top of page

Protecting Local Heritage: A Historian's Perspective

  • Writer: James Lesh
    James Lesh
  • Apr 30
  • 3 min read

Dr James Lesh, Founding Director of Heritage Workshop, had the privilege of presenting "Protecting Local Heritage: A Historian's Perspective" at the Royal Historical Society of Victoria event on 29 April 2025.


I want to share some of my key points and thoughts from that presentation with you here.


Setting the Stage


My aim for the presentation was to examine local heritage through my lens as a historian, drawing from public and urban history traditions. My real-world focus is on the planning, housing, policy, and conservation issues.


A Values-Based People-Centred Approach


A core element of my methodology, which is central to my work, is a people-centred, values-based approach. I believe that values are the building blocks of heritage. It's us, as a society, who ascribe value to places, which then elevates them to "Heritage Places."


As a historian, I see values as a lens through which we can trace the evolving thinking, approaches and experiences of heritage. This approach builds upon my previous work, most notably my book Values in Cities, which explores the history of the Australian heritage movement.


Values, to me, transform objects and places into ‘Heritage Places'. Conservation is fundamentally about sustaining the values embodied by that heritage. In my research, I define values as the attributes, characteristics, and qualities ascribed to things, places, and objects by people and societies over time.


Heritage campaigns in the 1960s to conserve nineteenth-century housing. This photo shows Canning Street, Carlton with the Royal Exhibition Building in the background.
Heritage campaigns in the 1960s to conserve nineteenth-century housing. This photo shows Canning Street, Carlton with the Royal Exhibition Building in the background.

Three Periods of Heritage Conservation


In my analysis, I divide the history of local heritage conservation into three distinct periods:


Proto Protections (1920s–60s): This era saw the initial engagement of architecture and planning with historical legacy. Landmark buildings were recognised for their "pioneering" history, "community pride," and "architecture." For example, I noted how the Melbourne Metropolitan Board of Works designated several landmarks as proto-protected areas.


Emergent Protections (1960s–80s): This period witnessed the rise of systematic protections driven by community activism. I recalled how diverse groups campaigned for heritage preservation. The National Trust declared Maldon as our first historic town and Parkville as our first historic suburb. Values during this period focused on integrity, intactness, and the valorisation of historical fabric.


Consolidating Protections (1990s–2010s): Planning reforms led to the emergence of the heritage overlay. I discussed the 1990s "save our suburbs" movement that arose in response to threats to participatory planning and heritage protections. New community, social, and spiritual values emerged in conservation efforts.


The Melbourne Metropolitan Board of Works in 1929 designates the Melbourne Boys’ High School, Hotel Windsor, the Princess Theatre, St. Patrick’s Cathedral, St. Peter’s Church, the Shrine and the whole Parliament Precinct on Spring Street as proto-protected areas
The Melbourne Metropolitan Board of Works in 1929 designates the Melbourne Boys’ High School, Hotel Windsor, the Princess Theatre, St. Patrick’s Cathedral, St. Peter’s Church, the Shrine and the whole Parliament Precinct on Spring Street as proto-protected areas

New Horizons: Evolve or Regress?


I emphasised during my presentation that the heritage overlay hasn't substantively evolved in recent decades, and this is a significant issue. I believe that local heritage faces "existential threats" and stands at a "fork in the road."


We either need to evolve local heritage, or it will inevitably become powerless in the current policy and political climate.


Dr James Lesh writes about the arguably shared aspirations of YIMBYs and NIMBYs for The Conversation.
Dr James Lesh writes about the arguably shared aspirations of YIMBYs and NIMBYs for The Conversation.

I cautioned against using heritage as a scapegoat for urban crises. To me, eroding the heritage overlay threatens the social, design, cultural and historical fabric of the neighbourhoods that people value.


Instead, I advocate for evolving local heritage by using the roadmap of existing policy work and integrating modern considerations:


  • Voice, Treaty, and Reconciliation

  • High-Quality Contextual Design

  • Sustainability and Climate Adaptation

  • Retrofit and Adaptive Reuse

  • Shared, Diverse and Conflicting Histories

  • Community and Wellbeing

  • Promoting Skilled Jobs, and Traditional Trades

  • Enabling Cultural Industries

  • Modernising the Heritage Overlay for housing more people in desirable and contextually designed homes


Heritage Workshop has been pursuing this kind of innovative policymaking in its heritage strategy consulting, including for the City of Melbourne.


Continuing the Conversation


By adopting a values-based, people-centred lens for conservation, we can trace heritages’ pasts, and draw inspiration for building positive heritage futures.


In question time, I suggested that we need stronger leadership for heritage across government and industry. It should not be a low-level concern, but rather is fundamental to sustainability, democracy, and the future of our cities.


I look forward to continuing this important discussion!

bottom of page