Page | 1

Heritage Impact Statement

Heritage Impact Statement for:

Former Royal Mint (Flagstaff East) (VHR H0770).Refer to Plate 1 and Plate 2 below and Appendix A for site plans.

Plate 1 Flagstaff Station location indicated in blue (Melways 2017)

Plate 2 Location of discharge vents Flagstaff Gardens (Flagstaff West) left arrow,Former Royal Mint (Flagstaff East) right arrow (Google 2017). Flagstaff East is thefocus of this Heritage Impact Statement.

Page | 2

This Heritage Impact Statement forms part of a permit application for:

This Heritage Impact Statement forms part of the permit application for the upgradeto existing discharge vent at the Former Royal Mint (Flagstaff East) (VHR H0770).Refer to Appendix A for details of the discharge vent.

The Melbourne Underground Rail Loop (MURL) is currently undergoing a detaileddesign process for the introduction of a smoke management system at FlagstaffStation, refer to Plate 1 for location. This system includes permeable platformceilings, smoke barriers, people with restricted mobility (PRM) refuges, extractionfans and discharge vents.

The upgrade to two existing discharge vents is proposed, one at Flagstaff Gardens(Flagstaff West) and another at the Former Royal Mint (Flagstaff East). These ventsare an integral part of the upgrade and installation of a smoke management systemfor Flagstaff Station, located at the corner of La Trobe Street and William Street,Melbourne.

Date:

16 June 2017

Victorian Heritage Register Number:

H0770

The proposed upgrade to the discharge vent, is located within the Former Royal Mint(Flagstaff East) (VHR H0770).

Address and location description:

The Former Royal Mint (Flagstaff East) is located to the immediate east of WilliamStreet to the south of La Trobe Street and to the north of Little Lonsdale Street,Melbourne 3000. The discharge vent upgrade is located to the immediate south of LaTrobe Street, approximately 40 m to the east of William Street.

Flagstaff Station is located at the corner of La Trobe Street and William Street,Melbourne 3000.

Prepared by:

Claire ArthurPrincipal Environmental ConsultantGHDLevel 8, 180 Lonsdale Street, Melbourne, Vic 3000T: 61 3 8687 8034claire.arthur@ghd.comFor:Liam MillsDesign ManagerProjects and Planning, Metro Trains MelbourneLevel 16, 700 Collins StreetDocklands, VIC 3008

Page | 3

Heritage Impact Statement______________________________________________

Existing condition of the registered place

The Former Royal Mint (Flagstaff East) (VHR H0770) is in good condition and ismanaged effectively for its heritage values through the implementation of itsConservation Management Plan (Andronas Conservation Architecture 2013).

Current use of the registered place

The Former Royal Mint (Flagstaff East) (VHR H0770) is used in a variety of functions.The main building has been adaptively reused for the Hellenic Museum and a seriesof offices, the northern guardhouse functions now as a bar and restaurant and thesouthern guardhouse is the base for Working Heritage.

For photographs of the Former Royal Mint and immediate surrounds, refer toAppendix B.

The proposed works

The Melbourne Underground Rail Loop (MURL) is currently undergoing a detaileddesign process for the introduction of a smoke management system at FlagstaffStation, refer to Plate 1 for location. This system includes permeable platformceilings, smoke barriers, people with restricted mobility (PRM) refuges, extractionfans and discharge vents.

Flagstaff Station was constructed during the late 1970s and early 1980s and did notincorporate an active smoke management systems that function to isolate andremove smoke from station platform areas in the event of fire. Further, the firesprinkler system within the station were installed during the station’s constructionmore than 30 years ago. Therefore, the design and installation of appropriate smokemanagement system and the upgrade of existing sprinkler system is required.

The proposed works, considered in this Heritage Impact Statement, is the upgrade ofthe discharge vent located at the Former Royal Mint (Flagstaff East).

Details of the Former Royal Mint (Flagstaff East) Discharge Vent Upgrade: A 9775 mm x 9775 mm x 2200 mm high D-shaped base, and 3 centrally positioned, 940 mm wide x 5370 mm long x 3000 mm high vents in

perforated steel architectural cladding

For plans of the discharge vent upgrade, refer to Appendix A.

