HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR PLANNERS NOTES

Heritage Impact Assessment for Planners 3 rd June 2014 HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR PLANNERS NOTES Planning Institute of Australia FOR PLANNERS Seminar Series 3 June 2014 IVAN MCDONALD Ivan McDonald Architects

Heritage Impact Assessment for Planners 3 rd June 2014 1 1. INTRODUCTION Outline of seminar: The statutory regime Heritage impact assessment methodology Relevant assessment codes The structure of a heritage impact report Who is qualified to do the work How to brief a consultant What to look for in a completed report The field of heritage conservation exists within what is often called the cultural environment which consists of three broad areas: the historic cultural environment the natural cultural environment the Indigenous cultural environment All three areas often require impact assessment for proposed development in somewhat similar circumstances and methods but this seminar intends to focus on the historic cultural environment because it most-commonly triggers the type of heritage impact assessment that planners deal with. The historic cultural environment typically deals with places of cultural heritage significance in the built environment and, more-typically, in the urban built environment. Such places are mainly buildings but can include a wide range of place types such as vegetation, open space, parks, bridges, railways, jetties, etc. It not only includes the physical fabric of built structures but can also include their physical settings and associated views. In this respect, the field often touches on matters of visual amenity impact. Heritage impact assessment should not be confused with: character assessment cultural heritage significance assessment (although this is integral to heritage impact assessment as shall be explained later) conservation management planning (although a conservation management plan can immeasurably help the heritage impact assessment process). The terms heritage impact report and heritage impact statement are used interchangeably and are intended to mean the same. Likewise, the terms cultural heritage significance and cultural significance are used interchangeably and are intended to mean the same. Heritage places are taken to include State and local heritage places, archaeological places and protected areas.

Heritage Impact Assessment for Planners 3 rd June 2014 2 2. THE STATUTORY REGIME THE BROAD REGIME Various statutes at all levels of government regulate development on heritage places. For world, national and Commonwealth heritage places, development is regulated by the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act (more commonly referred to as the EPBC Act). For State heritage places, development is regulated by the Queensland Heritage Act operating under the Sustainable Planning Act (proposed to soon be the Planning and Development Act). 1 For local heritage places, development is regulated (for some local government authorities) by a planning scheme. The Burra Charter of Australia ICOMOS 2 is not a statutory document but its principles are embedded in most heritage legislation and it is often a referred document in planning schemes. Other legislation such as the Environmental Protection Act, the Native Conservation Act and the Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Act deal with the natural and Indigenous cultural environments. WHEN IS HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT REQUIRED? A heritage impact statement (report) is mandatory information for development applications on State heritage places. Many local government planning schemes also set heritage impact assessment requirements for local heritage places in their planning schemes (eg. Brisbane and most of the provincial cities). Where a planning scheme s heritage provisions are not signed off by the State, the IDAS Code 3 is intended to apply to local heritage places and will be discussed later. Note that development adjoining a State heritage place no longer triggers assessment under the Queensland Heritage Act but may still trigger assessment under a planning scheme. By way of general guidance when drafting planning schemes, it would normally be appropriate to trigger heritage impact assessment in any of the following scenarios: where there is no statement of significance for the place where demolition of significant elements is proposed where a change of use is proposed where substantial intervention in significant fabric is proposed where a substantial change to the setting of a place is proposed. 1 As well as State heritage places, the Queensland Heritage Act also regulates development on State archaeological places and Protected Areas 2 The Burra Charter: The Australia ICOMOS Charter for Places of Cultural Significance 2013 3 The IDAS Code for Development on a Local Heritage Place applies to local heritage places for those local governments which are not exempted from this provision under s.8 of the Queensland Heritage Regulation.

