Depressing? Dour? The postwar CBD buildings deemed worthy of protecting

Dour, soulless and depressing are how city workers have described some of the 48 postwar CBD buildings protected under a sweeping heritage review approved by Victoria’s planning minister – but heritage advocates say they are important to Melbourne’s history.

About 40 per cent of the 121 buildings listed for heritage overlay protection under an amendment to Melbourne’s planning scheme are from the postwar construction boom, spanning the 1940s to 1970s.

Some of the Collins Street buildings preserved under sweeping new heritage overlays aren’t the typical beloved old buildings.Credit:Scott McNaughton

Many of the buildings are dotted along Collins Street; grid-like multi-storey towers that are heavy on concrete, glass and steel frames, sitting plainly beside ornate Victorian-era buildings and shiny 21st-century high-rises.

These block-style structures were once cutting-edge commercial hubs, home to institutions such as the Commonwealth, Adelaide and CBC banks.

“Is that what they define as heritage these days? I wouldn’t miss them if they got knocked down,” said Rob Boutchard, who works on Collins Street.

Another man said they look like “the kind of building a nine-year-old would draw”.

But Rohan Leppert, councillor and heritage lead at the City of Melbourne, said the review extended protection to dozens of postwar buildings “not in spite of community sentiment”.

“We did it because there were overwhelming calls in 2015 and 2016 from the community, including occasionally from some landowners, to say, ‘what is the government’s attitude to the next layer of history? What should be protected and why?’”

Leppert said what was visible in the buildings was the postwar period’s experimentation with new technologies and styles, which gave a consistent theme to parts of Melbourne, especially the commercial and legal precincts.

“If you don’t have any government regulation that says that there’s significance in that built form, then future generations won’t benefit from having this layer of history reflected in future planning decisions,” he said.

“You can’t underestimate the significant social and economic changes that came with the complete reimagining of the central city post-Second World War. Keeping those buildings in the heritage overlay is going to keep our city interesting.”

When Opposition Leader Matthew Guy was the planning minister under the Napthine government, he denied some buildings heritage protection, declaring he did not want to see the city “awash with structures built in the 1950s”.

Louise Honman, a member of the Australian Institute of Architects’ Victorian heritage committee, said postwar buildings hadn’t traditionally been selected for protection but society could now appreciate how they reflected historical and commercial forces within the city.

“It’s not just about whether they conform to an architectural ideal; it’s more that they are a representation of how a city develops,” Honman said.

A laneway view of the building known as Melbourne’s first “Glass Box” at 100-104 Collins Street, built in 1955.Credit:Scott McNaughton

Royal Historical Society of Victoria chair Professor Charles Sowerwine said that while postwar buildings weren’t his “personal favourite architecture”, they evolved in a period that was against ostentatious design.

“They wanted simplicity and only what was needed for structure, so they developed an aesthetic that we don’t always appreciate today but they tell the story of Melbourne … turning into a modern powerhouse city,” he said.

“If we allow it to be erased totally, we are left with just the remarkably old and very new.”

Sowerwine said while previous planning ministers hadn’t always advocated for postwar towers, the more time passed, the more Melburnians would perceive postwar buildings as a slice of the past “we don’t want to forget”.

“They work in the streetscapes: they don’t detract from the earlier, more ornate buildings next to them, and they are generally of a scale that doesn’t overpower,” he said.

Artur Hajda, vice president of Residents 3000, can see many of these buildings from his 50th-floor apartment in the CBD’s west.

“Yes, they may look grey or dour, but it doesn’t mean there is no value behind them,” he said.

Hajda said he didn’t want 40 years of history to become invisible in the CBD.

“It’s worth protecting,” he said. “We can’t ignore that some trends in architecture didn’t exist.”

The City of Melbourne originally proposed to add protection for 133 buildings, 12 more than what was eventually approved. Postwar buildings were among those removed.

“The question was, did they meet the threshold for protection in the heritage overlay in the central city, where land costs are the highest, attention is highest and government needs to be absolutely sure that it’s meeting the expectations of community when it comes to what is valuable,” Leppert said.

The Stella Maris Seafarer’s Centre at 588-600 Little Collins Street did not make the final cut.

“There’s a very commonly held perspective that it’s an ugly building,” Leppert said.

“There is undeniable heritage value in a building like that, but the threshold wasn’t met because the architectural significance maybe wasn’t high enough.”

Cath Evans, interim Victorian executive director at the Property Council of Australia, has previously warned of higher economic costs for property owners seeking to develop places selected for heritage overlay.

“A heritage listing can impose limitations on development and maintenance, which can block appropriate upgrades of buildings,” Evans said.

Click here to explore the full list of buildings that are receiving heritage protection.

The Morning Edition newsletter is our guide to the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up here.

Most Viewed in National

From our partners

Source: Read Full Article