{"id":"F2023L00437","name":"Australian War Memorial Heritage Management Plan 2022","slug":"australian-war-memorial-heritage-management-plan-2022","collection":"legislative_instrument","jurisdiction":"commonwealth","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":104117,"registerId":"commonwealth-F2023L00437-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-03","status":"InForce","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"Australian War Memorial","sectionType":"part","heading":"Australian War Memorial","content":"## Australian War Memorial\n\nHeritage Management Plan","sortOrder":0},{"sectionNumber":"Revised Final Report","sectionType":"subdivision","heading":"Revised Final Report","content":"#### Revised Final Report\n\nReport prepared for the Memorial\n\nMarch 2022\n\n![Australian War Memorial, Roll of Honour cloisters with bright red poppies in the brass panels.](image.003.jpeg) \n![Sydney Office Level 6, 372 Elizabeth Street Surry Hills NSW Australia 2010 T +61 2 9319 4811\nCanberra Office 2A Mugga Way Red Hill ACT Australia 2603 T +61 2 6273 7540\nGML Heritage Pty Ltd ABN 60 001 179 362\nwww.gml.com.au\n](image.004.png)","sortOrder":1},{"sectionNumber":"Report Register","sectionType":"section","heading":"Report Register","content":"##### Report Register\n\nThe following report register documents the development and issue of the report entitled Australian War Memorial—Heritage Management Plan—Revised Final Report, undertaken by GML Heritage Pty Ltd in accordance with its quality management system.\n\n| Job No. | Issue No. | Notes/Description | Issue Date |\n| -------- | --------- | ------------------------------------------------------- | ----------------- |\n| 18-0245 | 1 | Draft Report | 4 September 2018 |\n| 18-0245 | 2 | Revised Draft Report | 8 July 2019 |\n| 18-0245 | 3 | Final Draft Report | 5 August 2019 |\n| 18-0245 | 4 | Final Report | 13 September 2019 |\n| 18-0245B | 5 | Revised Final Report | 29 May 2020 |\n| 18-0245B | 6 | Revised Final Report with minor amendments | 26 June 2020 |\n| 18-0245B | 7 | Revised Final Report (DAWE comments amendments) | 8 June 2021 |\n| 18-0245B | 8 | Revised Final Report (DAWE and AWM comments amendments) | 22 June 2021 |\n| 18-0245B | 9 | Revised Final Report (for DAWE review) | 2 July 2021 |\n| 18-0245B | 10 | Revised Final Report (for AHC review) | 12 August 2021 |\n| 18-0256B | 11 | Revised Final Report (AHC Review) | 29 November 2021 |\n| 18-0245B | 12 | Revised Final Report (AHC Amendments) | 11 February 2022 |\n| 18-0245B | 13 | Revised Final Report (minor AHC Amendments) | 10 March 2022 |","sortOrder":2},{"sectionNumber":"Quality Assurance","sectionType":"section","heading":"Quality Assurance","content":"##### Quality Assurance\n\nGML Heritage Pty Ltd operates under a quality management system which has been certified as complying with the Australian/New Zealand Standard for quality management systems AS/NZS ISO 9001:2008.\n\nThe report has been reviewed and approved for issue in accordance with the GML quality assurance policy and procedures.\n\nCopyright\n\nHistorical sources and reference material used in the preparation of this report are acknowledged and referenced at the end of each section and/or in figure captions. Reasonable effort has been made to identify, contact, acknowledge and obtain permission to use material from the relevant copyright owners.\n\nUnless otherwise specified or agreed, copyright in this report vests in GML Heritage Pty Ltd (‘GML’) and in the owners of any pre-existing historic source or reference material.\n\nMoral Rights\n\nGML asserts its Moral Rights in this work, unless otherwise acknowledged, in accordance with the (Commonwealth) Copyright (Moral Rights) Amendment Act 2000. GML’s moral rights include the attribution of authorship, the right not to have the work falsely attributed and the right to integrity of authorship.\n\nRight to Use\n\nGML grants to the client for this project (and the client’s successors in title) an irrevocable royalty- free right to reproduce or use the material from this report, except where such use infringes the copyright and/or Moral Rights of GML or third parties.\n\nCover Image: Roll of Honour, AWM. (Source: GML, 2018)","sortOrder":3},{"sectionNumber":"Contents Page","sectionType":"division","heading":"Contents Page","content":"### ![](image.005.png) \nContents Page\n\n| Executive SummaryAbbreviations and Definitions | iiii |\n| --------------------------------------------------------------- | ---- |\n| Abbreviations | iii |\n| Australian War Memorial Terms | iv |\n| Definitions and Terminology | iv |\n| 1.0 Introduction | 1 |\n| 1.1 Background | 1 |\n| 1.2 Previous Heritage and Conservation Management Plans | 1 |\n| 1.3 Location of the Site | 2 |\n| 1.4 Heritage Listings | 3 |\n| 1.5 Heritage Register | 6 |\n| 1.6 Consultation | 6 |\n| 1.7 Endnotes | 7 |\n| 2.0 Understanding the Place—Historical Context | 8 |\n| 2.1 Aboriginal Cultural and Historical Context | 8 |\n| 2.2 Origins and Establishment | 8 |\n| 2.3 Expansion and Evolution | 14 |\n| 2.4 New Meanings | 16 |\n| 2.4.1 The Western Precinct—1999 to Present | 19 |\n| 2.4.2 The Eastern Precinct | 24 |\n| 2.5 Australian War Memorial Development Project 2019-2028 | 25 |\n| 2.5.1 Project Development | 25 |\n| 2.5.2 Initial Business Case (2017) | 25 |\n| 2.5.3 Detailed Business Case—Development of Options | 27 |\n| 2.5.4 Design Development | 37 |\n| 2.5.5 The Replacement of Anzac Hall | 40 |\n| 2.5.6 Project Development Outcomes | 42 |\n| 2.5.7 Community Response to the Development Project and Designs | 43 |\n| 2.5.8 Closure and demolition of Anzac Hall | 43 |\n| 2.6 Endnotes | 44 |\n| 3.0 Understanding the Place—Physical Context | 45 |\n| 3.1 Topographic Context | 45 |\n| 3.2 Physical Description | 45 |\n| 3.2.1 The Main Memorial Building | 49 |\n| 3.2.2 The Commemorative Area | 49 |\n| 3.2.3 The Galleries | 52 |\n| 3.2.4 The Dioramas | 55 |\n| 3.2.5 ANZAC Hall | 56 |\n| 3.2.6 The Administration Building | 57 |\n| 3.2.7 CEW Bean Building | 57 |","sortOrder":4},{"sectionNumber":"Executive Summary","sectionType":"division","heading":"Executive Summary","content":"### ![](image.006.png) \nExecutive Summary\n\nWar memorials are ubiquitous expressions of Australian nationhood. They appear amongst every concentration of people across the country, from our cities to our tiny outback towns. But the grandest of these expressions, the monument that strives to honour all forms of remembrance and all events that need to be remembered, is the Australian War Memorial (AWM) in Canberra.\n\nThe AWM is Australia’s National Shrine to those Australians who lost their lives and suffered as a result of war. It is an important place to the Australian community as a whole and has special associations with veterans and their families and descendants of those who fought in wars for Australia.\n\nThe AWM is unique in Australia and believed rare in the world as a purpose built repository where the nature of commemoration is based in equal parts in the relationship between the building, the collections of objects and records and the commemorative spaces.\n\nIts physical presence alone is a dominant feature of the nation’s capital: an Art Deco edifice at the head of Anzac Parade facing the federal houses of parliament across Lake Burley Griffin.\n\nA shrine, a museum, an archive, a formal landscape and an outstanding collection of buildings, the AWM offers itself to the nation as a place for reflection, research, education and ceremony. It embodies many heritage values which are recognised by its inclusion in the National Heritage List along with Anzac Parade, the Commonwealth Heritage List, the Register of the National Estate, the ACT Royal Australian Institute of Architects’ National Heritage List and Register of Significant Twentieth Century Architecture, the ACT National Trust Register.\n\nThe Commonwealth’s Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) and its accompanying regulations (EPBC Regulations) oblige government agencies to conserve and manage the heritage values of sites in their control. The legislation defines heritage principles that agencies must follow and directs agencies to create documents for guiding their care of heritage places, including this Heritage Management Plan.\n\nThis Heritage Management Plan (HMP) acts as a practical guide for conserving, managing and interpreting the site’s heritage. It begins by describing the AWM in detail: its history, its features and its heritage values. It discusses factors that need to be considered when managing the site, such as its statutory context and compliance requirements. The final sections of the plan provide conservation policies for the place’s managers and staff to follow. The report includes a collection of appendices that give further guidance and detailed information for asset managers and curators alike.\n\nTo conserve the AWM’s heritage values, the heritage legislation, a range of organisations and the general public, other management documents, logistics, forward planning and changing cultural attitudes need to be considered. This HMP acknowledges the significant obligations they place on the site’s managers and emphasises the need for community involvement and great care in any future development of the AWM.\n\nMindful of these issues, this plan provides useful policies to guide the Memorial to care for the site’s heritage values from day to day. Section 6.2 outlines general policies for the whole site and Section 6.3 focuses on individual parts in more detail. The policies cover conservation processes; management processes; stakeholder consultation and community involvement; interpretation; documentation, monitoring and review; and use, access and security. Recommended actions and timing for implementation are provided for each policy.","sortOrder":5},{"sectionNumber":"Abbreviations and Definitions","sectionType":"division","heading":"Abbreviations and Definitions","content":"### ![](image.006.png) \nAbbreviations and Definitions","sortOrder":6},{"sectionNumber":"Abbreviations","sectionType":"section","heading":"Abbreviations","content":"##### Abbreviations\n\nThe following table outlines a range of standard abbreviations used in the preparation of heritage management plans as well as specific abbreviations for this report.