SKM Ballarat Heritage Value

Analysis of the Value of Heritage to
the City of Ballarat.
31January 2007
Final (Draft) Report
Analysis of the Value of Heritage to the
City of Ballarat
31 January 2007
Final (Draft) Report
Sinclair Knight Merz

ABN 37 001 024 095
590 Orrong Road, Armadale 3143
PO Box 2500
Malvern VIC 3144 Australia
Tel: +61 3 9248 3100
Fax: +61 3 9248 3400

Web: www.skmconsulting.com
COPYRIGHT: T he c onc epts and information contai ned in this document are the property of Sincl air
Knight Merz Pty Ltd. Use or copying of this doc ument in whole or in part without the written permission
of Sincl air Knight Merz c onstitutes an infringement of copyright.
LIMITATION: This report has been prepared on behalf of and for the excl usive us e of Si nclair Knight
Merz Pty Ltd’s Client, and is s ubjec t to and iss ued in c onnection with the provisions of the agreement
between Sinclair Knight Merz and its Client. Sinclair Knight Merz acc epts no liability or res ponsibility
whatsoever for or in r espec t of any us e of or reliance upon this report by any third party.
Contents
1. Executive summary 1
1.1 Introduction of Purpose and objectives 1
1.2 Literature review 1
1.3 Comm unity attitudes 1
1.4 Value of heritage to Ballarat 2
1.5 Com petitive advantage of heritage to Ballarat 2
1.6 Benefits and costs of heritage 2
1.7 Im plications for the City of Ballarat 3
1.8 Centre for classical building 5
2. Introduction 7
2.1 Project purpose and objectives 7
2.2 Background 8
2.3 Methodology 9
3. Literature Review 10
3.1 Summ ary 10
3.2 Description of Ballarat’s heritage 11
3.2.1 State and Local Heritage Provisions 13
3.2.2 Financial Assi stance for Heritage Management 15
3.3 Com parison w ith other Victorian jurisdictions 16
3.3.1 City of Greater Bendigo 16
3.3.2 Traralgon, Latrobe Valley 17
3.3.3 Other State and Local programs 18
3.4 The ‘Value’ of Heritage 20
3.4.1 Public and Private benefits 20
3.4.2 Elemental Breakdown of Heritage Benefits 20
3.4.3 Private benefits of heritage protection 23
3.4.4 Public benefits of heritage protection 24
3.5 A Unique Value 27
3.6 Comm unity contingent valuation survey 27
3.7 Survey responses 29
3.7.1 Survey findings 31
3.8 Conclusion 32
4. Competitive Advantage of Heritage to Ballarat 34

4.1 Com petitive Advantage 34
4.2 Advantage to Existing and Prospective Residents 34
SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ
H:\STRATEGIC PLANNING\Active Strategic Projects\Heritage Benefits Assessment\report\exhibition version\SEBHTB exhibition draft feb 07.docPAGE
i
4.3 Tourism 35
4.4 City of Ballarat 36
4.5 Conclusion 36
5. Benefits and Costs of Heritage to Ballarat 38

5.1 Cost to the comm unity and City of Ballarat: 38
5.2 Cost to individuals: 39
5.3 Benefits of Heritage 41
5.4 Conclusion 44
6. Recommendations on ways to increase heritage benefits to Ballarat46
7. Centre for Classical Buildings 49

7.1 Background to development of a Centre for Classical Building 49
7.2 Concept for a Centre for Classical Building 51
7.2.1 Assessment 53
7.3 Initial Feasibility assessment 54
7.4 Key Im plementation Actions 56
Appendix A Alternative Funding Options 57

A.1 Revolving loan funds 57
Appendix B : Financial Assistance Programs 60

B.1 A summ ary of financial assistance programs at the local government60
Appendix C : Ballarat Provisions 63

C.1 Interim Controls and C58 Planning Scheme Amendment 63
C.2 C58 Amendment Panel Report 64
C.3 Influence of the Burra Charter 66
C.4 The Objectives of Planning in Victoria 68
Appendix D : Community workshops 69
Appendix E : Regional Infrastructure Development Fund 73
Appendix F : Survey Questionnaire 74

F.1 Value of Historic Heritage to Ballarat Survey 74
F.2 Background Inform ation – Ballarat 74
F.3 Background Heritage Inform ation 75
F.4 Survey Instrument 76
F.5 Heritage Protection Options 77
F.5.1 The ‘no change’ option 77
ii
Appendix G : Properties listed under Ballarat Heritage Scheme 85
Appendix H : Workshop Notes 90

H.1 Workshop 1 90
H.2 Workshop 2 91
H.3 Workshop 3 93
H.4 Workshop 4 95
Appendix I : Ballarat Heritage Advisory Committee 99

I.1 CHART ER 99
I.2 MEMBERSHIP 99
I.3 MEETING / M EETING PROCEDURES 100
I.4 STATUTORY RESPONSIBILITIES OF MEMBERS 100
I.5 REPORTING 101
I.6 ADMINIST RATION OF THE LOAN SCHEM E 101
iii
Document history and status
Revision Date issued Reviewed b y Approved b y Date approved Revision t ype
Final 19-09- 2006 RMcIntyre DCotterill 19-09- 2006 Final Draft Report
Distribution of copies
Revision Copy no Quantity Issued to
Printed: 15 Februar y 2007
Last saved: 12 Februar y 2007 02:21 PM
File nam e:
Author: David Cotterill
Project manag er: Roger McIntyre
Name of organisation: City of Ballarat
Name of project: Anal ysis of the Value of Heritage to the City of Ballarat
Name of document: Draft Final Report
Document version: Draft
Project number: SB17883
iv
1. Executive summary
1.1 Introduction of Purpose and objectives
1.2 Literature review
There have been a range of studies that have looked at the value of heritage places. A number of
the more important of these were reviewed in this study and a summary of the findings is provided
in Chapter 3.
The studies have looked at the range of residential, commercial and industrial places including their
role as tourism attractors either directly when adapted as museums or interpretive centres,
accommodation venues, restaurants or as other facilities such as arts centres/galleries or theatres.
With the exception of the more recent Allen Consulting Group study, the analysis has tended to be
relatively unsophisticated, location specific and has either used economic activity as a proxy for
value or has used partial benefit cost analyses based on limited data.
However, the findings have shown that property values have not been negatively affected by
heritage listing with the impacts generally either neutral or positive. Studies of the adaptive reuse of
heritage places as tourism venues and destinations have also tended to show a positive impact. In
addition, while the protection and/or adaptive reuse of a specific residential or commercial building
has similar effects it has tended to be the collective heritage ambience of a systematic listing
strategy to create heritage precincts and streetscapes that has provided the most positive result. This
finding is important in terms of the depth and breadth of available public and private heritage
buildings within and around the Ballarat CBD.
1.3 Comm unity attitudes

From the key stakeholder workshops held as part of the study a general consensus was found that
the Ballarat community appreciate and are proud of their history and heritage including the built
heritage. This appreciation relates to Ballarat offering both a more attractive urban character and
streetscapes as well as its significant restored buildings. It is recognised that the heritage buildings
are an important part of the overall attraction of Ballarat to both visitors and residents. It was also
suggested that the interim heritage overlay tends to protect the streetscape though its control of the
heritage buildings directly.
It was noted that there has been an influx of new residents from Melbourne and these new entrants
are helping to change perceptions and focus older residents’ appreciation of the City’s heritage.
These new entrants are drawn to Ballarat by the City’s range of relatively affordable heritage
homes. The real estate industry representatives indicated that heritage houses sell at a premium but
are still very affordable compared with a similar home in Melbourne.
PAGE 1
In support of this the community survey undertaken as input to this project indicated that Ballarat’s
heritage was the main or a very important reason for living in Ballarat.
There were concerns that heritage protection could impact on commercial developments but this
was not seen as insurmountable. It was noted that some heritage advisors had been very helpful in
facilitating commercial developments
1.4 Value of heritage to Ballarat

The Allen Consulting Group report estimates that the national population aged 18 years and over
would be prepared to pay some $1.6 billion per year for a relatively modest improvement in
heritage protection and improved condition. On a per capita basis this would mean that based on
the current estimated population, the population of Ballarat 18 and over would be prepared to pay
some $6.7 million per annum for a modest improvement in heritage protection.
1.5 Com petitive advantage of heritage to Ballarat

Ballarat is well supplied with a variety of economic, social and environmental advantages that
allow it to positively differentiate its image from that of its immediate competitors of Bendigo and
Geelong. Being located close to major to urban centres and supporting infrastructure, Ballarat is
within easy travelling distance for international, interstate and intrastate tourists. Marketing itself as
the largest inland city in Victoria, Ballarat is able to draw individuals to its region with a
combination of historical tourism based on its heritage buildings and modern conveniences of
shopping malls and entertainment.
The City’s collection of listed properties provide it with a real competitive advantage over
competing regional centres, in terms of brand, identity and cultural soul, all of which attract visitors
and residents alike. However, retention of this advantage requires the City to continue to protect,
maintain and use appropriately its owned buildings and encourage and facilitate protection and use
of other publicly and privately held heritage properties through heritage listing and programs of
renovation or restoration. Investment in promotion of their uniqueness and value to the community
is also necessary to maximise their value, as is encouragement of supporting industries (such as the
development of specialist heritage trades) within the region.
Support for heritage trades could occur at a number of levels and via various mechanisms. At one
level is a possible tie-in with development of a centre for excellence in heritage such as the
proposed Centre for Building Excellence noted below and discusse d in more detail in Chapter 6.
1.6 Benefits and costs of heritage

As noted above the research into the economic and social benefits-costs of heritage properties
while equivocal has not indicated any negative effect on property values. The Allen Consulting
Group estimates that the national population aged 18 and older would be willing to pay $1.6 billion
SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ 2
PAGE
per annum for a relatively modest improvement in heritage protection and improved condition.
However, the Australian property market is dynamic and property values are affected by many
factors including heritage listing so that particular property values may vary over time or
grow/decline at a different rate to an apparently similar property for many reasons outside of issues
related to the type of planning controls.
Based on the findings in this report some general benefit-cost assessments can be made in relation
to heritage properties within the Ballarat region:
Well maintained and marketed heritage listed residential properties are likely to sell at a
premium. The potential value of listed commercial properties is more equivocal but subject to
an appropriate reuse there is unlikely to be a negative impact on value based on heritage
controls alone
Well maintained and marketed heritage properties will generate employment.
Costs will be incurred by owners/ renters of heritage listed properties. While there may be
specific commercial or industrial uses where restoration and/or adaptation costs are higher than
for newer buildings, there are many examples where heritage buildings have been refitted cost
effectively and have provided more attractive corporate addresses
Owners could gain a personal net benefit through the knowledge their property is now more
secure in its appearance as a result of the restrictions and requirements placed on the property
through listing, and
The public will gain a net benefit from Heritage properties through a sense of civic pride in
their city. This benefit will only be maintained if these properties are adequately preserved
either by their private owners or government bodies (Local, State or Federal).
A region with a strong representation of heritage buildings should gain a net benefit from increased
tourism attracted by the heritage properties and precincts. This benefit will be fiscal; tourism
numbers, internal expenditure by local members of the community visiting heritage sites and
cultural; ‘public good’ generated by the presence of heritage properties and the importance they
hold within the community.
1.7 Im plications for the City of Ballarat

The study findings indicate a significant potential benefit to Ballarat from its heritage and history.
Maximising the benefit from this heritage and history will mean protecting it and promoting it in an
innovative and consistent manner. In particular this suggests the City should:
Provide a consistent Vision within a heritage Strategy

Develop a structured heritage marketing and promotion strategy. T his could be developed in
conjunction with Sovereign Hill with the aim of linking Sovereign Hill, the Gold Museum, the
PAGE
Eureka Centre and the City’s historic buildings and laneways to provide a broader story of the
development of Ballarat, Victoria and Australia for visitors and residents. As part of this, the
City’s heritage assets will need further interpretation including the development of appropriate
themes and stories, signage, walks and trails both within the City and linking the City to the
other historic venues
Provide or facilitate the development of a one stop shop in relation to heritage
restoration/maintenance advice and practice
Encourage on-going community education on good practice in heritage protection, restoration
and conservation. T his could include education and training programs, a regular heritage
column in the paper, an advisory talk back program on radio, etc
Ensure prospective purchasers have readily accessible advice on:
Permit requirements
Specific heritage issues such as:
Appropriate works, suppliers and trades people. Council could keep a data base of
accredited trades people. Accreditation would be provided by an appropriate third
party such as the proposed Centre for Classical Buildings and its registered training
organisation partners
Research on the building, photographs, documentation etc
Design issues such as colours etc
Assistance in negotiating contracts and in works supervision, etc
Incentive schemes
Facilitate the development of appropriate third party advisory bodies, and
Provide advocacy for more support for heritage protection and conservation from State and
Federal governments and the private sector.
In addition, Council should consider a broader package of incentives linked to following ‘good
practice’ advice, including possibly:
Rating linked to building conservation-reward good practice

Improved grant/soft loan scheme or other financial incentives
An award scheme that acknowledges business and residents who have done good work.
Awards could cover a range of categories, and
The feasibility of developing a group insurance scheme for owners of heritage buildings.
PAGE
1.8 Centre for classical building
The study considered a number of options to develop a ‘Centre for Classical Building’ (Chapter 7)
as proposed by Jonathon Hall and the University if Ballarat and concluded a collaborative model
involving a number of partners could be established reasonably quickly and cost effectively and
would provide a number of benefits.
Partners in this model could include:
The City of Ballarat

The University and potentially other education and training providers
Heritage advisory service providers and product suppliers, and
Relevant state and federal government agencies.
The proposed collaborative model could include, although not limited to:
Maintain a register of qualified professionals and trades people and advise on the available
firms/individuals to meet specific needs
Act as a clearing house for a range of issues including:
Relevant education and training programs
Materials suppliers
Other service providers
Eligibility and access to funding schemes.
Facilitate the development and delivery of education and training programs by partner
organisations. This could include:
Identification of need and development of business cases
Promotion of programs
Facilitate the development and delivery of heritage advisory services
Provide a front end to a heritage one stop shop facilitating access to relevant Council officers
and providing relevant information
Facilitate the hosting of relevant conferences and exhibitions, and
Encourage the establishment of new heritage businesses including specific support for the
City’s Economic Development Unit including information for business case development.
The advantages of the proposed model are that:
PAGE
It does not require a significant building with the consequent capital and more importantly on-
going maintenance and operating costs although it leaves the option open for acquisition or
development of a building late
It potentially could be operated with no more than two full time staff initially, and
It operates in partnership with a range of specialist service providers one or more of whom
could find it advantageous to provide some in-kind support including staff and office space.
The key benefits of establishing a Centre include the potential to:
Reduce heritage restoration and maintenance cost through ready access to appropriate skills,
experience and materials
Develop skills and experience that can be ‘exported’ beyond the Ballarat region, and
Develop a significant and at this stage unique heritage industry over time.
PAGE
2. Introduction
2.1 Project purpose and objectives
The purpose of this Study is to describe the economic, social and cultural benefits of heritage to the
City of Ballarat. From this, recommendations designed to assist Council and the Ballarat
community assess the likely value of future efforts to retain, protect, expand and enhance the
heritage infrastructure and associated activities in Ballarat.
The City of Ballarat aims to maximise the development of the City, its people and assets. T here is
a multitude of views on the best balance between the various ways in which this could be done.
The potential of heritage, and its contribution to tourism, satisfaction with quality of life and the
attractiveness of the region to those who may be evaluating relocation options is increasingly being
recognised.
Part of the impetus for this study was the World Conference of the League of Historic Cities1 ,
which was hosted by Ballarat in 2006. As heritage issues become more prominent around the
world, this event generated significant national and international focus on Ballarat. As part of its
preparation for this event, Ballarat is seeking to document the importance of heritage for its City.2
Council already has a number of initiatives in place to protect existing heritage infrastructure,
including:
Protecting heritage places under the planning scheme, including creating relevant local policies
and reviewing the heritage implications of development approval requests, particularly where
demolition is proposed.
Employing two people providing3 Heritage advice including:
Relevant advice to statutory planners, Council Officers and property owners
Promoting heritage issues and educating the community
Advising on policy development, and
Administering the Ballarat Heritage incentive scheme.
Maintaining heritage buildings owned and/or operated by the City of Ballarat
1
October 29th – November 1st - http://www.leaguehistoricalcities-ballarat.com
2
Ballarat City Council recently lodged a submission to the 2006 Productivity Commission Enquiry into Heritage2 which outlines these
benefits in a general sense.
3
Ballarat Council currently employ a full time Heritage adviser/ urban planner whose focus is primarily on education and policy . They
also have a separate heritage adviser however their role is only budgeted at 0.5. Their primary role is to provide comment on planning
applications
PAGE
Undertaking capital works as a result of measures/processes to ensure that works respect the
heritage values of various public areas
Renovating buildings in the City’s ownership. e.g. ‘Her Majesty’s T heatre’ and the former
Ballarat Mining Exchange, and
Managing a ‘Ballarat Heritage Special Committee’ that the City’s financial incentives and
interest free loans scheme.
2.2 Background
Analysing the value of heritage to any one city is a considerable challenge. T he sheer breath of
opinion and personal interest that exist within all societies will ensure that rarely is a happy
medium found when assessing virtues and detractions of heritage properties. Additionally, one
must ensure they do not to limit the scope of their investigations to the modern desire for monetary
returns, as a city’s heritage will likely encompass so much more. As noted in the Burra Charter4 ;
Places of cultural
significance enrich people’s
lives, often providing a deep
and inspirational sense of
connection to community and
landscape. Places of cultural
significance reflect the
diversity of our communities,
telling us about who we are
and the past that has formed
us and the Australian
landscape5 .
Ballarat joined the League of Historic Cities in 1994 and is one of the ‘oldest’ member cities. By
joining the League of Historic Cities6 , the City of Ballarat has signalled over more than ten years
that it not only recognises the importance that its heritage and architecture have in defining its
image to the wider community, but that this heritage is much valued and that will remain a central
element and theme of the City’s future. By hosting this conference this year, the council has
successfully raised community knowledge and profile of this membership.
4
Document that sets out the principles, processes and standards for the conservation of the cultural environment within Australia
5
http://www.nsw.nationaltrust.org.au/burracharter.html
6
4th World Conference of the League of Historic Cities – Ky oto, Japan - 1994
PAGE
In this study, assessments are made of the economic, social and cultural benefits that heritage
properties within Ballarat bring the community. The economic benefits accrue both directly in
terms of visitor expenditure, and indirectly on complementary developments such as restaurants,
cafes and other entertainment venues. T he latter includes key cultural facilities, such as Her
Majesty’s Theatre.
The aesthetic value of heritage to Ballarat is also discussed. T he aesthetic character and identity of
a City contributes to the overall sense of satisfaction and wellbeing of residents as well as of
potential migrants’ perceptions of towns and cities in their determination of where to live and work.
As numerous strategies are implemented at a State level to increase population growth in Provincial
Victoria, competition for highly skilled workers is intense and intact heritage precincts within
Ballarat gives the City a distinctive identity compared to other regional growth centres. This feature
was recognised in the City’s ‘Economic Development Strategy’ (2003):
“ The urban form of Ballarat will have significant bearing on the future economic
performance of the city . . . Decisions of individuals and families regarding residence
and business location are influenced by the quality of the urban environments and
amenity . . . Ballarat has a very significant and historic urban core with supporting
residential, commercial and industrial areas. It has an excellent legacy of open space
reserves with recreational facilities and other physical and social facilities and
infrastructure that make it a significant and attractive regional centre.”
This recognition of the importance of heritage to communities was confirmed in a series of case
studies undertaken across Victoria as part of a broader Economic Benefits of Heritage study that SKM
undertook for Heritage Victoria (2000)7 .
2.3 Methodology
The methodology applied in this study includes:
A literature review
An examination of what legal framework exists to protect and manage Ballarat’s Heritage
properties
A heritage survey of Ballarat residents and visitors, and
Comparison of valuation data between Ballarat and other similar regional nodes.
7
‘The Economics of Heritage Restoration’, D Cotterill, K M and T Nohel
PAGE
3. Literature Review
3.1 Summ ary
Heritage has been described variously as “ what we inherit” and the heritage value of a property as
its “ aesthetic, historic, scientific, social or spiritual value for past, present or future generations”8 .
Based on an extensive amount of literature reviewed, it is concluded that:
Market Values
Residential buildings that are subject to heritage restrictions are not, when all other variables
are held equal, unduly affected by such limitations. As heritage controls within Victoria do not
restrict property development or demolition, but rather place a responsibility on the proprietor
to secure necessary approvals, owners still maintain a considerable degree of flexibility in
managing their properties
Heritage protection tends to have a positive impact on ‘notable’ buildings. As such premises
are presumably already viewed as unique or ‘special’, protection of their features will generate
a premium that cannot be replicated in other properties
In general, residential property prices are more likely to be affected by external economic
factors such as interest rates, property location, urban sprawl and regional population growth
rather than by the any perceived limitations that heritage listing may place on the property.
Often there is no discernable change in value following the introduction of controls
Property values in towns with more extensive heritage controls tend to be higher than similar
regional townships without such controls. It is difficult to quantify whether this is reflective of
the positive benefit of heritage controls or a result of a proactive Council which may have
implemented other supporting policies within their area of influence
Studies on commercial properties have been more equivocal. Some have indicated that
commercial heritage properties generated lower capital returns over time while other studies
inferred that differences in values were, as with residential properties, more related to external
economic factors including timing in the market cycle, overall project risks etc. According to
the literature, the central difference between commercial and private heritage estates is the
expectations placed upon such properties by their owners. Where properties are owned for
residential purposes only, any financial return on investment will be observed as capital
appreciation over time. Commercial property owners however are required to gain maximum
use of their land and buildings in order to generate not just capital returns, but other income
streams as well. T his income could be affected by restrictions on size and development of the
site. This is best observed in those commercial properties where the chief business entity is not
8
Allen Consulting Group, ‘Thoughts on the “When” and “How” of government historic heritage protection – Research Report 1.
PAGE
the heritage aspect of the property itself, but other non-related business. In these circumstances
the heritage listing may affect the owner’s ability to gain full economic value from the building
and land, and
Positive outcomes are considered more likely when property owners have clear guidelines of
their rights and obligations as owners of heritage properties. In conjunction with this, proactive
council/ government facilitation can allow owners to better appreciate not just the importance
of their property, but also what added value can be realised with cosmetic improvements to the
property or adequate maintenance. By providing both commercial and residential owners such
structures, the decision making ability of the property owner is increased.
Quantified Public Benefits

