Development of Apple's first Australian flagship store hamstrung by heritage protection or...
An Australian government body tasked with administering cultural heritage regulations in the state of Victoria this week enacted an Interim Protection Order that precludes further development of Federal Square, the site of a proposed flagship Apple store, for a period of at least four months.
Handed down by the Heritage Victoria Executive Director Steven Avery on Tuesday, the order (PDF link) protects Federal Square under the Victoria State Government's Heritage Act of 2017 as the agency considers adding the area to the official Victorian Heritage Register.
As noted by "Our City, Our Square," a Federal Square-focused offshoot of advocacy group Citizens for Melbourne, the IPO prevents any construction, demolition, excavation or other alteration to the site, punishable by fines or imprisonment.
According to Avery, approved works in and around the area pose an "imminent threat" to the square and "may detrimentally affect its cultural heritage significance." Included among the named projects are a Metro Tunnel entrance and the Yarra building, the latter being the planned location of Apple's first Australian global flagship store.
"Fed Square has been given a reprieve until Christmas," said Tania Davidge, President of Citizens for Melbourne in statements posted to the Our City, Our Square website. "The Interim Protection Order allows us to take stock and think about what makes Fed Square truly special. It validates the community view that Fed Square is a place of social, cultural and civic importance."
Announced last December, Apple Federal Square was initially set to open in 2020, but the proposed retail presence amidst museums and eateries was met with significant pushback from public advocacy groups. Listed among the complaints was the store's original design, which some referred to as a "Pizza Hut pagoda."
Apple addressed local concerns in July when it unveiled revised plans for a store designed to complement surrounding structures. The company arrived at the refreshed architectural outline with the help of Federation Square Management, the Victorian Government and the Melbourne City Council.
Heritage Victoria and the Heritage Council will decide Federal Square's fate during the four-month evaluation period. It is unclear whether Apple will be able to move ahead with construction of the outlet if VHR status is approved, though Our City, Our Square believes heritage classification would impact those plans.
Handed down by the Heritage Victoria Executive Director Steven Avery on Tuesday, the order (PDF link) protects Federal Square under the Victoria State Government's Heritage Act of 2017 as the agency considers adding the area to the official Victorian Heritage Register.
As noted by "Our City, Our Square," a Federal Square-focused offshoot of advocacy group Citizens for Melbourne, the IPO prevents any construction, demolition, excavation or other alteration to the site, punishable by fines or imprisonment.
According to Avery, approved works in and around the area pose an "imminent threat" to the square and "may detrimentally affect its cultural heritage significance." Included among the named projects are a Metro Tunnel entrance and the Yarra building, the latter being the planned location of Apple's first Australian global flagship store.
"Fed Square has been given a reprieve until Christmas," said Tania Davidge, President of Citizens for Melbourne in statements posted to the Our City, Our Square website. "The Interim Protection Order allows us to take stock and think about what makes Fed Square truly special. It validates the community view that Fed Square is a place of social, cultural and civic importance."
Announced last December, Apple Federal Square was initially set to open in 2020, but the proposed retail presence amidst museums and eateries was met with significant pushback from public advocacy groups. Listed among the complaints was the store's original design, which some referred to as a "Pizza Hut pagoda."
Apple addressed local concerns in July when it unveiled revised plans for a store designed to complement surrounding structures. The company arrived at the refreshed architectural outline with the help of Federation Square Management, the Victorian Government and the Melbourne City Council.
Heritage Victoria and the Heritage Council will decide Federal Square's fate during the four-month evaluation period. It is unclear whether Apple will be able to move ahead with construction of the outlet if VHR status is approved, though Our City, Our Square believes heritage classification would impact those plans.
Comments
Hopefully they will come to an agreement about the look of the building and how it can be incorporated into the existing architecture - provided it doesn't end up looking as bad as the rest of the square.
Apple's proposal wasn't going to detract from the public space but maybe they can come to an agreement to ensure both sides are happy like they did with the folk art fountain at the Union Square store.
Fed Square would really be the ideal location in Melbourne. They could probably find a location at Docklands but Fed Square is more central and higher traffic.
I wondered about that. I thought they might mean that this is a ground up Apple building, while I think George Street was a fitout of the existing building. As far as I know, they haven't built the whole thing in Australia, yet. But if it's just a major store, then there's already one in Melbourne, just not in Federation Square.
What makes an Apple Store a flagship?
I'm all for heritage conservation - but when there is literally nothing to preserve it's just a tactic by a few obstructionists.
If I was Apple I would stick to Westfields in Melbourne, and put the flagship anywhere else other than Adelaide.
Either the citizens group is (cleverly) using Tunnel as a way to get it added to the VHR which inadvertently make apple store construction more difficult or they are just being opportunistic from this order. The article does not say who nominated Fed Sq to Heritage Victoria.
~~~
In making this order the Executive Director has considered the Guidelines for Interim Protection Orders (IPOs) under the Heritage Act 2017. ...
There may be a prima facie case for the inclusion of this place in the VHR.
This place is under imminent threat from approved works to facilitate the Metro Tunnel at the CBD South Precinct that may detrimentally affect its cultural heritage significance.
In other news, TUSA’s ruling party not only affirmed Apple’s request to nuke Melbourne, but fully endorsed it udner the new Protect TUSA with Tarrifs Act 2018. More news at 11!
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federation_Square#/media/File%3AFederation_Square_(5399921791).jpg
It really isn't. Not the way that The Sydney Harbour Bridge, or The Sydney Opera House, or even The Big Pineapple are. I really have no idea what Federation Square looks like, despite having been to Melbourne a few times in the past 20 years. (I may even have been to Federation Square, but I don't remember it.)
The MCG? That's a national icon. I know what that looks like, and I've never been there. And I don't follow AFL, or even the Cricket much these days.
The fact that a company as psychotically devoted to aesthetic purity as Apple, could even contemplate imposing its own taste and style on an existing, complete architectural scheme is, frankly, disappointing. It displays a fundamental disrespect for the location, and the existing architecture. There's no reason for Apple to have any visible branding presence if they want to be in that location, other than a simple sign with their logo. They managed to handle that quite well in historic buildings in Brisbane, London & Paris.
It's hard enough to protect significant "modern" architecture from the greed of developers, without companies like Apple trying to build temples to their own aggrandisement at the expense of culture in general.
Most importantly, the rejection of Apple's plan is a clear message that society is sick of back room deals between companies and governments, presented as fait accompli, to make sweeping changes to public spaces, and public infrastructure, without the public's consultation, or consent.