance of the Queen Victoria Market in the surrounding area

105. The full citation for the precinct, as included at Annexure B, in addition includes a table or

schedule of properties in the precinct. The table identifies the gradings of the properties,

including streetscape gradings, and provides a description of the properties. The descriptions are

not reproduced here, although the property gradings are.

Comment

106. With regard to the level of heritage protection afforded by the HOs, this is consistent with all

such places in the City of Melbourne and dependent upon location, development would be

subject to the provisions of Clauses 22.04 Heritage Places Within the Capital City Zone. Equally,

final decisions on development would be determined after consideration of all relevant overlay

controls and broader strategic planning policy and objectives.

107. Matters for consideration in the heritage controls and policy context include podium heights,

setbacks to taller built form, the height and overall form of new development, and street walls

and facades. As relevant to height and setback considerations, these include:

Objectives

To conserve and enhance all heritage places, and ensure that any alterations

or extensions to them are undertaken in accordance with accepted

conservation standards.

To conserve and enhance the character and appearance of precincts

identified as heritage places by ensuring that any new development

complements their character, scale, form and appearance.

Policy


The following matters shall be taken into account when considering applications for

buildings, works or demolition to heritage places as identified in the Heritage

Overlay:

All development affecting a heritage precinct should enhance the character of

the precinct as described by the following statements of significance.

Regard shall be given to buildings listed A, B, C and D or significant and/or

contributory in the individual conservation studies, and their significance as

described by their individual Building Identification Sheet

108. In considering redevelopment within HO7, other aspects of the heritage policy, as related to

demolition and the nature and scale of redevelopment, will also be relevant.

109. In considering the interface of these controls with DPO11, the statement of significance and list

of key attributes for the Queens Victoria Market Precinct is in many respects largely silent in

relation to the area south of the market. The focus of the statement is on the market itself with

little or no reference to its setting. In this context, and subject to the specific development

proposal put forward, the provisions of DPO11 do not present as in conflict with the local

heritage values of HO7.

Mandatory versus discretionary heights

110. The proposed DPO11 Schedule requirements identify maximum podium heights which ‘must’ not

be exceeded, and minimum podium heights which ‘should’ be adhered to. Setbacks to the taller

building components behind use similarly prescriptive language.

Comment

111. The Planning Practice Notes address mandatory provisions under Note 59, ‘The role of

mandatory provisions in planning schemes’ and Note 60, ‘Height and setback controls for activity

centres’. PPN59 sets out the basis upon which mandatory provisions should be instituted and

establishes a number of criteria to be considered in determining whether or not they are

appropriate. As a general comment PPN59 notes:

Mandatory provisions will only be considered in circumstances where it can be

clearly demonstrated that discretionary provisions are insufficient to achieve the

desired outcomes

112. Further to this, PPN60 also identifies a preference for discretionary rather than mandatory

controls:

Mandatory height and setback controls (that is, controls that cannot be exceeded

under any circumstances) will only be considered in exceptional circumstances.

113. Circumstances considered to be exceptional include sensitive coastal environments, significant

landscape precincts, significant heritage places (‘where other controls are demonstrated to be

inadequate to protect unique heritage values’), sites of recognised State significance where

height management adds to the significance of the place, and flight paths. The practice note

further discusses the justification for such controls by way of built form analysis and the need to

demonstrate that discretionary controls would result in ‘unacceptable built form outcomes’.

114. Mandatory heights have also been considered by a number of planning panels and most recently

in Melbourne in Amendment C240. The amendment provided for the implementation of a

combination of mandatory and discretionary height controls in the heritage listed Bourke Hill

precinct, located at the east end of Bourke Street. The focus of many submitters to this panel

was that, while height controls were appropriate, mandatory controls were not. The panel

concluded that some mandatory controls were justified in the precinct, particularly as related to


the maintenance of the Parliament House setting, sky views and the generally low scale of the

heritage precinct. As related to this, it was also noted that Plan Melbourne makes direct

reference to the implementation of mandatory height controls in this area.

115. In this regard, Initiative 4.2.3 ‘Protect Unique City Precincts’, Plan Melbourne notes in relation to

the QVM

Implement planning provisions that allow for the strategic redevelopment of the

Queen Victoria Market and immediate surrounding area that provides for a low

scale market that fits within a back drop to the south and south east of higher

density development, with appropriate building spacing, commercial and

employment opportunities, community infrastructure and community facilities.

116. Having regard to the above discussion the following table summarises my conclusions regarding

the appropriateness of mandatory controls.

Table 2 Summary of conclusions on mandatory controls

Control Comment

Podiums

Podiums fronting Therry Street and

Queen Street north of Franklin

Street should have a minimum

podium height of 10 metres and

must have a maximum podium

height of 20 metres.

