550-558 Spencer Street West Melbourne 3003

City of Melbourne 24th May 2020.
Melbourne Town Hall
120 Swanston Street
MELBOURNE VIC 3000

Dear Sir/ Madam,

550-558 SPENCER STREET, West Melbourne - Planning Permit Application TP-2020-12

I write to Council today as a resident West Melbourne regarding the above planning application advertised on the 30th of May 2020 for development of the above piece of land.

I am not against development. I welcome appropriate development in the right areas, however the proposal for an eight storey mixed use steel, concrete and glass tall structure comprising ground floor retail shopping, with upper levels 1 to level 8 all to be open plan, ‘hot desking’ style of office space, (by my count of seats, it appears to accommodate at least, but not limited to 828 individuals [1] inside it), and seeking a reduction in the required onsite car parking spaces in my considered opinion, is not the most appropriate development for this site [2].

I respect the developer and his team of lawyers at Property & Partners P/L, the architect at Kennon Studio and the builder, Crema Group. Dr Freeman has a right to build his vision for his future. However, after a thorough investigation into this proposal, I feel there are a dozen other, if not more, suitable locations nearby that would be, a better environment for the style and height of building he is planning on creating. Documents lodged with council don’t state if the developer’s intention is to utilise that open plan office and retail space himself or offer it up for rent or to on-sell it as an investment to someone else. Whether it be rented out to one single business, individuals or multi-tenanted as, a shared office space environment for small startups. I object to the location of the proposed redevelopment at this site and I state the following points below.

North of the site
The TP-2020-12 proposal is a 35.3 metre tall glass, steel and concrete pillar, rising straight up from Spencer Street like many other CBD hi-rise buildings within the Hoddle grid, Southbank and Docklands. Eight levels tall, it would be completely at odds with every single building on its northern side. Architecturally there is nothing else that looks like it or made of the same materials as the proposal in the surrounding vicinity. It is at odds to the existing surrounding northern side’s building fabric, at odds with existing architectural style towards the north and its proposed build height would set a negative precedent outcome, if it were to be approved in its current form, in such a low rise residential neighborhood on the northern side.

1. The northern sides neighborhood architecture in Roden and Hawke Street date from as early as the mid-Victorian period and the area has always been generally low-rise residential housing. There are fifty, one and two story historically significant residential terrace homes on the northern side (figure 1). Also, on block 55, is a significant 1920’s two story industrial pharmaceutical manufacturing facility & headquarters of Mr. Samuel John Marshall is at 613 King Street, designed by architect Mr. James A Wood. In 1969 Melbourne council approved the demolition of 6 significant two-story Victorian terrace homes, 13 to 23 Hawke Street (figure 2) on Mr. Colin Campbell’s land, lot 12 section 55 (figure3). These were the very first homes built in Hawke Street from around 1853. That site now has a three story 1970’s brick motel, catering to school groups and other clientele (figure4).

West of the site
The TP-2020-12 proposal’s building fabric of glass, steel and concrete (figure 5) conflicts with the western sides underlying brick building fabric (figure 6). It’s dramatic height also conflicts with the two storey westerly neighbor at 562 Spencer Street, the proposed height, on paper, looks and feels overwhelmingly oppressive by comparison (figure 7).

2. The existing building on the western side known as 562 Spencer Street or Radio Parts, is currently a two-story retail/warehouse operation, the first stage was built in 1926 for the Australian Spark Plugs Company P/L (figure 8). It is currently a white painted industrial styled red brick building. This building is historically significant to West Melbourne because of its connection to Government’s encouragement for increased local manufacturing activities as well as long term job creation for thousands of Australian returned service men and women from WW1. The community would look upon council more favorably if 562 Spencer’s 1926 structure is maintained for the future, rather than demolished, should that building ever have a development application in the future. The community would like the building shell and brickwork be retained and stripped back to highlight and celebrate the structure’s valued and interesting industrial past; that ultimately would be viewed as a positive outcome. Retaining and reusing existing building structures is a highly sustainable practice, something many councils everywhere will be encouraging more developers to do. Before 1973, the carpark behind Radio Parts (figure 9), off Hawke Street contained five 1873 Victorian two story terrace homes. Melbourne council approved demolition of those Victorian terrace homes for the construction of a ground level only car park. It is unfortunate that Council’s action at that time, in effect destroyed a valuable piece of West Melbourne’s prized and valued residential heritage in the process.

