Bryc Rawort CONSERVATION HERITAGE

6 March 2020

Statutory Planning City of Yarra

To Whom It May Concern

Re: 65-81 Dover Street, Cremorne Proposed demolition and in fill development

This letter has been prepared at the request of Planning & Property Partners on behalf of the owners of the property at 65-81 Dover Street, Cremorne. We have been asked to comment on the proposed development scheme for the subject land and in particular, its architectural response to nearby heritage properties subject to the Heritage Overlay.

The subject site is a rectangular area of land comprising four adjacent allotments on the east side of Dover Street, with buildings numbered 65, 67, 71, 75, 77 and 81 Dover Street, Cremorne. No's 65 and 67 comprise a small single and double-storey cream brick interwar factory, No. 71 is a single storey double-fronted Victorian timber cottage with a corrugated iron clad roof and No. 75 contains a small cream brick single storey interwar or postwar factory/garage. 77 Dover Street is a single fronted timber Victorian cottage, and 81 Dover street is a double fronted timber Victorian cottage. The site and its buildings are not included in, or subject to, the Heritage Overlay, notwithstanding that there has been a review of the Cremorne area in recent years. The site to the rear, comprising masonry Victorian cottages at 58-60 Cubitt Street, was identified in the most recent survey of the area and is subject to the Heritage Overlay (H0447).

It is proposed to demolish the existing buildings on the subject land and erect an 9 storey development, which will include an additional 2 basement levels containing car parking. At ground floor, the new building will abut the northern, eastern and southern property boundaries. It will partially abut the frontage to Dover Street, which will include three triangular shaped indents of the same geometry but varying sizes, each containing garden spaces. The scheme will present a three-storey brick podium to Dover Street with regularly spaced windows, which will be articulated into four bays by the three recessed triangular garden spaces. The brick podium treatment will be continued along the north and south elevations, providing corner returns in views from the north and south.

Above this will be an additional 6 levels at a setback of a minimum of 3 metres from Dover Street, which will be externally finished in a more lightweight style. Where the recessed form of the garden bays extends back greater than 3 metres in depth, this curved indent will be continued in plan above the podium level, to the full height of the tower. A central section of the rear east elevation will abut the property boundary up to Level 7, with the adjacent south section of the elevation set back 3 metres at ground level and the north section set back 3 metres from the first floor and above. The elevation treatment will also be varied at the lower levels to express a podium. The top level will incorporate additional setbacks on each side to minimise its visibility from adjacent streets.

The analysis below draws upon an inspection of the site and its context, and a review of Clause 43.01, the Heritage Overlay provisions of the Yarra Planning Scheme, the Development Guidelines for Sites Subject to the Heritage Overlay at Clause 22.02, Built Form and Design Policy at Clause 22.10, the Yarra Heritage Database and the City of Yarra Review of Heritage Overlay Areas 2007 Appendix B (Revised May 2018). We have also reviewed application drawings prepared by Fieldwork Architecture.

246 Albert Road. South Melbourne VIC 3205 I P .61 3 9525 4299 I bryceraworth.com.au

Dover Street in the vicinity of the subject land is mixed in character, comprising a mix of single-storey timber Victorian cottages and factories of varying scale dating from the interwar period and later. On the opposite west side of Dover Street is a double-storey polychrome brick Victorian-era former school known as 'Primary School No 2084'. This is a registered building [H1634].

The surrounding urban context is primarily low rise, comprising a similar mix of residential and industrial buildings to that seen in this part of Dover Street. There is also more substantial contemporary infill, including along Cubitt Street. As noted, east of the subject land are 58 and 60 Cubitt Street, a pair of attached single storey Victorian cottages with elaborately moulded parapets. These are graded 'Individually Significant' and are subject to an individual Heritage Overlay, H0447. Further to the south-west at 85-89 Cremome Street is the Former Melbourne Wire Works Factory & Head Office, the older part of which comprises a double-storey brick building. The Heritage Overlay map shows this as subject to an individual Heritage Overlay, H0518, though H0518 is not listed in the schedule to the Heritage Overlay at Clause 43.01.