Development Parcels A and B

The buildings on the south side of Therry Street and the

east side of Queen Street, north of Franklin Street are

approximately between 6 and 9 metres in height on the

street frontage. Some are likely to be retained on

heritage grounds and any new infill development will

need to relate to existing façade heights. In this regard

the 10 metre minimum, as a discretionary height, is

reasonable/appropriate. It is important that where

façade retention occurs the 10 metre setback for a

tower would still apply notwithstanding that the

retained façade may be lower than the 10 metre

minimum.

The mandatory maximum podium height of 20 metres,

in the context of both the QVM and the heritage

buildings in these streets, also presents as appropriate.

Having regard to the relevant guidelines and the height

sensitivity of the area, a mandatory height is

supportable. The 20 metres is also at the maximum

height which would generally be acceptable from a

heritage perspective and there should be no discretion

to exceed this height.

Podiums fronting all other streets

should have a minimum podium

height of 20 metres and must have

a maximum podium height of 40

metres.

Development Parcel B

Regarding Franklin Street (east of Queen Street and on

the south side of Development Parcel B), while this area

is located within the heritage precinct (HO7), it has been

the subject of significant development and has no

heritage sensitivity as related to the QVM. Further, with

the south side of the street, it increasingly presents as

part of the high rise city core.


Control Comment

In this context, the 20 metre minimum podium, as a

discretionary height, is acceptable. There is no heritage

justification for setting a mandatory maximum podium

height of 40 metres. A 40 metre discretionary height

could be supported.

Podiums fronting all other streets

should have a minimum podium

height of 20 metres and must have

a maximum podium height of 40

metres.

Development Parcel D

The heritage sensitivities relating to development on

this parcel will be those arising from the interface with

the market stores buildings, which Heritage Victoria

would in the first instance expect to be retained,

including the interface at the east and west ends of the

stores, and as abutting the south face of these buildings.

The DPO contemplates a 20 to 40 metre high podium

abutting the stores at the east and west ends, and tall

development abutting the stores on the south side.

Given the low scale of the existing buildings and the

relationship of the stores to the QVM, the requirement

for Heritage Victoria approval for any development on

the registered land, and the heritage policy as related to

HO7, the expectation is that the maximum podium

heights contemplated by the DPO would be moderated

(i.e. reduced to be less than 40m) in this area (abutting

the stores at the eastern and western ends). This would

also be consistent with the design parameters identified

in the schedule to the DPO.

On this basis, the 20 metre minimum podium, as a

discretionary height, is acceptable, with this also being

subject to the requirement for Heritage Victoria

approval; while the mandatory maximum podium height

of 40 metres is supported, due to the proximity to the

stores.

Regarding development to the south side of the stores,

where development occurs on or above the registered

land/building the development outcome will again be

one which is determined by Heritage Victoria.

The proposed podium heights of Parcel D, outside the

more heritage sensitive areas, are less sensitive to

heritage considerations. In this context there appears

to be no heritage justification for setting a mandatory

maximum podium height at 40 metres, although it is

accepted that there may be other urban design and

amenity considerations which support such an outcome.

Podiums fronting Therry Street and

Queen Street north of Franklin

Street should have a minimum

podium height of 10 metres and

Development Parcel C

This is already commented on above, whereby a lower

building of up to 13 metres is preferred over a building

at the maximum height of 20 metres. The lower height

would have an outcome which would likely sit more


Control Comment

must have a maximum podium

height of 20 metres.

comfortably in the context of the visibility of this

development from the market to the north, and its

relationship to the market stores to the south and

south-west.

The height could be stated as a discretionary maximum

of 13 metres across the whole of Parcel C.

Tower setbacks

Tower setbacks must be at least: It is assumed that the use of the word ‘must’ implies

that the following setbacks are mandatory.

Towers fronting all other streets –

10 metres from front of podium.

Development Parcels A and B

For Therry Street (south side) and Queen Street (east

side), a 10 metre minimum setback to towers is

acceptable, but in the absence of height settings once

beyond the setback there is no heritage justification for

the setback to be mandatory. As noted, while clearly

the expectation would be that a very tall tower would

be set back at least 10 metres, a lower tower may be

acceptable from a heritage perspective with a shallower

setback.

Towers fronting all other streets –

10 metres from front of podium.

Development Parcel B

For Franklin Street (east of Queen Street and on the

south side of Development Parcel B), a 10 metre

minimum setback to towers is acceptable, but there is

no heritage justification for the setback to be

mandatory.

Towers facing New Franklin Street

– 10 metres behind the northern

masonry facades of the existing

stores (but may cantilever over the

rear half of the existing stores).


A mandatory setback to the face of any tower

development behind the retained Franklin Street stores

is supported from a heritage perspective. The preferred

setback in this regard is 15 metres as opposed to the 10

metres proposed in the QVM DPO.

Towers fronting the former

alignment of Franklin Street - 6

metres from front of podium.