Heritage Impact Assessment for Planners 3 rd June 2014 3 3. HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY Heritage impact assessment is fundamentally about assessing the impact of proposed development on the cultural significance of a heritage place. It is a simple-enough idea but what must be kept uppermost in the mind of someone undertaking such a task is that an ASSESSMENT report is fundamentally differed to an ADVOCACY report. An architect, an urban designer or a landscape architect can wax lyrical about how great their design is in support of a development application - they can ADVOCATE A heritage consultant has to ASSESS a development s impact objectively and independently. If there is any advocacy involved, it is for the heritage conservation of the place under consideration. Both in concept and execution, heritage impact assessment is comparable to other environmental impact assessment methods and follows a quasi-scientific procedure of observation & data collection / analysis / rational & defendable conclusions. There is often confusion about different types of heritage assessment work and the various types of reports that result. Confusingly, different States and different consultants use slightly different terminology. In a broad sense: an ASSESSMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE looks only at whether a place is of cultural heritage significance. It usually does this by understanding the history and physical fabric of the place and by assessing significance against well-established criteria. 4 A threshold of heritage significance is also normally identified eg. local, State, national, world. A statement of significance is usually the succinct distillation and conclusion of this process. An assessment of significance does not consider management issues including any aspect of proposed development. a CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT PLAN (CMP) or CONSERVATION PLAN is a document which sets out what is significant about a place and what policies are appropriate to conserve that significance in its future use and development. A cmp will inherently include an assessment of significance (as set out above) and will also consider appropriate opportunities and constraints to manage and conserve a place s cultural significance. In doing so, it can both anticipate and directly address future development scenarios and develop appropriate conservation policies to manage these outcomes. A cmp is an immensely helpful tool in the future assessment of heritage impact but is not, of itself, an impact assessment report. a HERITAGE IMPACT REPORT is a document which considers: the cultural heritage significance of the place the nature of proposed development the likely impact of that development on the significance of the place. 4 The standard heritage assessment criteria relate broadly to matters of historic, social, aesthetic and scientific significance

Heritage Impact Assessment for Planners 3 rd June 2014 4 Development can have an impact on the cultural heritage significance of a place in three principal ways: use fabric setting. The impact of USE is often overlooked and the appropriateness of a use is often taken as a given. Particularly where a change of use is proposed, that use needs to be a COMPATIBLE use ie. a use that is compatible with the conservation of the place s significance. For example, it would not be a compatible use to change the single open space of an old church into a cellular configuration of small offices with full-height partitions. Sometimes, compatibility of use is the elephant in the room that should not be ignored. Most-commonly, it is FABRIC impacts that need to be considered. Fabric is the term for the physical material of the place the bricks and mortar. Not all fabric will be significant and there needs to be sufficient knowledge of the relative significance of the various fabric elements that make up the place in order to capably assess the heritage impact of a development. Sometimes, an understanding of the relative significance of the fabric will be readily apparent. Other times, further detailed analysis of the fabric will need to be undertaken before the assessment of impact can occur. In this scenario, a cmp would usually already provide this detailed fabric analysis. For fabric impacts, the d -word (demolition) is usually the action most likely to trigger adverse impacts. Any demolition of significant fabric will usually be assessed as an adverse heritage impact although this is always considered in the context of the scale of intervention and the relative significance of the fabric being intervened in. Reversibility in the future is a key mitigating factor for such impacts. For instance, taking a face sandstone window opening in a CBD street façade down to a door opening may never be an acceptable impact but the same action in a rendered brick façade (which is more-readily reversible in the future) may be acceptable. Impacts on the SETTING of the place should also be considered as a matter of course but will not always be relevant. Other times, there may be only impacts on setting to consider. Whether or not these impacts need to be assessed will be determined by what is significant about the place. Stakeholder input is a normal part of the impact assessment methodology but is often overlooked in heritage impact assessment. The Burra Charter encourages the participation of all relevant stakeholders in the conservation process. To some extent, impact assessable development applications are seen as providing the public with an opportunity to participate in the assessment process. Where adverse heritage impacts are likely to result, options to mitigate impact should be considered. If a heritage consultant has been involved since the start of the design process, such impacts are often identified early and averted. If not, it remains a key part of the impact assessment process to state these impacts as, and where, they will arise. Again, returning to the difference between advocacy reporting and assessment reporting, proper heritage impact methodology may well include negative comments about a proposed development.

