CONSERVATION PLANNING CONTEXT

1. Existing and proposed policies and conservation programs

Policies and programmes which aim to protect and enhance heritage elements and encourage development in keeping with them.

Statutory conservation controls through planning schemes
Since the introduction of the first urban conservation area controls into Victorian planning schemes in 1977 (Maldon Planning Scheme), statutory controls related to conservation in Victoria have followed a number of models. The State Planning & Environment Act1 and the Metropolitan Regional Section of Local Planning Schemes details a broad policy to conserve & enhance the character and appearance of nominated areas, buildings and features.2

Specific conservation zones
For some major coherent areas of heritage significance specific conservation zones with strict detailed development controls & requirements have been implemented; eg., St. James Park, Hawthorn; Maling Road, Canterbury.

Control over nominated individual building works, trees and sites which are listed in the planning scheme
This is the simplest method of control and (as at December 1991) is applied in about 60 municipalities in Victoria. The schedules are usually developed from specialist consultant studies of the area and/or listing on the Register of Historic Buildings. Permits are required for demolition and development/redevelopment of the nominated features and in some schemes criteria for the assessment of development applications are included.

Referral of applications to other bodies such as the Historic Buildings Council is also included in some schemes. Frankston Planning Scheme uses this device and lists one notable building (20 Davey St) and associated trees (Clause 132). Schedules often include a large number of notable buildings; eg., Melbourne Planning Scheme, Central City Development Area which lists over 300 notable buildings or groups of buildings as well as all buildings in 9 nominated heritage precincts. The Northcote Planning Scheme also introduces planning controls on most buildings and sites adjacent to the 74 nominated notable buildings to ensure their protection from inappropriate adjoining development. Another example is Portland Planning Scheme which has similar provisions and was administered for a number of years by Richard Head the current Frankston Town Planner. Detailed development guidelines are usually incorporated in policy documents adopted by the Responsible Authority rather than being written into the scheme.

4. Typical letter drop to householders in conservation areas or significant sites.

Overlay controls on top of existing zone provisions related to defined urban conservation areas or precincts, areas of historic significance, areas of special landscape interest, areas of special significance, etc.
These overlay controls have received widespread application in inner metropolitan municipalities with the area boundary definitions and selection of contributory buildings usually based on the recommendations of specialist consultant studies. Areas covered are often extensive, eg., nearly all of residential South Melbourne. The most often applied, Urban Conservation Area One control, requires a permit for full & partial demolition and all development including external alteration to facades, (which includes repainting in a different colour). The Urban Conservation Area Two control is usually applied to protect streetscapes, parks and natural areas and requires a permit for all new development but not demolition. Again, detailed development guidelines are usually incorporated in policy documents adopted by the Responsible Authority. The same two overlay controls with the same provisions have been applied metropolitan wide.

In 1990, the City of Essendon attempted to introduce a new Urban Conservation Area Three control which would still require a permit for demolition but other controls were to be modified to regulate the appearance of the building from the street only; ie., only within 15m of the frontage and for buildings mending one storey above ground level. Another approach was taken by the Kew and, more recently, Footscray municipalities where performance standards were incorporated into the planning amendments, providing for exceptions from planning controls if certain standards were shown to be complied with in the building application (ie. front fences).

Limited statutory controls provided heritage criteria area met (performance standards or as-of-right)
A refinement of the above controls is introduced in Kew Planning Scheme, Amendment L8 where six Heritage Residential Zones and twenty-one specific properties are nominated for conservation controls but permits are only required for demolition or where designated heritage criteria are not met eg., external alterations that are not potentially visible from the street do not require a permit; maintenance, repair, restoration and structural repair do not require a permit.

Defacto protection through land use restrictions
The conservation of significant buildings has often been threatened by the economic rationale applied to the highest and best use in a particular zone. Areas where it is desirable to protect, say, residential buildings may achieve this through prohibiting subdivision, flats, consulting rooms, etc., or the provision of residential standards or stringent council codes or policies. However, this may also lead to the stagnation of an area and the physical decline of large residential buildings or which alternative uses may be prohibited.