The cultural heritage significance of the place or object, including settingand any archaeological values or potential (relates to s.73(1)(a) of theHeritage Act)

Former Royal Mint (Flagstaff East) (VHR H0770) (Direct Excerpt from VHR) (HeritageCouncil of Victoria 2017a)

What is significant?The Former Royal Mint was designed by John James Clark of the Public Works Office.Design work began in 1869 and it was built during 1871-72 by the contractors

Page | 4

William Murray and Company of Emerald Hill, and Martin and Peacock of WestMelbourne. The complex originally contained coin production facilities, administrationand residential quarters and associated structures, but all that remains now are thetwo-storey office building and residence, two gate-houses, perimeter walling andpalisading. The main two storey building is a rendered brick structure on a heavyrusticated base. Unlike the Palladian norm, the piano nobile is on the ground floor.The first floor features paired ionic columns, while an attic storey features ovalwindows. The perimeter wall is an imposing brick construction with large wroughtiron gates and iron lamps.

How is it significant?The Former Royal Mint is of historical and architectural significance to the State ofVictoria.

Why is it significant?The Former Royal Mint is of historical significance because of its important role in theeconomic, financial and political development of Victoria for nearly 100 years.Lobbying for a mint to be established in Australia began soon after the discovery ofgold. Such an institution was considered by its proponents not only as an efficientway of providing currency for the colonies, but as an important sign of colonialindependence and maturity. As such it reflects the growing wealth and confidence ofgold-rush era Melbourne. As a branch of the Royal Mint, London, it initially boughtgold and minted only gold sovereigns until 1916. The first Australian silver coinswere minted in 1916, after the Federal Constitution gave the Commonwealth solepowers in the minting of coinage. The first Australian pennies and halfpennies wereproduced in 1927. When the Sydney Mint closed in 1926, the Melbourne Royal Mintbecame the only mint in Australia until it ceased operations in 1968. The FormerRoyal Mint is of architectural significance as one of the most impressive 19th centurygovernment buildings in Victoria, and for its associations with John James Clark. Theadministration building was styled after Raphael's Palazzo Vidoni-Caffarelli in Rome(1515). Its restrained ornamentation and dignified portico reflect the prestigious yetfunctional nature of the Mint. It is one of the finest examples of conservativeclassicism in Australia. Clark (1838-1915), who had a distinguished career in theoffice of the Colonial Architect (later Public Works Department) from 1852, when hewas 14, until 1878, was responsible for designing a number of important colonialgovernment buildings including the Government Printing Office (1856) and theTreasury (1857). He later went on to design major buildings in Sydney, Brisbane andPerth.

What physical and/or visual impacts will result from the proposed works?i.e. what will be the affect on the cultural heritage significance of the place(relates to s.73(1)(a) of the Heritage Act)

The upgrade to the discharge vent is located within the Former Royal Mint site,within the northern section of the site’s carpark (Flagstaff East) (VHR H0770).

This section assesses the potential heritage impacts of the upgrade of the dischargevent against:1) the cultural heritage significance of the Former Royal Mint2) the Former Royal Mint Conservation Management Plan (Andronas ConservationArchitecture 2013)

Page | 5

1) The Former Royal Mint–potential impact assessment against cultural heritagesignificance

The Former Royal Mint is of historical and architectural significance to the State ofVictoria.Due to the nature of the proposed works, the upgrade to the discharge ventis considered unlikely to impact on the historical significance of the Former RoyalMint. The proposed works are localised within a discrete area of the grounds, alreadycontaining a discharge vent and does not directly affect historical features including:structures, memorials or statues within the Royal Mint.

The upgrade to the discharge vent is considered unlikely to impact on thearchitectural significance of the Former Royal Mint.The construction of the proposed discharge vent does not directly impact on thearchitecture of the Former Royal Mint as the works have been sited within theexisting Draft Relief Shaft’s plinth.The design evolution of the discharge vent has been in progress since 2014. Thefinal detailed design has integrated feedback from City of Melbourne, HeritageVictoria and Working Heritage.

In summary, the discharge vent upgrade is unlikely to the impact the historical andarchitectural significance of the Former Royal Mint.

2) The Former Royal Mint Conservation Management Plan - potential impactassessment

The CMP does not document the discharge vent, however it notes in relation toconservation policies and guidelines that the views to and from the site, to La Trobe,William and Little Lonsdale should be protected (Andronas Conservation Architecture2013: 35).

The existing discharge vent is visible from La Trobe Street looking south. Theupgrade will raise the profile of the discharge vent an additional 3 m. That stated,careful design and consultation with Heritage Victoria and Working Heritage hasreduced the ‘visual bulk’, with the break up of the structure and visual permeabilityinto primary views around the Former Royal Mint. The structure is comprised ofperforated cladding which aims provide a recessive, translucent appearance from thestreet, refer to Plate 8.