\n\n| Abbreviation | Definition |\n| ------------ | ------------------------------------------------------------------- |\n| ACT | Australian Capital Territory |\n| AHC | Australian Heritage Council |\n| AHDB | Australian Heritage Database |\n| AIA | Australian Institute of Architects |\n| AR | Archival Recording, or Record |\n| AWM | Australian War Memorial |\n| BCA | Building Code of Australia |\n| BS | Buildings and Services |\n| BSS | Buildings and Services Section |\n| CAM | Communications and Marketing |\n| CHL | Commonwealth Heritage List |\n| CMG | Corporate Management Group |\n| CMP | Conservation Management Plan |\n| Cth | Commonwealth |\n| DAWE | Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment |\n| DCP | Development Control Plan |\n| DEX | Digital Experience |\n| EPBC Act | Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth) |\n| FCAC | Federal Capital Advisory Committee |\n| GML | GML Heritage Pty Ltd |\n| HA | Heritage Assessment |\n| HIA | Heritage Impact Assessment |\n| HMP | Heritage Management Plan |\n| ICOMOS | International Council on Monuments and Sites |\n| ILO | Indigenous Liaison Officer |\n| LGA | Local Government Area |\n| MNES | Matter of National Environmental Significance |\n| NC Act | Nature Conservation Act 2014 (ACT) |\n| NAA | National Archives of Australia |\n| NCA | National Capital Authority |\n| NCP | National Capital Plan |\n| NFSA | National Film and Sound Archive |","sortOrder":7},{"sectionNumber":"Australian War Memorial Terms","sectionType":"section","heading":"Australian War Memorial Terms","content":"##### Australian War Memorial Terms\n\nTo assist with understanding the references provided in this report, the Australian War Memorial terms used have been defined below.\n\n| Term | Definition |\n| ----------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |\n| Australian War Memorial (AWM) | Refers to the buildings (including the main Memorial building, ANZAC Hall, Administration building, the CEW Bean Building and Poppy’s Café), and surrounding grounds located at Campbell, ACT, that are managed by the Memorial (see above) as a national shrine, museum and archive. |\n| AWM Mitchell Precinct | Refers to the buildings located at Mitchell, ACT that are managed by the Memorial. It includes Treloar A (also known as the Annex), Treloar B, Treloar C, Treloar D (the Old Post Office), Treloar E and Treloar F (currently under lease). |\n| The Memorial | Refers to the organisational body and its people that manages the AWM and the AWM Mitchell Precinct (see above). |\n| Main Memorial Building | Refers to the sandstone building located at the AWM. |","sortOrder":8},{"sectionNumber":"Definitions and Terminology","sectionType":"section","heading":"Definitions and Terminology","content":"##### Definitions and Terminology\n\n| Term | Definition |\n| -------------------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |\n| Commonwealth Heritage List (CHL) | The CHL is a list of heritage places which are within a Commonwealth area (land owned or leased by the Commonwealth) which have been identified as having one or more Commonwealth Heritage values. To have Commonwealth Heritage values a place must have been assessed as being significant against one or more of the nine Commonwealth Heritage criteria. Places in the list can have natural, Indigenous and/or historic heritage values, or a combination of these, and range from places of local through to world heritage levels of importance. |\n| Commonwealth Heritage criteria | Under s 341D of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth) (EPBC Act), these are the criteria prescribed in the EPBC Regulations at reg 10.03A to establish if a place within a Commonwealth area has significant heritage value for its natural, Indigenous or historic heritage values. |\n| Commonwealth Heritage values | Commonwealth Heritage values are the legally listed values for which a place is included in the CHL. These can comprise one or more natural and cultural (historic or Indigenous) aspects such as significance for reasons of historical, research, aesthetic or social importance, or due to a place’s significant rarity, creative or technical achievement, characteristic features of a class of place, association with important people or importance as part of Indigenous tradition. |","sortOrder":9},{"sectionNumber":"1.0","sectionType":"division","heading":"Introduction","content":"### 1.0 ![](image.006.png) \nIntroduction","sortOrder":10},{"sectionNumber":"1.1","sectionType":"section","heading":"Background","content":"##### 1.1 Background\n\nThe AWM is a national shrine, a museum and an archive located in the northern Canberra suburb of Campbell in the Australian Capital Territory (ACT). It is managed by the Memorial and is a major research centre and tourist attraction, now consistently attracting more than one million visitors per year.[1](#_bookmark3)\n\nThese functions of the AWM are supported by the AWM Mitchell Precinct, which is also managed by the Memorial. The AWM Mitchell Precinct, consisting of Treloar A (also known as Annex A), Treloar B, Treloar C, Treloar D (the Old Post Office), Treloar E and Treloar F (currently under lease), provides additional storage and conservation facilities for the AWM collection in the suburb of Mitchell, ACT.\n\nThe values of the AWM are recognised through its inclusion in the National Heritage List (NHL) and the Commonwealth Heritage List (CHL) (refer to Appendix E and F for the official citations). The EPBC Act requires that a HMP be prepared for National and Commonwealth Heritage places to conserve, present and transmit their heritage values.\n\nThis HMP has been prepared by GML Heritage Pty Ltd (GML) in line with the requirements of the EPBC Act and its Regulations. A compliance table showing how this HMP meets the requirements of the EPBC Act and its Regulations is included at Appendix C. Additional text has been provided by the Memorial, in particular on the Australian War Memorial Development Project 2019–2028, provided 27 November 2021, at Sections 2.5, 5 and 6.","sortOrder":11},{"sectionNumber":"1.2","sectionType":"section","heading":"Previous Heritage and Conservation Management Plans","content":"##### 1.2 Previous Heritage and Conservation Management Plans\n\nThis HMP will update and replace the previous management plans for the AWM, which are listed as follows:\n\n  Godden Mackay Logan Pty Ltd 2011, Australian War Memorial Heritage Management Plan, prepared for the Australian War Memorial, Canberra;\n\n  Pearson, M and Crocket, G 1995, Australian War Memorial Conservation Management Plan (CMP), prepared for Bligh Voller Architects (referred to as the 1995 CMP);\n\n  Crocket, G 1997, Australian War Memorial Significance Assessment Report, prepared for Bligh Voller Architects; and\n\n  Bligh Voller Nield and HMC 1997, Australian War Memorial Heritage Conservation Masterplan, prepared for the Australian War Memorial.\n\nThe 1995 CMP was based on the Register of the National Estate (RNE) listing (date of listing 21 October 1980, Place ID 13286). Entry in the Commonwealth Heritage List (CHL) occurred in 2004 while entry in the National Heritage List (NHL) occurred in 2006.\n\nThe Memorial has also produced a Heritage Strategy and Heritage Register to meet and manage its heritage obligations under the EPBC Act and its Regulations. The heritage values of the AWM Mitchell Precinct have been assessed in the AWM Heritage Register.","sortOrder":12},{"sectionNumber":"1.3","sectionType":"section","heading":"Location of the Site","content":"##### 1.3 Location of the Site\n\nThe AWM is located in the ACT suburb of Campbell and is bounded by Limestone Avenue to the southwest, Fairbairn Avenue to the southeast and Treloar Crescent to the north. It is sited in a crucial symbolic location at the terminus of the land axis of Walter Burley Griffin’s plan for Canberra (refer to Figure 1.1).\n\nThe AWM has an area of approximately 14 hectares, including the whole of Section 39, Campbell, and is located at the foot of Mount Ainslie. This boundary is the area of land owned and controlled by the Memorial and is also the boundary of the Commonwealth Heritage listing for the AWM (refer to Section 1.4).\n\nThe AWM comprises:\n\n  the main Memorial Building;\n\n  ANZAC Hall;\n\n  the CEW Bean Building;\n\n  the Administration Building;\n\n  Poppy’s café; and\n\n  landscaped grounds incorporating sculptures, memorials, large technology objects, plaques, the Parade Ground and commemorative and landscape plantings (refer to Figure 1.2).\n\nDuring the drafting this plan (September 2018–June 2021) the Memorial has scheduled the commencement of a development project at the AWM Campbell site. The development includes the removal and replacement of Anzac Hall, creation of a glazed link connecting the main Memorial Building and the new Anzac Hall, and a new Research Centre. These elements will be located in, and around, the main Memorial Building. This project has been approved under the EPBC Act, and the Memorial will manage the project in accordance with the conditions of this approval; this includes management of the project under the previous Heritage Management Plan (2011) under which the proposal was developed, submitted and approved.","sortOrder":13},{"sectionNumber":"1.4","sectionType":"section","heading":"Heritage Listings","content":"##### 1.4 Heritage Listings\n\nThe AWM is entered in the CHL and the listing boundary is shown in [Figure 1.2.](#_bookmark0) The CHL citation is included in Appendix E.\n\nThe AWM is also entered in the NHL. The National Heritage listing incorporates the whole of Anzac Parade (including the median strip and its monuments) and the AWM, shown in [Figure 1.3.](#_bookmark1) The complete NHL citation is included in Appendix F. The area of the National Heritage listing is approximately 25 hectares, with Anzac Parade owned and controlled by the National Capital Authority (NCA), not the Memorial. This HMP does not cover the Anzac Parade portion of the National Heritage place, which has its own HMP.[2](#_bookmark4)\n\nThe AWM also falls within the Parliament House Vista (see [Figure 1.4](#_bookmark2)), another Commonwealth Heritage place. The complete CHL citation is included in Appendix F.\n\nTable 1.1 Summary of Statutory Heritage Listings Relevant to the AWM.\n\n```html\n