Heritage Impact Assessment for Planners 3 rd June 2014 5 4. RELEVANT ASSESSMENT CODES Development impact on heritage places is assessed against various codes. For State heritage places and archaeological places, there is now the Queensland Heritage Place State Code forming part of the State development assessment provisions. For local heritage places, there is the IDAS Code for Development on a Local Heritage Place except for the 12 local governments exempted from its application because they are considered to have adequate provisions in their planning schemes. For some planning schemes, there are specific codes and overlays which regulate heritage outcomes including: Brisbane City Plan Heritage Place Code (soon to be the Heritage Overlay Code) Ipswich Planning Scheme Character Code Gold Coast Planning Scheme Cultural Heritage (Historic) Code Cairns Plan Local Heritage Code.

Heritage Impact Assessment for Planners 3 rd June 2014 6 5. THE STRUCTURE OF A HERITAGE IMPACT REPORT This is not a field where one model report fits all circumstances. Depending on the simplicity or complexity of the proposed development, adequate heritage impact assessment could be carried out anywhere between a $300 single page letter of opinion and full-blown $30,000 report. In most cases, however, where a modest heritage impact report is required, it will include these basic components: what are the existing conditions? what is significant about the place? what is the nature of the proposed development? what impact will this development have on the significance of the place? a conclusive heritage impact statement. The meat of the report is the last component above the actual assessment of impact. This should typically address: the impact of the proposed use the impact on significant fabric the impact on the setting of the place the impact on the statement of significance. Ways and means of mitigating adverse impacts should be considered. Any missing or further required information should be identified. Relevant recommendations and/or approval conditions should be stated. It would be normal to append statutory heritage citations and relevant extracts from any conservation management plan. By way of guidance, the Department of Environment & Heritage Protection publishes a guideline document, Preparing a Heritage Impact Statement. This is intended for State heritage places, archaeological places and protected areas under the Queensland Heritage Act but also has good general application. Some planning schemes set out specific requirements for heritage impact reporting. Others, like the new Brisbane City Plan, set out more-general guidelines such as the SC6.12 Heritage Planning Scheme Policy. Because the necessary scope of heritage impact report is highly variable, it is wise for planning schemes to allow discretion and negotiation in the extent of reporting required. One of the contentious parts of the structure of a heritage impact report is sometimes whose assessment of significance should the report reply on. Should it be only a statutory statement of significance or should nonstatutory assessments of significance (such as a cmp) or a consultant s independent assessment be given weight?

Heritage Impact Assessment for Planners 3 rd June 2014 7 Where a heritage regulator s statement of significance does not exist (and the heritage regulator does not intend to prepare one), then an assessment of significance will need to be carried out usually by the proponent s consultant and often as the first part of a heritage impact report. Where a heritage regulator s statement of significance does exist, then an assessment of impact must be made against this statement of significance, even it if is considered to be wrong. Beyond that assessment, further impact assessment can be made against any other statement of significance that is considered relevant but it will usually be up to the heritage regulator to attach weight to any alternative assessment of significance.