The CMP advises that no new build should occur, whether permeant or temporarybetween the Administration Building and the Guardhouses. No new build is proposedbetween these assets.

The CMP details the history of the Former Royal Mint, which included the former coinproduction facilities, administration and residential quarters and associated structuresand potential sub-surface archaeological evidence of these (Andronas ConservationArchitecture 2013: 34). The proposed upgrade to the discharge vent occurs in anarea of the site which has undergone significant previous ground disturbance withthe original construction of the discharge vent. Whilst the discharge vent is notdocumented within the CMP, nor its establishment date, it is assumed the vent wasinitially constructed during the mid-1980s, along with the Flagstaff Gardens dischargevent. Further, the upgrade is to be confined to the existing vent plinth, avoidingpotential archaeological impacts.

Page | 6

In summary, the upgrade to the discharge vent does not alter the use, purpose or‘feel’ of the Former Royal Mint. The upgrade to the discharge vent has undergonecareful design consideration (for example selection of form, materials and colourpallet) to reduce potential visual impacts. The upgrade to the discharge vent doesnot impact on any historical features of structures of the Former Royal Mint and isconfined within the existing plinth to avoid archaeological impacts.

Further, as viewed from La Trobe Street, the upgrade to the vent is separated by thenorthern perimeter wall and mature trees.

Is the registered place or object in a World Heritage Environs Area? If yes,how does the proposal affect the world heritage values of the listed placeor any relevant Approved World Heritage Strategy Plan? (relates tos.73(1)(ab) of the Heritage Act)?

No. Not applicable

If there are detrimental impacts on the cultural heritage significance ofthe place or object, provide reasons why the proposal should be permitted(relates to s.73(1)(b), (e) and (f) and s.73(1A) of the Heritage Act)

The upgrade to the discharge vent represents part of the critical infrastructurerequired to introduce a smoke management system at Flagstaff Station. Under theAct, the proposed works do not affect: the use of the register place or object, its economic use or cause undue hardship

to the owner any matters relating to the protection and conservation of the place or object

that the Executive Director may consider relevant

In relation to s.73(1)(e), the applicant is a public authority tasked with providing animportant component of the Melbourne public transport system. Metro Trains have astatutory duty to provide a safe and efficient transport network, and the proposedworks are consistent with this. In undertaking this work, it is not considered thatdetrimental impacts on cultural heritage places or resources will result.

If there are detrimental impacts on the cultural heritage significance ofthe place or object, detail alternative proposals that were considered andreasons why these were dismissed (relates to s.73(1)(b), (e) and (f) ands.73(1A) of the Heritage Act)

The location of the proposed smoke management system is located within FlagstaffStation, and the discharge vent is located in the Former Royal Mint (Flagstaff East)due to functionality requirements. While the proposed discharge vent does notdirectly impact on the heritage features of the Former Royal Mint, the followingdesign process was followed to assess alternatives.

The design of the discharge vent has been an iterative process from 2014 onwardsfrom Preliminary Design, to Concept Design to Detailed Design in 2016. Initially, a 9m wide x 9 m long x 2 m high base with a 2 m wide x 8 m long x 3 m high vent wasproposed, refer to Plate 3.

Page | 7

Plate 3: 2014 Preliminary Design of the upgrade to the discharge vent (Former RoyalMint) (GHD 2017)

However, since 2014, the detail of the design has been refined, incorporatingfeedback from relevant stakeholders to achieve the functional requirements,including the findings of emissions modelling.

The following is a summary of the 2016 functional drivers of Flagstaff East: The existing brick clad concrete plinth must be demolished to ground level and

rebuilt, to allow for new structural load bearing concrete of known loadingcapacity to be installed. New bricks are to be interlaced in the salvaged bricks tomake up for loss due to damage during demolition.

A 9775 mm x 9775 mm x 2200 mm high D-shaped base, and 3 centrally positioned, 940 mm wide x 5370 mm long x 3000 mm high vents in

steel architectural cladding Secure maintenance access to the below ground shaft provided at ground level

via a dedicated security compliant locked door. Security mesh provided at top of base and discharge vents to prevent

unauthorised access as well as litter entering the vents.

In late 2016, an Architectural Design Framework document was commissioned whichexamined the relationship between the discharge vents at Flagstaff East andFlagstaff West and their respective streetscape settings to one another, refer to Plate4 and Plate 5 (GHD Woodhead 2016).

The 2016 report documented the heritage setting of the Former Royal Mint, and itsoriginal venting features of the former stacks that were used during mint production.The silhouette of the original stacks has influenced the current design of thedischarge vent, refer to Plate 6 to Plate 7 (GHD Woodhead 2016). Refer Appendix Efor full Architectural Design Framework report.

Page | 8

Plate 4: Functional relationship of Flagstaff East and Flagstaff West sites from theFlagstaff Station platforms (GHD Woodhead 2016)

Plate 5: CBD setting of Flagstaff East and Flagstaff West sites and respectiveconsideration of their settings (GHD Woodhead 2016)

Page | 9

Plate 6: Heritage setting of the Former Royal Mint, noting the original stacks (bottomright) in support of mint productions (Flagstaff East) (GHD Woodhead 2016)

Plate 6: Streetscape showing original stacks used during mint productions (GHDWoodhead 2016)

Page | 10

Plate 7: Geometry of the heritage stacks were used for the concept for the newventing (GHD Woodhead 2016)

The Architectural Design Framework document was used as a focus tool forconsultation with City of Melbourne, Heritage Victoria, OVGA and Working Heritage.The resulting refined 2016 design aims to minimise the visual mass of the structurewhilst maintaining the functional requirements.

The structure aims to provide visual interest for the public realm through patterningand form, influenced by the original Royal Mint stacks, whilst satisfying practicalmaintenance and performance requirements through material selection and physicalproportions.

Whilst initial thoughts were to provide the new venting in a reddish colour to reflectthe original stacks that was constructed of red brick, feedback from WorkingHeritage noted the desire to make the venting recessive, rather than prominent.This resulted in a dark grey colour selection for the discharge vent. Refer to Plate 8for an artist’s impression of the refined design.

Plate 8: 2016 Preliminary Design of the upgrade to the discharge vent (Former RoyalMint – winter noting the deciduous trees) (GHD 2017)

Page | 11

What measures are being proposed to avoid, limit or manage thedetrimental impacts?

Measures to avoid limit or mange potential detrimental impacts have beenundertaken in two key areas: design and construction. Each of these areas isdiscussed below.

Design

Design measures to avoid/limit/or manage potential heritage impacts: The mass of the design has been broken into three separate structures to allow

visual permeability into primary views around each site. The three structures also derived from a functional engineering requirement of

three proposed mechanical fans located inside the existing shaft. Engineeringdesigns has confirmed that the current orientation is the only viable technicalsolution within the constraints of the existing below ground Draft Relief Shaftstructure.

The form of each independent structure is developed from the ornamental,octagonal smoke shafts that were once present on the Former Royal Mint site,coincidentally several meters away from the current site. The perforationcladding aims provide a recessive, translucent appearance from the street.

City of Melbourne, Heritage Victoria, OVGA and Working Heritage have also beenconsulted to provide commentary and feedback around a preferred designsolution.

Through consultation with Heritage Victoria, the design team understood thatarchaeological impact can be avoided by constructing the updated dischargevent structure within in the footprint of the existing Draft Relief Shaft’s plinth. Assuch, this strategy has been adopted.

There will be a requirement for the immediate surrounding adjacent areas to bemade good and reinstated to existing conditions.

Construction

As part of the construction process for the discharge vent upgrade, the followingmeasures are to be undertaken as part of the project: Proactive consideration of the site’s heritage values and heritage fabric as part of

the Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP). Suggestions include:o Installation of protective barriers to protect heritage items during

construction activities, including vehicle movements in and out of the site.o Identify suitable laydown areas which avoid impacts to heritage fabrico Provide, as part of onsite induction to construction personnel, detail

regarding the heritage values of the Former Royal Mint, what is protectedand why.

Has the proposal been influenced by, or does it address any Local PlanningScheme or Building Act 1993 requirements? (relates to s.73(1)(f) ands.73(1A) of the Heritage Act)

The proposed discharge vent and fence line works are sited within the HeritageOverlay Schedule of HO758 Former Royal Mint, 280-318 William Street & 391-429LaTrobe Street & 388-426 Little Lonsdale Street, Melbourne.

Page | 12

The proposed upgrade to the existing discharge vent has considered the heritagevalues of the Former Royal Mint site and potential HO implications. No controlsapply, refer to Appendix F.

The Building Act 1993 is the overarching legislative framework for upgrade to theexisting discharge vent. The technical reference is the National Construction Code(NCC) of which the Building Code of Australia (BCA) is a component, to which thedesign of the discharge vent will comply.

