Insofar as local councils in NSW are concerned, the general objectives in a residential conservation area typically, are to conserve the ambience, form, materiality, scale, setting and subdivision pattern of the historic precinct in order that contributory buildings in such areas are appropriately conserved and new buildings introduced, are appropriately designed. It is simple politeness to deal with such precincts respectfully in a deferential manner rather than attempting to bombastically assert a bold and disruptive typology by way of new infill buildings that do not comply. Primarily, the aims and objectives of a typical residential conservation area are to; 1. Maintain all buildings and other structures which explain the history of the area and contribute to its significance – (HISTORICAL REFERENCE); 2. Ensure a consistency of scale and materials in extensions to existing buildings and in new buildings so that the new work does not detract from the historic buildings and their amenity or from the streetscape (CONSISTENCY).Read More
To all heritage architects/ consultants/ advisors/ builders/ planners/ managers and owners out there – there are five cardinal principles that should be applied when attempting to integrate new design into heritage buildings. I list them as follows; Bulk and scale, Setting, Form, Materials and Juxtaposition. Taking each individually, it is a common rule with heritage buildings to ensure that the new fabric does not overwhelm the heritage fabric i.e. that a there is a delicate balance between the two but always respectfully giving greater prominence to the older heritage building or at least allowing it to be recognised as distinct from the new building. Accordingly, in most cases, the new bulk and scale should be subservient to the heritage building. Roofs should be set down lower and walls set in behind. The concept of heritage design is very much based on the streetscape view i.e. what one sees from the street.Read More
What is the relationship between cultural heritage tourism, the community and heritage places in any given locality? Which comes first, and which is more important than the other? In this article, I argue that above all, communities must be protected from an inundation of tourism so as not to alienate that community from its own heritage assets and secondly, I argue that the buildings themselves must be protected from loss of fabric and loss of meaning especially when tourist products are turned into corporate brands and locals are treated completely incidentally to the tourist experience.
Speno (2010) argues completely in favour of the tourists’ experience as the highest priority in the mix. She says that tourism, the world’s largest industry, is essential to a community’s economic vitality, sustainability, and profitability. The historic and cultural resources associated with people, events, or aspects of a community’s past give that community its sense of identity and help tell its story.
There is a multiplicity of questions related to heritage management in society today especially for heritage property consultants and cultural heritage advisors. Based on the concept of the ‘social construction of reality’, there has been a shift from a consideration of heritage as a fixed list to a socially open process. The recognition of heritage as ―that which expresses some indefinable but recognizable element which current societies value and wish to pass on to posterity, gives rise to the interaction of different actors (social sectors) based on different values which are conducted through different disciplinary fields (Shalaginova 2012). In the sociological disciplines, culture is seen as a set of values, beliefs and symbols of expression and in anthropology, it is seen as the way of life of a society. In this regard, the conception of heritage as a social process is based on the revaluation by each generation and a conservation methodology to suit the production of future heritage.Read More
As communities throughout the world have come to recognise the importance of their cultural heritage, a number of unexpected results has arisen which demand our close analysis. These include the emergence of new heritage categories, a growing convergence of intangible and tangible heritage and an increasing demand for traditional conservation specialists to share our decision-making authority with those individuals and groups that have strong links to a particular heritage site.Read More
Enshrined in Goal 11 of the 2015 Sustainable Development Goals, the following aims are set out;
Goal 11: Make cities inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable. Cities are hubs for ideas, commerce, culture, science, productivity, social development and much more. At their best, cities have enabled people to advance socially and economically.Read More
The efficacy of cultural built heritage (CBH) in Australian society has been in steady decline since mid-1990s. Privately owned CBH accounts for 90% of Australia’s historic heritage places (approximately 135,000 items nation-wide – Productivity Commission Report – 2006 (PCR- 2006). Private owners shoulder the lion share of the costs to maintain heritage properties. Government funding…Read More
In 2012, Lisa Prosper – Director of Willowbank Centre for Cultural Landscape wrote in her submission to the ‘City of Toronto’s Official Plan Amendment to Adopt New Heritage and Public Realm Policies’ that values no longer reside exclusively in the tangible fabric of history but in intangible concepts which are in a state of constant flux.Read More