Heritage Impact Assessment for Planners 3 rd June 2014 8 6. WHO IS QUALIFIED TO DO THE WORK The DEHP guidelines referred to above apply the common test of a suitably qualified person. There are a wide range of specialist heritage conservation skills available in such fields as architecture, engineering, landscape, archaeology, etc. Who is qualified will be determined by the nature of the heritage place and the nature of the proposed development. In some instances, a multi-disciplinary assessment team may be required but this is rare. Sometimes, for very simple and straightforward development, a reasoned assessment of impact can be made by someone who is not necessarily a heritage specialist. Planners, for instance, often address the heritage requirements of a planning scheme as part of their normal planning report. There is nothing wrong with this approach provided all parties are happy that it is suitable in the circumstances. The yardstick by which the suitably qualified person can usually be judged is by full membership of Australia ICOMOS. This is the national organisation of heritage professionals in Australia and sets both qualification and ethical standards. Both the Department of Environment & Heritage Protection and the BCC City Architecture & Heritage Team maintain a list of suitably qualified persons for this purpose.

Heritage Impact Assessment for Planners 3 rd June 2014 9 7. HOW TO BRIEF A CONSULTANT Consider the need for a heritage consultant to provide: preliminary advice due diligence advice a conservation management plan (before design begins) pre-lodgement attendance review through the design phase co-ordination with other disciplines. These will all avoid problems at the impact assessment end of the project. If there has been no previous heritage input, the assessment of impact could lead to an unfavourable assessment which is not helpful to the development approval process. If a cmp is needed, commission it early. They take time to do and should be in place at the beginning of the design process, not the end. Tell your consultant what codes you consider are necessary to be addressed and ask if your consultant knows of any others. Don t ignore or hide potential heritage impact issues by setting a narrow brief. Heritage regulators will usually pick up on such oversights and the credibility of the whole heritage impact assessment may be lost. If additional services are needed (such as an assessment of significance or a detailed fabric analysis), allow sufficient time in the process for these to occur. Don t expect a heritage consultant to commit to a final assessment report until the client commits to final DA design.

Heritage Impact Assessment for Planners 3 rd June 2014 10 8. WHAT TO LOOK FOR IN A COMPLETED HIR Ultimately, what is needed is a conclusive statement about the nature and extent of the proposed development s heritage impact. The extent of heritage impact could be: NONE ideal but rare SOME some minor adverse impact is usual and is usually considered acceptable beware of the cumulative impact of many minor impacts SUBSTANTIAL substantial adverse impact will usually be considered unacceptable unless there is no prudent and feasible alternative 5. Like any professional report, a heritage impact report should be: concise but thorough rational, reasonable and objective conclusive. It should: demonstrate an understanding of the cultural significance of the place demonstrate an understanding of the nature of the proposed development make a balanced and unbiased assessment of the cultural heritage impact of the proposal consider ways and means of mitigating adverse heritage impacts recommend appropriate approval conditions. Beware of heritage impact reports which are heavy on description and light on analysis. If anything, the balance should be the other way around. Beware of the gun for hire who blindly supports any proposal and concludes no impact when clearly there will be. Such assessments will usually be given little credibility and are unhelpful in the development assessment process. Beware of the amateur who, simply by lack of knowledge, makes no actual useful assessment or, worse, makes the wrong assessment. A heritage impact report should address all aspects of the proposed development that have a heritage impact dimension even things that are implicit in the proposal like now building services will be reticulated or how new finishes will be applied or fixed in certain areas. These might not be high on a town planner s agenda but they will be high on a heritage regulator s agenda. 5 The no prudent or feasible tests are difficult to satisfy and often require extensive evidence, especially if financial feasibility is the basis.

Heritage Impact Assessment for Planners 3 rd June 2014 11 Lastly, don t expect a heritage consultant to expunge every negative comment from their report. If there is an adverse heritage impact, it needs to be identified and dealt with not hidden, ignored or glossed over. It is unprofessional to expect it, unprofessional for your consultant to do it and, ultimately, not in the applicant s interests when the heritage regulator spots the omissions. Having said that, it is certainly rare, in my experience, for such pressure to be applied. In the main, my experience has been that those who want the heritage impact of their proposed development assessed, let their heritage consultants get on and do their work with independence and professionalism as it should be. Ivan McDonald Dip Arch M Blt Env (Urb Des) FAIA MAIB M.ICOMOS