Conclusion

The discharge vent upgrade at the Former Royal Mint (Flagstaff East) is required aspart of the upgrade and installation of a smoke management system for FlagstaffStation, located at the corner of La Trobe Street and William Street, Melbourne.

The upgrade of the discharge vent is located within the Former Royal Mint (FlagstaffEast) (VHR H0770).

The upgrade of the existing discharge vent is considered unlikely to impact thehistorical and architectural significance of the place.

Careful design, integration of design feedback from key heritage stakeholdersregarding the form, scale and materiality within the functionality requirements, andconstruction recommendations for inclusion into the CEMP, limited potential heritageimpacts.

Attachments:

Appendix A - Site Plans and Artist ImpressionsAppendix B - Site Visit PhotosAppendix C - Land TitlesAppendix D – Planning Property ReportAppendix E – Architectural Design Framework (GHD Woodhead 2016)Appendix F – Heritage Overlay Schedule (extract)

Page | 13

Table 1

Some questions to be addressed in a HeritageImpact Statement and supporting information thatmay be required

PROPOSED CHANGE TOHERITAGE REGISTEREDPLACE

SOME QUESTIONS TO BE ADDRESSED IN ASTATEMENT OF HERITAGE IMPACT ANDSUPPORT INFORMATION THAT MAY BEREQUIRED BY THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

1. Totaldemolition/destruction ofa heritage registeredplace

Not applicable.

2. Demolition/destructionof one of a number ofbuildings on a registeredsite

Not applicable.

3. Partdemolition/destruction ofa heritage registeredplace, including interiors,fixtures and fittings,identified as significant

Not applicable.

4. Construction ofsubstantial extensions toa registered place

Not applicable.

5. Construction of newbuildings, car parking,within the grounds of aheritage registered place

Not applicable.The proposal is for the introduction of a smokemanagement system at Flagstaff Station.

6. Subdivision of heritageregistered place

Not applicable.

7. Physical change tofabric/feature identifiedas being of culturalheritage significance.

Not applicable.The proposal is for the introduction of a smokemanagement system.There are proposed extensions to the existingdischarge vent to meet functionality requirements.The fabric and design selected has been carefullyselected integrating feedback from key stakeholders.

8. Demolition/destructionof a non-significantbuilding within thegrounds of a registeredplace

Not applicable.

9. Partdemolition/destruction ofand/or changes to a

Not applicable.

Page | 14

registered place, includinginteriors, not identified assignificant

10. RepaintingUsing new colour scheme

Not applicable.

11. Re-roofing/re-cladding

Not applicable.

12. New services(air conditioning, plumbing)

Not applicable. The project is an upgrade theexisting discharge vent.

13. Fireprotection/servicesupgrade

The proposal is for the introduction of a smokemanagement system within Flagstaff Station.This will include extensions to the existing dischargevent to meet functionality requirements.

14. New landscape worksand features

Not applicable.The proposal is for the introduction of a smokemanagement system at Flagstaff Station, with adischarge vent located within the Former Royal Mint.The upgraded discharge vent structure is locatedabove the existing underground Draft Relief Shaft,within the footprint of an existing vent. As such,there will be a requirement for the immediatesurrounding asphalt areas adjacent to be madegood and reinstated to existing conditions. However,no landscaping works are proposed.

15. Tree removal orreplacement

No tree removal or landscaping works are proposed.

Page | 15

References

Andronas Conservation Architecture. 2013. Conservation Management Plan ReviewSeptember 2013, The Former Royal Mint Site 280 William Street, Melbourne. Reportfor the Former Royal Mint.

City of Melbourne. Melbourne Planning Scheme – Schedule to Clause 43.01 HeritageOverlay.http://planningschemes.dpcd.vic.gov.au/schemes/melbourne/ordinance/43_01s_melb.pdf . Site accessed 9 June 2017.

GHD. 2017. MURL Stage 2 Detailed Design, Design Report – Architectural –Flagstaff.Unpublished report for Metro Trains Melbourne.

GHD Woodhead 2016. Architectural Design Framework. Unpublished report for MetroTrains Melbourne.

Heritage Council of Victoria 2017a. Former Royal Minthttp://vhd.heritagecouncil.vic.gov.au/search?kw=former+royal+mint&aut_off=1Site accessed 24 May 2017.

Appendix A – Proposed Site Plans and Artists Impressions (GHD 2017)