In addition to private capital returns, heritage restoration has strong economic benefits to the
public. Analysis of the Victoria Heritage Program9 found that funding leverage1 0 over the
course of the program was measured at 3.4. Therefore, for every $1 of funding that the State
government committed through Heritage Victoria as a financial allocation to projects, the total
restoration project generated $3.40 worth of financial benefits to the immediate community
In one of the most comprehensive studies of its type, Allen Consulting undertook a large scale
study of public willingness to pay for heritage protection to determine the ‘non-use’ cultural,
social, educational and other values that people place in heritage protection generally. The
study found that there is a measurable willingness to pay for increased protection of heritage
properties ($105 per person per year to tighten development controls to increase the number of
heritage properties protected).
3.2 Description of Ballarat’s heritage

Ballarat’s stock of heritage properties is one of the most extensive and best preserved in Australia.
There are some 140 properties and locations1 1 (including mines and public monuments) located
within Ballarat listed on the Victorian Heritage Register, which provides the highest level of
protection for heritage places and objects in Victoria. Several of the best known heritage buildings
in Ballarat are:
The Ballarat Railway Station. Located on Ballarat’s renowned Lydiard Street, the main
structure was built in 1862 ( the clock tower and portico were added in 1891) and is noted for
its classic architecture
9
http://www.heritage.vic.gov.au/page.asp?ID=76
10
Funding leverage is an indicator of how much additional finance is contributed to restoration projects other than funding from the
Heritage Victoria restoration programs.
11
A complete list is presented in Appendix F
PAGE
Craig’s Hotel. Also located on Lydiard Street, the building was constructed in 1862 and once
described by Mark T wain as 't he pride of Ballarat'
He r Majesty’s Theatre , built in 1875 and the city' s premier performing arts facility, is the
oldest intact purpose-built theatre building in Australia
Other notable buildings and areas including
the Ballarat Botanical Gardens, the
Ballarat Fine Art Galle ry and the Eureka
Stockade12 .
The largest number of properties on the State

Heritage Register are historical mining sites and
associated buildings, as shown in the following
table.
Table 1: Ballarat Properties listed on the State Heritage Register (2006)
Type Count Examples
West Newington Gold Mining Site,
Historical mining sites & associated buildings 61
Tinworth'
s Mine
Others (memorials, monuments, religious Eureka Historic Precinct, Mechanics Institute,
46
buildings, schools, f arming & manufacturing) Buniny ong Botanical Gardens
Ballarat Fire Station, Buniny ong Town Hall,
Public buildings 19
Ballarat Town Hall
Commercial / retail buildings 8 Former Union Bank Building
Residences 8 Bishops Palace, Ercildoune Homestead
Source: Heritage Victoria
These examples of heritage architecture, although outstanding in their own right, do not however
solely represent the full value of heritage history that Ballarat holds. With hundreds of properties
influenced by various levels of heritage protection, the value of Ballarat’s heritage buildings is
multifaceted; in purely fiscal terms they are an important draw card for both national and
international tourists to the region1 3 whilst also providing the city with a brand and identity which
offers a much sought after competitive advantage to lure new residents vis-à-vis other comparable
Victorian regional centres. As with other resources that are in finite supply and not easily
substituted, the value of Ballarat’s heritage properties, should continue to increase in line with or
faster than other comparable, but non-heritage, properties.
12
Heritage Listing and Property Valuations in Victoria – Heritage Victoria
13
The Australian Productivity Commission notes Ballarat’s heritage-based identity as helping it attract over 2 million visitors each y ear,
with a total visitor expenditure of over $300 million.
PAGE
Culturally, the value of heritage properties is difficult to quantify as each observer will attach their
own values/ significance to a property. However it is accepted that in addition to some of the finest
examples of Victorian period architecture, these buildings provide the population a tangible link to
Ballarat’s past. Their individuality and uniqueness within the fabric of the community in which
they are found provides them, and their owners, a point of differentiation that modern properties
and developments simply cannot replicate.14
3.2.1 State and Local Heritage Provisions

Heritage, as a function of legislation, is mandated by all levels of government in Australia with the
role in the identification, management and protection of heritage places shared between local, state
and Commonwealth Governments. In Victoria, Heritage places of state significance are listed on
the Victorian Heritage Register1 5 , with the Heritage Council of Victoria (HCV) being the expert
statutory body for determining matters relating to cultural heritage. Between them, HCV and
Heritage Victoria are responsible for maintaining the heritage register and issuing heritage permits
for the development of heritage places of state significance under the relevant Heritage Act (1995).
Places selected as having significance to a certain locality can be protected by a Heritage Overlay
(detailed later), which are contained within local council planning schemes and assist in protecting
the heritage of a municipality. Municipal Councils are responsible for designating places of local
significance and issuing planning permits for the development of heritage places under the
Planning and Environment Act (1987). The Planning and Environment Act (along with the
Victorian Planning Provisions introduced in 1996), provides the framework by which local
councils develop and enact planning provisions state wide, thus providing consistency across
Victoria, generally, in the way that heritage is considered and controlled.
Broadly speaking, Council will develop a Local Planning Policy (LPP) or a policy statement of
intent or expectation. It states what the responsible authority will do in specified circumstances or
the responsible authority' s expectation of what should happen. An LPP gives council an
opportunity to state its view of a planning issue and its intentions for an area. In the context of
14
An important shortcoming of the Council’s efforts to document and protect its heritage stock, is the lack detailed knowledge of
heritage assets outside of the immediate Ballarat city locale. The result of this is an imbalance of information and knowledge across the
Council portfolio that sees many listed heritage properties having little if any information recorded about their heritage relevance or
importance. The original decision by Council to concentrate its research efforts on the central business area and immediate surrounds
will require a concerted effort study to rectify , but is achievable and when complete will provide the council with a more complete
picture of their heritage endowment.
15
http://www.heritage.vic.gov.au/page_239.asp?ID=239
PAGE
heritage, it explains why a place is worthy of heritage protection and the basis of Council
protection. The LPP will contain:
Zones: Standard zones for statewide application are included in the Victoria Planning
Provisions (VPP). The zones allow a wide range of uses for which an application may be
considered, reducing the need for ad-hoc amendments and site specific provisions. The
designation of zones may be influenced by heritage assets, e.g. community uses, recreation,
etc.
O ve rlays: As with the zones, standard overlays for statewide application are included in the
VPP. The requirements of any overlays apply in addition to the requirements of the zone, and
neither is viewed as more important than the other. Generally, overlays apply to a single issue
or related set of issues, such as heritage, flood risk, vegetation, etc. Overlays must have a
strategic justification and be linked to the MSS and local planning policies. Many overlays
have schedules to specify local objectives and requirements. Generally, overlays may only
make requirements about development, not use. Overlays do not change the intent of the zone,
but they are the primary tool for designating and controlling heritage.
The municipal council must provide the local planning policy content, (including a Municipal
Strategic Statement) and select the appropriate zones and overlays from the VPP, for inclusion in
their planning scheme. It is up to local councils, then, to undertake heritage reviews and designate
heritage properties and precincts that are then incorporated into local planning requirements
following State government review and acceptance.
The Burra Charter, adopted by Australia ICOMOS1 6 in 1979 and most recently revised in 1999, also
provides guidance for the conservation and management of places of cultural significance (cultural
heritage places), and is based on the knowledge and experience of Australia ICOMOS members.
The Charter sets a standard of practice for those who provide advice, make decisions about, or
undertake works to places of cultural significance, including owners, managers and custodians. The
Charter advocates a cautious approach to change recommending that with any alterations to the
heritage property, one should do as much as necessary to care for the place and to make it useable,
but otherwise alters the property as little as possible so that its cultural significance is retained.
All Council planning schemes in Victoria include a heritage overlay. Ballarat has under 200 sites /
precincts listed in its heritage overlay which is in the middle range for Councils. A majority of
Councils utilise precincts as well as individual controls.
16
International Council on Monuments and Sites
PAGE
Mt Alexander, Hepburn and Melbourne have over 900 sites / precincts listed and T owong,
Wodonga, Melton and LaTrobe have less than 10 sites or precincts listed. 22.5% of Victorian
Councils have between 150 to 250 sites / precincts listed in the heritage overlay. Appendix J
includes the list of heritage overlays in different municipalities.
Ballarat has two incorporated plans which accompany the heritage overlay control and outline a
range of works that are exempted from permit control under certain circumstances. No other
Council in Victoria has an incorporated plan which is as wide reaching.
3.2.2 Financial Assistance for Heritage Management

Protection of heritage properties is a fundamental precondition for the future sustainability of
heritage structures within Victoria. However just as a heritage listing on a property can potentially
add a premium to the sale price of the property it also places obligations on the owner to maintain
the property to certain standards1 7 . These standards can be potentially expensive as materials and
tradesman qualified to repair or renovate such properties can be difficult to find. Recommendations
to address this shortage of skilled tradespersons are discusse d later in this report.
In order to assist owners in managing heritage values , Heritage Victoria, as part of the Department
of Sustainability and Environment, provides financial assistance in the form of low-interest loans,
interest-free loans, direct grants, remission or deferral of municipal and water rates and land tax, for
the conservation of any heritage place or object listed on the Victorian Heritage Register, or
protected under a council planning scheme. All owners, or applicants authorised by owners, can
apply for this assistance at any time.
In the City of Ballarat, these loans are available through the Ballarat Council and its heritage low
interest loan scheme, which has been managed by City of Ballarat for 10 years 18 . The loan money,
generally in the order of $5,000 to $10,000 per successful applicant, is sourced from a fund which
was originally seeded by a grant to the City of Ballarat from the State Government of Victoria. The
types of work eligible for funding generally fall into two categories:
Works that enhance the appearance of a location. This can include:

Reconstruction of a front verandah or fence
External repainting in heritage colours, and
Restoration of interiors that will be seen by the community.
Works that repair and maintain the place so that it stays in existence, for example:
17
Refer Appendix C for Burra Charter requirements.
18
Council also has access to some $200,000 for Heritage Verandahs,. However as this scheme has a much wider application it has not
been assessed in this report.
PAGE
Restumping, rewiring, recladding the roof or walls
Chimney repairs, and
Improvements to drainage.
The City of Ballarat has previously made available $200,000 in grants under its Heritage Verandah
Incentives Fund program. Small grants were made available to commercial building owners in the
CBA to upgrade the façade of their buildings.
Additionally, funds are available through the National Heritage Investment Initiative, an Australian
Government grants programme that provides assistance to restore and conserve Australia' s most
important historic heritage places.
From 2005-06 to 2008-09, $10.5 million will be available for projects that restore and conserve
Australia'
s most important historic heritage places. Priority is given to those locations included in
the National Heritage List1 9 .
A separate scheme which local councils across Australia have entered into includes agreements
with private owners where a legally-binding contract intended to ensure the long-term conservation
of a heritage place is created. The agreements are generally signed in perpetuity and are therefore
binding on current and future owners. These agreements set out approaches to restoring and/or
managing the property, and may provide the owner with access to incentives such as rate
remissions, land tax reductions, grants or planning concessions2 0 .
The range of schemes available and the eligibility requirement could be promoted by the City on its
Web site and through its publications including My Ballarat.
3.3 Com parison w ith other Victorian jurisdictions

3.3.1 City of Greater Bendigo
The City of Greater Bendigo shares many of Ballarat’s heritage characteristics, with the town of
Bendigo developed during the same broad phase of gold rush-related population growth and having
been protected since under a similar approach to heritage listing. The value of heritage is
recognised by Council, and with economic and social benefits in mind, comprehensive studies of
heritage assets have been prepared to prioritise their protection and enhancement.
In 1992, the City of Greater Bendigo council commissioned the Bendigo Eaglehawk Heritage
Study 21 which identified heritage precincts and individually important buildings for inclusion in
19
http://www.deh.gov.au/heritage/national
20
Appendix B contains a list of other participating councils and heritage schemes currently in operation across Australia,
21
http://www.bendigo.vic.gov.au/Page/page.asp?Page_Id=112&h=0
PAGE
their Planning Scheme. The study identified over 4,000 individual buildings that could be
considered for heritage listing. In addition to this, the Bendigo City council has been progressively
funding further heritage studies in other regions of their municipality to ensure that a complete
record of heritage assets is prepared and important places protected.
The council offers financial assistance in the form of a no interest loan to the value of half of the
cost of heritage restoration projects. The restrictions the council place on this loan are instructive in
the way they highlight what restrictions are placed on owners who do take on one of these loans.
These include:
The loan is repayable over a three year period in equal instalments
If the loan is $5,000 or greater, Council will take out security (a caveat or mortgage) over the
property to ensure repayment of funds advanced
If the property is sold during the loan period, all funds will be required to be repaid to Council
at sale
The loan will be subject to the approval of the Heritage Advisory Committee. Council' s
Heritage Advisor will prepare a report on each application for financial assistance for
consideration by the committee, and
If works are undertaken at the property with assistance provided, it is expected that the
property will be maintained at a standard satisfactory to the Heritage Advisory Committee
during the five year period. Failure to maintain the property would result in the cancellation of
the agreement and the immediate repayment of the funds.
Greater Bendigo also offers a range of information about advisory services and links to a trade and
services directory on their website. Bendigo has over 600 sites or precincts listed in its schedule to
the heritage overlay.
3.3.2 Traralgon, Latrobe Valley

A number of heritage surveys have been undertaken in the Latrobe Valley in the past, including the
Latrobe Valley Heritage Study (1990) and the Traralgon Heritage Study prepared in 2001.
However it was found that neither of these studies incorporated a comprehensive understanding of
the heritage sites across the whole of the municipality.
In August 2004, the Latrobe City Council appointed Context Pty Ltd to undertake the Latrobe
Heritage Study, with the intention of drafting a planning scheme amendment that would introduce
statutory controls for protection of significant sites. In addition to this, it was expected that
recommendations would be made for the conservation and management of identified places that
would form the basis of a Conservation Program. At the time of writing, this study has been
completed and approved by council, and recommendations for amendments to the Latrobe
PAGE
Planning Scheme drafted. Planning Scheme Overlays will be drafted later in 2006, and the
package of amendments is to be advertised for public comment and considered by council in 2006 -
20072 2 .
3.3.3 City of Melbourne

The City of Melbourne operates the Melbourne Restoration Fund which is available to certain
metropolitan Councils. City of Melbourne has the third highest number of controls in Victoria and
includes information on the sites in a web searchable platform called i-heritage.
3.3.4 Mt Alexander
Mt Alexander has the greatest number of sites/precincts listed in Victoria. Mt Alexander has no
information about heritage adviser services or incentive funds currently available on its web page.
3.3.5 Hepburn Shire Council

Hepburn Shire has the second greatest number of sites / precincts listed in its heritage overlay.
Hepburn’s web page provides information to the public about its advisory service, loan scheme and
advisory committee on its web page.
3.3.6 Other State and Local programs

State governments and local councils around Australia have enacted a varying array of mechanisms
and schemes to protect their heritage resources. Some examples of grant funding programs and
activities institute include:
• Ne w South Wale s He ritage Office – operates the NSW Heritage Incentives Program
which supports the community' s identification, conservation, management and promotion
of NSW heritage. It has 12 targeted programs being; 1. Conservation Works; 2. Land Tax
and Local Rebates for Private Owners ; 3. Kick Start for major heritage funding appeals; 4.
Conservation Management Plans; 5. Special Purpose Grants and Loans; 6. Interpretation
for major heritage sites; 7. Heritage Education and Promotion; 8. T hematic Studies and
Nominations; 9. Aboriginal Heritage Program For projects protecting, conserving or
promoting NSW Aboriginal; 10. Local Government Heritage Management For heritage
advisory services, heritage studies and local heritage funds; 11. Heritage Partnership
Agreements Multi-year funding to community organisations for agreed programs; 12.
Local History and Archive Projects Funding
City of Adelaide - Operates a Heritage Incentives Scheme which provides grants to assist in
the conservation of privately-owned local heritage or state heritage places within the Adelaide
22
Peter Quigley , Manager Development Planning and Alison Tay lor Latrobe Council. Personal communication 7 August 2006
PAGE
City Council area. Operating since the 1980s the scheme provides up to $1,000,000 a year in
discretionary grants, with the maximum grant capped at 20% of the cost of a restoration
project. The fund also provides assistance for design and documentation work relating to
heritage values. Separately, the SA Department for Environment and Heritage administers
grants for heritage projects through the State Heritage Grants Program
Weste rn Australia – T he State Heritage Grants program provides funds to assist with
conservation planning and conservation work on heritage places. This program is primarily
aimed at assisting local governments, community groups, organisations and private owners to
undertake heritage reconstruction or renovation works. Priority is given to those places that
already have statutory protection, either through the State Register of Heritage Places or a local
authority’s T own Planning Scheme. Since 1997, the program has assisted more than 400
conservation projects and provided approximately $5.8 million in grant funding. In 2004 more
than $1 million was allocated to help protect 40 Western Australian heritage properties
City of Perth - This cities Heritage Grants program offers funding of up to $30,000 to support
heritage projects within the city. Funding is only allocated if a number of preconditions are
satisfied, including the need for the work to be undertaken in accordance with the provisions of
the Burra Charter; owner endorsement of entry in the Register of Heritage Places; regular
progress reports; acknowledgment of the source of funding and the provision of
invoices/receipts and details of expenditure. Grant recipients also required to appoint a
conservation consultant to ensure that the work is carried out in a way which is sympathetic to
the heritage values of the place
The Western Australian Lotteries Commission Heritage program is another example.
Established in 1994 to assist in the preservation of buildings and places of heritage value, the
fund has so far provided more than $6 million to assist with heritage conservation over a five
year period. Program guidelines indicate that priority funding is given to those projects that
enhance facilities for the local community; house community groups; serve as meeting places
or provide significant economic advantages to the community2 3 . It places highest priorities in
funding projects which have, or are related to:
Urgent works to stabilise a heritage building/structure
Projects that form an integral part of the cultural significance of a conservation area
Heritage buildings and structures with legal protection, and
Publication of rare material related to the functions of the Heritage Council.
23
Further examples of assistance programs available are to be found in Appendix A
PAGE
3.4 The ‘Value’ of Heritage
3.4.1 Public and Private benefits
The inherent value of heritage is able to be decomposed into several separate elements, some of
which are ‘private’ or accrue to an individual or group only, such as those which accrue to the title
holder of a property, and others which are ‘public’, - benefits which are not limited to private
entities, but which contribute to an overall advantage or benefit to the public at large, via a
contribution to community character, satisfaction, identity and well being. A local example of this
would be the community benefit of employment generated by heritage tourism. The recent
Productivity Commission Report2 4 into Heritage Conservation in Australia devotes a significant
amount of attention to the question of private and public benefits and costs of heritage
conservation, and concludes that a significant element of the value equation is indeed public, and
hence regulation of sector (via planning controls and financial incentives) is justified on the basis
of the existence of ‘market failure’. The market failure in this case is a classic case of external or
spillover benefits from the private to public realm in heritage preservation – where the total
benefits of a property’s preservation are generally above those captured by the private owner and
hence if only private benefits are considered, an under-provision towards heritage will occur.
As described in Section 5 below, in many instances, the impact of heritage listing may be negative
for private property holders, and at the same time, be positive for the public at large – with the
latter perhaps exceeding the former by a large margin in cases where a property is of state or
national significance, and in the case of Ballarat there are large number of properties which fall into
this category.
The question of the overall ‘value’ of heritage is therefore complicated by the need to consider both
private and public impacts of heritage listing, and consider the situation where private and public
benefits may indeed be contradictory.
3.4.2 Elemental Breakdown of Heritage Benefits

Heritage properties, like all properties, generate streams of value in a number of ways. For their
occupants, they provide a space to live or work, and for their owners, perhaps provide a capital
return on their investment. In addition to these, heritage properties may embody a representation of
a city’s past, displaying the various inspirations and styles present in the district over time, from
which other stakeholders, such as visitors or residents from ‘across town’ draw benefit, which is
less tangible or measurable than the personal or financial benefits described above, but yet
important as they may accrue to far larger numbers of people.
24
www.heritage.wa.gov.au/pdfs/pubList/section2/y our_guide_to_assistance.pdf
PAGE
The range of values may be expressed as a spectrum, ranging from ‘use-related’ to ‘non-use-
related’, or from direct to indirect, applying a methodology or taxonomy of valuation that has been
applied to environmental and social resources for several decades, and more recently has been
considered appropriate for heritage and cultural assets.
The total range or spectrum of values is captured by the concept of willingness to pay, and in their
recent work on the subject, Allen Consulting describes the economic value of heritage properties
as;
“ Values (that) are measured in terms of an individual’s willingness to pay (to improve
or protect a situation) or accept compensation (for an expected loss). For historic
heritage places to have economic value, a person must be willing to pay an amount of
money to protect the place or willing to accept an amount of money as compensation
for its loss”2 5
According to Serageldin 2 6 , the total economic value held within heritage property can be broken
down into the following sub-categories as shown overleaf.
This figure indicates that that total economic value is not just that financial (left hand side) element
which may be captured in a market transaction, but also includes significant intangible elements
which may not be captured by any party to a property transaction, such as historic legacy and
existence value, which are typically ‘public’ benefits. As these are generally unlimited by
geography, they may therefore accrue to a large number of people with the result that the public
benefits of heritage preservation may may be significantly higher than the private benefit which is
received by a property owner or tenant.
25
Ibid
26
Serageldin 1999, Very Special Places: The Architecture and Economics of Intervening in Historic Cities
PAGE
Figure 1: Historic Heritage: Categories of Value
Source: Valuing the P riceless: The Value of Historic Heritage in Australia, Allen Consulting Group, 2005, P age 5
As an example, buildings or precincts with significant regional or national cultural or historical

importance can have non-use values such as existence value for many people, despite the fact that
they may never have, and may never plan to, visit them. Despite being largely invisible, these
values are legitimately held, and should be included in the overall calculation of the importance and
value of the assets to which they relate. Such values are often only captured and measured via a
willingness to pay survey, or similar response measures. An estimate based on this approach is set
out below. As noted this type of valuation is designed to take into account all categories of value
noted in figure 1 above. As such they provide a better reflection of the private and public benefits
of heritage protection are described below.
PAGE
An estim ate of the value of heritage to Ballarat
The Allen Consulting Group undertook a national willingness to pay survey. From this survey they
estimate that the national population 18 and over years old would be prepared to pay some $1.6
billion per year for a relatively modest improvement in heritage protection and improved condition.
Assuming the population of Ballarat has similar characteristics to the general population it is not
unreasonable to ‘transfer’ the results estimated from the national survey to Ballarat on a
proportional population basis. On this relative per capita basis this would mean that based on the
current estimated population, the population of Ballarat 18 and over would be prepared to pay some
$6.7 million per annum for a modest improvement in heritage protection.
In practice the Ballarat population is slightly different with a slightly higher proportion of younger
and older people and slightly less in the middle age cohorts. In addition it differs in other
characteristics such as education and income. However, the estimate provides a broad indication of
the order of value of heritage to Ballarat.
3.4.3 Private benefits of heritage protection