Heritage Victoria's citation for Primary School No 2084 includes the following statement of significance:

What is significant?

Primary School No.2084 in Cremome Street Richmond consists of two finely detailed and

relatively intact school buildings built in 1878 and 1890. The earlier building is a single storey

polychrome brick structure with a slate roof. Polychrome brick was also used in the two storey

1890 building.

How is it significant?

Primary School No.2084 is of historical and architectural significance to the State of Victoria.

Why is it Significant?

Primary School No.2084 is of historical significance as it illustrates the character of education

provision in Victoria in the decades after the introduction of free and compulsory primary

education. It also serves as evidence of the social history of Richmond and of the provision of

education to working class communities. The school's design is derived from WH Ellerker's

competition-winning design of 1873 for a school of 500 students. The competition to produce

school designs was an indication of the importance accorded the task of building the State?s

education system by the newly formed Department of Education. Additionally, the idea of

producing attractive but standardised designs reflected the enormous task of building sufficient

schools to cope with the massive demand sparked by the introduction of free compulsory

education in 1873. Primary School No.2084 provides evidence not only of the influence of

Ellerker's school designs but of this broader context of the development of State education as

well. The school was initially constructed on a very small site and enrolments had exceeded its

capacity before it was completed, indicating the rapid growth of Melbourne's inner suburbs.

Expanded accommodation was not, however, provided until 1890. The cramped nature of the

site was evident in the provision of a rear verandah to cater for the recreational needs of the

children, the most significant departure from earlier plans. In the first decades of the 20th

century, the Education Department embarked on a program to improve the lighting of its

schools by altering inadequate windows. Primary School No.2084 was one of the very few

schools in the State to have been overlooked in this program. This, combined with the school's

small site and cramped recreational conditions, give some indication of the relatively low

priority given to schools in Melbourne's working class communities.

Primary School No.2084 is of architectural significance as its two buildings document the

development of school design in the two decades after the introduction of free and compulsory

education. The 1878 building reveals the influence of the designs obtained in the competition

conducted by the newly formed Department of Education in 1873. The competition schools are

important in the history of the development of State education in Victoria because the design

of a large number of schools such as this one was based on them. The competition also drew a

number of important Victorian architects, including Reed and Barnes, Terry and Oakden,

Charles Webb and Ellerker, the architect of the design on which this school was based. The

design of these early schools tells us something about the philosophy of education at the time,

the large classroom spaces indicating the size of classes, and the rather limited fenestration

revealing the priority given to the isolation of children during the education process over the

provision of natural light. The 1890 building, a larger and more imposing structure, is a

p. 2 246 Albert Road. South Melbourne VIC 3205 I P +61 3 9525 4299 I bryceraworth.com.au

P. 3

simplified version of a later style and the combination of the two styles, still largely intact, on the one site provides an interesting record of the development of State school design.

The 1878 building of Primary School No.2084 is of architectural significance as an example of the work of the notable Melbourne building firm of T Cockram & Co, whose other work includes the Windsor Hotel and Princess Theatre.

The statement of significance for 58-60 Cubitt Street (H0447), as included in the Heritage Gap Study: Review of 17

Heritage Precincts Stage 2 Report, is as follows:

What is significant? The late Victorian 'boom' era houses, constructed c.1890, at 58-60 Cubitt Street, Cremorne are significant. They are single-storey, single-fronted, rendered brick cottages, set back, with a high parapet. The centre-piece is double-ogee, with a medallion over a shaped panel. There is a pierced guilloche parapet between piers, over a comice and frieze-mould, between vermiculated corbels, over tripartite windows. it has bracket-pairs, with rosettes and panels between. Wing- walls have reverse-ogee profile, with a skillion verandah between rosette and vermiculated corbels on scroll-brackets. Cast-iron verandah-posts survive,

but the frieze has been removed. There is a diamond quarry-tile verandah-floor, bluestone edged with similar path to no.58. The chimneys

are rendered with cornices. The front fences and non-original alterations and additions to the houses are not significant.