Place

Location

Class

Status

Place Number

National Heritage List

Australian War Memorial and the Memorial Parade

Anzac Parade, Campbell, ACT

Historic

Listed Place

105889

Commonwealth Heritage List

Australian War Memorial

Anzac Parade, Campbell, ACT

Historic

Listed Place

105469

Parliament House Vista

Anzac Parade, Parkes, ACT

Historic

Listed Place

105466

\n```","sortOrder":14},{"sectionNumber":"1.5","sectionType":"section","heading":"Heritage Register","content":"##### 1.5 Heritage Register\n\nThe Memorial has prepared a Heritage Register in accordance with Section 341ZB (1)(c) of the EPBC Act and has assessed the heritage values of each place it owns and controls. The Heritage Register is a separate document that was created by GML for the Memorial in August 2020.\n\nThe AWM has eight entries in the Heritage Register, as set out in Table 1.2.\n\nTable 1.2 Places Owned and Controlled by the Memorial with Commonwealth and National Heritage Value.\n\n```html\n

Location

Element of Place

Register Entry Number

CHL/NHL Status

AWM

Entire AWM site

CH100

CHL Place ID 105469

Within NHL Place ID 105889

Hall of Memory, Courtyard and Roll of Honour

CH101

Within CHL Place ID 105469 Within NHL Place ID 105889

Galleries

CH102

Within CHL Place ID 105469 Within NHL Place ID 105889

Dioramas

CH102.001

Within CHL Place ID 105469 Within NHL Place ID 105889

Landscape

CH103

Within CHL Place ID 105469 Within NHL Place ID 105889

Lone Pine

CH103.001

Within CHL Place ID 105469 Within NHL Place ID 105889

Sculpture Garden

CH103.003

Within CHL Place ID 105469 Within NHL Place ID 105889

Aboriginal site

CH103.004

Within CHL Place ID 105469 Within NHL Place ID 105889

AWM Mitchell Precinct

Treloar A (also known as Annex A)