In the recent Productivity Commission analysis of Heritage Conservation2 7 it is acknowledged that
heritage listing has an equivocal influence on property values. On one hand, heritage listing of a
property can provide a greater degree of certainty regarding a property’s appearance and even
internal structure, and may prevent inappropriate adjacent development, but at the same time
heritage listing may prevent desirable improvements to a property’s functionality, or raise the cost
of any external cosmetic or basic repairs above those for a similar property. However, in many, if
not most, cases it is rare for heritage listing to place any internal controls on a building so that
prevention of required improvements to a property’s functionality is unlikely. Internal controls are
only likely where there is an internal feature of particular heritage significance.
The Productivity Commission report refers to a number of submissions from the public with
examples of both rises and declines in property value following heritage protection, and concludes
that the ‘whole is greater than the sum of the parts’ in the case of at least the financial benefits of
heritage preservation.
How listing impacts on property values will depend on the extent to which development controls
associated with listing impose opportunity costs and offset any potential benefits of being accorded
official heritage status. It is therefore necessary to distinguish between the [single property]
certification role of listing, and its possible role in preserving future neighbourhood amenity, and
any development and/or use restrictions. It may be the case that, where neighbourhood amenity is
valued, heritage listing ensures the continued preservation of the neighbourhood’s character and so
27
Conservation of Australia’s Heritage Places, Productivity Commission Report 37, April 2006
PAGE
enhances value. However, in cases where development pressures are important, the private costs of
listing may outweigh the benefits. (Productivity Commission, 2006, p.141-2)
In the City of Ballarat, there are several heritage precincts of varying size and homogeneity, some
of which extend to portions of streets and others entire neighbourhoods. The addition of another
‘link in a chain’ of properties is likely to contribute to neighbourhood amenity to a greater extent
than ‘the first link’ property may.
In the following table, the sale value of selected residential properties in the Ballarat region were
recorded over the period of 2002 to 2004. During this time, residential site and capital improved
values (CIV) in the central Ballarat area covered by the heritage overlay rose by just over 47%.
This compares to a closely similar figure for all residential properties across Ballarat of 46%. T hese
results are displayed below and show that the growth in the value of properties over the 2002-04
periods has not differed due to the presence of a heritage overlay. T he difference between changes
in CIV and site value is to be expected, as Heritage value is more closely aligned with buildings
and structures than land per se.
Table 2: Av erage grow th in values in residential property by type, Ballarat 2002-2004
Type 2002 2004 Growth

Site Value Site Value 2002-04 % 2002-04 %
CIV $ CIV $
$ $ CIV Site
Residential property –
70,211 8,105 103,291 11,596 47.1% 43.1%
on heritage overlays
Residential property
106,250 11,664 155,520 17,046 46.4% 46.1%
(total)
Source: SKM Analysis - CIV (Capital Improved Value)
These results indicate the limit to which private benefit can be claimed with respect to heritage
protection, particularly in environments where trades are in relatively short supply thus raising the
importance of renovation costs in real estate valuation, and the differential cost of works to heritage
properties are increasing faster than for the overall. These numbers indicate that for private
property holders, heritage has perhaps both benefits and costs – benefits in terms of attachment to a
valued past and aesthetic, and costs in terms of the real, expected costs of works and future sale
value.
3.4.4 Public benefits of heritage protection

The public benefits of heritage protection are separable from the private benefits, and relate to
community wellbeing, identity, cultural cohesiveness, and ‘public aesthetics’ as well as the broader
‘existence values’ noted above, which are above those benefits received by tenants or owners of
privately held heritage property.
PAGE
In addition to this ‘spillover public benefit’ related to privately-owned property, there is also public
benefit from publicly-held property, of which there are numerous examples across Ballarat,
including halls, hotels, monuments, theatres, places of worship and open space areas.
These benefits may translate into quantifiable measures on a number of levels – they have a
positive influence on tourist visitation (and hence the income received from tourists which is
valued at $300 million per annum) as well as a positive influence on migration to the City and the
economic and social benefits which are associated with it. . For example, the University of
Ballarat has estimated that 40% of the visitors to the heritage weekend held in October 2006 came
from outside Ballarat. They also estimated an economic impact to Ballarat in the order of $170,000
in additional income to the City. Of the people surveyed, 64% stated that appreciation of heritage
was the dominant overall attraction of the weekend.
Migrant Attraction
It is extremely difficult to estimate how important heritage is in attracting people to a region.

According to a recent study by the Ballarat Economic Development Unit, the main reasons given
for people choosing Ballarat are due to lifestyle, employment opportunities and as the direct result
of a job offer. Other factors that are perhaps likely to influence will include infrastructure provision
and access to education. The analysis also showed that new residents to Ballarat were principally
originating from regional Victoria (33%) and metropolitan Melbourne (32%) while significant
numbers are also moving here from interstate (20%) and overseas (15%).
The Ballarat Value of Heritage survey conducted as part of this project suggested that some 6% of
respondents rated Ballarat’s heritage as the main reason they live in Ballarat and a further 25%
indicated it was an important part of their choice to live in Ballarat. T his compares with 57% who
rated the City’s heritage character as something they enjoy but is not a determinant of why they
live in Ballarat and 12 % who suggested heritage was of no interest to them. While this indicates
that potentially heritage could be important factor in why nearly a third of Ballarat residents live in
the City, to determine the importance of heritage properties in the decision to migrate to Ballarat,
will require specific further market research.
The forecast growth in the number of households over the next thirty years for the Ballarat region
is 1.5% per annum or approximately 600 households per year2 8 . It would need to be determined
how much, if any of this growth is a result of the environment heritage creates and if so then
28
DSE, Victoria in Future 2004
PAGE
quantify it. The average household income in Ballarat is around $50,000 pa2 9 , with a large
proportion of this expected to be spent within the local economy.
Tourism
The Victorian Goldfields tourism region, which includes the principal centres of Ballarat, Bendigo
and the smaller towns of Maldon, Castlemaine and Maryborough, is the state’s premier Heritage
Tourism destination. The Vision for the region is that, “by 2010 the Goldfields region will be
recognised as regional Australia's premier heritage tourism region and regional Victoria' s events
capital.”30
Within the Goldfields region, Ballarat has the highest unprompted awareness for any centre among
prospective interstate tourists (with 13%) ahead of Bendigo (6.9%).3 1 Among those surveyed who
were aware of the Goldfields Region, some 74% were aware of Ballarat (when prompted) while
only 51.4% were aware of Bendigo 3 2 . T he dominance of heritage across the region is also shown in
actual consumer ‘associations’ as indicated in Tourism Victoria surveys. Consumers aware of the
Goldfields associate it with gold history and heritage (92.2%), historic towns (88.9%) and in
particular, Sovereign Hill (82.7%).3 3
The City of Ballarat has embraced heritage-themed tourism, with virtually all of its major
attractions linked in some manner with the culture and buildings associated with its past, and
mainly the gold rushes of the mid 19 th Century. Notable examples include Sovereign Hill, the
Ballarat Fine Art Gallery, the Eureka Centre and Reserve, and the Ballarat Gold Museum.
Further statistics for the Goldfields region indicate that during the 2005 period there were 2.9
million daytrips undertaken by domestic visitors to the Goldfields and visitors spent an estimated
$279 million. For domestic overnight visitors, expenditure was understandably greater at
approximately $320 million. Visitors to the region on average spent $89 per night and $214 per
visit. International visitors to the region (approximately 37,000 to year end June 2005) would spend
and average of $358 per visit or approx. $15.2million3 4
In its 2004-2007 Strategic Plan for the goldfields region, Tourism Victoria notes that:
… A significant amount of heritage product is in public sector hands and

governments have limited capacity to maintain heritage assets.
29
Based on 2001 Census data and inflated to 2006 using average income growth figures
30
Goldfields Tourism Region Strategic Plan 2004-2007, Tourism Victoria
31
Ibid.
32
Ibid.2003 Survey results quoted.
33
Ibid, page 24.
34
Tourism Victoria Goldfields Market Profile 2005
PAGE
Reinvigorating the heritage experience is best done in a fully integrated
manner across the region.
… Further interpretation of heritage experiences is required for both the

domestic and international markets. Interpretive signage is lacking or is of
poor quality at many sites of potential interest to key target markets. There
are limited tour operators specialising in Goldfields product.
This last comment suggests scope to improve signage related to both individual heritage buildings
and heritage walks and drives within Ballarat. There are many examples of towns that showcase
their heritage buildings through appropriate signs or plaques indicating important information
about the building, its history and important people associated with it. In some cases these are
developed into relevant themed walks and trails.
It is clear that cultural heritage is a key part of the tourism brand of the Goldfields region, and
without a well developed, interpreted and preserved ‘catalogue’ of heritage buildings and other
heritage/historical attractions and experienced to offer visitors, Ballarat and the other destinations
within the region would lose their best and highest-yield markets rapidly.
Unlike other centres in Victoria or interstate which have lost touch with their history and allowed
their heritage buildings to slip into anonymity, or be demolished or modified beyond recognition,
Ballarat has a stock of authentic heritage buildings, streetscapes and monuments, and has invested
in their protection and interpretation with the result of a unique experience to offer the domestic or
inbound tourist.
3.5 A Unique Value

Heritage properties within Victoria exist as unique and valued social assets. External of potential
financial returns such as capital appreciation or rental yield, heritage properties also provide social
benefits to their immediate region. They do this either by their cultural relevance and importance
within their local community or their importance within a national context. An example of such a
location is the Eureka Stockade. A place of considerable historical significance to Australia, its
name has over time come to be synonymous with the City of Ballarat, becoming not just an
attraction for tourists and other visitors, but also a point of pride within the community whose value
alone could not be measured in tourist receipts or daytrip visitors spends.
3.6 Comm unity contingent valuation survey

As part of the study into the social and cultural value of Ballarat, the City undertook a survey of the
community on their perceptions of the value of heritage in the City. The findings from this survey
are discussed in this section.
PAGE
T he survey this study was based on is similar to that used by the Allen Consulting Group in
undertaking the ’Valuing the Priceless: T he Value of Historic Heritage in Australia’ for the
Heritage Chairs and Officials Group. By using the methodology utilised in the Allen Survey, a
recent comparison of results in the national and state context can be achieved.
As this survey is focused on the value of historic heritage to Ballarat some changes have been
undertaken. T he Allen survey was based on national heritage funding figures. Ballarat’s heritage
properties represent just 0.67% of the combined national / state listed places, therefore the heritage
protection options presented relate to Ballarat’s share of the national figure utilised in the Allen
survey.
The survey covers historic heritage since European settlement including:
Buildings (Sturt St shops; Town Hall, individual houses, St Patrick’s etc.)

Design gardens and parks (Buninyong Botanic Gardens, Victoria Park, Ballarat Botanic
Gardens, Avenue of Honour etc)
Old mines and factories
Railways, roads, bridges (Ballarat Station)
Ruins
Places that show how people lived and worked (Sovereign Hill, Eureka Centre)
Monuments and memorials (Arch of Victoria; T itanic Memorial Bandstand), and
Historic Streets, suburbs and towns (Sturt St; Buninyong; Ballarat West Precinct etc).
The Survey asked respondents to evaluate their preferences for a number of options. The table
below indicates some important background information that was provided to help participants
complete the survey.
PAGE
Table 3: Survey Background Information
Heritage Attributes Description
One aspect of managing our heritage is to protect places from being
Number of Heritage Places protected
lost. Listing of places on a statutory register helps this but does not
from loss
guarantee against loss.
This ref ers to the physical soundness of a place and whether the
place has preserved its original features. Places in poor condition
Condition and integrity of places
may be an eyesore whilst restored places may not have maintained
a heritage character.
The measure of the proportion of listed places that come from
Age and mix of places different historic periods – the different age of places (e.g. Victorian,
Edwardian, Modern, post modern, art deco).
Whether the public is able to v isit a historic place and get hands-on
experience at the place and gain a deeper appreciation of the
Public accessibility
properties value and meaning, e.g. photography, guided tours,
workshops, open days etc.
The lev el of control on dev elopment in and around heritage places.
Planning control Some f orm of control is necessary but the level of control could v ary
depending on the heritage outcomes being sought.
*The survey questionnaire is provided at Appendix E
3.7 Survey responses

Of the 400 surveys randomly mailed out 142 responses were received from persons aged 18 and
over and were separated 43% male and 57% female. T his section describes the survey respondents
and compares them with the general Ballarat population.
The breakdown of age groups is shown in the following figure and compared to the population
breakdown of the residents of Ballarat.
As can be observed graphically in Figure 1 below, this survey sample was broadly skewed towards
older age groups3 5 . This skewing of the respondents will affect evaluation of the survey as older
persons within society will traditionally be more positive towards heritage properties3 6 and result in
comparatively more interest being shown in heritage buildings than if the respondents were drawn
from an even spread of age groups.
35
Data from the Economic Development Unit, Ballarat indicated that a relatively high proportion of people living in Ballarat are aged
less than 45 years; with the highest number of people occurring in the 15 – 19 y ear old age group. The median age of all people living in
Ballarat is 34 years.
36
Allen Consulting Group: Valuing the Priceless: The Value Historic Heritage in Australia
PAGE
Figure 2: Respondents by Age: Survey v s. Ballarat Population
35%
31.69%
30%
28.56%
26.76%
25%
20%
18.21%
16.20%
15% 15.23%
14.50% 13.82%
11.97%
10% 9.68%
9.15%
5% 4.23%
0%
18-24 25-34 35-49 50-59 60-69 70 and 0ver
Respondents to Survey Ballarat Population - General
T able 5 compares the breakdown by education against the population of Ballarat. This table
suggests that a significant number of respondents had a higher degree of educational attainment
than the general population.
Table 4: Breakdow n of survey respondents by education
Highest level of educational Survey respondents Ballarat Population

qualification
Number % Number %
Bachelor or higher 56 39% 5,751 9%
Adv anced Diploma/Diploma 13 9% 4,490 7%
Vocational 25 17% 9,486 15%
No post secondary qualifications 46 32% 36,126 57%
Not stated 0 0% 6,772 10%
Other 1 0% 0 0%
Total 141 100% 62,625 100%
According to the Allen survey this will again influence the results towards favouring heritage
related industries or properties. This survey indicated that there existed five individual
characteristics which were found to be statistically significant:
PAGE
Ge nder: Males are, on average, are less willing than females to support change from the status
quo level of heritage protection
Pro he ritage : People with a pro heritage disposition (i.e. if in the past 12 months the
respondent has had any affiliation with heritage organisations, been a member of local council
or donated time/money to heritage causes) are more likely to support additional heritage
protection
He ritage house : People living in heritage homes are, on average, more willing to support
heritage protection
Education: Less educated respondents are less willing to support additional heritage
protection, and
Income : The willingness to pay for additional heritage protection increases with income3 7 .
This does not detract from the survey conducted, but allows the results gathered to be put in context
against established understandings.
3.7.1 Survey findings

This section looks at the findings from the Ballarat survey. The first question asked whether they
believed enough is being done to protect Ballarat’s and Australia’s historic heritage. The results
suggest that citizens of Ballarat (45%) are more satisfied with the extent of heritage protection than
are persons in regional Victoria (27%) and Australia (32%). Comparatively speaking, Australia has
quite comprehensive heritage protection laws, and this outcome may be the result of a better
education policy currently in place within Ballarat.
Table 5: Comparison of views on adequacy of heritage protection
Answer Ballarat Regional Victoria Victoria Australia

Too Little 36.7% 67.2% 65.4% 61.9%
Just Right 45.5% 26.7% 28.6% 32.2%
Too Much 10.2% 2.5% 3.0% 3.4%
Don’t Know 7.4% 3.6% 3.0% 2.5%
Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Sources: Ballarat survey and the Allen Consulting Group Survey
Question 2 asked about the respondents where they believed additional funding for heritage places
(if available) should be spent. Responses from both surveys, shown below in T able 7, differ
considerably. In particular there was a greater emphasis on protection for heritage assets closer to
37
Allen Consulting Group: Valuing the Priceless: The Value Historic Heritage in Australia
PAGE
home in the Ballarat survey, indicating a desire or understanding by residents of the advantages of
local heritage protection.
Table 6: Preferred allocation of additional heritage protection funding
Answer Ballarat Regional Victoria Australia

Victoria
Places of signif icance to nation 7.6% 61.0% 62.4% 61.0%
Places of signif icance to Victoria 38.6% 17.1% 20.3% 19.3%
Places of signif icance to local
47.7% 19.5% 14.8% 17.2%
area
Don’t Know 6.1% 2.4% 2.5% 2.5%
Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Another question posed to respondents was whether they believed that heritage protection had an
important role in boosting the performance of the local or state/national economy. Ballarat
residents (as shown in Table 8) felt overwhelmingly that there was an important role for heritage to
play in boosting jobs and the economy, higher than comparable regional, state or national figures,
and that support for the notion was high overall. A maximum of just 11% disagreed or strongly
disagreed with the idea from the survey results.
Table 7: Looking after Heritage is important in creating j obs and boosting the economy
Answer Ballarat Regional Victoria Victoria Australia

Strongly Agree or Agree 72% 63% 59% 56%
Undecided 19% 31% 30% 33%
disagree or strongly
9% 6% 11% 11%
disagree
Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
3.8 Conclusion
Based on results from the Ballarat survey and weighed against those in the Allen survey, we can
conclude that residents of Ballarat;
Are more satisfied than other persons within Australia that the existing level of heritage
protection in place within their immediate region is adequate. This result may have been
influenced by the educational background of respondents to the survey, who could be expected
to be more aware of what legislation is in place.
Believe strongly that any further allocation of funding for heritage places should be directed
towards their own community.
PAGE
Believe that heritage properties directly contribute to their local economy. T his is not
surprising as marketing for Sovereign Hill and the Eureka stockade would be prevalent within
the community and it would be expected that many residents would be aware of persons who
are/ have been employed at a heritage designated tourist attraction in Ballarat.
PAGE
4. Competitive Advantage of Heritage to
Ballarat
4.1 Com petitive Advantage
For a competitive advantage to exist as a point of differentiation, possession of various assets and
attributes which give a competitive edge over rival suppliers or products is required. With heritage,
for a city to assert a competitive advantage it must possess at least one of a series of characteristics:
A collection of heritage properties that are historically or culturally important

A concentration of heritage properties in numbers significant enough to be noteworthy in their
own right
A developed ‘identity’ or brand, which carries or projects these heritage assets to a wide
audience/public
The capacity to invest in research, interpretation, promotion and restoration of heritage, so that
the stock is both maximised in ‘value’ and is maintained through time.
Ballarat is in a unique position among Australian cities, for it possesses all of these variables that
allow the city to successfully differentiate its image from competitors and capture a sustainable
competitive advantage which provides a range of public as well as private benefits.
Development of Ballarat’s heritage as more of a product through the use of consistent heritage
signage and the development of heritage maps and trails could allow this sustainable competitive
advantage to be ‘promoted’ to current and prospective visitors and as a basis for further events such
as the forth coming League of Historic Cities Conference. It would also support the concept of the
Centre of Classical Buildings discussed later in this report.
4.2 Advantage to Existing and Prospective Residents