How is it significant? The attached houses at 58 and 60 Cubitt Street, Cremorne are of local aesthetic significance to the City of

Yana.

Why is it significant? The attached houses at 58-60 Cubitt Street are significant as a fine example of late Victorian 'boom' era architecture applied to single fronted terrace houses. They are notable for the richly ornamented stucco decoration to the parapets and end walls including scrolls, masks, consoles and ums that characterises the flamboyant architecture of the 'boom' era. While Victorian era houses are common within Cremome, Boom-style houses with this level of decoration are rare. (Criteria B, D & E)

While the subject site is not itself within a Heritage Overlay itself, when having regard for the relationship of any proposal on the land with nearby heritage sites, regard may reasonably be had for the policy objectives and decision guidelines of Clause 43.01, the Heritage Overlay, the purpose and decision guidelines of which are as

follows:

To implement the Municipal Planning Strategy and the Planning Policy Framework. To conserve and enhance heritage places of natural or cultural significance. To conserve and enhance those elements which contribute to the significance of heritage places. To ensure that development does not adversely affect the significance of heritage places. To conserve specified heritage places by allowing a use that would otherwise be prohibited if this will demonstrably assist with the conservation of the significance of the heritage place.

Before deciding on an application, in addition to the decision guidelines in Clause 65, the responsible authority

will need to consider, as appropriate:

• The Municipal Planning Strategy and the Planning Policy Framework.

• The significance of the heritage place and whether the proposal will adversely affect the natural or

cultural significance of the place.

• Any applicable statement of significance (whether or not specified in the schedule to this overlay),

heritage study and any applicable conservation policy.

• Any applicable heritage design guideline specified in the schedule to this overlay.

• Whether the location, bulk, form or appearance of the proposed building will adversely affect the

significance of the heritage place.

• Whether the location, bulk, form and appearance of the proposed building is in keeping with the character and appearance of adjacent buildings and the heritage place.

246 Albert Road, South Melbourne VIC 3205 I P +61 3 9525 4299 I bryceraworth.com.au

p. 4

■ Whether the demolition, removal or external alteration will adversely affect the significance of the heritage place.

■ Whether the proposed works will adversely affect the significance, character or appearance of the heritage place ...

Similarly, while Council's local heritage policy as set out under Clause 22.02 is not directly applicable to development of the subject land, it provides guidance as to the forms of development that might be appropriate in the context of heritage places.

Policies in Clause 22.02 in relation to new development are as follows:

General

Encourage the design of new development and alterations and additions to a heritage place or a contributory element to a heritage place to:

• Respect the pattern, rhythm, orientation to the street, spatial characteristics, fenestration, roof form, materials and heritage character of the surrounding historic streetscape.

■ Be articulated and massed to correspond with the prevailing building form of the heritage place or contributory elements to the heritage place.

■ Be visually recessive and not dominate the heritage place.

• Be distinguishable from the original historic fabric.

■ Not remove, cover, damage or change original historic fabric. Not obscure views of principle fagades.

• Consider the architectural integrity and context of the heritage place or contributory element.

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

buildings; where there are differing adjoining setbacks, the greater setback will apply.

Encourage similar facade heights to the adjoining contributory elements in the street. Where there are differing facade heights, the design should adopt the lesser height.

1-1

Discourage elements which detract from the heritage fabric or are not contemporary with the era of the building such as unroofed or open upper level decks or balconies, reflective glass, glass balustrades and pedestrian entrance canopies.