This area is not subject to any heritage control and there

is no heritage justification for the setback to be

mandatory.

Side and rear boundaries – 10

metres from side and rear

boundaries

There is no heritage justification for the setback to be

mandatory.

Conclusion

117. As related to heritage considerations Amendment C245 to the Melbourne Planning Scheme

provides for development in proximity to the QVM by way of a permit process or under an

approved development plan. Subject to the comments within this statement, as summarised


below, the amendment in my assessment appropriately addresses the heritage sensitivities of

the QVM and its surrounds.

118. With regard to the determination as to whether or not podium heights and tower setbacks

should be mandatory or not, my assessment considers heritage in isolation. In doing so I

recognise that there will be other factors which will influence the determination of a final

outcome on this issue.

119. Summary of recommended amendments:

Include 501-503 Elizabeth Street within the QVM Precinct subject to the DPO.

Reduce the maximum height of development on Parcel C to 13 metres or the equivalent of

4 levels.

Increase the mandatory setback from the north façade of the Franklin Street stores

building to 15 metres.

In preference delete reference to a cantilever over the Franklin Street stores.

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

Annexure A Victorian Heritage Register, Statement of Cultural Heritage Significance

A 2 L O V E L L C H E N

Victorian Heritage Database Report

QUEEN VICTORIA MARKET

Queen Victoria Market SOHE 2008 1 queen victoria market victoria street melbourne front view market sheds

queen victoria market victoria street melboure interior market shed roof detail

queen victoria market victoria street melboure peel & victoria street corner

queen victoria market victoria street melbourne front view of meat market & food hall

queen victoria market victoria street melbourne side view meat & fish market

new victoria market plan.jpg Queen Vic Market 2.jpg Queen Vic Market 3.jpg

Queen Vic Market 4.jpg Queen Vic Market 5.jpg Queen Vic Market 6.jpg

Report generated 06/04/16


Queen Vic Market 25.jpg Queen Vic Market 1.jpg

vic market plan.jpg

Location

65-159 VICTORIA STREET WEST MELBOURNE, MELBOURNE CITY

Municipality

MELBOURNE CITY

Level of significance

Registered

Victorian Heritage Register (VHR) Number

H0734

Heritage Overlay Numbers

HO496

VHR Registration

May 3, 1989

Amendment to Registration

May 17, 2012

Heritage Listing

Victorian Heritage Register

Statement of Significance

Last updated on - October 11, 1999

What is significant?The Queen Victoria Market comprises two separate blocks: a western rectangular block bound by Franklin, Peel, Victoria and Queen Streets, known as the Upper Market; and the eastern triangular block bound by Queen, Victoria, Elizabeth and Therry Streets, known as the Lower Market. The market began operating in 1859, and progressively acquired the Old Melbourne Cemetery site to allow for its expansion.

The Market comprises the Meat Market (1869), Sheds A-F (1878), Sheds H and I (1878), Sheds K and L (1923), Elizabeth Street Stores, Victoria Street Shops (1887, 1891, and 1923), Dairy Produce Hall (1928), Franklin Street Stores (1929-1930), M Shed (1936), John Batman Memorial (1881), and the site of the Old Melbourne Cemetery (1837-1917).

In 1837, ten acres of land bound by Peel, Fulton, Queen and Franklin Streets were set aside for the purposes of establishing a cemetery for the growing township of Melbourne; the Melbourne Cemetery was officially gazetted in 1839. The cemetery site was surveyed by Robert Hoddle, and divided into seven sections: Presbyterian, Episcopalian, Roman Catholic, Wesleyan, Jewish, Independent, and the Society of Friends. The Society of Friends' (Quaker) section was soon divided in half, to accommodate a section for Aboriginal burials. Concerns about the cemetery's proximity to the increasingly populated areas of the city, led to its closure in 1854, following the opening in the previous year of the Melbourne General Cemetery in Carlton. Despite the closure those who had claims on family plots continued to be interred in the Cemetery until 1917. An estimated 8,000 to 10,000 people were buried at the site from 1837 to 1917.

In March 1859, the Melbourne Town Council was granted the eastern triangular block for use as a market. The earliest surviving building is the wholesale Meat Market building. In 1874 it also began operating as a meat and

produce retail market, and Sheds H and I were built for use by fruit and vegetable growers. The market was granted permission to take over some of the cemetery land under legislation in 1877, and following the exhumation of 45 burials, Sheds A-F were constructed in 1878. The market was officially opened as the 'Queen Victoria Market' in March of that same year. Sheds A-E were open on all sides with each divided by a service roadway, and Shed F was constructed with a brick wall on its southern side which divided the market from the remainder of the cemetery.

Two-storey terrace shop buildings constructed along Elizabeth and Victoria Streets in 1884 and 1887 respectively, provided a 'public' face to the market. Additional shops were also constructed on Victoria Street between 1890 and 1905.