The conservation of the heritage fabric of Ballarat helps define a sense of identity and pride in the
visual amenity of the City, which in turn helps build a strong feeling within that community. At just
75 minutes by car, Ballarat is a comfortable commuting distance from Melbourne and with
property prices in metropolitan Melbourne rising at historically rapid rates, the relative
attractiveness of rural towns and regional centres offering lifestyle advantages whilst still allowing
access to the greater employment in Melbourne market is increasing.
With its heritage ‘soul’ and modern conveniences, Ballarat is in a strong position to attract and
retain prospective residents over other regional centres such as Shepparton or Geelong which either
don’t have the stock of heritage or have not invested in its interpretation and promotion over time
as the City of Ballarat has.
PAGE
By virtue of both the real economic activity associated with heritage in Ballarat and the ‘virtual’
strength of its brand/image of a centre with a past and a place ‘with a soul’, Ballarat is well
positioned to take advantage of future population movements outside of Melbourne.
4.3 Tourism
“ Cultural heritage is a primary pull factor for international and domestic tourism. The value of
cultural heritage is that it has potential for sustainable tourism and provides economic benefits to
rural and regional communities3 8 ”.
As noted above, the Goldfields tourism region is best known for its gold rush-era history and
heritage and Ballarat is the most recognised and developed destination within the tourism region,
according to T ourism Victoria survey materials. To a large extent this reflects the importance of
Sovereign Hill and to a lesser extent the Eureka Centre as destinations. The range of post gold rush
built heritage in Ballarat offers a third destination if developed further with good interpretation,
signage and appropriate interpretive materials as discussed earlier. Extending the Ballarat product
could complement the existing offerings by providing a full weekend and/or short break
experience.
The significant heritage fabric of Ballarat dominates the overall Ballarat tourism product,
particularly with its links to the gold rush and the associated cultural changes that have occurred
over time. Ballarat’s special role in Australian history has provided the city with a rich source of
promotional and marketing material.
The large number of heritage buildings
in and around the central business
district enabling Ballarat to ‘tell its
story’ through its built history.
Additionally the cumulative effect of
‘streets’ of heritage buildings adds to
this image and helps communicate a
Ballarat of another time, drawing in
cultural tourists who want to experience
a slice of the gold rush times.
As noted in chapter 3 and shown in Figure 3, for the period 2004 – 2005, the Goldfields region
within Victoria attracted approximately 37,000 international tourists, who cumulatively spent
approximately $352 per person during their visit.
38
University of Canberra, 2000
PAGE
4.4 City of Ballarat
In the case of Ballarat, the existence of heritage buildings in significant numbers and condition
provide the city with assets and attributes that help attract both tourists and residents to the City. It
is this characteristic that sets Ballarat apart from competing regional towns such as Traralgon or
Geelong. Within the more defined demographic of visitors to Victorian ‘Goldfield’ attractions,
Ballarat is still notable because its combination of heritage inspired tourist assets such as Sovereign
Hill and the Eureka Stockade.
Competitive advantage however should not be strictly limited to just heritage considerations, for
the city of Ballarat possesses other significant advantages over its competitors that indirectly
contribute to the cities overall image. According to Ballarat’s current economic development plan,
this list would include Ballarat having or being:
the largest inland city in Victoria

a very strong cultural history which includes events and locations of iconic status
well-preserved built and natural heritage assets and great physical beauty
great physical charm, especially in terms of its heritage attractions
a strong perception (within the community) that Ballarat is a safe place to live when compared
against some alternative residential locations. This is particularly important for young families
when they make their housing and work choices
a low cost business environment compared with the metropolitan region
supported by a very strong education sector which includes two universities, and
a significant health sector, supported by two major hospitals.
4.5 Conclusion
Ballarat is well supplied with a variety of economic, social and environmental advantages that
allow it to positively differentiate its image from that of its immediate competitors of Bendigo and
Geelong. Being located close to major to urban centres and supporting infrastructure, Ballarat is
within easy travelling distance for international and intra state tourists. Marketing itself as the
largest inland city in Victoria, Ballarat is able to draw individuals to its region with a combination
of historical tourism through its heritage buildings and modern conveniences of shopping malls and
entertainment.
Regarding heritage, the City’s collection of listed properties provide it with a real competitive
advantage over competing regional centres, in terms of brand, identity and cultural soul, all of
which attract visitors and residents alike. However this advantage will only remain if the City
continues to invest and protects and maintains publicly held and privately held properties through
programs of renovation or restoration. Investment in promotion of their uniqueness and value to the
PAGE
community is also necessary to maximise their value, as is encouragement of supporting industries
(such as niche trades) within the region.
Support for niche trades could occur at a number of levels and via various mechanisms. At one
level is a possible tie-in with development of a centre for excellence in heritage (chapter six refers)
with the recent state government announcement of a new specialist centre focusing on the
application of environmentally sustainable technologies and practices in building and construction.
The combining of these two centres would immediately establish Ballarat as an acknowledged
leader in heritage related industries, potentially creating further economic benefits to the city in the
form of migrants, students and supporting business infrastructure.
PAGE
5. Benefits and Costs of Heritage to Ballarat
The contribution of heritage to Ballarat’s economy is substantial. The Ballarat tourism ‘product’ is
focused around historic and heritage events and places of the region, and hence the built heritage of
the city plays a vital role in this. It is important to note however, maintaining Ballarat’s’ heritage
also imposes some costs, both on the community and on individual property owners. While it is
often not straightforward to quantify these costs and benefits due to their ‘social’ nature, it is
possible to outline the areas affected.
5.1 Cost to the comm unity and City of Ballarat:

Costs are borne by the City of Ballarat to maintain and enforce heritage protection to the built
heritage fabric of the city. These range from the costs of identifying and recording to physical
maintenance undertaken on heritage properties. Table 9 lists some of the identified costs of heritage
to the City of Ballarat.
Table 8: Communal costs of Heritage in Ballarat39
Category Explanation
Identif ication & Identifying heritage places & undertaking heritage studies
Recording
Consideration of renov ation/alteration requests and applying to the State Planning
Planning controls Minister f or interim heritage overlay where appropriate
Processing amendments to the Planning Scheme to include properties in the

Planning controls Heritage Overlay and introduce local policies.
Processing and making determinations on planning permit applications relating to

Planning controls properties with a Heritage Ov erlay
Employ ing a f ull time Heritage Officer to:

Prov ide Heritage advice to statutory planners on planning permit applications
Liaise with property owners and other Council officers to adv ise on way s to
Staff ing, Planning achiev e heritage conservation of indiv idual buildings and/or public works
controls, Policy &
Administration Promotes heritage issues and educates the community on heritage matters
Adv ises on policy dev elopment
Administers the Ballarat incentives scheme and interest free loans to land owners
Undertaking capital works as a result of measures/processes to ensure that works

Maintenance & Capital
respect heritage v alues of various public areas
Works
Maintenance & Capital Renov ating buildings in the City’s ownership e.g. ‘Her Majesty’s Theatre’, the
39
Submission to Heritage Inquiry by productivity commission, August 2005
PAGE
Category Explanation
Works f ormer Ballarat Mining Exchange
Managing a ‘Ballarat Heritage Adv isory Committee’ that overseas the City’s
Policy & Administration
f inancial incentives and low interest loans scheme
Identif ication &

recording, Planning Additional sites added to the Heritage Ov erlay
controls, Administration
Consultants, Policy &

Heritage Precinct Studies
Administration
5.2 Cost to individuals:

In addition to costs incurred by the City of Ballarat, costs are also incurred by individual property
owners and commercial operators in complying with Heritage Overlays and maintaining heritage
properties.
Table 9: Indiv idual costs of Heritage in Ballarat
Category Cost category

Planning controls,
Apply ing f or a planning permit & associated fees f rom engaging an architect or
Consultants
building design practitioner and engagement of an expert heritage advisor
Planning controls Possible holding costs in some cases associated with delays caused by applying
f or a planning permit under the Heritage Overlay where otherwise no permit would
hav e been required.
Maintenance & Capital Additional longer term maintenance costs associated with retention of heritage
Works material which is often not perceiv ed as being as durable as more modern
building materials.
Maintenance & Capital Increased maintenance and capital costs due to a shortage in tradesmen with
Works skills to perf orm heritage works. This is particularly relevant in Ballarat, with a
small labour pool and significant built heritage.
A Heritage ‘premium’ attached to well preserv ed properties could be expected to
be incurred by potential buy ers during the transaction process, thereby inflating
the f inal cost of the property. With a f inite supply of quality heritage properties, a
Market seller can differentiate and market the unique and hard replicate aspects of their
property , thereby allowing them to attach an added cost to the property. This
uniqueness will of course not appeal to all buy ers, so the seller will be required to
target their markets carefully. This ‘cost’ is two sided though as the seller will
consider the attached premium a benefit.
Costs sustained by the individual or commercial owner/operator for complying with heritage
overlay requirements and maintenance of their properties are going to vary a great deal. Each
PAGE
heritage property will be unique in its construction and current state of repair. Furthermore the
ultimate intentions of the owner will affect what final expenses are incurred. Logic dictates the
more work to be required, the greater the number of requests to be submitted to council resulting in
a greater chance of at least one element of the application being rejected or altered from original
specifications. This action will of course translate into increased expense for the owner of the
property.
Costs could also potentially be incurred by the owner when their property is listed as heritage,
either individually or as part of a general heritage overlay/ zone, after they have purchased the
property4 0 .
The Urban Development Institute of Australia, Western Australian Division noted in the Australian
Productivity Commission report on Heritage4 1 , that listing (a property as heritage) generally had a
negative impact on a property’s long-term property values:
“ … in regards to the impact of heritage listing on property values industry is

of the view that the direct impact of listing is limited over the short term
however it generally has a negative impact on value over the lifecycle of an
asset, due to restoration and maintenance issues:
Short-term impact – generally none

Medium-term – maybe negative
Long-term – negative.”
Heritage listing does, however, have a negative economic impact on the development potential of a
site which has direct cost implications due to additional time, resources and requirements necessary
to obtain development approvals for heritage properties.
For commercial operators it is often perceived that the best economic outcome for an allotment of
land is to demolish the standing structure, replacing it with another building that is more acceptable
to their profit maximising objectives. For example buildings that allow for installation and
integration with modern building, have decreased maintenance expenses and do not require the
services of heritage specialists if/when maintenance is required. As noted in Ballarat council’s
submission to the Productivity Commission these causes will understandably contribute to some
short term thinking that reflects the immediate needs of an individual and their needs. However
40
John Boy d (sub. 8, p. 2) obtained a property valuation which suggested that the value of his place could be reduced by around
$120,000 (or about 17 per cent of its current market value) if it was included on the local government list or the State heritage list -
Australian Productivity Commission - Heritage Report, 2006
41
PAGE
there is no guarantee that the community will also hold such views of the property and consider
that a “particular building is important from a heritage point of view and should be retained”.
5.3 Benefits of Heritage

Traditionally any benefits generated from an object of value usually go solely to the owner. Market
forces of supply and demand specific to each commodity will often (external of any legislative or
monopolistic barriers) be the largest determinant of how such benefits are distributed to the
population. With heritage properties however the opposite is often true. As in a NSW Heritage
office study,
“ … an area with architectural or heritage significance may benefit those who reside in
it, those nearby or those who just pass through or visit it, as in the case of a heritage
property or precinct drawing tourists to the area.4 2 ”
It can be also that the qualities that distinguish heritage properties from their modern competitors
such as age, structure, building materials etc, may not expose them to normal supply and demand
conditions.
To asses the what economic benefits commercial and residential heritage properties might accrue
as result of heritage listing, we must first identify all potential stakeholders. These would most
likely be;
The Owne r (through capital appreciation/ depreciation of property values)

The Tenant (rental/lease payments vs. restrictions on internal and external modifications)
The Gene ral Community (cultural heritage, community/ civic pride)
Tourists/tourism related businesses (revenue generation vs. maximisation of profits on
available land), and
Gove rnment Authorities (obligation to balance economic progress against management of
regions/ towns historical landmarks)
Next we must identify what specific benefits exist. Abelson in his paper on public benefits of
heritage properties4 3 sited several methods for measuring such benefits, as summarised in T able 11.
42
Heritage Australia: A Review of Australian Material Regarding the Economic and Social Benefits of Heritage Property
Professor Graeme Newell, Peter Wills and Chris Eves - 2005
43
ibid
PAGE
Table 10: Public Benefits of Heritage Properties
Benefits Explanation
To owners of other
Well maintained heritage properties can expectedly come with a rental premium
commercial properties in
attached, dependant on what commercial v alue the operators expect extract f rom
the precinct the building
To owners of residential
properties in the precinct This can be in the form of capital gains, rental or lease return
An easily quantifiable measure of this benefit is tourist numbers to the region.

Benef its of tourist v isitors Calculation of their length of stay and individual spend per v isit will allow
to the heritage building comparison of the heritage v alue of assets such as the Eureka stockade or
or precinct Sov ereign Hill with other non-heritage related attractions. Howev er it is not
possible to measure within this f igure the social and cultural returns tourists gain
from visiting these locations
Benef its to the general Difficult to quantify as personal gain is, by its very nature, limited to the indiv idual
public experience and extrapolating any responses gained to the community as a whole
would leav e results open to potential biases.
Public benefits of heritage buildings are also those that can not be effectively appropriated by the
owner. In particular these Public Benefits can include:
Assisting in the preservation of a sense of history in the City and linkages to the origins of the
City;
Attracting tourism related investment and employment;
Attracting new residents to Ballarat from other areas;
Maintenance of the cultural identity of Ballarat which in a sense is ‘built on gold’ and provides
a substantial and more than critical mass of important public and private buildings that
demonstrate the successful development of late Victorian Ballarat. As noted above, this offers
scope to strengthen the City as a tourist destination to complement Sovereign Hill and the
Eureka Centre
Improved amenity and associated benefits to other property owners in the heritage precinct,
and
Attracting visitors, particularly those with an interest in history, heritage and architecture.
Dr Lynne Armitage summarised the results of past benefit-cost studies into heritage listing of
properties and noted that (authors highlighting):
“ The effect appears generally marginal for residential property when taken as a
whole - although the evidence indicates a tendency for the direction of value
movement to be positive as opposed to negative - particularly where entire precincts
are involved - though significant upside or downside value movements may be
PAGE
associated with individual cases. It may be surmised that there is a stabilisation
effect occurring where heritage controls are being introduced within districts/
neighbourhoods/ precincts. The effect of certainty may account for the positive
influence on the property market’s expectation of statutory intervention: owners are
accorded greater protection particularly from future development; there is the
expectation of increased consistency and greater certainty with the character of the
area legally protected.”4 4
Government involvement in heritage in conservation is an important element of any successful

heritage program. With the involvement of government authorities be it local, state or federal in
Heritage properties, potential benefits for the immediate community include:
Enabling a higher degree of protection of heritage places and buildings than would otherwise
occur. The failure of the market to identify and protect heritage buildings through market
mechanisms necessitates government intervention to ensure the continued existence of
buildings that present significant public benefits
Ensuring there is a statutory process for consideration of the merits of planning permit
applications for development of properties identified in the heritage overlay without
necessarily prohibiting proposed development. This allows a balance to be made between
protection, conservation and on-going development and evolution of heritage places
Giving municipalities some capacity to seek expert design advice on planning permit
application, and give expert advice to land owners, which may not have been possible due to
budgetary constraints
Ensuring there is a statutory process for consideration of all demolition application to
determine whether interim planning protection should be initiated where heritage values are
likely and warrant further justification
Providing incentives for land owners to conserve buildings that might not otherwise have
occurred without financial assistance, and to encourage the adaptive re-use of buildings. This
could include appropriate uses for the building which might not be allowed under the current
planning scheme. This in itself allows the building to retain its heritage value and contribute as
a meaningful space with a modern use, and
In employment generation, tourism within Ballarat, which is dominated by the heritage
industry, accounts for nearly 6% of total employment. This figure, which has remained
consistent for nearly six years, is shown below in table 12, which also details the growth in
tourism employment within the region over the corresponding period.
44
PAGE
Table 11: Composition of Employment in the Region
Tourism Tourism’s share of
Change 1997-2003
Employment Employment (%)
Region
Tourism Tourism’s
1997 - 1998 2002 – 2003 1997 - 1998 2002 - 2003
Employ ment share
Ballarat
2,145 2,444 5.8 5.9 +13.9 +0.1
Bendigo/
Loddon 2,497 2,857 4.9 5.0 +14.4 +0.1
Total
4,642 5,301 5.3 5.4 +14.2 +0.1
Source: TTF Australia, Tourism Victoria
5.4 Conclusion
Research into the economic and social benefits-costs of heritage properties is equivocal. Any
overarching conclusion drawn from these studies will have to remain sweeping in its scope as the
Australian property market is too dynamic to tag a single property feature such as heritage as
having either a net benefit or cost to their owners and the general public. Each property will come
to the market with its own individual characteristics and these will be assessed and valued
independently by the market at that time.
For the purpose of this report though, some general benefit-cost assessments can be made in
relation to heritage properties within the Ballarat region.
Well maintained and marketed heritage properties will generate employment

Costs will be incurred by owners/ renters of heritage listed properties. These costs will vary
though in their amount and frequency although more prominent problems may occur with
heritage properties that are listed for corporate use. The rapid development of computers and
advanced communication needs has seen the business requirement that a building must fulfil
for corporate owners change enormously. Where in the past businesses could make the
necessary alterations to a property for their corporate needs with minimal expense, today
modern requirements of bandwidth, fire protection, OH&S guidelines, cable ducts etc, could
see owners, tenants and developers view heritage listed properties as less attractive if
alterations to a heritage building to meet their requirements are seen to be more expensive than
a modern office building. While there may be specific commercial or industrial uses where
this occurs, there are many examples where heritage buildings have been refitted cost
effectively and have provided more attractive corporate addresses
PAGE
Owners could gain a personal net benefit through the knowledge their property is now more
secure in its appearance as a result of the restrictions and requirements placed on the property
through listing, As Dr Lynne Armitage and Janine Lyons note;
“ The effect of certainty (through listing) may account for the positive influence on
the property market’s expectation of statutory intervention: owners are accorded
greater protection particularly from future development; there is the expectation of
increased consistency and greater certainty with the character of the area legally
protected.4 5 ”
The public will gain a net benefit from Heritage properties through a sense of civic pride in
their city. This benefit will only be maintained if these properties are adequately preserved
either by their private owners or government bodies (local, state or Federal), and
The region will gain a net benefit from increased tourism generated by heritage properties.
This benefit will be fiscal; tourism numbers, internal expense by local members of the
community visiting heritage sites and cultural; ‘public good’ generated by the presence of
heritage properties and the importance they hold within the community.
45
PAGE
6. Recommendations on ways to increase
heritage benefits to Ballarat
Australia’s three-tiered government-based approach to heritage classification and protection has
resulted in heritage lists covering hundreds of thousands of properties nationwide4 6 . Victoria alone
has over 100,000 properties listed under various pieces of heritage legislation.
Despite this large number of protected heritage places, the City of Ballarat is one of the few cities
that possess such assets in concentrated numbers and has sought to employ this advantage by
investing in both its built assets as well as its “heritage image” over a number of years. By
establishing a point of differentiation over other regional competitors such as Geelong and even
Bendigo, Ballarat has created a valuable marketing tool to attract tourists and relocating families to
its region. However as tabled at the heritage study workshops held earlier this and noted in the
‘Economic Development Strategy, Ballarat - 2006’, the city of Ballarat can still improve if efforts
with maintaining and managing its current 4 7 heritage assets. T o preserve this advantage, the
following options could be considered:
Increase to two full time heritage officer positions within council. As noted earlier, at this time
council has a full time heritage adviser/urban designer officer who focuses on education and
policy and a heritage adviser employed at 0.5 full time equivalent who provides comments on
planning applications. The workshops held as part of this study indicated a perception that
there was not enough heritage support for current and prospective residents and developers
considering restoring or adapting a heritage building for reuse and that allocating sufficient
personnel to provide a one stop shop for heritage advice within Council would demonstrate
Council’s commitment to heritage conservation
The heritage overlay is a state based control under the Planning and Environment Act which
regulates land use and development. Council is looking at ways to assist landholders to
manage heritage values. The establishment of a ‘one-stop-shop’ for all heritage needs will
greatly benefit the Ballarat community in a number of ways. Markets are their most efficient
when competing parties have access to all available information and this position would
provide residents and commercial operators/owners a centralised corporate knowledge
database on all heritage matters relating to residential, corporate and government heritage
properties. T his proactive undertaking would immediately simplify many of the current
standby processes that Ballarat council appear to operate under and allow existing council
46
> 140,000 collective. Australian Productivity Commission - Heritage Report, 2006
47
The drafting of this report was hampered by the lack of such a position. Despite the much valued and professional assistance provided
by council officers, it became apparent that what heritage knowledge existed was spread across many areas.
PAGE
officers to redirect their work efforts to areas more within their immediate skill set and role
designation. Prospective users of this service could receive advice on:
Permit requirements
Appropriate works, suppliers and trades people with Council maintaining a data base
of accredited trades’ people. Accreditation would be provided by an appropriate third
party; research on the building, photographs, documentation, and
Design issues such as colours, structural changes.
Negotiating of contracts and in works supervision.
Heritage preservation incentive schemes
Provide a consistent Heritage Strategy at local level
The Australian Productivity Commission report on heritage found that confusion
concerning heritage laws exists predominantly at local government level rather than with
state or Federal bodies4 8 . T his should be expected as State and National heritage lists deal
principally with a smaller number of properties that are generally well established. T his
comment does not apply in Victoria. Nonetheless, an efficient and professional heritage
service should be provided to citizens, especially those in regions such as Ballarat where
council has placed a large number of properties und
Ballarat Heritage Advisory Committee. This committee4 9 was established initially as the
Ballarat Heritage Special Committee, but was reviewed in 2006 to take on a broader role
and function in assisting in the promotion of the value of heritage within the City of
Ballarat. It compromises 19 separate groups/ departmental representatives. Expected to
meet every two months, one of its roles is to consider applications for loans and grants
under the Ballarat Heritage Fund and to make recommendations on loans and grant
applications to the Planning and Development Committee of Council. The main
repository of knowledge concerning heritage within Ballarat should remain with the
heritage officer, however this committee could/ should act in conjunction with the heritage
officer by managing heritage loan applications and other supporting documentation
requirements. A formal separation of members into their respective subcommittees will
allow for a more active approach to this committee that could be a valuable tool in the
Council’s management of heritage. An opportunity exists to provide strong relationships
with other heritage stakeholders in Ballarat through this Committee, and achieve broader
outcomes than simply administration of the loan scheme.
48
49
Appendix I details the current terms of Reference for this committee
PAGE
Other options include:
Establish on going community education on good practice in heritage protection,
restoration and conservation. This could include education and training programs, a
regular heritage column in a local paper and an advisory talk back program on local radio.
Update the web page to provide more information on trade skills, controls, incentives and
funding programs and how to research sites.
Facilitate the development of appropriate third party advisory bodies to supplement
existing heritage departments
Advocate for more support for heritage protection and conservation from State and
Federal governments and the private sector. Both State and Federal branches of
government have greater resource capabilities than local councils. Attempting to move
more properties onto either list will help consolidate current heritage lists and also lower
‘red tape’ obstructions that are present within any system of management, and
Consideration of facilitating a group insurance scheme for owners of heritage buildings.
Any attempt to lower the cost burden on owners of heritage properties either by removing
some requirements or cost sharing expenses incurred with the wider community will add
to the attraction of heritage listing.
Council could consider a broader package of incentives linked to following ‘good practice’ advice,
including possibly:
Ratings linked to building conservation-reward good practice
Improved grant/soft loan scheme or other incentives
An award scheme that acknowledges business and residents who have done good
work. Awards would cover a range of categories, and
Better linking of heritage properties with their history. This option presents an
opportunity to tell the stories of individuals who lived in these residences and the
conditions they experienced. Examples of successful implementation of such
concepts idea include plaques on heritage buildings in Europe (in particular London),
heritage trails and either guided or self guide d walks.
Implementation of any of the listed options should provide a benefit to Ballarat community.
However, an overriding consideration on any proposed government intervention in heritage
property should be that heritage places are:
“ … not homogenous, they vary in their level of significance to the community, auth enticity,
rarity and form. As a result, the benefits of retaining heritage values vary, as do the costs of
providing them, for example, in terms of the impact on the value of a property. In many cases,
property owners have normal co mmer cial and private incentives to conser ve the heritage
values embodi ed in their property, but in some cas es they do not. As private incentives vary
on a case-by-case basis so will the need for, and most appropriate type of, government
intervention5 0 ”
50
Ibid
PAGE
7. Centre for Classical Buildings
This chapter discusses the concept of establishing a Centre for Classical Building in Ballarat. The
chapter considers the possible role and functions of a Centre, the issues and feasibility of
establishing one and the possible implementation actions. The chapter notes some of the actions
that have already taken place in developing the concept.
7.1 Background to development of a Centre for Classical Building