CH104

Not listed. Identified Commonwealth Heritage values

\n```","sortOrder":15},{"sectionNumber":"1.6","sectionType":"section","heading":"Consultation","content":"##### 1.6 Consultation\n\nGML consulted with the Building and Services Section within the AWM Corporate Services Branch throughout the preparation of the HMP.\n\nConsultation with relevant Indigenous community members was undertaken in the preparation of this HMP in 2018. This consultation was undertaken in accordance with the Ask First Guidelines.[3](#_bookmark5) In the ACT there are four Representative Aboriginal Organisations (RAOs) with whom consultation should be undertaken for heritage related projects. These RAOs are:\n\n  Buru Ngunawal Aboriginal Corporation;\n\n  King Brown Tribal Group;\n\n  Mirrabei (formerly known as Little Gudgenby River Tribal Council); and\n\n  Ngarigo Currawong Clan.","sortOrder":16},{"sectionNumber":"1.7","sectionType":"section","heading":"Endnotes","content":"##### 1.7 Endnotes\n\n1 Australian War Memorial 2017, Australian War Memorial Corporate Plan, 2017-2021, Australian War Memorial, Canberra, p 5.\n\n2 Geoff Butler & Associates et al., Anzac Parade, Canberra—Heritage Management Plan, report prepared for National Capital Authority, August 2013.\n\n3 Australian Heritage Commission 2002, Ask First: A Guide to Respecting Indigenous Heritage Places and Values, Australian Heritage Commission, Canberra.","sortOrder":17},{"sectionNumber":"2.0","sectionType":"division","heading":"Understanding the Place—Historical Context","content":"### 2.0 ![](image.006.png) \nUnderstanding the Place—Historical Context\n\nThis section provides a summary of the history of both the AWM as a place and the Memorial as an organisation. It draws on the historical analysis presented in the 1995 CMP[1](#_bookmark18) and 2011 HMP, supplemented with additional material relating to the recent history of the place.\n\nFurther historical information regarding individual elements within the AWM is provided in the Heritage Register.","sortOrder":18},{"sectionNumber":"2.1","sectionType":"section","heading":"Aboriginal Cultural and Historical Context","content":"##### 2.1 Aboriginal Cultural and Historical Context\n\nTribal boundaries within Australia are largely based on linguistic evidence and it is probable that boundaries, clan estates and band ranges were fluid and varied over time. Consequently, ‘tribal boundaries’ as delineated today must be regarded as approximations only and relative to the period of, or immediately before, European contact. Social interaction across these language boundaries appears to have been a common occurrence.\n\nAccording to Tindale,[2](#_bookmark19) the territories of the Ngunawal, Ngarigo and the Walgalu peoples coincide and meet in the Queanbeyan area. The AWM probably falls within the tribal boundaries of the Ngunawal people.\n\nReferences to the traditional Aboriginal inhabitants of the Canberra region are rare and often difficult to interpret.[3](#_bookmark20) However, the consistent impression is one of rapid depopulation and a desperate disintegration of a traditional way of life over little more than 50 years from initial European contact.[4](#_bookmark21) This process was probably accelerated by the impact of European diseases, which may have included the smallpox epidemic in 1830, influenza, and a severe measles epidemic by the 1860s.[5](#_bookmark22)\n\nBy the 1850s the traditional Aboriginal economy had largely been replaced by an economy based on European commodities and supply points. Reduced population, isolation from the most productive grasslands, and the destruction of traditional social networks meant that the final decades of the region’s semi-traditional Indigenous culture and economy was centered around European settlements and properties.[6](#_bookmark23)\n\nBy 1856 the local ‘Canberra Tribe’, presumably members of the Ngunawal, were reported to number around 70[7](#_bookmark24) and by 1872 only five or six ‘survivors’ were recorded.[8](#_bookmark25) In 1873, one so-called ‘pure blood’ member remained, known to the European community as Nelly Hamilton or ‘Queen Nellie’.\n\nCombined with other ethnohistorical evidence, this lack of early accounts of Aboriginal people led Flood [9](#_bookmark26) to suggest that the Aboriginal population density in the Canberra region and Southern Uplands was generally quite low.\n\nFrequently, only so called ‘pure blooded’ individuals were considered ‘Aboriginal’ or ‘tribal’ by European observers. This consideration made possible the assertion of local tribal ‘extinctions’. In reality, ‘Koori’ and tribal identity remained integral to the descendants of the nineteenth-century Ngunawal people, some of whom continue to live in the Canberra/Queanbeyan/Yass region.","sortOrder":19},{"sectionNumber":"2.2","sectionType":"section","heading":"Origins and Establishment","content":"##### 2.2 Origins and Establishment\n\nThe origins of the AWM are integrally associated with CEW Bean, Australia’s official war correspondent during World War I (refer to [Figure 2.1](#_bookmark6)). Bean envisioned a national war museum in Australia’s new capital, Canberra, which would house the relics and trophies of battle. At the same time, Bean was actively working towards earning Australia the right to keep and maintain its own war","sortOrder":20},{"sectionNumber":"2.3","sectionType":"section","heading":"Expansion and Evolution","content":"##### 2.3 Expansion and Evolution\n\nThe AWM is a place that has always adapted by responding to society’s changing need for commemoration and perceptions of the significance of military history generally. The decision to include World War II in the scope of the AWM necessitated extensions to the space available for display (refer to [Figure 2.10](#_bookmark14)). In 1961 the Roll of Honour panels commemorating the dead of World War I were installed within the cloisters (refer to Figure 2.9). Supplementary panels commemorating later conflicts have continued to be installed since the 1960s, with the panels updated annually to reflect those involved in ongoing conflicts. In 1968–1971 two wings were constructed to extend the transepts of the main Memorial building. These extensions were entirely in keeping with the original concept of the building, utilising the same design and stonework. The extensions of the transepts","sortOrder":21},{"sectionNumber":"2.4","sectionType":"section","heading":"New Meanings","content":"##### 2.4 New Meanings\n\nThe installation of the Tomb of the Unknown Australian Solider in 1993 signaled another significant evolution in the meaning of the AWM. The famous speech delivered by the then prime minister, Paul Keating, at the interment signaled that, more than ever before, the sacrifice of ordinary men and women in war was seen as crucial to national identity:[11](#_bookmark28)\n\nThe Unknown Australian Soldier we inter today was one of those who by his deeds proved that real nobility and grandeur belongs not to empires and nations but to the people on whom they, in the last resort, always depend.\n\nThat is surely at the heart of the Anzac story, the Australian legend which emerged from the war. It is a legend not of sweeping military victories so much as triumphs against the odds, of courage and ingenuity in adversity. It is a legend of free and independent spirits whose discipline derived less from military formalities and customs than from the bonds of mateship and the demands of necessity.\n\nIt has been suggested that with the interment of the Unknown Australian Soldier the meaning of the Hall of Memory has been clarified and entrenched as a national mausoleum and the heart of the AWM.[12](#_bookmark29) With the growth of the importance of ‘heritage’ through the 1990s, memorials to war have taken on new meanings in Australian society; it has been argued that they provide a mythology or even a sacred component for the secular modern nation.[13](#_bookmark30) This is reflected in a dynamic period of change and development across the AWM, mirroring the rise in the symbolic cultural importance of memorials which commemorate the sacrifice of Australians in war. From the mid-1990s to the present, the Memorial has expanded and upgraded its galleries and exhibitions and also made significant changes to its surrounding grounds. Between 1996 and 1999, the Memorial undertook Gallery Development Stage One. This included redeveloping the Second World War Galleries and Research Centre, relocating and changing the Post 1945 Galleries, the redesign and expansion of the Orientation Gallery and the creation of a temporary exhibition space. These were opened by then Prime Minister John Howard.","sortOrder":22},{"sectionNumber":"2.5","sectionType":"section","heading":"Australian War Memorial Development Project 2019-2028","content":"##### 2.5 Australian War Memorial Development Project 2019-2028\n\nOn 1 November 2018, the Australian Government approved, and committed funding for the Australian War Memorial (Development Project (the Project). This section includes text provided by the Memorial.\n\nThe scope of the Project is to construct additional exhibition spaces to enable the Memorial to continue to comply with the Australian War Memorial Act 1980; to equitably tell the stories of all Australian servicemen and women who have served overseas in conflicts and operations. This section provides additional information, prepared by the Memorial, on the background and development of the Project.\n\n2.5.1 Project Development\n\nIn 2014 the Memorial identified, through its business planning process, the need to examine how it would tell the stories of recent and then ongoing service in wars and on peacekeeping and peacemaking operations. This was included as a priority in its 2014-17 Corporate Plan and research undertaken into possible ways to meet this need.\n\nIn 2017 the Memorial received funds under a New Policy Proposal to Government for an Initial Business Case (IBC) to examine this need.\n\nThe IBC was scoped to examine the following four key issues:\n\n a lack of capacity to provide equitable coverage of conflicts and operations;\n\n a lack of capacity to describe a broader description of war;\n\n a lack of circulation space; and\n\n poor accessibility and access.\n\n2.5.2 Initial Business Case (2017)\n\nThe Initial Business Case (IBC) undertook an initial, broad, approach to examining the four key issues presented above before moving to more detailed examination of options","sortOrder":23},{"sectionNumber":"2.6","sectionType":"section","heading":"Endnotes","content":"##### 2.6 Endnotes\n\n1 Pearson, M and Crockett, G, Australian War Memorial: Conservation Management Plan, report prepared for Bligh Voller Architects and The Australian War Memorial, April 1995.\n\n2 Tindale, N 1940, Map showing the distribution of the Aboriginal tribes of Australia, T.F.E Moore, Government Photolithographer, Adelaide.\n\n3 Flood, J 1980, The moth hunters: Aboriginal prehistory of the Australian Alps, Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies, Canberra\n\n4 Officer 1989 Namadgi pictures: the Aboriginal rock art sites within the Namadgi National Park, ACT: their recording, significance, analysis and conservation. Heritage Unit & ACT Parks and Conservation Service, ACT.\n\n5 Flood, J 1980, The moth hunters: Aboriginal prehistory of the Australian Alps, Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies, Canberra; Butlin, N 1984, ‘Macassans and the Aboriginal smallpox: the “1789” and “1829” epidemics’, Working papers in economic history, Australian National University No. 22, Canberra.\n\n6 Officer, K 1989, Namadgi pictures: the Aboriginal rock art sites within the Namadgi National Park, ACT: their recording, significance, analysis and conservation, Heritage Unit & ACT Parks and Conservation Service, ACT.\n\n7 Shumack, S, ‘Canberra Blacks’, Sydney Morning Herald, 11 June 1927, p 9.\n\n8 Goulburn Herald, 9 November 1872.\n\n9 Flood, J 1980, The moth hunters: Aboriginal prehistory of the Australian Alps, Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies, Canberra.\n\n10 Australian War Memorial website, ‘Lieutenant Colonel John Linton Treloar’ <[http://www.awm.gov.au/people/327.asp](http://www.awm.gov.au/people/327.asp)\\>.\n\n11 Funeral Service of the Unknown Australian Soldier, speech by Paul Keating <[http://australianpolitics.com/executive/keating/93-11-](http://australianpolitics.com/executive/keating/93-11-) 11\\_unknown-soldier.shtml>.\n\n12 Michael Pearson Heritage Management Consultants and Graeham Crockett Marleesh 1995, Australian War Memorial: Conservation Management Plan.\n\n13 See for instance Inglis, KS 2008, Sacred places, War Memorials in the Australian Landscape, Melbourne University Press, third edition; Seal, G 2007, ‘ANZAC: the sacred in the secular’, Journal of Australian Studies, March 2007.\n\n14 Johnson Pilton Walker Pty Ltd, Australian War Memorial Campbell Precinct Site Development Plan Review, report prepared for Australian War Memorial, November 2017, p 16.","sortOrder":24},{"sectionNumber":"3.0","sectionType":"division","heading":"Understanding the Place—Physical Context","content":"### 3.0 ![](image.006.png) \nUnderstanding the Place—Physical Context\n\nThis section provides a description of the physical fabric of the AWM.","sortOrder":25},{"sectionNumber":"3.1","sectionType":"section","heading":"Topographic Context","content":"##### 3.1 Topographic Context\n\nThe AWM lies on the lower southwest-facing basal slopes of the Mount Ainslie and Mount Pleasant ridgeline water catchment. An unnamed tributary that drained into the Molonglo River (now Lake Burley Griffin) is located along the eastern boundary of the site.\n\nThe bedrock geology of the area is dominated by the Ainslie volcanics, which consist of Devonian rocks including rhyolite, dacite, tuff, and quartz porphyry.[1](#_bookmark47) Soils within the area typically include red earths and red and yellow podzolic soils. Massive earths of a red or brown colour occur on the fan deposits flanking Mount Ainslie.