We have so many systems for cultural built heritage in Australia today. I have counted more than 90. For example, in NSW, we have approximately 150 different jurisdictions – just at the local level. Then for State Heritage, we have one, for the Commonwealth, we have another, and for National, another again.

Apart from this, there’s the National Trust of NSW and its listings, as well as specialties like engineering listings, DOCOMOMO, post-war and Australian Institute of Architecture (AIA) listings. This is just in NSW. Count all the rest of the jurisdictions in Australia and you get close to the 90 mark.

Why are there so many? Mainly because of the way in which the lists developed. They have materialised in a haphazard fashion.

The first list was developed by the National Trust in the 1960s. Many of our local listings owe their reason for being on the trailblazing efforts by the National Trust, after which, local listings grew.

In the 1970s, during Whitlam’s era, the Register of the National Estate (RNE) was established by Tom Uren and Robert Marsden Hope. At the time of closing, the register comprised of 13,200 items, many of the listings under RNE was Australia’s first attempt at establishing a list for the entire country. However, the listing ultimately failed and was shut down. Many of the RNE listings were picked up by other listing systems as time went on.

Notwithstanding, my main concern today is that there is a wide discrepancy in decision-making regarding cultural built heritage in Australia. On one side, we have a very timid approach which relies heavily on Local Environment Plan (LEP) and Development Control Plan (DCP) guidelines. At the other end of the spectrum is well-informed and confident decisions about cultural built heritage, usually espoused by architects and consultants with a wealth of experience and knowledge in the field. In-between, there are 50 shades of grey.

In the UK, they have what is called the ‘National Policy Planning Framework’ document. The NPPF provides a guideline for officers working in local Government, including Scotland, Ireland and Wales. In addition to this, an entire British standard for heritage decision-making in the UK.

In Australia, we have nothing. However, over the years, there have been various attempts at providing a NPPF for heritage.

It is no wonder that our Australian Governments are beset enormous discrepancies in the way individuals make decisions about cultural built heritage. Why don’t we have our own NPPF? Why doesn’t Australia have a cultural built heritage standard?

The problem we have today is the lack of consistency, not only between states, but also between council jurisdictions – even within those councils. Such a situation isn’t very helpful, especially for applicants, who sometimes spend hundreds of dollars putting together a Development Application (DA).

I have often contemplated producing a document akin to the UK NPPF. I have thought of bringing together the most experienced architects and town planners to make this happen. I have even thought of doing a PhD to narrow down the range to promote a much higher degree for applicants lodging expensive DA’s that involve heritage.

I still think it is one of the most important things yet to be done.

At the end of the day, we need to narrow down the type of decision-making in order to be less subjective. I also believe that it is necessary to throw in factors that are currently ignored. For instance, ‘economic viability’. I am of the view that all decisions ultimately lead to economic viability. In situations where applicants seek to provide the only and last economically viable solution, these are often ignored by councils without batting an eyelid. Today, historical, aesthetic and associative significance plays an enormous part. I fail to see why economic viability in today’s world, is not more important than history and aesthetics.

I hope to continue with this topic in other blogs, and I look forward to your comments.

Paul Rappoport

Conservation Architect and Heritage Planner

2 October 2024

Image references:

“Everglades House and Gardens Leura – National Trust NSW: A Charming 1930s Art Deco House & Cold Climate Garden in Leura.” Blue Mountains Mums. March 12, 2022.  Everglades House and Gardens Leura – National Trust NSW: A Charming 1930s Art Deco House & Cold Climate Garden In Leura – Blue Mountains Mums.

“National Planning Policy Framework – Why Does it Really Need Changing?” Webb Developments. February 22, 2023.  National Planning Policy Framework – Why Does It Really Need Changing? – Webb Developments (webb-developments.com)

“Vienna Cottage – National Trust”. National Trust of NSW. 2024. vienna cottage nsw national trust – Search (bing.com)