The concept of establishing a Centre has been developed over the last three years or so by a group
of interested people with support from the University of Ballarat. T he original concept included
recognising Ballarat as an historical and crafted City where the City would work with the Building
Studies Department of the University of Ballarat to introduce an integrated program of training and
education to train planners, architects, builders, tradesmen and craftsmen in all aspects of classical
design and building conservation and restoration.5 1
The project would be designed to have a number of outcomes for Ballarat including:
The development as a specialist centre for all aspects of classical building including:
Design and architecture
Iron, brass and bronze casting
Stone masonry
Carpentry and joinery
Traditional painting techniques and knowledge of traditional decorating materials
Cabinet and furniture making
Wet / solid plastering, etc
Ability to attract high quality teaching staff in classical building

A national centre to educate and train relevant specialist professionals, tradespersons and
craftsperson’s
A role model and facilitator to attract young people to the various education and training
streams
A ready supply of appropriately qualified and experienced people to maintain and conserve
Ballarat’s heritage
51
Response to Municipal Strategic Statement of Ballarat City Council, Jonathan Halls, 26 September 2002.
PAGE
Provide a catalyst for new enterprises servicing classical buildings across Australia and
potentially overseas. These could include both service businesses and suppliers across the
supply chain of heritage restoration products. This could offer the potential for a long term
competitive advantage to Ballarat including the potential to be the dominant player nationally
including developing appropriate international linkages and partnerships, and
Assist Ballarat’s tourism attraction both directly through hosting education and training
programs, conferences etc. and as a result of the quality of the City’s heritage architecture and
urban character.
The former Heritage Ballarat Special Committee (now Ballarat Heritage Advisory Committee)
took up promotion of the idea and a memo from the Committee was circulated to Councillors and
senior staff in late 20035 2 . T his memorandum and attachments noted the economic benefits of the
development of a Centre for Classical Building as including:
New heritage related educational programs

New heritage advice and consultancy services
New heritage incentive and award schemes
New heritage related industries
New capital investment in restoring, reclaiming and reinstating built heritage
New capital investment in sympathetic new residential, commercial and public buildings
Increased property values
Growth in tourism
Optimisation of Ballarat as highly desirable residential location, and
New employment from all of the above.
The memo noted that the timing was critical as the University was examining options for relocation
of the Building Studies and Design Departments and that the Building Studies Department was
proceeding towards offering post-apprenticeship courses in a number of aspects of classical
building.
More recently the City has facilitated a forum on Developing a Centre for Classical Building and
there are current plans to run a two or three day program of workshops on a variety of heritage
building and conservation subjects immediately after the League of Historical Cities Conference as
the first official activity of the Centre for Classical Building.
52
Interoffice Memorandum and attached reports, Mr Greg Binns Chairperson 3 October 2003
PAGE
Moves are afoot for the University of Ballarat to develop formal partnerships with the Venice
Centre for the Skills of Architectural Heritage Conservation (University of Venice) and the
Department of Architectural Restoration and Conservation at the University of Florence. The aim
is to connect the University of Ballarat, and a new Centre for Classical Building to highly regarded
overseas institutions and develop collaborative projects.
A broader number of international contacts have been made at a personal level with people who
indicated both interest in the concept and in participating in the proposed workshop program.
The workshops program includes key conservation topics led by international experts including:
Training of heritage architects

Conservation of stone
Restoration and conservation of timber
The European system of skilled trades
Restoration of Architectural T imber-work in Public and Commercial Buildings
Restoration of cast iron lacework
Stained glass
Building in stone
Restoration of stone and masonry
Coach building and its relevance to architectural restoration
Interior decoration-Paint effects and techniques, and
Interior decoration for the period home.
The Centre’s sponsoring group were keen to purchase or gain a long term lease over the Pratt
Building, a bluestone building built around 1860 as a home for the Centre. The aim was to restore
this as a showcase of appropriate restoration and conservation as well as a home for the Centre’s
activities. The Pratt building offered potential for showroom/retail type space and both hands on
working and classroom education and training spaces including scope for on site accommodation.
The proximity of the building to the University’s City campus was an added attraction.
At this stage it seems unlikely that the Pratt Building will be available.
7.2 Concept for a Centre for Classical Building

The concept has not been finalised yet but could include all of the ideas above. It could also be part
of the proposals in this report for a more proactive approach to heritage from the City of Ballarat.
The Centre could provide the practical advice on restoration techniques, methods, materials and
specialist professional and trades people. This could include:
PAGE
Pre purchase and pre restoration inspection services
Maintaining a register of skilled people and providing advice on appropriate people to employ,
and
Advising on specific materials, methods and techniques on a fee for service or a funded basis.
Depending on style of centre and location the Centre could also provide a home for the City’s
Heritage Adviser and a relevant planning person to provide a proactive heritage planning
information and advisory service. Alternatively the Centre could operate from appropriate Council
premises.
In determining the feasibility of the Centre it is important to clarify its role and functions. At one
end the Centre could provide a largely planning, coordination and advisory role working with a
number of direct service providers including the University and the City.
In this role the Centre could:
Materials suppliers
Other service providers, and
This role need not require a specific building, the services could be provided on-line and/or over
the telephone. Staffing requirements would also be minimal.
At the other end of the scale the Centre could be established in its own leased or owned building
and provide the range of services which could include in addition to the clearing house activities
above:
Direct heritage advisory services such as pre purchase and pre restoration inspections
Provision of appropriate education and training programs at both award and hobby/DIY levels.
Such programs could be provided either alone or in collaboration with other providers
Arranging conferences and exhibitions
Demonstration and showcasing of techniques and materials
Facilitating the development of businesses including potentially offering a business incubator
type operation
PAGE
Managing grant and loan schemes, and
Providing a museum of classical design, etc.
Either of these models could assist in minimising restoration costs as they would ensure that the
most appropriate skills and experience would be use d and facilitate access to required materials.
7.2.1 Assessment
Based on the history to date there appears merit in the Centre developing a collaborative
development model where it works with a range of partners. To date the Centre has support from
and potentially close association with the University, the City, the ISS and a number of overseas
individuals and institutions.
A collaborative model would go beyond the clearing house/information exchange role at the
smallest scale but would not extend to the provision of direct services, at least not initially. Direct
service delivery may be justified if the ‘market’ does not provide them and there is clearly a
demand. At this stage services would be provided to meet an identified demand and not
speculatively to meet a projected demand.
A collaborative model could:
Materials suppliers
Other service providers
Facilitate the development and delivery of education and training programs by partner
organisations. This could include:
Identification of need and development of business cases
Promotion of programs
Facilitate the development and delivery of heritage advisory services
Provide a front end to a heritage one stop shop facilitating access to relevant Council officers
and providing relevant information
Facilitate the hosting of relevant conferences and exhibitions, and
Encourage the establishment of new heritage businesses including specific support for the
City’s Economic Development Unit including information for business case development.
PAGE
As noted above, partners in this model could include:
The City of Ballarat

The University and potentially other education and training providers
Heritage advisory service providers and product suppliers, and
Relevant state and federal government agencies.
The model would need minimal staff, an office and access to relevant office equipment but would
not need major premises initially. Any further development and resources would be base d on
demand. Additional support would be needed at the set up stage including, IT /database/web type
services. Premises could be leased or could be made available by a partner organisation as an in-
kind contribution. Similarly while computers would need to be dedicated to the Centre, access to
office equipment such photocopiers could be provided on a shared basis.
7.3 Initial Feasibility assessment

This section looks at the potential issues in assessing the feasibility of the proposed concept above.
A full feasibility assessment will depend on the final concept agreed. The advantages of the
proposed model are that:
It does not require a significant building with the consequent capital and more importantly on-
going maintenance and operating costs although it leaves the option open for acquisition or
development of a building late
It potentially could be operated with say two full time staff initially, and
It operates in partnership with a range of specialist service providers one or more of who could
find it advantageous to provide some in-kind support which could include office space.
The model could be expanded as demand requires.
The benefits of establishing a Centre are set out above and include the potential to develop a
significant and at this stage unique heritage industry over time. The broad issues of feasibility are
set out in the following table.
PAGE
Table 12: Feasibility Table
Function Activity Benefit Cost Partner

Start up cost to
Access to best establish office and Univ ersity of Ballarat.
Dev elop practice heritage
database computer systems, Other RTOs.
restoration recruit appropriate
cov ering: inf ormation and City of Ballarat.
staff Etc.
Clearing House Registered adv ice.
Function Say $50,000 State and Federal
serv ice prov iders. Assistance in Gov ernment.
optimising Cash costs could be
Funding Relev ant
schemes. restoration reduced by in kind
contribution f rom Businesses.
activ ities.
partners.
Dev elop unique
marketable (local On going staffing and
and export) skill office costs, Univ ersity of Ballarat.
Identify needs. set. Say $150,000 pa. Other RTOs.
Education and
Training Promote Direct income for Cash costs could be State and Federal
Programs programs. regional prov iders. reduced by in kind Gov ernment.
New business and contribution f rom
employ ment partners
dev elopment.
City of Ballarat.
Heritage serv ices
Facilitation of prov iders.
Heritage new serv ices. New business and
Advisory employ ment Included above Univ ersity of Ballarat.
services Promotion of dev elopment.
existing services. Other RTOs.
State and Federal
Gov ernment.
Serv ice to residents
and potentially
Inf ormation on reduced restoration
requirements. costs and better City of Ballarat.
Access to outcomes. Heritage serv ices
Front end to one relev ant Council Similar f or prov iders.
Staff. Included above
stop shop dev elopers. State and Federal
Inf ormation on Assists Council Gov ernment.
serv ice prov iders. including some
arms lengthening of
Council from
serv ices.
Identify topics.
Direct new income City of Ballarat.
Facilitate access
to speakers. into region. Heritage serv ices
Regional prov iders.
Heritage Work with
promotion. Included above Univ ersity of Ballarat.
Conferences Business
Ballarat. New tourism Other RTOs.
Work with agreed opportunities.
State and Federal
conf erence International links. Gov ernment.
organisers.
New heritage Identify needs. New business and Included above City of Ballarat.
PAGE
Function Activity Benefit Cost Partner
businesses Promote employ ment Heritage serv ices
opportunities. dev elopment. prov iders.
Facilitate access Univ ersity of Ballarat.
to appropriate Other RTOs.
training business
start up advice State and Federal
etc. Gov ernment.
Promote new
businesses
through
database.
Encourage/f acilit
ate business
mentoring and
networking
The model potentially provides significant regional development benefits for limited resource costs
some or all of which may be able to be covered by in kind contributions from key partners such as
the City and the University.
The model offers potential to grow based on actual demand and subject to appropriate business
case development.
7.4 Key Im plementation Actions

The most important action is to confirm agreement for the Centre concept. The model proposed is
an incremental approach starting small with limited up front or on-going costs. A larger scale
operation would require a more formal feasibility assessment including funding requirements and
sources. T his would be a higher risk operation.
The other key action will be recruitment of appropriate staff, although these people may already be
resident in partner organisations.
The proposed workshop program could provide an appropriate launch for the model proposed.
PAGE
Appendix A Alternative Funding Options
A.1 Revolving loan funds
Revolving loan funding is available to owners of heritage properties, though its use is less common
than grant programs. The report “ Revolving funds for historic heritage - An information paper”
(2005)5 3 , notes that revolving funds for historic heritage are not common in Australia and examples
to date have generally been small-scale restoration funds set up by local governments, often with
State Government support and mainly in NSW or Victoria.
Of the larger funds, the two most prominent include;
The City of Hobart and T asmanian government jointly established a $2 million fund to
purchase heritage buildings considered under threat. Any proceeds, including interest earned
on banked funds, are returned rolled directly into the fund.
The City of Melbourne and the Victorian State government jointly established a $2 million
Heritage Fund to provide for grants and loans for heritage conservation projects within the
city. Like the T asmania Heritage fund, all proceeds including interest are returned to the fund.
The report continues to suggest that the majority of the grant, loan and tax schemes provided in
Australia for heritage properties have been too small, often falling short of the amount required to
make a significant impact on heritage conservation activity within a state or locality.
Oversubscription for these programs has been common, for example:
A 7:1 oversubscription of the annual grant scheme in WA of $1 million was the average from
1997-2001, and that scheme subsequently fell by over 50% in size
The Australian Heritage Commission reported an oversubscription of 12:1 in the 1997/98
National Estate Grants Program
T ax Incentives for Heritage Conservation round 3 was oversubscribe d 5:1
The NSW Heritage Assistance Program is typically oversubscribed by 12:1.
This disproportion between applications and available funds masks the broader pool of applicants
who do not apply because the quantity of available funding is manifestly too low.
53
National Incentives Taskforce, Environment Protection and Heritage Council (2004)
PAGE
A short summary of separate findings from the NITF report are as follows:
In Western Australia the grant scheme provided $1,000,000 per annum from 1997-2001 (now
reduced)
The South Australian scheme offered a total of $250,000 per annum.
Victorian private property owners could apply from a pool of offered $300,000 per year. The
Victorian Heritage Council offers an option for assistance in the form of subsidise d interest
payments to owners who take out commercial loans for conservation works. The interest
subsidy is paid to the property owner in the form of a grant, equivalent to approximately 3% of
the interest rate.
The New South Wales Heritage Assistance Program has averaged $1.5 million in recent years
Some conservation tools offered by state governments that are not directly related to financial
assistance include:
In New South Wales, if a property is listed in a local environment plan, the owner may be
entitled to parking, building site ratio and land use concessions.
The Victoria Planning provisions allow for otherwise non-complying uses to be permitted in
developments that involve conservation of heritage places.
In South Australia under the Development Act 1993, Councils have the ability to relax
planning and building requirements to encourage use or conservation of a heritage site. T his
could include relaxing parking requirements, allowing a use that would not ordinarily be
permitted, or allowing variation to the usual safety and/or disability requirements.
On the local level, a variety of financial and policy tools are in place to assist in heritage
conservation.
In New South Wales, approximately 70 rural local governments operate a heritage fund which
provides small grants and/or loans, generally co-funded by NSW Heritage Office.
In New South Wales and Victoria, a number of local governments provide concessional loans for
heritage conservation work. The City of Broken Hill provides small loans of up to $15,000 over 3
years, with an interest rate which is half the prevailing commercial rate. The City of Greater
Geelong has a similar scheme that has provided over 50 loans since 1990 at an average size of
$5,000.
PAGE
The Melbourne Restoration Fund is a larger loan scheme established in 1988 with funding from the
State Government, City of Melbourne and Bicentennial Program. Loans are repayable over 5 years
or amounts less than $50,000, and 3 years for amounts greater than $50,000. The interest rate is set
at 50% of the prevailing Commonwealth Bond Rate (between 0% and 3% in recent times)54 .
54
A summary of financial assistance programs at the local government level including non-financial tools such as the transferring of
development rights, heritage agreements and technical assistance can be found in Appendix B.
PAGE
Appendix B : Financial Assistance Programs
B.1 A summ ary of financial assistance programs at the local government
City of Sydney - operates the Heritage Floor Space (HFS) scheme. Under the HFS, an owner
of a heritage property may be awarded an amount of HFS by conserving the property. Once all
conservation works are completed to the council’s satisfaction, the HFS can then be sold or
exchanged to enable additional floor space to be built in a new development. Between 1990
and 2001, around 78 sales of HFS took place under the scheme accounting for 119,000m2.
Sale prices varied, but averaged around $608 per square metre in 2000 and $450 per square
metre in 2001.
Adelaide City Council - operates a Transferable Floor Area program. Eleven transactions
were approved between 1988 and 1993, with none since. The Adelaide CBD is experiencing
an economic downturn with a surplus of office space, and hence there is no demand for
heritage floor space transfers. The Adelaide City Council is now considering an alternate
approach using transferable floor area as a means of obtaining other planning dispensations.
Ne w South Wale s Gove rnment - has developed the Heritage Trades T raining Strategy 2000-
2005. The strategy aims to encourage interest in heritage trades in response to a decline in
traditional building skills. The strategy states that ‘buildings are at risk of degradation or loss
simply because there is a lack of skilled trades’ people available to conserve them’. The
training aspect of the strategy targets qualified trades people in the building and construction
industry, particularly through courses in heritage bricklaying, carpentry, joinery, painting,
decorating, stonemasonry, plastering and roof plumbing.
The following figure presents a list of the various forms and limits of financial assistance offered
by local government across Australia;
PAGE
PAGE
.
PAGE
Appendix C : Ballarat Provisions
C.1 Interim Controls and C58 Planning Scheme Amendment
From April 2001 to November 2007 Inner Ballarat, Learmonth and Buninyong had interim heritage
planning controls. Additional heritage study work has been undertaken in support of these interim
controls in these three areas. This work, known as the Ballarat Heritage Stage 2 Study, builds on
work done in Ballarat related to heritage review and analysis since the late 1970s. These interim
controls expiried in November 2006 upon approval of Ballarat’s proposed C58 Planning Scheme
Amendment.The Ballarat Heritage Stage 2 study, which informs the basis of the C58 Amendment,
recommends the inclusion of 19 areas of Ballarat, Learmonth and Buninyong be designated as
“ Heritage Precincts” within the Heritage Overlay in the Ballarat Planning Scheme. Each precinct
will have its own planning provisions included within the planning scheme to protect and better
manage the heritage character within that precinct. Local planning policies will provide direction to
property owners, planners and others when assessing and determining heritage planning permit
applications.
The Heritage Overlay provisions are set out at clause 43.01 within the Ballarat Planning Scheme. A
local schedule to the Overlay lists the properties affected by the Heritage Overlay and any
additional controls which may apply to that particular site. Under the Heritage Overlay a planning
permit is required from Council to:
Subdivide or consolidate land

Demolish or remove a building or part thereof
Construct a building or part thereof
Externally alter a building
Construct or carry out works
Construct or display a sign
Externally paint an unpainted surface
Externally paint a building if the painting constitutes an advertisement.
Within a Heritage Precinct, the primary objective is to ensure that conservation of those elements
that contribute to the area’s significance. Not every building will be significant, and the removal or
alteration of non-contributory elements or the development of these sites is not typically a major
concern. However, if the heritage place is individually significant, or if it contributes to the
significance of an area, a permit for substantial building changes or demolition may be refused if
the proposal would adversely affect the significance of the place.
PAGE
A planning permit is not required under the Heritage Overlay to carry out routine maintenance and
repairs which do not change the appearance of the heritage place. If the repairs or maintenance
involve replacing “ like with like”, then a planning permit may not be required.
To assist in the implementation of the heritage policies in the local planning scheme, Ballarat offers
a Heritage Advisory Service. T he Service is free and offered by the City of Ballarat to assist
residents/ratepayers care for heritage places in the most appropriate way.
Ballarat has also utilised an incorporated document in heritage precincts to more closely link permit
triggers to potential impact on significance.
C.2 C58 Amendment Panel Report