[2](#_bookmark48)\n\nThe area is characterised by a constructed, undulating landscape where extensive landscaping and modification has subsumed the original landscape topography. Vegetation at the AWM site largely represents cultural plantings since the 1940s. The native vegetation is discussed further in Section [3.2.10.](#_bookmark45)","sortOrder":26},{"sectionNumber":"3.2","sectionType":"section","heading":"Physical Description","content":"##### 3.2 Physical Description\n\nThe AWM is located at the northern end of the land axis, the major planning axis that runs from Parliament House on Capital Hill through Federation Mall and Parkes Place and along Anzac Parade to Mount Ainslie (refer to [Figure 3.1](#_bookmark32)). The AWM has an elevated position at the end of Anzac Parade and is framed by Mount Ainslie in the background (refer to [Figure 3.2](#_bookmark33)).\n\nThe immediate site of the AWM is the area bounded by Limestone Avenue, Fairbairn Avenue and Treloar Crescent. The AWM is part of a larger landscape structured by the land axis and includes Anzac Park and Anzac Parade, as well as the Remembrance Nature Park on the slopes of Mount Ainslie behind the AWM. The AWM and Anzac Parade form part of the Parliament House Vista and are visually linked to the nearby Reid Conservation Area (refer to [Figure 3.3](#_bookmark34)). The AWM is associated with the many memorials that line Anzac Parade and commemorate specific aspects of Australia’s involvement in various theatres of international conflict.\n\nIndividual elements that comprise the AWM are briefly described below and are shown in [Figure 3.4.](#_bookmark35) Detailed descriptions, location maps and plans of the different elements of the place briefly outlined below are to be found in the Heritage Register and are to be used in conjunction with this HMP. The Heritage Register also contains a full list of the awards the Memorial has received recognising the creative and technical achievement of the AWM.\n\nAt the time of drafting this plan September 2018–June 2021, a project to expand the AWM is scheduled to commence. The development project will result in changes to the physical layout and features of the site, including internally in galleries and visitor amenity spaces, and externally with the creation of a new iteration of Anzac Hall, a glazed link between the new Anzac Hall and the main Memorial Building, a new Research Centre, the Parade Ground and the surrounding landscape. The physical descriptions in this section respond to the site before the development project commenced, and may change as the site undergoes development.\n\nAll photographs were taken by GML in 2018 unless otherwise indicated.","sortOrder":27},{"sectionNumber":"3.3","sectionType":"section","heading":"Comparative Analysis","content":"##### 3.3 Comparative Analysis\n\n3.3.1 Introduction\n\nThis section provides a desktop-based comparative analysis to establish the relative importance, rarity and representativeness of the AWM in relation to other war memorials and national cultural institutions.\n\nRepresentativeness refers to a place having value because it is a fine representative example of an important class of a significant place or environment.[11](#_bookmark57)\n\nThe comparative analysis below comprises two parts: the comparison of the Memorial with other memorials in Australia—notably those in Melbourne and Sydney; and with other national cultural institutions in Canberra.\n\n3.3.2 War Memorials in Australia\n\n![Image result for War Memorial Sydney ](image.091.jpeg) \n\nFigure 3.51 ANZAC War Memorial, Sydney. (Source: NSW Government)\n\nANZAC War Memorial, Sydney\n\nThe ANZAC War Memorial is located near Liverpool Street in Hyde Park, Sydney. It is considered the state’s principal commemorative and interpretive monument to the service and sacrifice of Australians in armed conflicts.\n\nIn 1916, the Returned Sailors & Soldiers Imperial League of Australia (RSSILA) began collecting money for the establishment of an ANZAC memorial building. While initially developed for ANZAC soldiers who fought in the Gallipoli campaign, it later came to represent all Australians who lost their lives in World War I.\n\nFollowing much debate and division regarding the purpose and style of the memorial, a design competition for the new building was launched in 1923. Included in the competition’s restrictions were Australian applicants only and a cost limit of £75,000, and the building was required to have office accommodation for the RSSILA and other soldiers’ associations. The competition was won by Sydney architect Charles Bruce Dellit. Dellit deviated from the classical symbolism of the time in favour of more abstract images, incorporated into an Art Deco style stepped ziggurat.[12](#_bookmark58) For example:[13](#_bookmark59)\n\nThe statues on the four corners at the top of the edifice were to be the ‘Four Seasons, representing Eternity’. Lower down on the sixteen buttresses were ‘symbolical figures representing the arts of war and peace’ and level with the top of the buttresses were ‘bas reliefs of Australian soldiers’. On the eastern and western sides were ‘symbolical groups’ of statuary – one representing ‘peace crowning endurance and courage’, the other ‘victory after sacrifice’. Above the northern and southern doors were classical quotations.","sortOrder":28},{"sectionNumber":"3.4","sectionType":"section","heading":"Conclusion","content":"##### 3.4 Conclusion\n\nThe comparative analysis demonstrates that the AWM is one of a broader class of national cultural institutions established in Caberra to preserve and promote Australia’s national culture and sense of identity. The AWM’s significant architecture and prominent positioning within the centre of Canberra, including within the boundaries of the Parliament House Vista, are principal characteristics of national institutions established within Canberra.\n\nThe AWM also serves as an important early example of the use of the Australian Art Deco architectural style, through its use of contrasting horizontal lines, vertical features and Art Deco detailing.\n\nThe AWM is rare, compared with other national cultural institutions located within Canberra, for its unique function as a combined shrine, museum and archive.","sortOrder":29},{"sectionNumber":"3.5","sectionType":"section","heading":"Endnotes","content":"##### 3.5 Endnotes\n\n1 Canberra 1:250,000 geological map, second edition, 1964.\n\n2 Walker, PH 1978, Soil-Landscape Associations of the Canberra Area, Division of Soils Divisional Report No. 29, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Australia.\n\n3 Michael Pearson Heritage Management Consultants and Graeham Crockett Marleesh 1995, Australian War Memorial: Conservation Management Plan.\n\n4 The dioramas are the subject of a separate Register entry.\n\n5 Condé, A 1991, ‘A marriage of sculpture and art: dioramas at the Memorial’, Journal of the Australian War Memorial, 19, p 56.\n\n6 Condé, A 1991, ‘A marriage of sculpture and art: dioramas at the Memorial’, Journal of the Australian War Memorial, 19, p 58.\n\n7 Hewitt, T 1984, ‘Diorama presentation’, Journal of the Australian War Memorial, 5, p 32.\n\n8 Hewitt, T 1984, ‘Diorama presentation’, Journal of the Australian War Memorial, 5, p 33.\n\n9 Australian War Memorial files, correspondence, File Nos. 89/1431 and 234/004/008.\n\n10 Gold Leaf Tree Services, Tree Management Plan—Australian War Memorial, report prepared for Australian War Memorial, February 2018.\n\n11 NSW Heritage Office, Heritage Terms and Abbreviations 1991, Department of Urban Affairs and Planning NSW,\n\n12 State Heritage Inventory, 2011, 'Anzac Memorial', 5053512\\*, viewed 24 August 2018.\n\n13 NSW Government Architect's Office, ANZAC Memorial Conservation Management Plan, report prepared for Trustees of the ANZAC Memorial, September 2015, p 37.\n\n14 Department of the Environment and Energy 1998, ‘The Shrine of Remembrance, St Kilda Rd, Melbourne, VIC, Australia’, Australian Heritage Database.\n\n15 National Museum of Australia 2018, National Museum of Australia Strategic Plan 2018–2022.\n\n16 National Museum of Australia, ‘About our collection’, viewed 21 August 2018 <[http://www.nma.gov.au/collections/about-the-national-](http://www.nma.gov.au/collections/about-the-national-) historical-collection>.\n\n17 National Archives of Australia 2018, ‘Welcome to the National Archives’, viewed 21 August 2018 <[http://naa.gov.au/about-us/](http://naa.gov.au/about-us/)\\>.\n\n18 National Archives of Australia 2018, ‘Managing our collection’, viewed 21 August 2018 <[http://www.naa.gov.au/collection/managing-](http://www.naa.gov.au/collection/managing-) collection/index.aspx>.\n\n19 National Library of Australia, ‘Who We Are’, viewed 22 August 2018 .\n\n20 National Gallery of Australia 2017, Corporate Plan, p 5, viewed 23 August 2018 .\n\n21 National Gallery of Australia 2018, ‘The Building’, viewed 23 August 2018 .\n\n22 Australian Government, Royal Australian Mint, ‘About the Mint’, viewed 23 August 2018 .\n\n23 Australian Government, Royal Australian Mint, ‘About the Mint’, viewed 23 August 2018 .\n\n24 Australian Government, Royal Australian Mint, ‘About the Mint’, viewed 23 August 2018 .\n\n25 Museum of Australian Democracy 2018, Strategic Plan 2018–23 .\n\n26 Museum of Australian Democracy 2018, Strategic Plan 2018–23 .","sortOrder":30},{"sectionNumber":"4.0","sectionType":"division","heading":"Understanding the Heritage Values","content":"### 4.0 ![](image.006.png) \nUnderstanding the Heritage Values","sortOrder":31},{"sectionNumber":"4.1","sectionType":"section","heading":"Introduction","content":"##### 4.1 Introduction\n\nThe AWM is a place of recognised National and Commonwealth Heritage value—included on the NHL in 2006 (Place ID: 105889) and the CHL in 2004 (Place ID: 105469). The official citations are included in Appendix E and F.\n\nNational and Commonwealth Heritage values have a specific meaning under the EPBC Act and these are the values that the Australian Heritage Council have identified, and the Minister has officially listed for a place. As such, any statutory obligations under the EPBC Act related to National and Commonwealth Heritage values apply to the values as gazetted and stated in the official listing. Following the EPBC Act and Regulations, Commonwealth agencies have a responsibility to identify, assess and monitor listed and possible National and Commonwealth Heritage values of places they own or manage. The management of National and Commonwealth Heritage places also should respect all heritage values of the place. In addition, the EPBC Act protects all heritage values on Commonwealth land from actions which are likely to have a significant impact on these values (also refer to Section 5.2.2).\n\nThe purpose of this section is to explain the legislative requirements (refer to Section 4.2) and state the listed National and Commonwealth Heritage values of the AWM as officially gazetted and listed. Section\n\n4.4 provides a commentary on the listed values to validate them, ensure that any changes, errors and/or gaps are addressed, and any new heritage values are identified. This HMP provides the AWM with the framework to manage the listed National and Commonwealth Heritage values and to ensure that any recommended updated or additional values (identified in the commentary in Section 4.4) are acknowledged and appropriately managed (through this HMP).","sortOrder":32},{"sectionNumber":"4.2","sectionType":"section","heading":"Identifying Heritage Values","content":"##### 4.2 Identifying Heritage Values\n\nAssessments of heritage value identify whether a place has heritage significance, establish what the heritage values are, and why the place (or an element of a place) is considered important and valuable to the community. Heritage values are embodied in attributes, such as the location, function, form and fabric of a place. Intangible attributes may also be significant, including use, access, traditions, cultural practices, knowledge and the sensory and experiential responses that the place evokes. All attributes need to be considered when assessing a place.\n\nThe Burra Charter: the Australia ICOMOS Charter for Places of Cultural Significance 2013 (the Burra Charter) and its Guidelines for the Assessment of Cultural Significance recommends that significance is assessed in categories such as aesthetic, historic, technical, scientific and social significance.\n\nIdentifying the many layers of value of heritage—its sites, places, elements and collections—and assessing their relative values through this report provides the knowledge base needed for the framing and implementation of heritage management and conservation policies discussed in Section 6.0.\n\n4.2.1 Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth)\n\nSection 528 of the EPBC Act defines the ‘heritage value’ of a place as including the place’s natural and cultural environment, having aesthetic, historic, scientific or social significance, or other significance, for current and future generations of Australians. The EPBC Act therefore covers all forms of cultural significance (Indigenous and non-Indigenous) and natural heritage significance.","sortOrder":33},{"sectionNumber":"4.3","sectionType":"section","heading":"National and Commonwealth Heritage Values","content":"##### 4.3 National and Commonwealth Heritage Values\n\n4.3.1 National Heritage List Statement of Significance\n\nThe following Statement of Significance is from the National Heritage citation for the ‘Australian War Memorial and the Memorial Parade’.\n\nThe Australian War Memorial (AWM) is Australia’s national shrine to those Australians who lost their lives and suffered as a result of war. As such it is important to the Australian community as a whole and has special associations with veterans and their families including the Returned & Services League of Australia. These special associations are reinforced on ANZAC Day and at ceremonies specific to particular memorials on Anzac Parade.\n\nThe AWM in its setting was a direct consequence of the First World War, one of the seminal events in Australian history. Official war correspondent, Charles Bean, believed that the war would have a strong influence on the creation of a sense of nationhood and a distinctly Australian character and identity. Bean’s vision of a war memorial as a place to house the objects made sacred by their direct association with the events and sacrifice of Australians at war was embodied in the establishment of the AWM. A purpose built repository, the AWM is a place where the nature of commemoration was based on an integral relationship between the building, commemorative spaces and the collections of objects and records. This is rare in Australia and uncommon in the world. The AWM has a unique and important function in collecting and displaying objects and records of Australians’ experience of war. It has the potential to yield information that will contribute to Australia’s social, political and military history.