Bonus controls/negotiated planning
There are numerous examples, particularly in the large cities of Australia, where the protection and/or enhancement of significant buildings has been achieved through some form of negotiated planning with a developer and a development bonus (usually in the form of additional floor space) being given either on the subject site or other property. Clause 220 of the Local Section of the Melbourne Planning Scheme relates to plot ratio bonuses for the conservation and restoration of a building of historic or architectural interest and other matters. The Portland Planning Scheme also allows Council discretion in approving developments, provided conservation goals are met. In other instances, site specific planning scheme amendments have occurred as part of this negotiation process.

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (A.A.T.)
The A.A.T. has a role in implementing contested statutory controls. The A.A.T. appears to give considerable weight to the underlying objectives of conservation controls and the specialist. conservation studies carried out to arrive at the controls. Mr. Marsden, in 1987, clearly stated the objective of the Planning Division of the A.A.T.:-

Urban conservation is not primarily for the purist, but is to provide the general public of today and the future with a three-dimensioned representation of what buildings and streets of buildings were like at given periods of our history.

The Historic Buildings Register
Buildings, works and objects whose historic or architectural merit makes them important on a Statewide basis may be included on the Historic Buildings Register. Buildings on the Register are legally protected and, in general, may not be added to, altered, subdivided or demolished without the permission of the Historic Buildings Council. The Council is also able to offer advice, technical assistance or financial help to owners of these buildings. Issues relating to demolition or registration of these buildings is often highly political and subject to considerable public opinion.

Designation decisions can be reversed by an application to remove a site from the register which is constantly updated and supplemented. The homestead, gardens and other buildings or Ballam Park, Cranbourne Road, Frankston, for example, are included on the Register, as is the property, Stokesay, Nepean Highway.3

5. Brochure for recent metropolitan heritage advisory service (MPE, 1989).

Other non-statutory controls at local level
A range of other mechanisms have been introduced in particular areas, usually to complement other statutory controls. They are listed briefly below and discussed in more detail elsewhere, where relevant.

• Rate rebates for owners of buildings identified as significant, (Shire of Bet Bet).
• Differential rating system for significant properties (no known implementation in Victoria but 1991 implementation in Municipality of Ku­-ring-gai (NSW) where a 10% discount is given for the 600 protected properties in the local Plan. Total cost est. $30,000 or $1 per household).
• Low interest loans or percentage contributions for appropriate restoration or maintenance of significant buildings (Melbourne Heritage Restoration Fund, Gold Fields Restoration Fund and many local municipalities such as Cities of Coburg and Portland).
• The provision of a Heritage or Architectural Advisory service, usually with joint Council and Department of Planning and Housing funding. Most common form is a consultant advising on development control matters for half a day per week or fortnight.
• Non-charge for development applications involving heritage buildings, (Ashfield and Manly Municipalities, NSW).
• Local heritage promotion eg., identification of significance of buildings on rate notices, local heritage award schemes, voluntary panels of local residents to provide architectural or historic advice, local heritage plaques on buildings, development of heritage walking trails, etc.

Other State and Federal options
The only activity at Federal level to protect Significant buildings, sites or areas of natural and cultural significance is the listing of the property on the Register of the National Estate. This, however, provides no legal constraints on owners of private property except the commonwealth government as an owner and is seen more as a means to alert decision makers at all levels of the significance of the property. In some instances National Estate listed properties (except Commonwealth-owned sites) are controlled in local planning schemes. There are a range of other financial mechanisms and incentives which could be introduced at State and Federal level to support heritage conservation. They include :­-

• Federal government income tax rebates for the maintenance on non-income producing historic properties;
• State government exemptions or part-exemptions from Land Tax and/or Stamp Duty on sale of nominated properties;
• The development of, some form of State income generation for heritage improvement program; eg., 'Heritage Lottery'. These sorts of mechanisms require much consideration and are discussed in more detail in the Report of the Working Party to the Planning Ministers Conference (1986) entitled "Tax Incentives for Heritage Conservation".