South of the site
The TP-2020-12 proposal opposite the four buildings on the southern side of Spencer Street (figure 10) would also be architecturally at odds to its southern neighboring buildings. Like Radio Parts building, these are brick industrial buildings and range in height from two and three storeys tall. If the application is approved, the 8 storey development opposite these existing buildings would seriously upset the current balance in this area of Spencer Street.

3. The four buildings on the southern side of Spencer Street include a two-storey hotel at 579 Spencer Street. Originally built by Mr. Alexander Edward Short in the 1870’s, its internal fabric still remains but its facade has been altered in the 1970’s. The original architect plans (figure 11) have been located. It is a community desire, in the future, that the Hotel owner considers restoring it to its former Victorian glory. Alexander Edward Short was a local J.P. and later elected as Shire President in 1884/5 for Jika Jika and the Preston Shire President in 1888/9. At number 567 Spencer there is a 3-level significant 1930’s industrial warehouse, converted into 10 residential units. 567 & 551 Spencer Street have a strong connection to Mr. James Hemphill. He built a double fronted Victorian period home on that site at 569 Spencer Street (figure12). Hemphill was a successful Merchant as well as a Melbourne councilor in 1858/9. At 561 Spencer Street, known as Cinnabar Square, another significant 1930’s industrial era warehouse, has been carefully converted into 12 residential units with ground floor office space. Both buildings cleverly revived back into usable and highly productive life. At 551 Spencer Street is an empty 2 level warehouse ripe for an industrial style residential warehouse conversion. Prior to it being a warehouse, the earlier Victorian built home and shop, was owned by the Woodland family who lived and worked there from 1886 until 1941. That site is socially and historically significant to the local community.

East of the site
The TP-2020-12 proposal is directly adjacent to 544 Spencer, known to locals as Horton’s Store. It’s a single-story Victorian painted brick-built retail shop with a residence at the rear (figure 13). The proposed development would be at its most extreme difference on this side of the street, especially being 7 storeys larger and in completely different building materials to the shop (figure 14). Melbourne Planning Scheme’s DDO29 document on Councils website (figure 15) states a maximum building height on a mixed-use site ought to be no more than 4 levels in tall. The proposed building fabric would not be complementary or sympathetic to any of the surrounding buildings especially to the highly sought-after Victorian style of architecture of Horton’s shop and it would be a huge loss of Victorian architectural style if Horton’s shop were to ever go.

4. The existing single-story shop located on the corner of Roden at 544 Spencer Street directly opposite the proposal on its eastern side is not only socially significant, it’s also architecturally and historically significant to the neighborhood of West Melbourne. The site was used as early as May 1856 by Mr. John Newton Horton, as his home and shop. The original iron shop he erected was later rebuilt in brick in 1876 as it appears there today by Mr. R. B. Martin. Martin also built Victorian period homes in Carlton, Parkville and West Melbourne. Horton owned many properties in and around North and West Melbourne and was the father of well-known Architect Mr. Ernest John Horton.

Proposed use of the site
The TP-2020-12 proposal’s use as open plan office workspace and a ground floor retail shop, whilst it may fit in within the ‘guidelines’ of a mixed-use zone theme, is at the opposite spectrum of what this piece of land was predominantly utilised for in the past. Five families lived in five architect designed homes on this site (figure 16). Melbourne council has the power liaise with the State Minister for Planning & Housing seeking an amendment to change zoning at this site from mixed-use zone back to a residential zone. That would encourage development to return the site to its original use as residential in nature rather than it becoming a high rise open-plan ‘hot-desking’ office space for an estimated 828 people (figure 17) during daylight hours, and a dead quiet ‘ghost-town’ kind of environment after business hours.