\n\nThe role of the AWM with its central location in the nation’s capital is an important landmark in Australia and a popular national icon. Although the AWM was not part of the original design for Canberra, Walter Burley Griffin agreed that it would be a fitting structure for its prominent position. The surrounding landscape design, indigenous and exotic plantings and setting and sympathetic location of associated structures and the symmetry of land axis have maintained the importance of the views of the AWM and its dominance in the landscape. As the terminating building at the northern end of the land axis of Griffin’s plan for Canberra, the AWM makes a major contribution to the principal views from both Parliament Houses and from Mount Ainslie. Major features of the original site include: the main building; the external fabric; the ceremonial landscape including indigenous and exotic plantings immediately in front of the main building; the Lone Pine tree; and displays and sculptures. The Hall of Memory with the Tomb of the Unknown Australian Soldier and in conjunction with aspects of its setting, demonstrates changing and evolving concepts of commemoration. The courtyard and its honour colonnade, the reflection pool and plantings contribute to its outstanding significance.\n\nThe AWM in its setting is of outstanding importance for its aesthetic characteristics. The place is highly valued for its great beauty by the Australian community and veteran groups. The main building and the surrounding landscape, the Hall of Memory, the Roll of Honour, ANZAC Hall and the collections act as reminders of important events and people in Australia’s history. The AWM triggers disturbing and poignant responses from the vast majority of visitors and has also inspired artistic works such as paintings and photographs.","sortOrder":34},{"sectionNumber":"4.4","sectionType":"section","heading":"National and Commonwealth Heritage Values Commentary","content":"##### 4.4 National and Commonwealth Heritage Values Commentary\n\n4.4.1 Status of Heritage Values\n\nAs noted in Section 4.1, National and Commonwealth Heritage values have a specific meaning under the EPBC Act and any suggested changes or additional values identified through this revised assessment do not formally alter the listed heritage values under the EPBC Act. Rather, they provide an understanding of the heritage significance of the site to inform ongoing management, while continuing to recognise the status of the listed National and Commonwealth Heritage values.","sortOrder":35},{"sectionNumber":"4.5","sectionType":"section","heading":"Other Heritage Values","content":"##### 4.5 Other Heritage Values\n\n4.5.1 Natural Heritage Values\n\nAs discussed in Section 3.0, the AWM grounds retain a small number of trees that are possible remnants of the native woodland vegetation from prior to the AWM’s construction. The AWM does not currently have National or Commonwealth Heritage-listed natural values — the ‘remnant’ trees are not items of","sortOrder":36},{"sectionNumber":"4.6","sectionType":"section","heading":"Summary of National and Commonwealth Heritage Values","content":"##### 4.6 Summary of National and Commonwealth Heritage Values\n\nThe AWM is a place of National and Commonwealth Heritage value. The listed National Heritage values state that the Memorial holds National Heritage value against criteria (a) Processes, (b) Rarity, (c) Research Potential, (e) Aesthetic Characteristics, (g) Social Values and (h) Significant People, with","sortOrder":37},{"sectionNumber":"4.7","sectionType":"section","heading":"Endnotes","content":"##### 4.7 Endnotes\n\n1 Australian Heritage Commission, Ask First: A Guide to Respecting Indigenous Heritage Places and Values 2002, Canberra, p 6.\n\n2 Australian Heritage Commission 2002, Ask First: A Guide to Respecting Indigenous Heritage Places and Values, Canberra, p 6.\n\n3 Australian Heritage Commission 2002, Australian Natural Heritage Charter: For the conservation of places of natural heritage significance, 2nd, Australian Heritage Commission, Canberra.\n\n4 Australian Heritage Commission 2002, Australian Natural Heritage Charter: For the conservation of places of natural heritage significance, 2nd, Australian Heritage Commission, Canberra, p 2.\n\n5 Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment, Australian Heritage Database, ‘Australian War Memorial, Anzac Pde’, viewed 1 May 2020 <[http://www.environment.gov.au>](http://www.environment.gov.au/).\n\n6 Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment, Australian Heritage Database, ‘Australian War Memorial and the Memorial Parade, Anzac Pde’, viewed 1 May 2020 <[http://www.environment.gov.au](http://www.environment.gov.au/)\\>.\n\n7 Marshall, D et al., Parliament House Vista Area, Heritage Management Plan, vol. 1, report prepared for National Capital Authority, 2010.\n\n8 Australian Heritage Database ‘Parliament House Vista, Anzac Pde’, viewed 1 May 2020 <[http://www.environment.gov.au>](http://www.environment.gov.au/).\n\n9 Anderson, B 1991, Imagined Communities: reflections on the origin and spread of rationalsim, Second edition, Verso, London, New York.","sortOrder":38},{"sectionNumber":"5.0","sectionType":"division","heading":"Issues and Constraints","content":"### 5.0 ![](image.006.png) \nIssues and Constraints","sortOrder":39},{"sectionNumber":"5.1","sectionType":"section","heading":"Introduction","content":"##### 5.1 Introduction\n\nThis section discusses the issues affecting the future conservation, management, presentation and interpretation of the AWM’s heritage values—both listed National and Commonwealth Heritage values, and other/additional values identified through the heritage values commentary in Section 4.0. It leads to, contextualises, and provides the justification for the management policies and processes set out in Section 6.0.\n\nThe key issues for the ongoing management of the AWM derive from:\n\n the nature of and obligations arising from its heritage values, which are embodied in the tangible fabric, setting and context of the building, landscape and collections, but also in the intangible associations and symbolic meanings of the place;\n\n the legislation that governs its management, principally the EPBC Act and its Regulations and the Australian War Memorial Act 1980, but also the Australian Capital Territory (Planning and Land Management) Act 1988 and the National Capital Plan (NCP);\n\n the vision and priorities of the Memorial, as identified by the board and staff; and\n\n the requirements and aspirations of the AWM’s users, visitors and broader stakeholder community.","sortOrder":40},{"sectionNumber":"5.2","sectionType":"section","heading":"The Legislative and Management Framework","content":"##### 5.2 The Legislative and Management Framework\n\n5.2.1 Australian War Memorial Act 1980 (Cth)\n\nThe Memorial is a statutory authority within the Veterans’ Affairs portfolio and functions in accordance with the requirements of the Australian War Memorial Act 1980 (Cth), the Commonwealth Authorities Companies Act 1987 (Cth), and other applicable acts. The functions of the Memorial are set out in the Australian War Memorial Act 1980 as follows:\n\n (1) The functions of the Memorial are:\n\n (a) to maintain and develop the national memorial referred to in subsection 6(1) of the Australian War Memorial Act 1962 as a national memorial of Australians who have died:\n (i) on or as a result of active service; or\n\n (ii) as a result of any war or warlike operations in which Australians have been on active service;\n\n (b) to develop and maintain, as an integral part of the national memorial referred to in paragraph (a), a national collection of historic material;\n (c) to exhibit, or to make available for exhibition by others, historical material from the memorial collection or historical material that is otherwise in the possession of the Memorial;\n (d) to conduct, arrange for and assist in research into matters pertaining to Australian history; and\n\n (e) to disseminate information relating to:\n\n (i) Australian military history;","sortOrder":41},{"sectionNumber":"5.3","sectionType":"section","heading":"Conservation and Condition Monitoring","content":"##### 5.3 Conservation and Condition Monitoring\n\n5.3.1 Monitoring Heritage Values\n\nThe Memorial has a set routine to ensure the regular monitoring of the condition of the facilities and collection. The Memorial has a schedule and system of inspections that is carried out by various sections. For example:\n\n All plant rooms are inspected by Buildings and Services staff on a monthly basis. These inspections are to check for potential issues such as cracks, weeps, leaks, and vermin.\n\n A crack monitoring program has been underway for many years. Due to the stable condition of existing building cracks, this has been extended to carrying out inspections every 5 years.\n\n All Visitor Services staff are required to monitor building and collection condition for damage or degradation. They prepare reports that are sent to Security for processing by the appropriate section or area of the Memorial.\n\n Security is required to monitor the condition of the buildings, grounds and collection during their routine area patrols and report to the Memorial on a case by case basis.\n\n5.3.2 Approvals\n\nThe Memorial has a staged approach to undertaking works with all new work and maintenance activities, including those of a minor, medium or significant scale, requiring the preparation of a heritage impact assessment as part of the approval process. The following provides a summary of the approval process for different scales of new works and maintenance activities:\n\n Significant new work or maintenance activities require a Submission to the Corporate Management Group (CMG) and this Submission must include a detailed Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) before it will be considered by the CMG.\n\n Medium scale new works or maintenance activities require a ‘Brief to the CMG’. The Brief must contain a HIA before it will be considered by the CMG.\n\n Minor new works and Building & Exhibition maintenance activities both require an application, including a Heritage Impact Assessment (less detailed than for larger scale works/activities), to be prepared before the relevant Section Head will review and approve the works.","sortOrder":42},{"sectionNumber":"5.4","sectionType":"section","heading":"Landscape","content":"##### 5.4 Landscape\n\n5.4.1 Tree Management\n\nIn addition to the identified values of the formal and informal landscape of the AWM as a whole, trees have been planted individually, and as elements within larger monuments. Of particular note is the Lone Pine and two Aleppo pine reserve plantings propagated from the original. The original Lone Pine, planted in 1934, is actively managed to ensure its longevity, with reserve plantings being established to provide continuity of the specimen on the site.\n\nOther trees on the site, whilst not individually significant, also contribute to the visual setting of the main Memorial building, and the character of the site generally. These are also managed to ensure longevity, and with regard for public safety, particularly those located in high traffic areas, and species known to drop limbs. This requires regular checking and pruning; however, damage caused by cockatoos is increasing the risk of limb failure in a number of notable specimens in front of the main Memorial building.\n\nThe Tree Management Plan outlines the condition and risk associated with each tree located on the site and provides specific management recommendations.\n\nThe large trees in the Central Precinct of the landscape, and along pathways into the Sculpture Garden, inhibit security monitoring of the site in areas with CCTV video. Under lighting of large trees within the Eastern Precinct has been implemented to improve amenity in these areas as well as appreciation of the larger and more significant specimens.\n\nThe Western Precinct features mature plantings of exotic trees amongst the open lawn areas, garden beds and paths. Species of trees chosen in the Western Precinct are generally exotic, and complement the formality of the landscape, such as the two large spreading oaks. Others have symbolic associations, such as the Lone Pine, cherry trees surrounding the British Commonwealth Occupation Forces Memorial, and the silver birch behind the Australian Serviceman Memorial.[11](#_bookmark94)\n\nPlantings within the Central and Eastern Precincts comprise both formal landscaped areas, such as the Parade Ground, and National Service Memorial, as well as informal native plantings, predominantly eucalypt species. Landscaping behind Poppy’s Café is planted with eucalypts of assorted species and ages blending this area of the site in with the backdrop of Mount Ainslie. The only identified remnant trees are Eucalyptus melliodora and Eucalyptus bridgesiana, yet other species have also been planted. There has been varying degrees of success due to the climate (including inconsistent rainfall) and wind tunnel conditions in this portion of the site.\n\n5.4.2 Pests and Faunal Disturbance\n\nThe Memorial actively manages invasive species across the site. Subsidence due to extensive rabbit burrowing has been repaired in the area of the Administration Building in 2016. Changes to the landscaping within the Western Precinct have been undertaken to minimise habitats conducive to occupation by rabbits including the replacement of juniper bushes within the precinct with ivy, underlain with chicken wire. This is consistent with the plantings along Anzac Parade. While the works have successfully removed the rabbit population from the Western Precinct, there is ongoing but opportunistic works undertaken to eradicate them in the Eastern Precinct.","sortOrder":43},{"sectionNumber":"5.5","sectionType":"section","heading":"Site Use","content":"##### 5.5 Site Use\n\nPrevious management plans have noted change to the AWM as an ongoing part of its history, in order to continue serving its various functions. Conservation management planning for the place needs to take this history of change and development into account, balancing conservation of the elements of significance while recognising the need for flexibility for future change and development.