The C58 panel submission made by Ballarat defined and justified the 19 heritage precincts and
described Ballarat’s proposed administrative actions to preserve local heritage whilst streamlining
the planning process for certain actions related to heritage properties and precinct. The Panel report
was returned to Ballarat with, generally, favourable comments and feedback, indicating that
changes to the proposed planning scheme amendment can be treated as modifications (and
therefore not require additional rounds of public consultation). It stated that:
The Panel finds that the Ballarat Heritage Study Stage 2 provides adequate justification for the
application of the Heritage Overlay to the relevant precincts.
The statements of significance in the Ballarat Heritage Study Stage 2 are adequate for the
purpose of identifying the nature of the heritage significance relied upon as justifying the
Heritage Overlay.
In terms of the application of the Heritage Overlay to widespread areas of Ballarat, the Panel
endorses the findings of previous panels that the Heritage Overlay should be applied to places
of identified heritage significance without reference to the effect this may have on other
planning objectives.
The Panel endorses the Council’s proposed use of the incorporated plan as a means of reducing
the burdens associated with the Heritage Overlay in terms of administrative and compliance
costs. The incorporated plan will set out a range of minor works that will not affect the
heritage significance of a place and will exclude these works from the need for a permit.
Negative remarks in the Panel report relate to the fact that many of the concepts and guidance it
contains are not clearly expressed or readily intelligible to people without a heritage conservation
background; possibly offend good conservation practice and the principles of the Burra Charter;
contain material and constraints (egg. height limits) that do not properly belong in a heritage policy
and contain contradictory messages about the appropriate style of alterations, additions and new
development. Moreover, the proposed amendment depends on distinctions such as between
PAGE
significant and non-significant buildings which cannot be ascertained from the amendment or other
exhibited material. Lastly, it provides 19 separate precinct policies which ought to be consolidated
into one heritage policy, with precinct areas/maps used to define where the overall policy applies.
It also notes that the proposed heritage controls may conflict with other strategic objectives within
the Ballarat Planning Scheme, for example on the potential for increasing housing densities within
existing areas. It states that it may be the case that the economic and other benefits associated with
conserving and promoting Ballarat’s heritage outweigh the possible disbenefits (such as density)
associated with application of the overlay. But it is incumbent that the MSS provide more explicit
guidance about the way the Council views the balance between multiple strategic objectives, and
that when policies are formulated, they need to account for this relationship to other strategies55 .
For example, the panel report states that:
“The Panel has concluded there is a strong case for recommending that where heritage
conservation policies include policies which effectively prohibit demolition of significant or
contributory buildings or which otherwise restrict the height or form of new development
contrary to other provisions of the planning scheme, they should not be approved unless they
are supported by an analysis of the way in which the policy will impact on the achievement
of other strategic objectives. The Panel considers that when any such heritage conservation
policies are approved, they should be integrated with other strategies, especially residential
and housing strategies.” (54)
It is in the successful application and management of the planning process where decisions are
made that discern the hierarchy of needs and outcomes for individual sites or buildings.
The Panel report has found that in Ballarat’s use of certain terminology to define and provide
specificity to its heritage designations – that is, State significance, Local significance, Contributory
local significance and Non-contributory heritage places – is inconsistent with AHC (Australian
Heritage Commission) guidelines and therefore will need to change to reflect standard practice
(i.e., significant and non-significant.)
The Heritage Policy should in effect imply that all buildings within a heritage place that are not
listed as ‘not of heritage significance’ within the incorporated document are considered to be prima
facie contributory to the significance of heritage place.
55
At the same time, the Panel takes the view that the Heritage Overlay should be applied to places of identified heritage significance
without reference to the effect this may have on other planning objectives. Other issues and objectives should be considered within the
context of heritage management policies or the decision-making process.
PAGE
There are two types of heritage significance that a building may have. It may be of individual
significance as a heritage place; alternatively, it may be of contributory significance in that it
contributes to the significance of the larger heritage place in which it is located even though it has
no individual heritage significance. The Panel believes that decisions about whether a building is of
contributory significance in a heritage area and whether its removal will have an adverse effect on
the significance of the heritage place or area are fundamental judgements that must be made in the
exercise of discretion under the Heritage Overlay (rather than through the designation of
significance of individual buildings through the policy.)
In application, buildings that are not of heritage significance (but within heritage precincts) that are
seeking demolition should not require a different permit by virtue of its location in the Heritage
precinct. Similarly, external paint controls can be relaxed, except for except the Sturt Street,
Lydiard Street, Bridge Mall/Bakery Hill and Buninyong Precincts (HO181). These measures will
simplify the planning process and reduce costs for Council and owners.
The Panel also recognises that the guidance provided by Victoria DSE in its 2000 Draft Guidelines
for the Assessment of Heritage Planning Applications needs to be updated and finalised, noting that
criteria used to assess heritage significance at a local level and the use of such criteria needs
refinement. The current draft guidelines do not provide adequate distinction between heritage
places that are areas or precincts and those that are buildings of individual significance, and the
differences in approach to their management under the Heritage Overlay.
The Council adopted Amendment C58, taking into account the Panel’s recommendations, in July
2006. The amendment was approved in November 2007.
C.3 Influence of the Burra Charter

The Burra Charter, adopted by Australia ICOMOS (the Australian National Committee of
ICOMOS) in 1979 at Burra, South Australia provides guidance for the conservation and
management of places of cultural significance (cultural heritage places), and is based on the
knowledge and experience of Australia ICOMOS members.
The Charter sets a standard of practice for those who provide advice, make decisions about, or
undertake works to places of cultural significance, including owners, managers and custodians. The
Burra Charter advocates a cautious approach to change: do as much as necessary to care for the
place and to make it useable, but otherwise change it as little as possible so that its cultural
significance is retained.
The following select provisions and explanatory notes (in italics) of the Burra Charter offer some
insight into the goals and actions related to preservation of built form that influence the
development and management of local planning provisions.
PAGE
3.1: Conservation is based on a respect for the existing fabric, use, associations and meanings.
It requires a cautious approach of changing as much as necessary but as little as possible.
7.2: A place should have a compatible use.

The policy should identify a use or combination of uses or constraints on uses that retain the
cultural significance of the place. New use of a place should involve minimal change, to
significant fabric and use; should respect associations and meanings; and where appropriate
should provide for continuation of practices which contribute to the cultural significance of the
place.
8: Conservation requires the retention of an appropriate visual setting and other relationships
that contribute to the cultural significance of the place. New construction, demolition,
intrusions or other changes which would adversely affect the setting or relationships are not
appropriate.
Aspects of the visual setting may include use, siting, bulk, form, scale, character, colour,
texture and materials. Other relationships, such as historical connections, may contribute to
interpretation, appreciation, enjoyment or experience of the place.
15.2: Changes which reduce cultural significance should be reversible, and be reversed when
circumstances permit.
Reversible changes should be considered temporary. Non-reversible change should only be
used as a last resort and should not prevent future conservation action.
15.3: Demolition of significant fabric of a place is generally not acceptable. However, in some
cases minor demolition may be appropriate as part of conservation. Removed significant fabric
should be reinstated when circumstances permit.
21.2: Adaptation should involve minimal change to significant fabric, achieved only after
considering alternatives.
26.1: Work on a place should be preceded by studies to understand the place which should
include analysis of physical, documentary, oral and other evidence, drawing on appropriate
knowledge, skills and disciplines.
The results of studies should be up to date, regularly reviewed and revised as necessary.
26.2: Written statements of cultural significance and policy for the place should be prepared,
justified and accompanied by supporting evidence. T he statements of significance and policy
should be incorporated into a management plan for the place. Statements of significance and
policy should be kept up to date by regular review and revision as necessary. The management
plan may deal with other matters related to the management of the place.
PAGE
C.4 The Objectives of Planning in Victoria
Planning Schemes in Victoria must seek to achieve the objectives of planning in Victoria as set out
in Section 4(1) of the Planning & Environment Act 1987. These objectives are:
To provide for the fair, orderly, economic and sustainable use and development of land.
To provide for the protection of natural and man-made resources and the maintenance of
ecological processes and genetic diversity.
To secure a pleasant, efficient and safe working, living and recreational environment for all
Victorians and visitors to Victoria.
To conserve and enhance those buildings, areas or other places which are of scientific,
aesthetic, architectural or historical interest, or otherwise of special cultural value.
To protect public utilities and other assets and enable the orderly provision and coordination of
public utilities and other facilities for the benefit of the community.
To facilitate development in accordance with the objectives set out in the points above.
To balance the present and future interests of all Victorians.
PAGE
Appendix D : Community workshops
This section summarises the key issues and conclusions raised in the discussions during four
workshops5 6 which were held with different groups, who were as follows:
Workshop 1 - Council Officers

Workshop 2 - Community members
Workshop 3 - Business and development industry
Workshop 4 - Agencies and the University of Ballarat.
From the workshops a general consensus was found that the Ballarat community appreciate and are
proud of their history and heritage including the built heritage. There were some comments that the
appreciation related to a more attractive urban character and attractive streetscapes rather than
heritage per se. However, it was recognised that the heritage buildings are an important part of the
overall attraction. It was also suggested that the interim heritage overlay tended to protect the
streetscape rather than the heritage buildings directly.
It was noted that there has been an influx of new residents from Melbourne and these new entrants
are helping to change perceptions and focus older residents’ appreciation of the City’s heritage.
These new entrants were apparently drawn to Ballarat by the cities range of, relatively, affordable
heritage homes. T he real estate industry participants indicated that heritage houses sell at a
premium but are still very affordable compared with a similar home in Melbourne.
The discussion suggested that the smaller miner’s cottages were less sought after than the larger
brick and weatherboard houses, although there are a number of these dwellings that have been
renovated and extended very attractively in Ballarat. Some participants wondered how many of
these smaller cottages were needed and whether some of the less attractive examples need to be
protected.
There was a lot of discussion about heritage restoration and maintenance of heritage properties.
The majority, although not a consensus, view was that heritage properties were more expensive to
restore and maintain due to such issues as:
Ceiling heights that required the hire of scaffolding for simple tasks such as painting
More time consuming techniques such as wet plaster rather than plaster board, on site joinery
rather than installation of factory units etc.
56
Notes on the workshop discussions are provided at Appendix B
PAGE
Limited number of skilled and knowledgeable trades people.
This issue of cost related to both residential and commercial properties. There were also some
concerns that heritage protection could impact on commercial developments but this was not seen
as insurmountable. It was noted that some previous heritage advisors had been very helpful in
facilitating commercial developments, others less so. The lack of consistency in heritage advice has
been an issue and a proactive advisory process as noted below, based on a clear vision and strategy
would help solve many issues.
It was also noted that on occasion the heritage strategy and the retail strategy seemed at odds.
Again a pro active advisory process could address this.
Concerns were raised with commercial and public buildings in relation to disability access. This
aspect also applied to streetscapes with concerns about walking and wheelchair use on cobbled
streets.
There was a range of discussion about residential restoration problems. The general view was that
many of the problem stories related to projects where the initial homework had not been done. This
lack of planning led to extra costs through delays in approvals, rework to replace faulty or
inappropriate work or materials, need to hire additional equipment, additional time due to lack of
skills or experience of the contractors, etc. It was suggested that many of these issues could be
addressed by a more proactive advisory approach to prospective buyers. This issue is addressed
below.
It was suggested that Ballarat has a very good collection of 1880’s and up to the early 1900s
buildings, public, commercial and residential, but no really iconic building. As such the City
needed to maintain its breadth and depth of collection and ensure it is displayed and promoted
appropriately. The feeling was that this is not yet ‘sold’ well by the City.
It was noted that Sovereign Hill is recreating the Ballarat of the 1850s and early 1860s which is
largely lost providing a real opportunity for the rest of the City to showcase the post Gold period
with its elegant and in some cases majestic buildings ‘built on gold’ and on the post gold economy.
This would allow Ballarat to complement Sovereign Hill and potentially be a more equal partner in
attracting visitors. The feeling was that Ballarat is under selling the sophistication of the late 1800s.
The need to link heritage with history was noted. It was considered that opportunities were lost if
buildings were divorced from the stories of the people who lived there. Ensuring these stories are
told was seen to offer more to a prospective buyer as well as offering an opportunity to develop the
heritage tourism market across the City as well as through Sovereign Hill and the Eureka Centre.
Ways of doing this include plaques on heritage buildings as in London, heritage trails and either
guided or self guided walks.
PAGE
In general it was felt that the City should be more proactive in developing and supporting its
heritage. A key point in this was that the City should have a full time heritage advisor. It sends the
wrong message to have no advisor or a part time one.
It was suggested Council needed to be proactive in its support for heritage conservation including:
Providing a consistent Vision within a heritage Strategy

Providing or facilitating the development of a one stop shop in relation to heritage
restoration/maintenance advice and practice
On going community education on good practice in heritage protection, restoration and
conservation. This could include education and training programs, a regular heritage column in
the paper, an advisory talk back program on radio, etc.
Prospective purchasers could receive advice on:
Permit requirements
Direct advice from the Heritage advisor on:
Appropriate works, suppliers and trades people. Council could keep a data base of
accredited trade’s people. Accreditation would be provided by an appropriate third
party such as the proposed Centre for Classical buildings and its registered training
organisation partners
Research on the building, photographs, documentation etc.
Design issues such as colours etc.
Assistance in negotiating contracts and in works supervision, etc.
Incentive schemes
Facilitating the development of appropriate third party advisory bodies
Advocacy for more support for heritage protection and conservation from State and Federal
governments and the private sector
Consideration of facilitating a group insurance scheme for owners of heritage buildings.
It was felt that Council should consider a broader package of incentives linked to following ‘good
practice’ advice, including possibly:
Rating linked to building conservation-reward good practice

Improved grant/soft loan scheme
An award scheme that acknowledges business and residents who have done good work.
Awards would cover a range of categories.
Discussion also noted some potential economic benefits from heritage including:
PAGE
Developing/supporting a range of heritage services including:
Heritage advisory services
Skilled trades people
Heritage materials
Promoting heritage conferences
Developing and delivering a range of heritage education and training courses
Developing heritage awareness games. Note this fits with Ballarat’s ICT industry development
as any games could be both computer based and more traditional games
PAGE
Appendix E : Regional Infrastructure Development Fund
Funded Projects across Regional Victoria
PAGE
Appendix F : Survey Questionnaire
F.1 Value of Historic Heritage to Ballarat Survey
Ballarat is hosting the 2006 League of Historic Cities Conference in October 2006. As part of
preparations for this event Council is examining the benefit of its historic heritage places to the
social and economic wellbeing of the City.
Council is seeking your participation in this survey to gain a better understanding of community
preferences for different heritage protection options. There are no right or wrong answers as
everyone has there own opinion on heritage and its protection.
Your answers will be treated confidentially.
F.2 Background Inform ation – Ballarat

The contribution of heritage to Ballarat’s economy is substantial, forming a basis for significant
employment generated by tourism. Ballarat owes much of its attractiveness as a tourist destination
to its mining activities, impressive 19th century architecture and wide tree-lined streets. Ballarat’s
grand public buildings from the Victorian era are some of the best examples internationally of this
era of development.
The town’s principal tourist attraction is Sovereign Hill which attracts over 500,000 people
annually. Another major attraction is the Eureka Centre which attracts approximately 40,000
people a year. Whilst Sovereign Hill and the Eureka Centre are arguably the most well known
attractions in the City, Ballarat has several other tourist draw cards, including the historic central
business area, Ballarat Botanical Gardens, Lake Wendouree, the Ballarat Fine Art Gallery and the
Gold Muse um.
Over 2 million visitors to Ballarat each year, with a total visitor expenditure of over $300 million.
This consists of 1.4 million day trippers, 654,000 domestic overnight visitors and 25,500
international visitors.
Visitor spending makes a significant contribution to the income of many retail services that are also
utilized by local residents, such as restaurants, cafes and other entertainment. In the absence of
visitor spending, some of these facilities and services would not be able to operate viably.
The social importance of heritage to the well-being of residents in terms of a sense of identity and
pride in visual amenity is a core value of the ‘Vision’ articulated in the City of Ballarat’s
Community Plan “ Blueprint Ballarat” as follows:
“In 2030 Ballarat will be a confident, outward-looking city, as proud of its

heritage as it is ambitious for the prosperity and wellbeing of its people—a city
PAGE
in its own right. .. What will distinguish it from other cities will be the way that
Ballarat values and celebrates its natural environment, its history and its
cultural life. It is these elements that give Ballarat its distinctive identity.”
F.3 Background Heritage Inform ation

Ballarat has a fine range of historic heritage places. There are three main ways in which heritage
places are recorded:
1) The National Heritage List (Eureka Stockade Gardens)

2) The Stage Heritage Register (58 Ballarat sites are listed including the Avenue of Honour, the
Town Hall, Craig’s Hotel and the School of Mines.
3) The Ballarat Planning Scheme Heritage Overlay.
Proposed changes to places on the National Heritage List are overseen by the Commonwealth
Department of Environment and Heritage. Heritage Victoria administers applications in relation to
places on the State Heritage Register and Council administers applications to local heritage places
listed in the Ballarat Planning Scheme.
At present Victoria’s heritage places represent one quarter of all heritage places yet the Victorian
Government spending on heritage is less than one tenth of the national figure.
There are currently 182 places listed in the Heritage Overlay of the Ballarat Planning Scheme.
This is made up of individually listed places as well as precinct areas which contain several
buildings within the one listing. Council has recently prepared a study that looks at some precinct
areas within inner Ballarat. The Study recommends:
Including six new heritage precincts in the Heritage Overlay of the Ballarat Planning Scheme
Considering a number of properties for individual listing in the Heritage Overlay
There is much that the City of Ballarat does to preserve its heritage, including:
Identifying heritage places (i.e. undertaking heritage studies) and amending the Planning
Scheme to include these places in the Heritage Overlay
Considering demolition requests and permit applications
Employing a full time Heritage Officer who:
Provides advice to statutory planners to guide decision making on planning permit
applications
Liaises with property owners and other Council officers to advice on ways to achieve
heritage conservation of individual buildings and/or public works
Promotes heritage issues and educates the community
PAGE
Advises on policy development
Administers the Ballarat incentives scheme and interest free loans to land owners
Maintaining heritage buildings owned and/or operated by the City of Ballarat
Undertaking capital works as a result of measures/processes to ensure that works respect the
heritage values of various public areas, and
Renovating buildings in the City’s ownership. e.g. ‘Her Majesty’s T heatre’ and the former
Ballarat Mining Exchange.
Managing a ‘Ballarat Heritage Special Committee’ that overseas the City’s financial incentives and
interest free loans scheme.
F.4 Survey Instrument

T his survey is based on the survey used by the Allen Consulting Group (the Allen survey) in
undertaking the Valuing the Priceless: The Value of Historic Heritage in Australia for the Heritage
Chairs and Officials Group. By utilising the methodology utilised in the Allen Survey a recent
comparison for results in the national and state context can be achieved.
As this survey is focused on the value of historic heritage to Ballarat some changes have been
undertaken. The Allen survey was based on national heritage funding figures. Ballarat represents
0.674% of the combined national / state listed places, therefore the heritage protection options
presented relate to Ballarat’s share of the national figure utilised in the Allen survey.
This survey covers historic heritage since European settlement. Historic heritage places can be
included:
Buildings (Sturt St shops; Town Hall, individual houses, St Patrick’s etc

Design gardens and parks (Buninyong Botanic Gardens, Victoria Park, Ballarat Botanic
Gardens, Avenue of Honour)
Old mines, factories
Railways, roads, bridges (Ballarat Station)
Ruins
Places that show how people lived and worked (Sovereign Hill, Eureka Centre)
Monuments and memorials (Arch of Victoria; T itanic Memorial Bandstand), and
Historic Streets, suburbs and towns (Sturt St; Buninyong; Ballarat West Precinct etc)
This Survey will ask you to evaluate your preferences for a number of options. The table below
outlines important information to help complete the survey.
PAGE
Heritage Attributes Description
Number of Heritage Places One aspect of managing out heritage is to protect places f rom being lost. Listing
protected f rom loss of places on a statutory register helps this but does not guarantee against loss.
This ref ers to the physical soundness of a place and whether the place has
Condition and integrity of
preserv ed the original f eatures of the place. Places in poor condition may be an
places
ey esore whilst restored places may not hav e maintained a heritage character.
The measure of the proportion of listed places that come from different historic
Age and mix of places periods – the different age of places (egg Victorian, Edwardian, Modern, post
modern, art deco)
Whether the public is able to v isit a historic place and get hands on experience
Public accessibility at the place and gain a deeper appreciation of the place’s v alue and meaning,
egg photography, guided tours, workshops, open days etc.
The lev el of control on dev elopment in and around heritage places. Some f orm
Planning control of control is necessary but the lev el of control could vary depending on the
heritage outcomes being sought.
F.5 Heritage Protection Options

F.5.1 The ‘no change’ option
One option for heritage protection is to continue with the same level of funding and same type of
management programs. Currently the State / T erritory and Commonwealth governments spend
around $10 per person on heritage protection.
Heritage experts estimate that the current level of spending and programs will lead to the following
20 ye ar outcomes:
Places protected from loss:
An additional 5000 places will be protected f rom loss across Australia over the next 20 years. Ballarat’s share
of those places (% of overall heritage stock) will be 34 places.
Condition and integrity of places:
At present about 20% of all places listed on official registers are in good condition and high integrity. Ov er the
next 20 y ears, this proportion is expected to fall to 15% of places due to f unding limitations.
Age mix of places:
At present, about 80% of listed places are more than 100 years old. Over the next 20 years, this proportion is
expected to increase slightly to 85% as places progressively get older.
Public Accessibility:
PAGE
At present, about 10% of listed places are accessible as most places are private residences or commercial
office properties. Over the next 20 years, this proportion is expected to f all to 5% of places due to funding
limitations.
Development control:
Under the current system, substantial modif ications are permitted to heritage places, although approv al f or
demolition is rare. Ov er the next 20 y ears, demolition approvals may become more common as it is becoming
more difficult to control dev elopment.
Question 1 Overall, based on these outcomes, do you think enough is being done in Ballarat to
protect historic heritage?
No, too little is being done
Yes, about right
Too much is being done
Don’t know
Question 2 Historic heritage protection is funded by all levels of government. If more funds were
to become available, where do you think the additional money should be spent? (Please tick one
box only)
Places of significance to the nation (i.e. Eureka Stockade Garden)
Places of significance to Victoria (egg Craig’s Hotel, Avenue of Honour, School of

Mines)
Places of significance to Ballarat (egg Dana St School, Sturt St Precinct, Soldier Hill)
Don’t know
PAGE
Question 3a Visitors to Ballarat What is the purpose of your visit?
– Visit friends and relatives – Visit friends and relatives

– Go shopping (pleasure) – Go shopping (pleasure)
– Visit history, heritage buildings or – Visit history, heritage buildings or
monuments monuments
– Visit museums or art galleries – Visit museums or art galleries
– Visit botanical or other public gardens – Visit botanical or other public gardens
– Visit amusements or theme parks – Visit amusements or theme parks
– Attend an organised sporting event – Attend an organised sporting event
– Eat out at restaurants, go to pubs, clubs – Eat out at restaurants, go to pubs, clubs
– General sight seeing – General sight seeing
– Go on a daytrip to another place – Go on a daytrip to another place
– Picnics or BBQs, outdoor activities – Picnics or BBQs, outdoor activities
– Bush walking or rainforest walks – Bush walking or rainforest walks
– Movies or videos – Movies or videos
How long are you staying in Ballarat? __________
Question 3b Residents of Ballarat: What activities do you undertake in Ballarat?
– Visit friends and relatives – Attend organised sporting events

– Go shopping (pleasure) – Eat out at restaurants, go to pubs, clubs
– Visit history, heritage buildings or – General sight seeing
monuments – Go on a daytrip to another place
– Visit museums or art galleries – Picnics or BBQs, outdoor activities
– Visit botanical or other public gardens – Bush walking or rainforest walks
– Visit amusements or theme parks – Movies or videos
What venues or sites do you take visitors to in Ballarat?
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
PAGE
To what extent does Ballarat’s built heritage and character influence your decision to live in
Ballarat?
It is the main reason I live in Ballarat

It is an important part of why I live in Ballarat
It is something I enjoy but does not influence why I live in Ballarat
It is not important to me.
Alternative Management O ptions
For some people, the ‘no change’ option may not be their preferred option.
One way of doing more for heritage would be to establish a levy specifically for protecting historic
heritage. The Levy could be introduced through the tax system or collected as part of council rates.
The proceeds of the levy could be managed through a trust fund. Whilst the details of this proposal
would need to be worked out and there may be other options to raise funds we would like you to
consider what could be achieved with additional funding and how you value these changes.
With additional funding there would be scope to do more for heritage so that:
More places are protected from loss

Improvements made too the condition and integrity of heritage places
The age mix of places could be changed
Places could be made more accessible to the public.
The purpose of this survey is to find out your preferences for these outcomes.
You will now be shown a range of alternative options with a different package of 20 year
outcomes.
Your task is to pick the option that suits you best. T his task will be repeated 8 times. Please treat
each question independently.
Some of the options require you to make an annual payment through a levy payable as part of
your tax return. Whilst this is a hypothetical exercise, we would like you to treat the question
se riously and answer honestly as if considering a real payment.
PAGE
Question 4 Please consider the three heritage protection options below. Packages of 20 year
outcomes are shown for each option.
No change to current
Alternative Option 1 Alternative Option 2
management option
Additional Number of
places protected over 20 34 54 13.5
y ears
Condition and integrity of
places (% of listed
places in good condition
15% 20% 40%
and high integrity after
20 y ears)
Many over 100 y ears old, Many over 100 y ears
Age mix of places All ov er 100 y ears old
some more recent old, some more recent
Public Accessibility (% of
listed places accessible
5% 25% 20%
in 20 y ears)
Substantial
Demolition permitted Minor modif ications
Planning control modif ications permitted
subject to assessment permitted.
but no demolition
Annual levy payment $0 $200 $200
I would prefer: Tick one box only
Alternative Option 1
No change option
PAGE
No change to
current Alternative Option 1 Alternative Option 2
management option
Additional Number of places
34 15 68
protected ov er 20 years
Condition and integrity of places (%
of listed places in good condition
15% 80% 15%
and high integrity after 20 y ears)
Many over 100 y ears
Half over 100 y ears
Age mix of places old, some more All ov er 100 y ears old
old, half more recent
recent
Public Accessibility (% of listed
places accessible in 20 y ears) 5% 15% 20%
Demolition permitted Demolition permitted
No modifications
Planning control subject to subject to
permitted
assessment assessment
No change option
PAGE
No change to
management option
34 13.5 13.5
15% 80% 20%
Many over 100 y ears Almost all over 100
Age mix of places old, some more All ov er 100 y ears old y ears old, few more
recent recent
No modifications
permitted
No change option
PAGE
No change to
management option
34 68 13.5
15% 15% 80%
recent
No modifications
permitted.
No change option
PAGE
Question 8 Please consider the three heritage protection options below. A package of 20 year
No change to
management option
34 34 13.5
15% 40% 40%
Age mix of places old, some more y ears old, few more All ov er 100 y ears old
recent recent
Demolition permitted
Minor modif ications Minor modif ications
Planning control subject to
permitted. permitted.
assessment
No change option
PAGE
No change to
management option
34 68 54
15% 15% 40%
Age mix of places old, some more y ears old, few more
recent recent
Substantial
modif ications Minor modif ications
permitted by no permitted.
assessment
demolition
No change option
PAGE
No change to
management option
Additional Number of places 34 34 13.5
protected over 20 y ears
(% of listed places in good
condition and high integrity after 20 15% 40% 20%
y ears)
Age mix of places old, some more y ears old, few more
recent recent
Minor modif ications Minor modif ications
permitted. permitted.
assessment
No change option
PAGE
No change to current
Alternative Option 1 Alternative Option 2
management option
34 54 54
(% of listed places in good
condition and high integrity after 15% 20% 15%
20 y ears)
Many over 100 y ears old,
some more recent
recent
Substantial Substantial
Demolition permitted modif ications modif ications
Planning control
subject to assessment permitted but no permitted but no
demolition demolition
No change option
Question 12 – only answer if you answered ‘no change” to each choice set.
In the previous eight questions you selected the ‘no change’ option for every question. Which
statement below most closely describes your reason for making this choice? Did you choose the
‘no change’ option for ALL questions because:
4) I believe that historic heritage is already well managed

5) I support more protection but can’t afford to contribute to the cost
6) I oppose the idea of a heritage levy
I am prepared to pay for additional heritage outcomes but distrust that my payment into a fund will
be wisely spent
I didn’t know which option was best so I stuck with the ‘no change’ option
PAGE
Question 13 - To what ex tent do you agree or disagree with the following statements about heritage?
Neither
It is important to educate Strongly Strongly
Agree agree or Disagree
children about heritage agree disagree
disagree
It is important to keep historic
f eatures wherev er possible when
try ing to improv e towns and cities
Built heritage can mean small and
modest places as well as grand
historic buildings and churches
The historic buildings in my local
area are worth sav ing and are
important parts of heritage
The historic houses in my local
area are an important part of the
area’s character and identity
Celebrating heritage is important
Heritage can mean recent as well
as old buildings
Looking after our heritage is
important in creating jobs and
boosting the economy
Heritage plays an important part in
Australia’s culture
We protect too much heritage

It is possible to keep heritage
places and prov ide f or the needs of
today
My lif e is richer for having the
opportunity to v isit or see heritage
I don’t know what heritage
activ ities are taking place in my
area
There’s nev er any information on
the heritage topics of interest to me
Australia’s heritage is not relev ant
to me or my f amily
Heritage is a part of Australia’s
identity
It is important to protect heritage
places even though I may nev er
visit them
PAGE
Question 14 - If more money was to be spent on he ritage issues, which of the following would
you choose to spend it on?
Please rank in order of importance from 1-10 where 1 is the most important item and 10 is the
least important item. Please put a number in every box and do not give two or more items the same
ranking.
€ Education about heritage

€ Re-using historic buildings
€ Protecting non-built heritage (e.g. cemeteries, shipwrecks, old mines)
€ Improved public access to historic buildings and places
€ Better information on how people can look after their heritage
€ Exploring the heritage of different cultures in the local area
€ Looking after historic heritage
€ Improved protection and recognition of more recent heritage (post 1950)
€ Buying out or compensating owners of properties who lose development opportunities as a
result of heritage listing
€ Other (please specify)

____________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
A Few Questions about You…
To finish, we would like to ask you some questions about yourself to ensure that we are surveying
a wide range of people.
Please note that the information collected here will only be used for statistical analysis and will not
be passed on to any third parties or used in any other way.
Question 15. What is your gender?
€ male
€ female
Question 16. Please indicate whether any of the following applies to you. Tick the relevant
box(es).
€ Member of a historic society or club?
PAGE
€ Past or present member of a local council?
€ Volunteered your time for heritage activities?
€ Donated to heritage causes in the last 12 months?
€ Own or live in a heritage-listed property?
€ None of the above apply to me
Question 17. Which age do bracket to you belong to?
€ 18-24 € 50-54
€ 25-29 € 55-59
€ 30-34 € 60-64
€ 35-39 € 65-69
€ 40-44 € 70+
€ 45-49
Question 18. What is the highest level of formal education qualification you have completed?
€ Post Graduate
€ Graduate Diploma or Graduate
Certificate
€ Bachelor Degree
€ Advanced Diploma or Diploma
€ Certificate
€ Year 12 or equivalent
€ Year 11 or equivalent
€ Year 7 to Year 10
€ Primary School
€ Other Please specify _________
PAGE
Question 19. Please indicate your gross income (before tax, including pensions and
allowances)
that you receive each week from all sources
€ Less than $120 per week (up to $5,759 per year)

€ $120 to $299 per week ($5,760 to $14,352 per year)
€ $1,000 to $1,499 per week ($47,953 to $71,952 per year)
€ $1,500 to $1,999 per week ($71,953 to $95,952 per year)
€ $2,000 or more per week (over $95,953 per year)
€ I prefer not to answer
Question 20. What is your postcode? __ ___ __ __
Question 21. Are you an Australian citizen?
€ Yes
€ No
Those are all the questions we have for you today.
Thank you for your time and assistance with this proje ct.
PAGE 84
Appendix G : Properties listed under Ballarat In
the Victorian Heritage Register
PUBLIC BUILDINGS
NO. ITEM NAME ADDRESS
BALLARAT FINE ART GALLERY, 40 LY DIARD STREET
1 EUREKA FLAG
BALLARAT
3 ST ANDREWS KIRK & SCHOOL
4 CAMP STREET PRECINCT CAMP STREET BALLARAT
5 OLD CURIOSITY SHOP 7 QUEEN STREET BALLARAT
22 BARKLEY STREET AND PRINCES STREET
6 BALLARAT FIRE STATION
BALLARAT EAST
LY DIARD STREET NORTH & STURT STREET
7 BALLARAT POST OFFICE
BALLARAT
8 BALLARAT TOWN HALL 25 STURT STREET BALLARAT
9 GEORGE HOTEL 25 LYDIARD STREET NORTH BALLARAT
10 CRAIG'ROY AL HOTEL 10-16 LYDIARD STREET SOUTH BALLARAT
11 FINE ART GALLERY 40-50 LYDIARD STREET NORTH BALLARAT
12 FORMER POLICE STATION CAMP STREET BALLARAT
13 HER MAJESTY '
S THEATRE 17 LYDIARD STREET SOUTH BALLARAT
121 LYDIARD STREET NORTH AND CORNER
14 THE PROVINCIAL HOTEL
ARARAT STREET BALLARAT
FORMER UNICORN HOTEL
16 127 STURT STREET BALLARAT
FACADE AND VERANDAH
17 BUNINY ONG TOWN HALL 307-309 LEARMONTH STREET BUNINY ONG
18 FORMER LIBRARY 408 WARRENHEIP STREET BUNINY ONG
FORMER BALLARAT EAST FREE

19 25-29 BARKLY STREET BALLARAT
LIBRARY
RESIDENCES
1 CLOWANCE 518 BARKLEY STREET BALLARAT
2 BALLANTRAE GEELONG ROAD & MIDLAND HIGHWAY BALLARAT
3 FORMER RESIDENCE 802 STURT STREET BALLARAT

4 BISHOPS PALACE 1444 STURT STREET BALLARAT
5 MONTROSE COTTAGE 111 EUREKA STREET BALLARAT
6 LAUDERDALE 7 PRINCE STREET ALFREDTON
7 Y ARROWEE HALL 1 DARLING STREET BALLARAT
COMMERCIAL / RETAIL BUILDINGS

PAGE
1 FORMER MINING EXCHANGE 12 LYDIARD STREET NORTH BALLARAT
2 ANZ BANK 202 LYDIARD STREET NORTH BALLARAT
FORMER REIDS COFFEE
3 128 STURT STREET BALLARAT
PALACE
4 WESTPAC BANK 13 LYDIARD STREET NORTH BALLARAT
5 ANZ BANK 9 LYDIARD STREET NORTH BALLARAT
6 ALEXANDRIA TEA ROOMS 26-34 LYDIARD STREET NORTH BALLARAT
101 MAIR STREET AND CORNER CAMP STREET
7 PRATTS WAREHOUSE
BALLARAT
8 FORMER UNION BANK BUILDING 4-6 LYDIARD STREET SOUTH BALLARAT
HISTORICAL MINING SITES & ASSOCIATED BUILDINGS

WEST NEWINGTON GOLD STURT STREET AND RUSSELL STREET AND
1
MINING SITE ALFRED STREET BALLARAT
TEMPERANCE MINE SITE AND
2 BALLARAT CITY
HEAD OF EUREKA LEAD
BUNINY ONG CREEK ALLUVIAL
3
WORKINGS
4 BAND OF HOPE NO. 9
FRENCHMAN' S GULLY /
5
KANGAROO GULLY WORKINGS
BUNINY ONG RAND CO.
6 PREVIOUSLY THE BUNINY ONG
ESTATE CO.
7 PRINCE OF WALES NO. 1 PRINCE STREET SEBASTOPOL
NORTH PRINCE REGENT SOUTH
8 WOAH HAUP (ALSO KNOWN AS
REWARD MINE)
9 WOAH HAUP CANTON GEELONG ROAD BALLARAT
BALLARAT EXTENDED NO. 1 &
10
NO. 2
11 PARK MINE / BAND OF HOPE
NORTH PRINCE EXTENDED
12
MINE
NORTH PRINCE EXTENDED
13
MINE
14 GOLD DISCOVERY MONUMENT
ALL NATIONS OR TOWER HILL
15
CO.
DALZELL-CUM-PRINCE REGENT
16
MINE
17 HOMEWARD BOUND CO.
18 SOVEREIGN MINE OFF MAGPIE STREET BALLARAT
19 OUTWARD BOUND CO.
EVENING STAR (LATER KNOWN
20
AS) WORKING MINERS NO. 2
DESOZA CO. / AUSTRALIAN
21
GOLD DEVELOPMENT
22 WINTER'S FREEHOLD NO. 2
23 BUNINY ONG ESTATE (BISHOP'
S)
24 NORTH WOAH HAUP MINE OFF ELSWORTH STREET WEST BALLARAT
PRINCE OF WALES OR
25
BONSHAW' S
26 TINWORTH'
S MINE OFF GEELONG ROAD BALLARAT
PAGE
HISTORICAL MINING SITES & ASSOCIATED BUILDINGS
27 BLACK HILL REEF WORKINGS SIMS STREET BLACK HILL
28 TURNTIDE CO.
PRINCE IMPERIAL AND ALBION
29
CONSOLS
30 IMPERIAL NO. 1 CO.
31 NEW NORMANBY MINE OFF MAGPIE STREET BALLARAT
QUEENS G.M. NO. 1 OR NEW
32 PHEASANT OR FRENCHMAN' S
MINE
33 GREAT CENTRAL CO.
34 JOHN BULL CO.
35 BUNINY ONG NEW CO.
LEVIATHAN G.M. NO. 3,
36 PREVIOUSLY THE SCOTTISH-
CORNISH NO. 2
37 OLD FORTIES CO.
38 GREAT BRITAIN CO.
39 GREAT BUNINY ONG ESTATE CO.
40 BONDSHAW CO.
UNITED WORKINGS MINERS NO.
41
2 SHAFT
42 ENFIELD CO.
43 GREEN HILL CO.
44 SOUTH IMPERIAL CO.
SCOTTISH AND CORNISH G.M.
45
NO. 1
BUNINY ONG FREEHOLD G.M.
46 NO. 4 LATER BUNINY ONG GOLD
MINE NO. 4
47 OPTIMUS CO.
48 BUNINY ONG
CO.
49 DEVONSHIRE LEAD MINES
NO. 1 ORIGINALLY THE
50
BUNINY ONG GOLD MINE CO.
NO. 1
PRINCE OF WALES G.M. CO. NO.
51 MILES STREET SEBASTOPOL
3 CAMP G.M. CO.
52 MONMOUTH CO.
53 LEVIATHAN NO. 1
54 EAST REDAN OR PHOENIX CO. SAGO HILL ROAD BUNKERS
55 WHIPSTICK GULLY PUDDLER
MAIN LEAD ALLUVIAL NR BALLARAT-MARY BOROUGH RAILWAY LINE
56
WORKINGS ADELAIDE LEAD
57 MOPOKE GULLY SLUICING BALLARAT CITY & HEPBURN SHIRE
58 TOWER HILL CO. OFF JONES AVENUE CANADIAN
59 WOAH HAUP CENTRAL MINE BRADLEY S LANE CANADIAN
60 DALZELL & BUCHANAN MINE OFF WHITEHORSE ROAD CANADIAN
61 WOAH HAUP NO. 1 MINE WHITEHORSE ROAD CANADIAN
PAGE
OTHERS (MEMORIALS, MONUMENTS, RELIGIOUS BUILDINGS, SCHOOLS, FARMING &
MANUFACTURING)
OLD BALLARAT CEMETERY, CRESWICK ROAD
1 EUREKA MEMORIALS
BALLARAT
2 AVENUE OF HONOUR BALLARAT-BURRUMBEET ROAD
ALFREDTON CARDIGAN WINDERMERE
3 ARCH OF VICTORY WEATHERBOARD BURRUMBEET AND BALLARAT
ROAD
4 BARKLEY STREET AND CORNER PRINCESS
4 SY NAGOGUE
STREET BALLARAT
STURT STREET AND DAWSON STREET AND
5 ST ANDREWS KIRK & SCHOOL
RAGLAN STREET NORTH BALLARAT
6 TWO MILE HILL WELLS BALLARAT SOUTH
POVERTY POINT GOLD
7
DISCOVERY MONUMENT
8 ROSE HILL NO. 1
9 EDWARDS PYRITES WORKS
Y ARROWEE CREEK SLUICING
10
DUMP
CENTRAL PLATEAU OR BAND
11
OF HOPE
BUNINY ONG GOLD DISCOVERY
12
MONUMENT
MOUNT BECKWORTH ROAD AND EVANSFORD
13 STONEHENGE DAM
ROAD WAUBRA
EVANSFORD ROAD WAUBRA AND MOUNT
14 STONEHENGE HUT
BECKWORTH ROAD WAUBRA JUNCTION
15 FRANK WILSONS GRAVE DOVETON STREET NORTH INVERWAY
16 JENKINS BARN / DIARY WESTERN HIGHWAY AND CLARKS ROAD BALLARAT
17 EUREKA STOCKADE EUREKA STREET BALLARAT EAST

MCKENNAS LANE COBBLED
18 MCKENNAS LANE BALLARAT
ROAD AND DRY STONE WALL
19 AVENUE OF TREES WESTERN HIGHWAY BALLARAT
EUREKA STREET RODIER STREET STAWELL
20 EUREKA HISTORIC PRECINCT STREET SOUTH CHARLESWORTH STREET
BALLARAT
MORONGO PRIVATE BOARDING 205 BALLARAT ROAD AND 5-61 ANAKIE ROAD BELL
21
SCHOOL POST HILL
BUNINY ONG BOTANICE
21 LEARMONTH STREET BUNINY ONG
GARDENS
22 MARY S MOUNT 1600 STURT STREET BALLARAT
OUTSIDE CRAIG'S HOTEL, 10-16 LYDIARD STREET
23 GAS LAMPS
BALLARAT
QUEEN ALEXANDRA
24 STURT STREET BALLARAT
BANDSTAND
CURTIS STREET LOWE STREET SHEPPARD STREET
25 RANGER BARRACKS
BALLARAT
26 MECHANICS INSTITUTE 115-119 STURT STREET BALLARAT
27 KINNEARS ROPEWORKS 124-188 BALLARAT ROAD FOOTSCRAY
FORMER FEMALE REFUGE
28 183 SCOTT PARADE BALLARAT EAST
COMPLEX
29 BALLARAT HIGH SCHOOL STURT STREET WEST BALLARAT
OVER MOORABOOL RIVER AND BALLARAT-
30 RAILWAY VIADUCT
GEELONG LINE MOORABOOL BATESFORD
PAGE
OTHERS (MEMORIALS, MONUMENTS, RELIGIOUS BUILDINGS, SCHOOLS, FARMING &
MANUFACTURING)
1 DAWSON STREET NORTH AND CNR STURT
31 ST ANDREWS UNITING CHURCH
STREET BALLARAT
ST PATRICKS CATHEDRAL AND
32 STURT STREET AND DAWSON STREET BALLARAT
HALL
TITANIC MEMORIAL
33 STURT STREET BALLARAT
BANDSTAND
FORMER CONGREGATIONAL 503 MAIR STREET AND DAWSON STREET NORTH
34
CHURCH AND HALL BALLARAT
FORMER WESLEY AN CHURCH 101 LYDIARD STREET SOUTH AND DANA STREET
35
AND SUNDAY SCHOOL BALLARAT
GLENELG HIGHWAY BETWEEN SCARSDALE AND
36 STONE MILEPOSTS
BALLARAT
37 PRIMARY SCHOOL NO. 2093 MONTE STREET NERRINA
RAIL BRIDGE AND GEELONG-BALLARAT LINE ELAINE AND MOUNT
38
EMBANKMENT DORAN-EGLINGTON ROAD ELAINE
FORMER PRIMARY SCHOOL NO. CORNER WESTERN HIGHWAY AND WHITES ROAD
39
668 CARDIGAN
BALLARAT MUNICIPAL 439 COBDEN STREET AND MAGPIE STREET
40
OBSERVATORY BALLARAT
41 SCHOOL OF MINES LY DIARD STREET SOUTH BALLARAT
OLD COLONISTS CLUB
42 16-24 LYDIARD STREET NORTH BALLARAT
ASSOCIATION
43 FORMER BAPTIST CHURCH 3 DAWSON STREET SOUTH BALLARAT
44 PRIMARY SCHOOL NO. 33 401 DANA STREET BALLARAT
45 BALLARAT TRADES HALL 24-26 CAMP STREET BALLARAT
46 BALLARAT RAILWAY COMPLEX 140 LYDIARD STREET NORTH BALLARAT
PAGE
Appendix H : Workshop Notes
H.1 Workshop 1
Attendees (all from Ballarat Council):
Andrew Miller Jeff Hayden

Eoghan McColl Sue Howard
Cr. Herman Ruyg Barb Chalkey
David Keenan
Attendees represented Community and Culture, Statutory Planning, Economic