There is an overwhelming desire in the marketplace, among people who aspire to live in West Melbourne. This desire is specifically for heritage homes, the desire will only continue to grow over time. I speak from time to time to local real estate agents within our community about the local property market. For the customers who have the means, those aspirants overwhelmingly choose to live in a heritage property as their top option. Those who don’t have the means of owning one, may have the desire and ability to rent in West Melbourne, they will choose above all else, to rent a heritage property, not a new build. Others who don’t have the ability to buy or rent a heritage property in West Melbourne, begrudgingly fall back to the cheapest option, and reside in a high-rise block of tiny flats with no back yard gardens. What its telling us is, the market really wants older good-sized existing heritage homes that have loads of unique character and come with their own back yard gardens.

TP-2020-12 seeks to develop land to create open plan office space for workers. Connected to that, is the fundamental issue faced at both a state and municipal level, which is the need to create homes for those 828 workers and their partners who will be working there if the project is approved. The State government has said it wants more immigration flowing into Melbourne and Victoria. Regardless of what side of the immigration debate one chooses to take, there still remains a critical ‘shortage of housing’ fact which needs to be swiftly addressed within Melbourne. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs (figure 34) tells us the physiological needs such as shelter are first and foremost. Why are developers unable to build more tall blocks of flats out in new suburban developments, far away from existing inner Melbourne’s heritage areas where land is cheaper by miles. I’ve been there and seen the expansion around outer Melbourne with my own eyes, in these new development corridors, such as Casey, Melton, Whittlesea and Cardinia. I’ve observed a majority of the new homes under construction and built in those areas are predominantly single storey in height. Those new growth areas could easily take hundreds of multiple blocks of high-rise flats housing tens of thousands of people. Food for thought.

The community is aware 550-558 Spencer site does need to be put to a better use than as a car wash, however we believe a redevelopment on the site would be better suited to be low rise, architecturally sympathetic to its surroundings and residential nature (figure 18). Ideally a redevelopment which is complimentary to the nearby building fabric of heritage homes, built to a size that does not dwarf everything else around it would be the community’s ideal outcome (figures 19). While the five Federation terrace homes once on 550-558 Spencer site have gone, planners can still draw upon nearby examples of residences in Roden Street as a style guide to rely upon to help guide future redesigns. I sincerely request council and planners please take into consideration the significant social and architectural value once associated with this site and it’s surrounds when assessing this or any other future development proposal.

5. The land at 550-558 Spencer Street was used as a Car Wash for about 25 years. Before that it was a Caltex Petrol station from 1966 onwards. Before the land was mixed-use, it was totally used for residential purposes (figure 16). In 1853, this vacant piece of crown land was first purchased by business partners John Alison and Andrew Halley Knight. They began the first milling enterprise in Melbourne in 1841 on Flinders Lane [3]. Andrew Halley Knight became a politician in colonial Victoria, and a member of the Victorian Legislative Council [4]. They purchased this land in May 1853 (figure 20) and it remained a vacant piece of land for 53 years until 1906. Then all 5 lots were purchased by the Fourth Victorian Permanent Building Society (figure 21) managed by Mr. Victor Yule Kimpton of the famous ‘Kimpton's Flour Milling’ family. The first two Federation terraces were created at number 550 & 552 Spencer Street in early July 1906 and were designed by architect Mr. Isidor George Beaver [5]. His best-known work is the construction of the National Mutual Life Association building in Collins Street Melbourne. Four of the five homes were built by the master building firm Gamiln Brothers of Church Street Richmond. The second two Federation terraces at 554 & 556 Spencer Street were built in mid July 1906. They were designed by Mr. George Brown Leith. Leith commenced his practice in Collins Street, Melbourne after arriving in 1879. He was a well-known and respected city architect as well as an Essendon Town Councilor and Lord Mayor [6]. The fifth Federation terrace house at 558 Spencer Street was created in 1909 by master builder William Owen Longmuir of 17 Lobb Street Brunswick. He was the founder of W. O. Longmuir Construction which still operates to this day [7].