\n\n5.5.1 Change of Use—Pressure on Gallery Space\n\nThe pressure for more exhibition space to tell new stories and new perspectives of the existing collection continues to grow. In addition to the formal gallery spaces, circulation spaces, such as corridors and lobbies, are increasingly also being used for display. Visitor numbers can put pressure on the ability of significant heritage values and spaces in the Memorial to be accessible and perform their intended function.\n\nThe relocation of collection storage to the AWM Mitchell Precinct to facilitate this is a practical requirement of the growing pressure for space at the AWM as well as the size of the collection, and the modern-day requirements for caring for collections.\n\nThe removal of research and archive spaces for the creation of new exhibition spaces reduces the Memorial’s ability to fulfil a core function at the AWM, as outlined in the original proposal for the place: ‘to conduct, arrange for and assist in research into matters pertaining to Australian military history’. Increasing use of digital technology to record and disseminate information about the collection and records held by the Memorial arguably allows for greater public access than ever before.\n\nChanges to the function and fabric of the place should have regard for the sensitivity to change when managing pressures on gallery space. For the gallery spaces, their configuration and fabric contribute to the values of the place as a purpose-built repository for the AWM’s significant collection, and a place which provides unique and important information on Australian’s experience of war. However, there is","sortOrder":44},{"sectionNumber":"5.6","sectionType":"section","heading":"Hazards and Risks","content":"##### 5.6 Hazards and Risks\n\nAs a site of National and Commonwealth Heritage value, it is important that risks to the property are well understood and managed. The vulnerability and exposure of the site to the following natural and manmade hazards should be evaluated to determine the level of risk they pose to the buildings. Disaster","sortOrder":45},{"sectionNumber":"5.7","sectionType":"section","heading":"Indigenous Cultural Issues and Consultation","content":"##### 5.7 Indigenous Cultural Issues and Consultation\n\nOne Aboriginal site, an isolated Aboriginal stone artefact (AWM 1), was identified at the AWM in 2008, in conjunction with local Aboriginal community representatives. This find was in a disturbed context and the extensive modifications to the landscape of the AWM mean that there is little potential for further or in situ Aboriginal archaeological evidence to survive on the site. As an isolated, residual surface find in a disturbed context, the management of this single artefact in situ, in a highly used landscape, is unlikely to be feasible in even the short term.\n\nWhilst Indigenous cultural values have not been identified with specific regard to the AWM, consultation with the Indigenous community representatives may be required when works are proposed at the AWM. Indigenous Heritage values and sensitivities should be considered and protected as part of the environment of the AWM, even if they may not be included in the official Commonwealth or National heritage values of the place. The possibility of impacts on potential Indigenous heritage values should therefore be considered when undertaking works at the site.\n\nThe Memorial understands that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are the primary source of information on their cultural heritage and therefore, are consulted on matters that may affect places that have cultural heritage values.","sortOrder":46},{"sectionNumber":"5.8","sectionType":"section","heading":"Future Proposals","content":"##### 5.8 Future Proposals\n\n5.8.1 Gallery Masterplanning\n\nThe Memorial is currently undertaking a range of masterplanning exercises to manage the range of pressures currently faced at the site and ensure the future needs of the organisation are able to be met within the operational and heritage constraints of the site. This includes the preparation of a site masterplan for the AWM as a whole, and a Gallery Masterplan which will address the continued growth in visitor numbers, changing methods of display and storytelling, increasing number of exhibitions required and future growth of the collection and its storage requirements.\n\nAs noted elsewhere in this HMP, the National and Commonwealth Heritage values of the place, and the regulations of the EPBC Act, underpin decision making regarding such changes across the site.","sortOrder":47},{"sectionNumber":"5.9","sectionType":"section","heading":"AWM Development Project","content":"##### 5.9 AWM Development Project\n\nAs part of the Memorial’s business development planning, it was granted funds from the Australian Government for the expansion of gallery spaces to improve and modernise the existing buildings and generally enhance visitor experience at the AWM. Major works to the AWM are due to commence both internally and externally as a series of projects, including:\n\n removal and replacement of the current ANZAC Hall for additional gallery space;\n\n new Glazed Link connection the main Memorial building to expanded gallery space to the north (the new ANZAC Hall);\n\n a new southern entrance to improve visitor orientation and provide additional gallery spaces;\n\n new extension and refurbishment to CEW Bean Building to consolidate operational and non- critical administration functions out of the main Memorial building and include a new research centre;\n\n internal refurbishment works to the main Memorial building including modern conflict galleries;\n\n design changes to the layout and landscape of the Parade Ground;\n\n additional car parking to the east of Poppy’s Café carpark; and\n\n landscaping works that address accessibility constraints, enhance site security and re-profile the parade ground.\n\n5.9.1 Assessment Process\n\nThe development project, explained in Section 2.5 by the Memorial, was referred for consideration under the EPBC Act and received approval with conditions in December 2020 from the Minister for the Environment. The approval conditions include ensuring design details are consistent with the heritage values of the AWM and Memorial Parade and Parliament House Vista as well as the National and Commonwealth Heritage Principles; undertaking design and engineering decisions (such as for the construction of the new Anzac Hall and Glazed Link) to minimise the impact on the heritage values of","sortOrder":48},{"sectionNumber":"5.10","sectionType":"section","heading":"Conclusions","content":"##### 5.10 Conclusions\n\nThe range of National, Commonwealth and other identified heritage values of the AWM gives rise to EPBC Act obligations for conservation, protection, management and interpretation, and compliance with the relevant legislation, as discussed above.\n\nEffective stakeholder consultation in decision making regarding the future management of the AWM is needed throughout the development of future works.\n\nThe implementation of the major projects, the SDP and any other future developments must reflect the importance of the National Shrine and unique qualities of the place. The future management and design development of the AWM and its broader setting will be an ongoing, dynamic process, responding to changing community needs and aspirations. As the AWM undergoes significant changes as part of the","sortOrder":49},{"sectionNumber":"5.11","sectionType":"section","heading":"Endnotes","content":"##### 5.11 Endnotes\n\n1 Australian War Memorial Act 1980, p 4.\n\n2 Significant Impact Guidelines 1.1, p 2.\n\n3 Marshall, D et al., Parliament House Vista Area, Heritage Management Plan, vol. 1, report prepared for National Capital Authority, 2010, p 15.\n\n4 Marshall, D et al., Parliament House Vista Area, Heritage Management Plan, vol. 1, report prepared for National Capital Authority, 2010, p 281.\n\n5 National Capital Authority 2016, National Capital Plan, National Capital Authority, Canberra, ACT, p 12.\n\n6 National Capital Authority 2002, Consolidated National Capital Plan, p 74.\n\n7 Under the National Capital Plan, see the National Capital Authority website:\n\n<[http://nationalcapital.gov.au/planning\\_and\\_urban\\_design/works\\_approval/index.asp>](http://nationalcapital.gov.au/planning_and_urban_design/works_approval/index.asp).\n\n8 NCAs Application for Works/Development Approval <[http://www.nationalcapital.gov.au/](http://www.nationalcapital.gov.au/)\\>.\n\n9 National Capital Authority, August 2002, Guidelines for Commemorative Works in the National Capital, Appendix 1.\n\n10 National Capital Authority, August 2002, Guidelines for Commemorative Works in the National Capital, Appendix 1, p 3.\n\n11 Gold Leaf Tree Services, Tree Management Plan—Australian War Memorial, report prepared for Australian War Memorial, February 2018.\n\n12 Australian War Memorial, Annual Report 2016-2017, report prepared for Australian War Memorial, June 2017.\n\n13 Australian War Memorial 2015, Reflect Reconciliation Action Plan 2015-2016, Australian War Memorial, Canberra, ACT, p 1.","sortOrder":50},{"sectionNumber":"6.0","sectionType":"division","heading":"Conservation Policy","content":"### 6.0 ![](image.006.png) \nConservation Policy\n\nConservation policy is based on the principles embodied in the Burra Charter, a set of principles, processes and guidelines for best practice in heritage conservation developed by Australia ICOMOS (International Council of Monuments and Sites) and based on international standards.\n\nThe management and conservation policies identified in this section define how the conservation of the AWM’s heritage values—both official, listed National and Commonwealth Heritage values, and other, additional values identified in Section 4.0—identified values should be achieved. Implementation of these policies will also ensure the Memorial fulfils its obligations under the EPBC Act.\n\nThe tables in Section 6.2 identify general heritage conservation policies and actions for the AWM. Section 6.3 presents specific policies and actions for individual components of the AWM with specific requirements such as the Commemorative Area, Galleries and Landscape.\n\nThe use of these tools will assist in administering policy for conservation of the AWM’s heritage values. Managers will also need to ensure that proposals are not inconsistent with relevant policies in the Parliament House Vista and ANZAC Parade HMPs.","sortOrder":51},{"sectionNumber":"6.1","sectionType":"section","heading":"Implementation of the Conservation Policies and Actions","content":"##### 6.1 Implementation of the Conservation Policies and Actions\n\n6.1.1 Timing/Priority\n\nTiming parameters have been established for the implementation of policies and actions in line with their priority, based on the different levels of risk to the site’s heritage significance.\n\nImplementation should be completed:\n\n immediately upon adoption of the HMP (within 12 months);\n\n annually;\n\n on an ongoing basis;\n\n within two–three years;\n\n within five–10 years; or\n\n as required.\n\n6.1.2 Responsibilities\n\nThe key responsibility for implementation, review and monitoring of the HMP lies with the Memorial’s Corporate Services Branch and the Buildings and Services Section. This Section is responsible for the management and maintenance of the buildings and grounds, including conservation works. While all sections at the Memorial are responsible for legislative compliance with regard to heritage matters, the Building and Services Section provides support and guidance. The Memorial’s CMG oversees the implementation of the documentation.\n\nHowever, all groups of the Memorial including Public Programs, National Collection and Corporate Services, should adopt the policies and decision-making processes of the HMP and develop an understanding of the AWM’s heritage values.","sortOrder":52},{"sectionNumber":"6.2","sectionType":"section","heading":"Key Objective of the General Conservation Policy","content":"##### 6.2 Key Objective of the General Conservation Policy\n\nSchedules 5A and 7A of the EPBC Regulations item (a) requires that government ‘establish objectives for the identification, protection, conservation, presentation and transmission of the National/Commonwealth Heritage values of the place’. This HMP has been prepared to manage the National and Commonwealth Heritage values of the AWM, and those values identified through the heritage values commentary in Section 4.0. The key objective of this conservation policy is to ensure the conservation, management and interpretation of these heritage values of the AWM in the context of its ongoing use, development and evolution as the place of the National Shrine, an integral part of the symbolic landscape of the National Capital, and one of Australia’s most significant cultural sites.\n\nAWM Development Project\n\nThe AWM development project (discussed at Sections 2.5 and 5.9) has been approved under the EPBC Act with conditions, and has been subject to rigorous consideration of the impacts of the proposed action and the heritage values of the site. The project is required to be undertaken in accordance with its approval conditions, which provide a framework for management of heritage impacts specifically associated with the development project. The conditions provide guidance for the conservation and management of the Memorial’s heritage values while undertaking the project. The full conditions for the project are included at Appendix K.\n\nIn instances where the approval conditions do not cover conservation or management issues associated with the development, the policies below should be used to guide decision-making. Actions on the site which are separate to the development project should continue to be managed in accordance with this section of the HMP.\n\n6.2.1 Policy 1: Conservation Processes\n\n```html\n