Legislation in 1917 provided for the remainder of the cemetery land to be acquired for market purposes. The final burial took place in 1917, and as part of the transition from cemetery to market, 914 bodies are known to have been exhumed and relocated from 1920 to 1922.

Developments from this time included the construction of Sheds K and L in the Upper Market in 1923 and in the Lower Market the Dairy Produce Hall in 1928 which provided dairy producers with dedicated accommodation. On the Upper Market site, the Market Square development of 1929-1930 provided storage for market traders and merchants in two rows of sixty brick stores. This development, of which only the Franklin Street Stores survive, enclosed the market site along Franklin Street, and resulted in the market taking over the last of the former cemetery land. Shed M was constructed in 1936 on the Upper Market site.

The John Batman Memorial, in the north-east of the carpark, was erected by public subscription in 1881. While no longer in its original location, the memorial recognises John Batman who was buried in the cemetery in 1839, with his remains relocated to Fawkner Cemetery in 1922.

In more recent years some of the buildings have been renovated to accommodate the changing needs of market stall holders and shoppers.

The Queen Victoria Market is on the traditional land of the Kulin Nation.How is it significant?The Queen Victoria Market is of historical, archaeological, social, architectural and aesthetic significance to the State of Victoria.Why is it significant?The Queen Victoria Market is of historical significance as one of the great nineteenth century markets of Victoria and the only one surviving from a group of important central markets built by the corporation of the City of Melbourne. It is also of historical significance for remaining in operation from the 1870s.

The Queen Victoria Market is of historical significance as the site of Melbourne's first official cemetery, which was in use between 1837 and 1854, and intermittently from 1854 until its final closure in 1917.

The former cemetery site is of archaeological significance because it contains an estimated 6,500 to 9,000 burials. The site has the potential to yield information about the early population of Melbourne, including the Aboriginal and European communities, and their burial practices and customs.

The Queen Victoria Market is of social significance for its ongoing role and continued popularity as a fresh meat and vegetable market, shopping and meeting place for Victorians and visitors alike.

The Queen Victoria Market is of architectural significance for its remarkably intact collection of purpose built nineteenth and early twentieth century market buildings, which demonstrate the largely utilitarian style adopted for historic market places.

The Elizabeth Street and Victoria Street terraces are of aesthetic significance for their distinctive demonstration of an attempt to create a more appealing 'public' street frontage and increase revenue by enclosing the market and concealing the stalls behind a row of nineteenth century shops.'

Permit Exemptions

General Conditions: 1. All exempted alterations are to be planned and carried out in a manner which prevents damage to the fabric of the registered place or object. General Conditions: 2. Should it become apparent during further inspection or the carrying out of works that original or previously hidden or inaccessible details of the place or object are revealed which relate to the significance of the place or object, then the exemption covering such works shall cease and Heritage Victoria shall be notified as soon as possible. General Conditions: 3. If there is a conservation policy and plan , all works shall be in accordance with it. Note: . It may not be necessary to obtain a heritage permit for certain works specified in the management plan.

General Conditions: 4. Nothing in this determination prevents the Executive Director from amending or rescinding all or any of the permit exemptions. General Conditions: 5. Nothing in this determination exempts owners or their agents from the responsibility to seek relevant planning or building permits from the responsible authorities where applicable. Minor Works : Note: Any Minor Works that in the opinion of the Executive Director will not adversely affect the heritage significance of the place may be exempt from the permit requirements of the Heritage Act. A person proposing to undertake minor works must submit a proposal to the Executive Director. If the Executive Director is satisfied that the proposed works will not adversely affect the heritage values of the site, the applicant may be exempted from the requirement to obtain a heritage permit. If an applicant is uncertain whether a heritage permit is required, it is recommended that the permits co-ordinator be contacted.

Specific Exemptions:Alterations to the non-registered buildings or structures on the registered land are permit exempt; however any additions or construction of new structures will require a permit.Surface and above-surface works to the former cemetery site (which do not include subsurface disturbance or the installation of new structures) are permit exempt.Works to the internal features (which do not involve a subsurface component) of both the Meat Market building and Franklin Street Stores at 154-190 Franklin Street are permit exempt.