We hear a lot about high rise construction issues these days, some not positive, especially for the customers who end up with a faulty, problem ridden product at the end. The buildings go up quick, some developers, who builds these, may chose to de-register soon after certain projects are completed. Some builders later, rise again like a phoenix from the ashes under a different name. These stories have been widely reported in the press over the last few years.

Historically buildings use to last a long time, they could be passed down from generation to generation, but there’s been a change in society and a cultural shift lately, more towards making a fast dollar on low margins and churning out high volume, mostly high rise blocks of flats. That kind of practice is highly unsustainable and needs to change. Some, rather than creating a product that will endure long after its creators have moved on, only offer up very substandard outcomes and are bad for the building industry.

People desperately aspire a quiet and peaceful home to live in, one that has enduring heritage and a back-yard garden, but often cannot afford to buy a house like their parents or grandparents could in the past. That’s why there’s been such a rise in demand in the marketplace for smaller sized, less costly, light weighted and lower quality forms of housing such as noisy high-rise flats. They meet a specific need.

All products, no matter what they are, must come from nature at some point in time, that’s just the harsh reality of any materially made good. Every wasted product, something that could be functional, that is no longer being used, requires something new to be created to replace it. So, society goes and extracts more trees, and mines more minerals from our natural environment, which can have a significant impact on our world. For everything that is discarded to the tip, it requires something new or if you are incredibly lucky, recycled to replace it. Land fill is a significant issue especially when there is a huge diversity of waste materials going into them. The bigger issue though, is sustainability. Weight equals impact, the more volume that is thrown away, the greater the impact that will have on our environment. Tearing down existing, perfectly usable buildings and replacing them with new buildings and new materials will create a larger carbon footprint than it would, if society were to consider preserving existing historic architectural buildings in our environment. Most new buildings are designed to have a short finite life span. Whereas the near on, 150-year old home I’m living in today was carefully crafted and created by master builder Mr. James Thurgood [8], so as to last for generations. I believe, as long as my homes future owners after me, give it the maintenance and care it needs, this home ought to last for another 150 years. Heritage homes and buildings if cared for, rank highly on the sustainability scale by comparison to new construction.

TP-2020-12 ustilises concrete and a report I recently read stated, if everyone in the building industry got behind the use of Geopolymer concrete [9] rather than using traditional lime based concrete cement, making the change would cut global Co2 emissions by two thirds.

TP-2020-12 on paper shows it to be mostly open plan office space. Going through the current pandemic crisis is showing society that open plan office space will no longer be a wise type of working environment for people to operate in. Something people do need more than anything else today are homes that are safe and peaceful havens, ones that can be a combination of a home and a work-from-home base. If a 90-minute restaurant meal, a 120-minute choir practice or a 180-minute birthday party is enough for one person to infect a roomful of others, how much more risk is in a 540-minute workday in an open plan office environment, even with precautions? By working from home for as long as possible, society will do more to fight COVID-19. The fewer people who return to work, the safer the workplace will be for those who do. The office space giant, WeWork is asking its landlords for a break on its huge rent bill as it tries to survive the pandemic [10]. Some of that company’s small-business customers are also seeking relief on the rent they owe. The question we all must consider, is the usage proposed by the owner/developer of 550-558 Spencer Street, the right kind of long-term usage or would a small number of low-rise residences be a better use?

Would the owner/developer of 550-558 Spencer Street land consider building some low-rise homes on the site or perhaps place the land back on the market and consider look elsewhere creating the 8 storey office building in another preexisting office type of environment?

TP-2020-12 seems to me to be a Commercial Property. Recently I read the minutes of the Reserve Bank board meeting of the 19th of May, in it, they revealed their concern that Commercial property was likely to take a substantial valuation hit [11]. "Members discussed vulnerabilities associated with commercial property, particularly for office and retail property. A large amount of new office space was expected to be completed in Sydney and Melbourne in 2020. Members noted that demand was not expected to keep pace with stronger supply in the near term and therefore it was likely that vacancy rates would rise, and office rents would fall. Rising vacancies and reduced rent would be likely to lead to lower valuations, which would pose challenges for all leveraged property investors and developers."

If the developer is determined to press ahead with idea of building an 8 storey Commercial office building, perhaps they might wisely reconsider some other alternatives. I’ve researched them and listed below. The environment surrounding the other locations might match up better to the developer’s creative vision rather than using the site at 550-558 Spencer which is located close to an existing low rise on the northern side, highly heritage valued, residential neighborhood.

Other potential site options for an 8 storey building.
1. Vacant Commercial Site located at 695-699 La Trobe Street, Docklands, 3008. (figure 22)
2. Vacant Site located at 938 Collins Street, Docklands, 3008. (figure 23)
3. Vacant Site located at Buckhurst and Kerr Streets in South Melbourne. (figure 24)
4. Former Kennards Tool Hire site at 240-246 Normanby Road South Melbourne. (figure 25)
5. Vacant Site located at 164 Gladstone Street South Melbourne. (figure 26)
6. Vacant Site located at 161 Buckhurst Street South Melbourne. (figure 27)
7. Vacant Site located at the corner of Woodruff & Boundary Street Port Melbourne. (figure 28)
8. Tuck’s Industrial building 120 Ferrars Street South Melbourne. (figure 29)
9. Vacant single-story brick building, corner site, 379 City Road Southbank. (figure 30)
10. Vacant site used as temporary car parking, 129 Kavanagh Street Southbank. (figure 31)
11. Vacant site used as temporary car parking, 274 Sturt Street Southbank. (figure 32)
12. Vacant brick single storey factory site located at 56 Clarke Street Southbank, currently listed for sale with Colliers International Melbourne. (figure 33)

TP-2020-12 is a Commercial office building. Docklands and Southbank precincts have existing high-rise office style buildings that would match the developer’s proposal in materials and building fabric as well as also match his desired building height.

The heritage custodians who live in West Melbourne truly value the historic buildings and homes that were created by the early forefathers of Melbourne. Sadly, though when we see town planners recommend destruction, and Council approving a new modern structure within our historic streetscapes, it undermines and detracts from the overall Victorian architectural style we are so earnestly striving to protect and preserve for future generations.

I read an article in the press by Mr. Jones recently, about the passing of Mr. Jack Mundy and I’ll quote Jones.
“If Sir Robert Askin had had his way, The Rocks (in Sydney) would now consist of bland '60s/'70s "architecture" and its origins would be nothing but a note in the history books. Thanks to the courage and determination of Jack Mundy, millions of tourists now enjoy what little remains of Sydney's early history. Imagine, too, just how different those glorious panoramas looking back to the city could have been if blighted by those possible towers.”

Melbourne as a city has a golden opportunity to benefit from an increase in that kind of architectural heritage tourism in the future, but a boost to Melbourne’s heritage preservation needs to be a much higher priority than it is now.

Is it unreasonable to ask our town planners and Melbourne council to consider enacting even more stringent heritage measures than those that currently exist? Instead of weakening existing heritage-built form, why not increases preservation rules, for future generations. One can only wonder what the potential possibilities and opportunities that might lay ahead. Heritage architecture requires many skilled artisans and craftspeople, apprentices would need to be specifically trained up from the building industry, to learn about maintaining heritage buildings, this would create many thousands of sustainable long-term jobs for Victorians and support thousands of small businesses and boost TAFE.

I am honestly thankful of what the elders built in West Melbourne and count my blessing every day, when I admire the heritage architecture around the neighborhood. Preserving our past helps us to understand where we, as a society, have come from and will help us navigate our way ahead.
Could we ask for all future construction that occurs within a heritage realm be made to be complimentary to the architectural style created by Mr. William Burgess [12] where possible?

If Melbourne council approves the TP-2020-12 proposal in its current form, our community would see it as an erosion of Melbourne’s valuable period architectural. It is the heritage of North and West Melbourne that makes the neighborhood such a highly desirable place to live in.
Councillors, please do not turn West Melbourne into a highly densified, bland and soulless space no different to every other modern city, let Melbourne be the leading example of worlds’ ‘best practice’ in protecting and preserving our shared heritage legacy.