Policies

Actions

Timing

1.1 Conserve all officially listed and identified heritage values of the AWM in compliance with the requirements of the EPBC Act, the National Capital Plan and the AWM Act.

1.1.1 The Memorial should formally adopt this HMP as the basis for future management of the heritage values of the AWM.

Immediately

1.1.2 The listed National and Commonwealth heritage values (and identified heritage values) of the AWM will be the principal basis for all future planning, management and impact assessment of activities or actions.

Ongoing

1.1.3 The Memorial must undertake a self-assessment of any actions to determine whether they will have, or are likely to have a significant impact on the National Heritage values of any other heritage values of the AWM, and refer the action to the Minister for the Environment for approval if a significant impact is likely.

As required

1.1.4 Update official National and Commonwealth Heritage citations to nominate and reflect the identified, suggested revisions for additional values (refer to Section 4.0).

Within five—ten years.

1.2 Refer to this HMP as the primary heritage management document for the AWM.

1.2.1 Implement the policies and actions set out in this HMP, in line with the identified timing guidelines.

Immediately

\n```","sortOrder":53},{"sectionNumber":"6.3","sectionType":"section","heading":"Specific Conservation Policies","content":"##### 6.3 Specific Conservation Policies\n\nThe following tables set out the heritage management policies and actions for individual components of the AWM with specific requirements. These policies and actions provide detailed management frameworks for the protection and conservation of the range of identified heritage fabric and values.\n\n6.3.1 Commemorative Area\n\n```html\n

Policies

Actions

Timing

8.1 Conserve, manage and interpret the architectural forms of the Commemorative Area.

8.1.1 Conserve and manage the architectural form and fabric of the courtyard and cloisters and avoid further accretions.

Immediately

8.1.2 Maintain the external form of the Hall of Memory.

Ongoing

8.1.3 Maintain the connection between the individual components as a total experience of reflection and commemoration.

Ongoing

8.1.4 Ensure the individual spaces do not become thoroughfares.

Ongoing

8.2 Conserve, manage and interpret the heritage values of the courtyard— Pool of Reflection.

8.2.1 Retain the courtyard as the place for the Pool of Reflection.

As required

8.2.2 Retain appropriate plant species to ensure they complement the important qualities of the Commemorative Area.

Annually

8.2.3 Ensure plants and planter boxes are maintained and checked regularly to prevent water ingress into the building fabric.

Annually

8.3 Conserve, manage and interpret the carved stone figures lining the courtyard.

8.3.1 Monitor the condition of the carved stone figures and drainage systems they support. Review and consult with stakeholders if further intervention is required to slow future degradation.

Annually

\n```","sortOrder":54},{"sectionNumber":"7.0","sectionType":"division","heading":"Key Conclusions of the HMP","content":"### ![](image.006.png) \n7.0 Key Conclusions of the HMP\n\nThe key objective of this HMP is to ensure the conservation, management and interpretation of the heritage values of the AWM in the context of its ongoing use, development and evolution as Australia’s National Shrine, an integral part of the symbolic landscape of the national capital, and one of Australia’s most significant cultural sites.\n\nGuidance for Heritage Management\n\n The policies provide the future direction for management of the National, Commonwealth and additional identified heritage values of the AWM. They outline approaches to the conservation, maintenance, and monitoring of the heritage values.\n\n The EPBC Act requires that a self-assessment process be established to make decisions about the potential for significant adverse impact on the heritage values. Appendix A, the decision- making framework, and Appendix B, the assessment form, will assist the Memorial in making decisions about impacts on heritage values and in documenting this process.\n\nGuidance for Future Development\n\n The HMP provides a framework to conserve, protect and manage the heritage values of the AWM. Through this framework, it provides heritage guidance for decision-making on forward planning, design development and future developments at the AWM.\n\n The HMP, best heritage practice and compliance with the obligation of the EPBC Act must be followed when planning and implementing any new work or major projects including the implementation of the Site Development Plan and expansions associated with new gallery space.\n\n Understanding of the National and Commonwealth Heritage values of the place, and its primary purpose as a National Shrine, needs to underpin decision making regarding the potential for future development.\n\n The HMP establishes the need for any development on the site to be assessed in terms of its potential to impact upon, or positively contribute to, the heritage values of the AWM, the Parliament House Vista and Griffin Land Axis.\n\n The HMP policies are intended to provide guidance for design development of any new works at the AWM as well as the need for consultation with key stakeholders and specific approvals under the EPBC Act and National Capital Plan.\n\nGuidance for Stakeholder Consultation\n\n The Memorial should consult widely when proposing changes with the potential to impact on the heritage values of the place, given it has National Heritage value and cultural significance.\n\n The Memorial should utilise a variety of communication and marketing channels to communicate and engage with stakeholder groups.","sortOrder":55},{"sectionNumber":"8.0","sectionType":"division","heading":"Appendices","content":"### ![](image.006.png) \n8.0 Appendices","sortOrder":56},{"sectionNumber":"Appendix A","sectionType":"section","heading":"Appendix A","content":"##### Appendix A\n\nDecision Making Process","sortOrder":57},{"sectionNumber":"Appendix B","sectionType":"section","heading":"Appendix B","content":"##### Appendix B\n\nHeritage Impact Self-Assessment Form","sortOrder":58},{"sectionNumber":"Appendix C","sectionType":"section","heading":"Appendix C","content":"##### Appendix C\n\nEPBC Regulations Compliance Checklists","sortOrder":59},{"sectionNumber":"Appendix D","sectionType":"section","heading":"Appendix D","content":"##### Appendix D\n\nNCA Works Approval Application Information Checklists","sortOrder":60},{"sectionNumber":"Appendix E","sectionType":"section","heading":"Appendix E","content":"##### Appendix E\n\nAWM and Memorial Parade National Heritage List Citation","sortOrder":61},{"sectionNumber":"Appendix F","sectionType":"section","heading":"Appendix F","content":"##### Appendix F\n\nAWM Commonwealth Heritage List Citation","sortOrder":62},{"sectionNumber":"Appendix G","sectionType":"section","heading":"Appendix G","content":"##### Appendix G\n\nParliament House Vista Commonwealth Heritage List Citation","sortOrder":63},{"sectionNumber":"Appendix H","sectionType":"section","heading":"Appendix H","content":"##### Appendix H\n\nAWM Vegetation Study, Neil Urwin—Griffin Associates Environmental","sortOrder":64},{"sectionNumber":"Appendix I","sectionType":"section","heading":"Appendix I","content":"##### Appendix I\n\nNavin Officer, Australian War Memorial, Campbell and Mitchell, ACT—Indigenous Cultural Heritage Assessment, March 2008","sortOrder":65},{"sectionNumber":"Appendix J","sectionType":"section","heading":"Appendix J","content":"##### Appendix J\n\nMemorial Stakeholder and Community Consultation","sortOrder":66},{"sectionNumber":"Appendix K","sectionType":"section","heading":"Appendix K","content":"##### Appendix K\n\nEPBC Referral 2019-8574 Approval Conditions","sortOrder":67},{"sectionNumber":"Appendix A—Decision Making Process","sectionType":"division","heading":"Appendix A—Decision Making Process","content":"### ![](image.102.png) \nAppendix A—Decision Making Process\n\nIn developing works or planning for an action at the AWM, the following table summarises the process that should be taken by the Memorial. Reference should also be made to the EPBC Act Policy Statements: Significant Impact Guidelines 1.1—Matters of National Environmental Significance and Significant Impact Guidelines 1.2—Actions on or impacting upon, Commonwealth land and Actions by Commonwealth Agencies in making an initial assessment.1\n\n![Decision making tree, that sets out steps and outcomes for proposing work effecting Heritage material.](image.103.jpeg) \n\nFigure 1 Decision making process to ensure National/Commonwealth Heritage values are considered when planning developments, activities and other proposals.","sortOrder":69},{"sectionNumber":"Endnotes","sectionType":"section","heading":"Endnotes","content":"##### Endnotes\n\n1 Department responsible for the EPBC Act, <[http://www.environment.gov.au/epbc/policy/index.html#guidelines](http://www.environment.gov.au/epbc/policy/index.html#guidelines)\\>.","sortOrder":70},{"sectionNumber":"Appendix B—Heritage Impact Self-Assessme","sectionType":"division","heading":"Appendix B—Heritage Impact Self-Assessment Form","content":"### ![](image.104.png) \nAppendix B—Heritage Impact Self-Assessment Form","sortOrder":72},{"sectionNumber":"Introduction","sectionType":"section","heading":"Introduction","content":"##### Introduction\n\nThe Australian War Memorial (AWM) is a place included in both the National Heritage List (NHL) and the Commonwealth Heritage List (CHL). This means it is protected under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth) (EPBC Act). As a National Heritage place, the AWM is also considered a matter of national environmental significance (MNES).\n\nAs an organisation, the Memorial has a responsibility to protect the National and Commonwealth Heritage values by making sure that all AWM staff and contractors avoid impacts to the heritage values.\n\nInformation about the heritage values of the AWM and their management can be found in the Heritage Strategy, the Heritage Register and the Heritage Management Plan. These documents can be found on the Memorial’s Intranet under the Buildings & Services Section.\n\nThis form is to be completed when any works or activities (known as an ‘action’) are proposed at the AWM that may have an impact to the heritage values. It describes the type of action being undertaken, identifies the heritage values that may be affected by the action and outlines the measures being undertaken to avoid or lessen any impacts.\n\nCompleting this form is an important step in meeting the Memorial’s legislative obligation to identify if an action has, will have, or is likely to have a ‘significant impact’ on the Commonwealth and/or National Heritage values of the AWM. A significant impact is described in further detail below.\n\nHowever, completing this form is not the only step. If, after completing this form, a ‘significant impact’ is identified as a possibility, a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) should be prepared by a qualified heritage practitioner familiar with the EPBC Act. Once completed, this form is to be submitted to the Head, Buildings and Services for initial assessment and advice.","sortOrder":73},{"sectionNumber":"What is an ‘action’?","sectionType":"section","heading":"What is an ‘action’?","content":"##### What is an ‘action’?\n\nAn action is defined in the EPBC Act as ‘a project, a development, an undertaking, an activity or a series of activities, or an alteration of any of these things.’ Sometimes, these actions can be obvious, such as:\n\n refurbishment;\n\n construction;\n\n demolition;\n\n alterations and modifications;\n\n maintenance;\n\n infrastructure works; and\n\n landscape works.\n\nOther times, these actions can be less obvious, such as activities or works that are visual rather than physical, temporary rather than permanent or that result in a change in use. All aspects of an action should be considered when assessing if there may be an impact to the heritage values, such as site preparation, access and decanting.\n\nIt is important to note that an action should be considered at its broadest possible scope when assessing the potential to impacts to the heritage values.","sortOrder":74},{"sectionNumber":"What is a ