Conversations about conserving Hobart’s heritage
Conversations about conserving Hobart’s heritage character often fall into two opposing camps – those who prioritise the protection of our city’s heritage precincts, and those who feel that new developments and job creation should take priority.
Could these two sides come closer together if it was clear that we could preserve Hobart’s heritage without sacrificing economic growth and employment opportunities? I hope they can.
I recently moderated a City Talks panel discussion on the economic value of heritage with international real estate economist and heritage expert, Donovan Rypkema.
Donovan’s firm, Heritage Strategies International, has undertaken heritage preservation projects in more than 50 countries across Europe, Asia and Australia. Much of what he has learned through his work in historic cities is relevant to our own conversations about heritage and development in Hobart.
Our heritage buildings aren’t just important to our city’s character, they are a vital economic asset.
Hobart’s intact heritage landscape is a key point of differentiation between ourselves and other cities, something which has allowed us to build our brand and visitor economy. There are few Australian cities where you can walk around and appreciate the past in such a material, tangible and authentic way.
Donovan provided compelling evidence about the economic power of ‘adaptive reuse’ – which is converting or repurposing older buildings for more efficient and appropriate modern use.
He shared case studies from cities such as Baltimore, Nashville and New Orleans, demonstrating that heritage preservation actually leads to better economic value than new development does. That value is created in a number of ways: sometimes directly through the jobs that restoration processes create, sometimes indirectly through the uplift in property values and the interest in developing around iconic heritage buildings.
Dollar for dollar there are more jobs in the rehabilitation of heritage buildings compared to new construction. For every 100 jobs created through rehabilitation and ‘adaptive reuse’ of heritage buildings, there are 186 indirect jobs created elsewhere. This is more ‘jobs rich’ that new construction where only 135 indirect jobs are created.
This is not because of a higher cost of building with heritage, but rather that in new construction projects more of the budget has to be spent on new materials, whereas in restoration projects a greater share of the spend is spent on jobs.
Redevelopment of heritage buildings can also have a ‘halo effect’ on the surrounding areas. The catalytic appeal of a quality restorations can impact on the appeal of the surrounding area.
A quality development reusing and restoring a heritage building will reverse population decline in areas and increase property values.
Donovan’s research has found that heritage areas of cities are more likely to attract creative, professional and scientific jobs. In Nashville, for example, 3% of all jobs were located in heritage areas, but these areas accounted for 11% of job growth, 13% of start-up jobs, and 15% of small business jobs. Knowledge economy jobs tend to like to be based places that have authentic layers of history and character.
Case studies such as these suggest to me that adaptive reuse is certainly an approach that we should do more to encourage in Hobart and Tasmania. But there are very few incentives for heritage restoration and reuse here, whereas in the United States the Federal tax law provides a 20% tax credit for every dollar spent on the restoration of a heritage building. Thirty-five state governments in the US have matched this approach and also provide a discount on state taxes if a heritage building is restored. If Councils themselves can’t afford to provide incentives, the least we can do is join with property owners to lobby the state and federal governments for similar tax incentives.
Hobart has many big decisions to make about what we want our city to look and feel like. We have applied for 76 heritage precincts to be recognised in the Tasmanian government’s new statewide planning rule book.
These precincts can host modern buildings, but only if it doesn’t require the demolition of heritage or see new builds so incongruous that it leads to a loss of the value our heritage.
Planning rules are there to get quality design that is congruous to the legacy of our city. Hobart will evolve over time but buildings should be like human beings and be respectful to our neighbours. When someone wants to build a 15 storey building in a street full of 2 storey heritage buildings, its like a rude neighbour screaming.
Donovan Rypkema concluded his contribution during the event by sharing a piece of advice that resonated strongly with me. He said, “The worst thing a city can do is try to be more like another city. No. Be more like yourself.”
A principle that is hugely important to remember as we continue this discussion. We should not be trying to emulate Melbourne or Sydney. Nor indeed should we be trying to emulate Florence or Lisbon. We should simply try to be more Hobart – the best Hobart we can possibly be.