Development, Infrastructure and one Councillor
General consensus of community pride toward heritage
Statutory planner noted enthusiasm for heritage wanes when people feel / perceive that it
limits their individual actions at their properties
One comment on how community seems complacent and not all that engaged in heritage
issues. A very vocal minority (i.e. Citizens for Thoughtful Development) is seen as
carrying the banner; there’s a noticeable drop-off of interest / engagement once groups
like this are accounted for
Some (RE development community) would sugge st that the central core of Ballarat is
blighted by its heritage; it prevents development and pushes activity elsewhere
“ Heritage” and “ urban character” often confused / conflated
In regional perception studies from T ourism Vic, Ballarat comes at or near the top in
responses / visitor perception
Influx of Melbournians is changing the way that heritage is valued / appreciated in
Ballarat. Melbournians are buying in because of the heritage and can afford to maintain /
upgrade properties. Local residents may be more pragmatic about heritage properties and
recognise not every property can be kept. Creates some local tension in outlook toward
maintenance and development.
Heritage properties are expensive to maintain. Many sell rather than struggle to keep
pouring money into premises. Painting cited as a significant issue. O.H. & S. regulations
that now require scaffolding are more likely to hit owners of heritage versus non-heritage
properties.
Some discussion on merits (environmentally) of heritage; are they eco-friendly because
of embodied energy, reuse of materials, or not because they tend to be energy intensive
Disability access also a problem; some buildings not easy to adapt to current codes /
community expectations on access. With ageing population, this is an issue particularly
with public and commercial buildings
Comment on “how many miner cottages do you need?” Are there too many properties
being protected? Sugge stion that there’s an imperative to maintain the “ quality precincts”
but perhaps let others go more by the market.
PAGE
Drawing very hard boundaries on keeping only a number of heritage areas risks “theme
park” type presentation of Ballarat / certain neighbourhoods
Several comments on “ history” versus “ heritage” – suggested there was a need to
separate the two; other comments suggest its not just the buildings but the history that
accompanies them that is critical
Business community has mixed opinions on heritage
It can be used as a weapon to stop development – frame the opposition in terms of losing
/ badly altering a heritage property, where in fact the opposition stems from other
considerations
Discussion on the Commonwealth Bank, proposal to rebuild (this was noted as contrary
to the Burra Charter)
Council loses money on the Miner’s Exchange
Suggestion that the mix of heritage properties has been good for attracting skilled
tradespeople that can work on the buildings (though this is tempered by the fact that
there’s an overall shortage of skilled trades people.) Suppliers present in Ballarat that are
focused on the heritage market.
OHS issues with working on / with old materials, old tools
RE agents were cited as a problem. They don’t properly explain to buyers what
restrictions or issues may be present when buying a heritage property. Leads to unhappy
residents when they seek approval from Council and are unsuccessful because they didn’t
know the particulars
Statutory planning in Ballarat was defended – 70% of applications were issued in 60 days
or less. Hard to blame heritage for causing a slowdown in planning processes
The planning controls in place (as part of planning scheme via interim controls pending
formal adoption) are a response to development pressures (inappropriate development).
Controls take a “ precinct” rather than “ building” perspective. However, Ballarat has been
slow to put in place proper controls and it feels like they are playing catch up.
Phoenix Hotel often cited as problem development where Council has made it too
difficult for anything to happen there; Council suggests that the impasse / inactivity lies
with the developer.
H.2 Workshop 2
Attendees (Community representatives):
Andrew Small Greg Binns

Dianne Gow Dina McCance
Liz Sheedy Anne Beggs Sunter
Heritage is Ballarat’s biggest asset
PAGE
Question mark on how much community truly appreciates the heritage aspects, save a
few key / iconic buildings
A level of complacency seen now – though things tend to go in cycles
Streetscapes are often better appreciated than the buildings, the history of the place
Ballarat has a problem selling itself and its heritage
RE agents know that a heritage property, even if run down, will sell better, for more, than
a 5 or 15 year old home
Social benefits / social features of heritage are critical (but perhaps overlooked)
Many examples of people drawn to Ballarat to explore the heritage, the history and the
stories. Overseas visitors seeking information on family members once in Ballarat during
the gold rush
The interpretation of Ballarat’s heritage, generally and tied to specific buildings, is
missing
Not just gold rush – Ballarat’s industrial heritage is being ignored (left to disintegrate)
Participants noted the value of “place” in a globalised / homogenised world
Heritage is always mentioned in Ballarat strategic plans and statements and Council
strategies, but putting into action has been difficult
There is a strong base of information, many archives – Council collection, Ballarat
Heritage Society, Geological Society
Sense that Ballarat was missing the full economic development potential from its heritage
– to draw in visitors, from research and analysis, etc.
Knowledge gaps from homeowners, some trades on building material, how to maintain,
rehab methods, etc.
The heritage precinct study that led to the current interim controls was effective in raising
awareness, drawing in community participation. Implementation is behind, though, and
seems to be dragging.
Specialised local suppliers – Simms T imber, Robson’s Glass
Good base of skills in metal working / metal trades from volume of heritage restorations
Idea has been around for a number of years to teach classical building skills through the
University of Ballarat / T AFE
Trade referrals tend to happen word of mouth
Council needs to provide better advice to what can and cannot be done to heritage
properties
Insurance is an issue for some buildings / owners; difficulty in getting insurance
Challenge for social service organisations that occupy old / heritage buildings to
maintain, bring up to current standards
There could / should be take advantages – deduct portion of the rehab costs of heritage
buildings
PAGE
In commercial core, there’s an underutilisation of 2 nd level spaces above shop fronts. Cost
of upgrades to bring to reasonable standard cited (often due to reconfiguration of street
level that makes 2nd floor access difficult)
Businesses don’t seem to take advantage of heritage buildings, benefits and attraction of
heritage
Lots of absentee landlords who don’t take issue seriously (or see it as a problem – too
hard to upgrade and don’t bother)
Participants see a lack of confidence in Council to take a strong stand and maintain /
enhance heritage assets (enforce standards in the community). They do not draw a hard
line against inappropriate development (too much poor signage, lack of consideration of
awnings). Quick to cave in to developers / dollars.
Council needs to:
Fully implement heritage controls / overlay
Educate Councillors
Educate CBD building owners (if they want to occupy a key position in town, they need
to take more responsibility)
Signage needs to be regulated (seen as advisory now)
Link rates to building maintenance (rate breaks for investment / good maintenance)
Issue with street trees, utility cables. No consideration of maintaining streetscape
Miner’s Exchange – upgraded, but underutilised
Pavilions around Lake Wendouree seem to be suffering from lack of attention as heritage
assets
Suggestion for Council award program / recognition for heritage, restoration
Need for ongoing community education. More stories in the local papers, on the radio.
More attention on restored properties, success stories, interesting matters of local history
There was, at one stage, a presentation prepared by the heritage committee to educate
new Councillors on heritage. Where is it?
Question of whether the League of Historical Cities conference was being promoted /
appreciated by the community.
H.3 Workshop 3
Attendees (Business community):
Michael Wilson Shannon Meadows

Matthew Fleischmann Trevor Booth
Wendy Jacobs James Iles
Range of opinions from strong appreciation of heritage to not much interest /

understanding beyond Sturt Street buildings, to heritage seen as a hindrance
PAGE
Strong demand, positive impact on values in the residential sector
Some problems seen by homeowners when trying to modernise to suit current tastes
Commercial premises different; question of commercial viability of meeting
requirements of being in heritage overlay precinct
Council wants to present Ballarat as historical, a destination for heritage – but it takes
them years and years to get the planning regulations up to date as related to heritage
There are many instances of surprise of what can and cannot be done (residential and
commercial) after properties have been purchased. If Council wants to be serious about
heritage, they need to have a full-time advisor, one that is proactive about presenting
upgrade / rehab options and gives advice about what can be done rather than just talking
about restrictions, sending back applications
A number of different heritage advisors have had different opinions / answers to what can
be done, what is acceptable, what can be approved. Lack of consistency and objectivity is
a problem. Public is confused because it gets conflicting advice, sees a lack of standards.
There is a lack of advice given over the counter; tends to be reactive only
Lack of expertise in town to get credible design advice on what can be done, how to deal
with complex building and design issues
Council has fallen short on advice through planning office, on providing references on
knowledgeable trades people, on the role of the advisory committee
Participants see a problem in that workload is only going to go up as new heritage
regulation come on line – and Council is already struggling
In spite of the complications, upgrading / maintaining heritage homes is worth doing.
They hold their value.
Suggestion that whilst there are areas that do not stringent protection, other areas may be
overprotected.
Least desirable / marketable are the miner’s cottages. Often rundown but on large blocks
of land. Seen as a development site, but difficulty in building out to meet developer
expectations. (Immigrants of Melbournians are buying the bigger, better properties, not
the miner cottages.)
Council should provide incentives to fix / keep the cottage in front to make the
development at the rear of the block more financially viable.
There is a perceived mentality of Council by the business community that they are better
at stopping change than managing it reasonably.
There has been some controversy from recent heritage studies where some buildings
where designated as significant, others not.
Commercial properties – much harder to get a reasonable return to match the investment
that is needed to make them attractive, marketable, up to standard, suitable for disability
access. Council should be proactive, prepared guidance, suggested design options for
owners so that when a lease turns over, the owner has ideas / concepts that are ready to
move forward and will be approved. Low interest loans to facilitate would help
PAGE
Council needs to be tougher on streetscape issues; get rid of power poles, regulate
billboards, work with VicRoads to make road signs more attractive and less obtrusive,
coordinate light pole design, etc.
Non-commercial organisations that don’t have the resources to maintain heritage
properties are a risk – there are many church buildings that are falling apart and are at
risk. Who will fix these / pay?
Lack of interpretation of history – the story of the building in Ballarat (but don’t overdo it
like Beechworth)
Story plaques, heritage signage / trails not seen to be positive or negative to building
values
Costs of maintaining homes seen to be higher in heritage properties.
Potential case study – 26 Lydiard Street (across from T revor Booth office) – commercial
property, prime location, sits vacant. To maintain internal heritage elements (partitioning)
reduces the lettable area and makes property less attractive to tenants. Owners have
gotten conflicting advice from Council on what is allowed (without having even done a
walkthrough)
Shortage of trades people for heritage buildings (but this is across the board for all
projects). Hard plasterers difficult to get. The skills are out there, generally, but there’s
wait time to get people on projects
Some evidence that trades people are training up other practitioners
Suggestion that Council fast-track heritage application (for a higher fee, which would
help support position to offer better advice)
More community education, Make it scattershot, repeat it over and over. People only pay
attention when their current situation matches the story being told.
Scaffolding / painting (OHS) cited as major problem, impact on costs.
H.4 Workshop 4
Attendees (Institutional representatives):
Bob Bevern Colin T rembatt

Jason Martin Tony Armstrong
Gordon Morrison Mary Hollick
Carolyn Bourne (via telephone)
Organisations represented – University of Ballarat, Victoria DSE, VicUrban, Heritage

Victoria, Ballarat Fine Art Gallery and CSS
Believe that Heritage is broadly valued, but difficult to quantify. Perception that people
value heritage more when its not there.
Ballarat has a remarkable local historical / art collection, a legacy from the 1880s to
preserve local history, grow the collection. A real asset to the town
PAGE
There seems to be an overemphasis / awareness on 1850s (gold rush) history at the
expense of the 1880s onward
Maintenance of commercial buildings lags behind residential sector
Social history not well told and explored
Participants expressed concern at local conditions – no strong leadership or sense of
direction, funding seems to lag, lack of Council resources / heritage advisory committee
is symptomatic of this.
Lack of maintenance, use, upgrade of some commercial type facilities, egg. railway
precinct
Lack of skills in heritage training (construction, contracting, restoration) has harmed
many buildings (work has been done poorly) – restoration of council building windows
cited.
There needs to be more interpretation of the history beyond Eureka and Sovereign Hill –
what about a tour of the statues and fountains?
Heritage is seen as elite – no active program to engage young people, create
intergenerational interest
The city is not effectively marketing its assets (say, in comparison to Sovereign Hill)
Can better efforts be made at attending to streetscape whilst renovations are being
undertaken in commercial core? Example of Myers cited; what about screen printing an
image of the façade of the cloth shielding the scaffolding.
There needs to better connections to Sovereign Hill. It tells the story up to 1870; assets in
Ballarat from 1870 onwards. These need to be tied together for the visitor
Concern of lack of management and resources to keep and maintain local artefacts and
collections, i.e. local historical societies. Tend to be run be people getting older and
older, and no human resources in the pipeline to take over. Needs to be more focus on
skilling / grooming management capacity. These collections are vulnerable to being lost
due to neglect, lack of funds to store, display properly.
Need more funds to recruit, train volunteers to manage and tell the City’s / region’s
history, from local neighbourhood level on up
Problem with vandalism and statues / pieces of public art and sculpture being removed.
Seen as a simple answer rather than engaging in community to get them to take
ownership so vandalism is less common. Why not get schools to “adopt a garden” or
“ adopt a statue?”
Not much evidence that business community finds value in heritage properties, seen as an
asset for business and good investment
Problems with absentee landlords and underinvestment cited
It was noted that there was a matching fund around for façade and verandah restoration,
but it seemed to disappear as quickly as it was introduced
The vacant second floors of commercial buildings is a severely underutilised asset.
Seemingly there is a market for people seeking living or live/work spaces in these types
of properties, but they’re not available
PAGE
Real lack of resources, expertise from lack of full-time heritage coordinator at Council.
Council needs to get serious and get a full time position established and staffed. Position
needs to have a 3 – 5 year contract associated with it and have the support of Council,
otherwise turnover will remain a problem.
There is little or no information for visitors about Ballarat’s heritage if arriving by train.
Makes a poor entry statement
Can public-private investment partnerships / vehicles be explored to maintain parts of
heritage buildings whilst allowing further development on premises to enhance
profitability
The lake area is seen as neglected, heritage wise. Great social history there that is not
being told
Problem with VCAT overriding local decisions to allow substantial alterations and tear
downs to heritage buildings
When Council puts money into buildings to restore, there is then too much emphasis on
getting tenants to generate lease returns rather than populating with tenants /activities that
will seed interest in the area, have spillover impacts to other businesses and activities
The Council (Councillors) lack a strong heritage advocate
Councillors seen as enabling “ deals” for constituents to spur development rather than
defending heritage assets
One developer cited (T erry Benjamin – “ Benji Boxes”) as problematic of trend – pulls
down heritage properties to put up pretty poor replacement buildings driven by bottom
line interests; or redevelops at the rear of blocks with heritage properties but harms
heritage streetscape in the process
Concern that the City is not upgrading / maintaining their heritage properties adequately
Big concern about skills – led to idea for institute of classical design
Participants recognise that business owners often face many hurdles to get things done /
approved via planning process; Council and processes need to be more proactive.
PAGE
PAGE
Appendix I : Ballarat Heritage Advisory Committee
BALLARAT CITY COUNCIL
Terms of Reference
I.1 CHART ER
The Committee’s primary functions are to:
A Assist in the promotion of the value of heritage within the City of Ballarat.
B Document best practice in the management of heritage within the City of

Ballarat.
C Assist in the preparation of technical notes, specialist trade courses and

community education material in relation to heritage.
D Consider applications for loans and grants under the Ballarat Heritage Fund and
to make recommendations on loans and grant applications to the Planning and
Development Committee of Council.
E To provide advice and recommendations on proposals related to heritage places

and objects when referred to the committee by Council.
F To make recommendations to Council about further work required to document

and protect Ballarat’s Heritage.
G To assist Council in sourcing external funding opportunities to further heritage

conservation, promotion, management and education.
H To liaise with other interest groups and parties as required to fulfil the charter of
the Committee.
I.2 MEMBERSHIP
A The membership of the committee shall consist of 3 community representatives
and one member from the following organisations and groups:
PAGE
Ballarat Fine Art Gallery,
Central Highlands Historical Association
Chamber of Commerce
City of Ballarat - Councillor
City of Ballarat - Property
City of Ballarat Economic Development Unit,
City of Ballarat Tourism and Events
City of Ballarat’s Heritage Adviser
Department and Education and T raining
DSE – Crown Lands
DSE Heritage Places
Gold Muse um
Heritage Victoria
National Trust
Real Estate Institute of Victoria
Sovereign Hill
The University of Ballarat - Finance
Tourism Victoria,
University of Ballarat – Tourism
B Each member is appointed for three years.
C Each member will be appointed to a subcommittee relating to promotion, education or

management.
D Community representative positions are to be publicly advertised as members terms

expire.
E The Chairperson of the Committee and each subcommittee is to be determined by

Ballarat City Council. An alternate chairperson shall also be nominated.
F The Committee may from time to time with the approval of the General Manager City
Infrastructure and Development call on expert advice and second persons in order to
supplement the Committee’s expertise.
PAGE 99
I.3 MEETING / M EETING PROCEDURES
A. The Chairperson must preside at meetings of the Committee. In the absence of the
Chairperson the alternate chairperson shall chair the meeting.
B The Committee shall report to the Planning Committee of Council every four months.
C The Chairperson has a casting vote.
D The quorum of the committee as a whole is 11. The quorum of each subcommittee is
4.
E Only members present are entitled to vote.
F The Committee shall meet every second month. Subcommittees shall meet as
required in the interceding month.
G The Committee must receive written comments and recommendations from the
Heritage adviser or delegate at each meeting on any application for a loan under the
Ballarat Heritage Fund.
H The Committee must receive a financial report on the status of the Ballarat Heritage
Fund at each meeting. The report will cover:
Amount available for loan

Amount of loans outstanding
Repayments made
I The Committee shall receive status reports from loan recipients on works undertaken
at six months from the date of the loan and at completion of the works.
J The Committee shall receive the minutes of any subcommittee meeting for
consideration and reporting to the Planning and Development Committee of Council.
K In all other respects the Committee may set its own meeting procedures.
I.4 STATUTORY RESPONSIBILITIES OF MEMBERS

A Committee members are bound by the Pecuniary Interest Provisions of the Local
Government Act sections 78 and 79.
PAGE
B Committee members must not make improper use of information acquired as a
Committee member and are bound by Section 77 of the Local Government Act.
C Non Council Committee members have been exempted by the Council from
submitting primary returns of their financial interest pursuant to section 81 of the
Local Government Act 1989.
I.5 REPORTING
A. The Committee shall cause minutes of all meetings to be maintained and shall be
reported to the Planning and Development Committee of Council at a minimum of one
report every 2 full committee meetings (4 months).
B The Committee shall prepare an annual report and make presentations of its activities
and performance to the Planning and Development Committee of Council.
I.6 ADMINIST RATION OF THE LOAN SCHEM E

A Loans may not be recommended for approval where the amount of loans approved but
not collected exceeds the amount available for loan.
B Loans offered shall be on the condition that if not acted upon within 12 months of
offer the loan shall cease to be approved.
C Applications for loan must be accompanied by:
An outline of the works to be undertaken.

Detail of the techniques, materials and trade persons to be involved in the works.
Copies of relevant planning and or building approvals.
Evidence of ability to service the loan.
D Loans shall be conditional on the grantee signing a loan contract that specifies:
T erm of the loan.

The method of payment.
The requirement to pay the loan in full on sale of the property.
Debt collection on default payments.
PAGE
Alpine Resorts
LaTrobe
Wodonga
Melton
Towong
West Wimmera
Buloke
French & Sandstone Islands
Colac Otway
Murrindindi
Gannawarra
Horsham
Strathbogie
Wyndham
Northern Grampians
Moira
Hindmarsh
Moyne
Frankston
Moorabool
Knox
Yarriambiak
Mansfield
Benalla
Whittlesea
Greater Dandenong
Alpine
Maroondah
Surf Coast
Golden Plains
No. Heritage Overlays by Council
Monash
Wellington
Kingston
Banyule
South Gippsland
Brimbank
Ararat
Corangamite
Council
Cardinia
Glen Eira
Greater Shepparton
Queenscliffe
Glenelg
Hobsons Bay
Darebin
Wangaratta
Whitehorse
Bass Coast
Ballarat
PAGE 99
Maribyrnong
Casey
Manningham
Swan Hill
Central Goldfields
Warrnambool
Appendix J Chart of Council sites / precincts in the heritage overlay
Mitchell
Southern Grampians
Moreland
Nillumbik
Macedon Ranges
Boroondara
Baw Baw
Loddon
Mildura
Campaspe
Moonee Valley
Mornington Peninsula
Yarra
East Gippsland
Stonnington
Pyrenees
Hume
Yarra Ranges
Yarra Ranges
Port Phillip
Greater Bendigo
Bayside
Indigo
Melbourne
Hepburn
Mt Alexander
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
No Heritage Overlays

SKM Ballarat Heritage Value

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

SKM Ballarat Heritage Value

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Analysis of the Value of Heritage to

the City of Ballarat.

Sinclair Knight Merz

Fax: +61 3 9248 3400

4. Competitive Advantage of Heritage to Ballarat 34

5. Benefits and Costs of Heritage to Ballarat 38

6. Recommendations on ways to increase heritage benefits to Ballarat46

7. Centre for Classical Buildings 49

Appendix A Alternative Funding Options 57

Appendix B : Financial Assistance Programs 60

Appendix C : Ballarat Provisions 63

Appendix D : Community workshops 69

Appendix E : Regional Infrastructure Development Fund 73

Appendix F : Survey Questionnaire 74

Appendix H : Workshop Notes 90

Appendix I : Ballarat Heritage Advisory Committee 99

SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ

Printed: 15 Februar y 2007

Last saved: 12 Februar y 2007 02:21 PM

Author: David Cotterill

Project manag er: Roger McIntyre

Name of organisation: City of Ballarat

Name of document: Draft Final Report

Document version: Draft

Project number: SB17883

SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ

1.3 Comm unity attitudes

SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ

1.4 Value of heritage to Ballarat

1.5 Com petitive advantage of heritage to Ballarat

1.6 Benefits and costs of heritage

1.7 Im plications for the City of Ballarat

Provide a consistent Vision within a heritage Strategy

SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ 3

Rating linked to building conservation-reward good practice

SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ 4

Partners in this model could include:

The City of Ballarat

The advantages of the proposed model are that:

SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ 5

The key benefits of establishing a Centre include the potential to:

SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ 6

SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ 7

SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ 8

SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ 9

SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ 10

Quantified Public Benefits

3.2 Description of Ballarat’s heritage

SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ 11

The largest number of properties on the State

SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ 12

3.2.1 State and Local Heritage Provisions

SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ 13

SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ 14

3.2.2 Financial Assistance for Heritage Management

Works that enhance the appearance of a location. This can include:

SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ 15

3.3 Com parison w ith other Victorian jurisdictions

SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ 16

3.3.2 Traralgon, Latrobe Valley

SINCLAIR KNIGHT MERZ 17

3.3.3 City of Melbourne

3.3.5 Hepburn Shire Council