In summary, I ask the town planner and Melbourne councilors to consider the following.
• Reject TP-2020-12 in its current form.
• Liaise with the Minister of Planning to change the site back into its original residential use from MUZ.
• The site proposed has been used for residential purposes for a longer period of time than mixed use.
• DDO29 document obtained two days ago from Melbourne council website states a 4 storey maximum, TP-2020-12 is 8 storey and not an acceptable height under those guidelines.
• The building materials are unharmonious to the existing built form fabric in the surrounding area.
• If the proposal is to be approved, construction materials must prioritise being sourced firstly from Victorian sources, secondly via sources in other Australian States and where possible and thirdly avoid sourcing any material from overseas whatsoever.
• Stipulate some acceptable level of locally recycled construction materials be utilised where possible.
• Specify the use of Geopolymer concrete as well as other low carbon emitting products in the build.
• Specify local rather than overseas professionals and trades people be used in relation to this build.
• Pay respects to the surrounding low-rise heritage architecture in any building redesign.
• Ensure any contaminated material, from ground level or below it, that is removed from the site is cleaned up and fit for safe reuse elsewhere in the environment and not buried deep underground, to be left like a dirty poisoned ticking time bomb for the future.
• The concept of open plan office space will end, more people will be working from home. Consider this site use to be low rise residential rather than 8 storeys of office space that may struggle to find customers who want to use that type of open plan space in the years ahead.
• Encourage the developer to consider a more appropriate low-rise residential use for the site or suggest they sell it and find a more suited site elsewhere.
• Strengthen existing heritage laws so that preservation is first and foremost in everyone’s mind.
• Consider how Council might liaise more with State Government to assist community, revive more heritage artisans and craftspeople trades, boost apprentices and help TAFE.
• Encourage architects and designers wherever possible to celebrate the Victorian architectural style created by Mr. William Burgess within new building designs.
• Consider the issue of sustainability, let’s keep old building structures and reuse them where possible, rather than tearing them down and dumping it into landfill. Let us not waste all those great building materials that people had to dug up, cut down, cut up, formed into shapes so that a finished building can be created and last many lifetimes.

Yours sincerely,
Stephen Hatcher

CC The hon. Richard Wynne, Minister for Planning, Minister for Housing.