.Permit exempt works as defined in the Guidelines for Food Stalls in Sheds A, B, H and I (QVM October 2011)[Document in Attachments]

Construction dates 1868,

Architect/Designer Salway, William,

Heritage Act Categories Heritage place, Archaeological place,

Other NamesMelbourne's first General Cemetery, OLD MELBOURNE CEMETERY, QUEEN VIC MARKET, VIC MARKET,

Hermes Number 1211

Property Number

History

Contextual History:History of Place:

Much of the Queen Victoria Market site was originally occupied by the first Melbourne Cemetery. It closed in 1867, the land eventually being acquired by the Melbourne City Council for extensions to the market. The market began in the meat market building in the irregular eastern block bounded by Queen, Victoria, Elizabeth and Therry Streets in 1869. There have been numerous extensions and renovations over the years, but most of the original fabric remains intact, as do many of the marketâ€™s original functions. The Queen Victoria Market is the last of Melbourneâ€™s great markets, the Eastern, Western and Flinders Street Fish markets all having been demolished. The market was the principal wholesale market for fresh fruit and vegetables from 1878 to 1975 and remains a popular source of fresh produce, while also becoming an important leisure and tourism destination.Associated People:

Extent of Registration

1. All the land marked L1 on Diagram 734 held by the Executive Director being all of Crown Allotments 5, 6, and 7, Section F Parish of Melbourne North, Township of Melbourne at West Melbourne.

2. All of the buildings marked as follows on Diagram 734 held by the Executive Director:B1 Meat Market

B2 Shops at 507-523 Elizabeth StreetB3 Dairy HallB4 Shops at 65-81 Victoria Street (between Elizabeth and Queen Streets)B5 Shops at 83- 159 Victoria Street (between Queen and Peel Streets)B6 Shed AB7 Shed BB8 Shed CB9 Shed DB10 Shed EB11 Shed FB12 Shed HB13 Shed IB14 Sheds K and LB15 Shed MB16 Franklin Street Stores at 154-190 Franklin StreetF1 John Batman Memorial

This place/object may be included in the Victorian Heritage Register pursuant to the Heritage Act 1995. Check the Victorian Heritage Database, selecting 'Heritage Victoria' as the place data owner.

For further details about Heritage Overlay places, contact the relevant local council or go to Planning Schemes Onlinehttp://planningschemes.dpcd.vic.gov.au/

http://planningschemes.dpcd.vic.gov.au/

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

Annexure B Queen Victoria Market Precinct (HO7) Statement of Significance

A 2 L O V E L L C H E N

79

QUEEN VICTORIA MARKET PRECINCT (HO7)

Address Refer schedule

Date/period 1869 onwards/mostly Victorian and Interwar

Building type Commercial

Grading Refer schedule

Meat Hall, 1869 Meat Hall with 1884 façade

65-81 Victoria St Sheds K + L, Queen St

Significance


The land and all the buildings located on the Queen Victoria Market site and bound by Peel Street (west), Victoria

Parade (north), Elizabeth Street (east), as well as Therry and Franklin Streets (south). This includes the meat and

dairy halls, substation to Therry Street, all the sheds (A-F and H-M), the shops to Elizabeth Street (nos 507-523)

and Victoria Street (nos 65-159) and the stores to Franklin Street (nos 160-196).

In addition, several adjacent and nearby shops:

the east side of Elizabeth Street between Therry and Victoria Streets (nos 510-16);

east side of Queen Street between Franklin and Therry Streets (nos 422-460);

the south side of Therry Street between Queen and Elizabeth Streets (nos 93-141); and

two earlier, 19th

century warehouses in Franklin Street (nos 126-130 and 132-140).

How is it Significant?The Queen Victoria Market precinct is of historic, social and aesthetic significance to the City of Melbourne.

Why is it Significant?

The Queen Victoria Market precinct is of historic and social significance as Melbourne's premier market in

operation for over 130 years (since the late 1870s), with origins dating back to 1859. It is the last surviving 19th

century market established by the City of Melbourne, and has been an important hub of social life in the city. The

80

Meat Hall, the oldest extant building, was constructed in 1869. It is one of the earliest, purpose-built market

complexes in Australia, with its single span roof only the second of its type when erected. The market has

evolved throughout its history in line with changing requirements, with several phases of expansion.

(AHC Criteria A4, B2 and G1)

The Queen Victoria Market precinct is of aesthetic significance as a fine example of a Victorian era market which

retains much of its original 19th

century fabric intact. Its present configuration is largely that which was established

by the end of the Interwar period. Architecturally, there is a mixture of utilitarian buildings – the sheds – and more

elaborate brick buildings, with the most exuberant being the 1884 façade of the Meat Hall, by noted architect

William Salway. The later but more intact Dairy Produce Hall (1929) features a distinctive Georgian Revival style

to the upper part of the façade in combination with Art Deco style to the lower part (canopy, tiling and shop

fronts).The groups of shops to Victoria and Elizabeth Streets are rare examples of such extensive, intact rows of

Victorian period commercial buildings, as are the Interwar period shops to Franklin Street.

(AHC Criteria E1)

81

QUEEN VICTORIA MARKET PRECINCT (HO7)

SCHEDULE

Name Address

Grading

Date/

Period

Description

Shops 506-16 Elizabeth

Street, Melbourne

C1 1922/

Interwar

By the end of the 19th

century, there was limited development on this land. Constructed as showrooms,

office and shops, the verandah was added in 1923.

2 storey shops, red brick with stuccoed bands. The parapet steps down from the Victoria Street corner,

which features a tower element with a flagpole, and the façade is divided into bays with Tuscan Order

pilasters. Modern, sliding aluminium-framed windows replaced earlier multi-paned types. Several elaborate

stained glass windows (with Art Nouveau style glass with panels and sinuous floral motifs) survive at the

north end, though one of the distinctive burnished frame with arched entry (to a pair of shops) also

survives at the southern end.

Part of major Interwar development phase creating a consistent streetscape on the square opposite the

entry to the market.

Shops 507-523 Elizabeth St,

Melbourne

C1 1884/

Victorian

2 storey shops in two groups of four, separated by pedimented arched way with a cast iron verandah,

which have been reinstated, extending across the group. The walls have a grey stuccoed finish with tooled

lines. To the first floor, the pairs of windows are set in recessed arches with a keystone and are separated

by pilasters with Tuscan Order capitals. The pilasters flanking each shop extend to the simple entablature

with brackets and there are orbs to the parapet. At ground level, the early metal-framed shopfronts with a

brass/burnished finish (the manufacturer's name is difficult to determine) are largely intact with recessed

entries, and stained glass and leadlight in a lozenge and diamond pattern above (two types are evident).

Some also have a band with rectangles and a central panel (south end).

Designed by William Salway and built by Kinnaird & McMullen for about £7000. The shop at the southern

corner with a timber shop front was originally a post office.

Meat Hall 525 Elizabeth Street,

Melbourne

A1 1869

(façade

1884)/

A large, double height building and centre piece of the market. . Initially setback with a plainer façade

treatment (similar to the extension at the western end, Queen St), constructed by P. Cunningham for about

82

Name Address

Grading

Date/

Period

Description

Victorian £3,800.

The extant façade was added by William Salway in 1884. These works were undertaken by Kinnaird &

McMullen for about £3300. The stuccoed façade has paired Giant Order pilasters on tall pedestals, arched

thermal windows, and recessed sections, some with doorways. The pediment has smaller pilasters, a

central raked section with tympanum (concealing the lantern), bottled balustrading and orbs. The bas-relief

in the tympanum features various animals and was the work of sculptor, John Simpson McKennel.

Sections of the original bi-chrome treatment and arcading to the side walls are visible. A small goods

section was added to the west end (Queen Street) in 1906, however the current western extension dates

to the 1980s. It has a wider façade than at the east end because of the differing relationship to the street.

There were initially five doorways with timber doors to the façade, the outer two of which have been

infilled.

Warehouse

(Former Gladstone

Buildings)

126-130 Franklin

Street, Melbourne

D3 1878-1881/

Victorian

3 storey, masonry warehouse with basalt plinth and stuccoed façade, which appears to have been recently

renewed without tooled lines. The façade consists of three separate bays, each with three windows. There

are cornices at each level, with the most prominent (with brackets) being to the first floor.

To the rear the basalt plinth, extended at the curved corners, and face brickwork is intact as are most of the

original window openings.

Probably constructed by the owner/builder, A.G. Corbett, in a series of stages. Initially nos 128+130

(originally 18-20 Franklin St West) were built in 1878 and 1879 as 2 storey sections. In 1880, no. 126

(originally 16 Franklin St West) was built as a 3 storey section. In 1881, 3rd

storey to nos 128+130 was

added (Burchett Index nos: 7464, 8033, 8461 + 8659).

Warehouse Rear 128-130 Franklin

Street, Melbourne

C2 1882/

Victorian

2 storey, red brick warehouse, with a gable roof. Constructed by owner/builder A G Corbett (Burchett

Index, no. 9361).

Former Gordon &

Gotch warehouse

(Concord House)

132-140 Franklin

Street, Melbourne

D3 1898/

Victorian

Designed by architects F. Crook & N. Barnet and constructed by Clements Langford. An early image

shows that all the front openings were blocked up except the eastern despatch area (UMA/1/2358). It has

been partly altered by introduction of the central entry and the additional storey, probably added in 1968.

The originally single storey warehouse has a rock-faced basalt plinth with red brick walls, now painted.

83

Name Address

Grading

Date/

Period

Description

There are six bays, four with pairs of windows. Bullnose bricks have been used extensively to the openings

and the panels below the windows, and the basement windows have been blocked up.

The rear elevation is largely intact and features pairs of blind niches (mirroring the windows to the front).

Some early openings have filled in or altered.

Warehouses 160-176 and 180-196

Franklin Street,

Melbourne

C2 1930/

Interwar

Two groups of single storey warehouses, which have a panelled parapet with curved profile to the main

façade (south) and a rectangular parapet to the secondary façade (north). Originally there were four

windows to the gable roof to the north elevation, above the verandah, but these have been filled

in/boarded over. Pilasters are also barely visible above the broad canopies with panelled edges. The upper

part of the walls has a stucco finish and the lower part is of red brick. The south elevation typically has

large, central, paired timber doors with a flanking, multi-paned window either side, many of which have

sheeting or bars over. . Part of major Interwar development phase creating a consistent streetscape.

There had been another row of similar warehouses to the north.

Sheds A-E Peel Street, Melbourne A1 1878, 1905

(west part

A-C), 1922

(east part

D-E)

The first stage was constructed by James Thurgood of Hotham. They have been extended in several

stages. Shed C, which was initially slightly shorter, was extended to Peel Street by 1894. All sheds were

extended to Queen Street in 1903, sheds A + B were extended to Peel Street in 1905, and sheds D to F

were extended to Peel Street in 1922. The extensions at the west end (Peel St) are demarcated by wider

overhangs.

Plain gable ends are clad with timber boards to the sheds, alternating with a more decorative timber

pediment. A verandah extends in front with cast iron columns with a plain shaft and a decorative fringe in

front of a metal fascia. The roof is steel-framed and has a cantilever with bracket and a bracing frieze

extends between the capitals.

Due to the slope of the site, the roof is configured in stepped sections with steel trusses and clad in

corrugated metal sheeting with some translucent panels. There are curved brackets to the outer edges.

The large timber posts generally have a pyramidal basalt pad footing, though these are often largely

obscured by asphalt paving, and a curvilinear capital/bracket in between the beams that extend along the

length of the sheds, all with chamfered edges. Part of early phase of development at the market.

84

Name Address

Grading

Date/

Period

Description

Shed F Peel Street, Melbourne A1 Wall 1878 &

sheds

The wall formed part of the boundary of the Old Melbourne Cemetery.

Thomas Walker was engaged in 1877 to construct the attached shed for £2,197. The shed was initially

open and individual stalls may have been introduced circa 1890, by which time it was being used for dairy

products.

It was extended to Peel Street (red brick section) in 1922.

The eastern two-thirds have bi-chrome (brown and cream) brick walls with blind, segmental arches on the

south side and the shops on the north side. Part of early phase of development at the market.

Shed H-I Queen Street,

Melbourne

A1 1878 Similar to Sheds A to E, although shed H appears to be the most intact (or possibly earlier). Initially longer,

they were truncated during the 1920s to allow for the introduction of the Dairy Produce Hall. There had

been a third shed adjacent to the meat hall, shed G, which was built 1904/5 (probably transferred from the

Eastern Market) and demolished 1980-82 to allow for expansion of meat market.

Shed J Peel Street, Melbourne D1 1992 This area had been a road way. This structure is clearly identifiable as a recent insertion. It has concrete

piers with steel poles, a fully glazed lantern, and a segmental arch canopy at either end.

Sheds K + L Peel Street, Melbourne A1 1923/

Interwar

These two sheds have a basilica-like configuration of three gable roofs, consisting of a larger central gable

with lantern sections, and smaller, outer gables. The timber-framed walls of the clerestory of the main

gable, and those of the central lantern with arched roof, have multi-paned windows alternating with

louvered sections. There are steel supports to these sheds and a central arched entry at either end. . Part

of major Interwar period of expansion.

Shed M Peel Street, Melbourne C1 1936 Built in 1936 for pea and bean merchants. A concrete floor about 30cm thick was installed to keep produce

dry. It is one of three sheds of similar length that was constructed at this stage, however the other two,

which were wider, have since been demolished (sheds N + O). and is a marker of the Interwar

development phase.

This shed is narrower, more modest, steel-framed structure than the nearby sheds. Enclosed sections at

either end have full-height roller-doors and currently there are several container-pods installed in the

intermediate area.

85

Toilet Block Queen Street

(near Therry Street)

D2 c.1920/Early

Interwar

Red brick, with the original, central section having a plinth and gable roof, now obscured. Windows are

four-paned, timber hoppers to both long elevations (east and west) and a timber door survives on the west

side. The building has been extended to both the north and south ends and encircling verandah/canopy

installed.

Shop 422-428 Queen Street,

Melbourne

C2 1964/Post

war

2 storey, distinctive design with bands of canted windows to the first floor. Remarkably intact. Probably built

for the Globe Tyre Co. [Refer K Jalla image of 1966, SLV, no. H36133/220).

Warehouse 432-438 Queen Street,

Melbourne

C2 c1915/

Federation

2 storey, stuccoed pediment, flanked by simple piers, metal-framed windows to first floor. Non-original

verandah with lacework and fluted columns added since 1985 though remains largely intact.


Melbourne

D2 1955/Post

war

2 storey, first floor windows obscured.


Melbourne

D2 1932(?)/

Interwar

Single storey, altered in 1932, but may partly date to an earlier period. Brick walls, now painted. It has a

broad parapet with an upper soldier course in a dogtooth format. Wide cantilevered canopy. Modern

aluminium-framed openings.

Shops

(part of Munro's

Corner)

452-54 Queen Street,

Melbourne

C2 1935/

Interwar

Single storey with wider southern shop and narrower, northern garage. Face, clinker brick with, soldier

coursing to plinth and upper part of parapet. Pilasters have stucco finish and band above window,

scalloped to upper and lower margins. Intact and part of major Interwar development phase creating a

consistent streetscape.

Produce Hall 50-60 Therry Street,

Melbourne

B1 1928/

Interwar

An eclectic building with the upper level possessing principal characteristics of Georgian Revival style

design in the vein of Sir John Soane. It is red brick with a prominent cornice and has three large arched

windows to the central bay, flanked by a small rectangular window to each recessed, side bay. The multi-

paned, metal-framed windows have moulded, stucco aedicules. The sawtooth roof however has timber-

framed windows. Detailing below is more representative of the Art Deco style, including the awning with

original metal sheeting, and the façade, which is clad with speckled tiles, including plinth and those to the

entries. The original burnished shop fronts (Federal brand) survive with decorative glass (leadlight in

geometric design). Internally, many original elements also survive.

Substation 70-74 Therry Street,

Melbourne

C1 1928/

Interwar

The red brick building has a similar façade treatment as the upper part of the adjacent Produce Hall, with a

cornice and series of stuccoed, blind arched niches. It has been extended to the west end without the

same detailing. Part of major Interwar period of development.

86

Name Address

Grading

Date/

Period

Description

Shops 93-141 Therry Street,

Melbourne

C2 Interwar Extensive repair works were undertaken following a fire in 1945. There are 2 sections, nos 97-135 & 137-

141. Both parts are two storey red brick. The main section has stucco parapet and multi-paned windows,

though in varying rhythms and many covered by roller shutters. The smaller western end has steel-framed

windows, some with hoppers and a wide entry with double doors. The shop fronts generally have textured

bricks and timber-framed windows and may date to the mid-1940s. Part of major Interwar development

phase creating a consistent streetscape.

Munro's Corner 143-151 Therry Street,

Melbourne

C2 1935/

Interwar

Two storey, with glazed infill section at southern end. Similar detailing as nos 452-54 (soldier coursing and

stucco band with scalloped margins). Multi-paned windows and French doors to first floor. Variety of

opening types to ground floor shops. Prominent corner location, largely intact and and part of major

Interwar development phase creating a consistent streetscape.

Shops 65-81 Victoria Street,

Melbourne

A1 1889/

Victorian

Designed by the City Surveyor's department, these were built by R. C. Brocon.

They have slate clad roofs, chimneys and timber brackets to the chamfered corner at the western end.

There is bi-chrome brickwork to the first floor, with cream bricks employed to the cornice, frieze and string

mouldings. The ground floor façade has a stucco finish and consists of shop fronts and doorways to the

first floor. The shop fronts have arched windows to the upper part and several decorative features including

capitals, leafs to spandrels and a guilloche pattern to the lintel. Some early painted signage also survives.

The façade has been improved by the removal of paint to the first floor and reinstatement of the cast iron

verandahs. They form part of an extensive and intact, Victorian era streetscape.

Shops (21) 83-129 Victoria Street,

Melbourne

A1 1889-90/

Victorian

Designed by the City Surveyor's department, these were built in two stages: east part (12 shops) by R. R.

Vincent (1889) and western part (9 shops) by J. R. Allen (1890). They are single storey with slate clad

roofs, partly concealed by the distinctive parapet with circles. The walls are bi-chrome brick with cream

brick employed to the cornices and some stuccoed elements (capitals and brackets). Remnants of black

pointing are evident to the shaft of the pilasters. The shops have central recessed entries with French

doors and a guilloche pattern to the lintel. Original shop fronts have arched window frames with capitals

and decorative brackets to the spandrels (possibly cast iron). The shops are distinguished by both front

and rear entries and the verandahs have been replaced. and now form part of an extensive and intact,

Victorian era streetscape..

87

Name Address

Grading

Date/

Period

Description

Shops 133-159 Victoria Street C1 1923/

Interwar

The detailing of this group at the corner of Peel Street differs from the adjacent shops along Victoria Street,

including verandahs which were constructed later. The plain parapet has a stucco finish and the

rectangular windows have smaller panes to the upper part and a stucco lintel above which extends across

the façade. Part of major Interwar period of development.

Statement of Heritage Evidence - City of Melbourne€¦ · Lovell for MELBOURNE CITY COUNCIL...

Documents

Transcript of Statement of Heritage Evidence - City of Melbourne€¦ · Lovell for MELBOURNE CITY COUNCIL...