Policies in relation to garages are as follows:

Carports, Car Spaces, Garages, and Outbuildings

Encourage carports, car spaces, garages and outbuildings to be set back behind the front building line

(excluding verandahs, porches, bay windows or similar projecting features) of the heritage place or

contributory element or to be reasonably obscured. New works should be sited within the 'envelope' shown in Figure 1 of 22.02-5.7.1.

Discourage:

• new vehicle crossovers in streets with few or no crossovers

• high fencing, doors and boundary treatments associated with car parking that are unrelated to

the historic character of the area

• new vehicle crossovers in excess of 3 metres wide in residential streets.

Demolition of the existing buildings on the subject land is supported given these are not subject to the Heritage Overlay.

The proposed development scheme responds appropriately to its heritage setting through the expression of a brick street level podium, the setbacks of the upper levels, the articulation of the facade using recessed indents and the referencing of traditional materials.

246 Albert Road. South Melbourne VIC 3205 I P +61 3 9525 4299 I bryceraworth.com.au

Further to the latter, the former school opposite the proposed development is a substantial 2 storey polychromatic Victorian brick building with a steeply pitched roof. The 2 storeys in a heritage building such as this may be considered the equivalent of 3 storeys in a contemporary structure. The proposed 3 storey podium height directly references the parapet line of the existing adjacent (non-heritage) building to the south at 83-87 Dover Street, but also the scale of the former school, consolidating this as the street wall height in this part of Dover Street and providing a visual linkage between these buildings. The brick treatment to the podium and the pattern of fenestration reference the character of the registered building, albeit in a contemporary and interpretive manner.

Notably, the manner in which the 3 storey podium is articulated as projecting bays with recessive 'breaks' between introduces and interprets a sense of grain that is compatible with the scale of frontage of these neighbours and

with the subdivision pattern of the area.

The setbacks to the upper levels and their lighter architectural treatment will reduce their visibility and visual weight in views from street level, including in distant views along Dover Street from the north to the south. Dover and Cubitt Streets are relatively narrow in proportion, which reduces the extent to which the upper levels will be noticeable in such axial views. The overall height of the development is considered to be primarily an urban planning consideration, noting there is development of a comparable scale approved or constructed nearby in this

part of Cremorne.

With respect to the north-west corner treatment of the new building above the podium, there is an increased setback with a curved chamfer (or scalloped) form referencing the geometry of the recessed triangular bays in the main street facade, and reducing the extent to which the new building might abut future highrise development on the adjacent site to the north. This is a considered response, and is seen as acceptable from a heritage

perspective.

We consider the interface between the eastern boundary walls of the proposed development and the cottages to the east at 58 and 60 Cubitt Street (H0447) to be acceptable. It is not unusual for low scale residential buildings to abut much higher contemporary built form, particularly in areas whether the planning scheme encourages more

intensive development.

The podium treatment is continued along the rear elevation of the new building, providing a visual transition in height behind the heritage dwellings, rather than immediately rising the full height of the building. It is noted that the cottages themselves may receive multi-storey rear additions in the future, which will in turn further mediate a transition in height relative to their single storey street facades.

Moreover, it is apparent that these cottages may well have taller development to either side and opposite within Cubitt Street itself as part of the ongoing development within this area, and development within the street of address will be more appreciable in its impact than that to the rear of these buildings and the associated land.

The proposal responds appropriately to Council's guidelines for new development abutting land in a Heritage Overlay at Clause 22.10 through its podium treatment and setback. It is noted that the guidelines provided relate to the street interface, and a rear interface such as this is not a matter given comparable consideration in the

guidelines.

In conclusion, we consider the proposed development scheme for the subject site to be acceptable with respect to heritage considerations, due to its proposed podium, upper level setbacks, and facade treatments including materials and articulation.

Please contact the office if there are any queries in relation to the above.

Bryce Raworth Pty Ltd

P. 5 246 Albert Road, South Melbourne VIC 3205 I P +61 3 9525 4299 I bryceraworth.com.au