(figures supplied to council on the original objection - and unable to be pasted into this form)
List of Figures
1864 West Melbourne Building allotments – TP-2020-12 site is on Section 55
Figure 1, Section 55 in 2020 bound by Spencer, Hawke, King & Roden Streets West Melbourne.
Figure 2, showing Mr. Colin Campbell’s 1853 terrace homes on the Miami Motel site.
Figure 3, part of Section 55 showing Mr. Colin Campbell’s land
Figure 4 Miami Motel Hawke Street West Melbourne.
Figure 5 building materials for TP-2020-12
Figure 6, fabric in the Australian Spark Plug Company building, now Radio Parts Group, Spencer Street, adjacent to TP-2020-12
Figure 7, shows difference in heights between Radio Parts building on left and TP-2020-12 proposal on right.
Figure 8 B.E.S. brand owned and made by the Australian Spark Plug Company, situated where Radio Parts Group is now.
Figure 9, shows the loss of six Victorian era homes, before left – after right. A car park on the western side of TP-2020-12
Figure 10, shows actual heights and styles of buildings on the southern boundary that would be facing towards TP-2020-12
Figure 11, original architectural drawings for Alexander Short's Hotel, (Moomba Hotel) Spencer Street before alterations.
Figure 12, an 1895 MMBW map showing location of the Hemphill house opposite TP-2020-12.
1860’s Compiled Crown Record Plan – showing Mr. James Hemphill site, opposite TP-2020-12
Figure 13, Horton’s Store, corner of Roden & Spencer Streets, directly to the eastern side of TP-2020-12.
Figure 14, showing Horton’s Store to the right of TP-2020-12, corner of Roden & Spencer Streets.
Figure 15, DDO29 Maximum Building Height – 4 storeys. Taken from Melbourne Council website, 20th May 2020.
Figure 16, 544 to 588 Spencer Street, 60 years of residential land usage – land proposed for TP-2020-12.
Data Source: Melbourne Council Rate Books and Sands & McDougall Melbourne Directories 1859-1966.
Figure 17, estimate of seating for people in TP-2020-12 proposal.
Figure 18, 187-189 Adderley Street, West Melbourne, redevelopment is respectful of existing heritage terrace height beside it.
Figure 19, redevelopment respectful of existing heritage-built form at 90-98 Curzon St North Melbourne.
Figure 20, Original sale of crown land associated with 550-558 Spencer Street development site - TP-2020-12.
Figure 21, first owner/developer of land at 550-558 Spencer Street West Melbourne, created 5 Federation styled terrace homes.
Figure 22, Option #1 vacant land 695-699 La Trobe St Docklands.
Figure 23, Option #2 Vacant Site located at 938 Collins Street, Docklands.
Figure 24, Option #3 Vacant Site located at Buckhurst and Kerr Streets in South Melbourne.
Figure 25, Option #4 Former Kennards Tool Hire site at 240-246 Normanby Road South Melbourne.
Figure 26 Option #5 Vacant Site located at 164 Gladstone Street South Melbourne.
Figure 27 Option #6. Vacant Site located at 161 Buckhurst Street South Melbourne.
Figure 28 #7. Vacant Site located at the corner of Woodruff & Boundary Street Port Melbourne.
Figure 29 #8. Tuck’s Industrial building 120 Ferrars Street South Melbourne.
Figure 30 #9. Vacant single-story brick building, corner site, 379 City Road Southbank.
Figure 31 #10. Vacant site used as temporary car parking, 129 Kavanagh Street Southbank.
Figure 32 #11. Vacant site used as temporary car parking, 274 Sturt Street Southbank.
Figure 33 #12. Vacant brick single storey factory site located at 56 Clarke Street Southbank, currently listed for sale with Colliers International Melbourne.
Figure 34, https://www.thoughtco.com/maslows-hierarchy-of-needs-4582571

References
[1] Kennon Studio, "TP-2020-12-3," Melbourne, 18/12/2019.
[2] Planning & Property Partners, "Application for a Planning Permit," 13/1 Collins Street Melbourne, 23/12/2019.
[3] Port Phillip Patriot and Melbourne Advertiser, "Melbourne Flour Mills.," 1841.
[4] Parliament of Victoria, "Former Members," [Online]. Available: https://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/about/people-in-parliament/re-member/details/24/622. [Accessed 2020].
[5] University of South Australia, [Online]. Available: https://www.architectsdatabase.unisa.edu.au/arch_full.asp?Arch_ID=146. [Accessed 2020].
[6] TROVE, [Online]. Available: http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article11083665. [Accessed 2020].
[7] W. O. Longmuir Construction, [Online]. Available: http://www.longmuirconstruction.com.au/. [Accessed 2020].
[8] City of Melbourne, "Heritage Shed Restoration QVM," [Online]. Available: https://www.melbourne.vic.gov.au/SiteCollectionDocuments/qvm-shed-work-notice-sept.pdf. [Accessed 2020].
[9] J. A. a. J. Day, "Geopolymer Concrete, a suitable alternative," [Online]. Available: https://www.wagner.com.au/media/1517/jaldred_jday_geopolymer-concrete_singapore-2012.pdf. [Accessed 2020].
[10] P. Eavis, "WeWork Wants a Rent Break. Its Customers Do, Too.," The New York Times, 18 5 2020. [Online]. Available: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/18/business/wework-rent-coronavirus.html. [Accessed 2020].
[11] M. Cranston, "What the RBA is thinking about property prices," Australian Financial Review, 19 5 2020. [Online]. Available: https://www.afr.com/policy/economy/what-the-rba-is-thinking-about-property-prices-20200519-p54uck. [Accessed 2020].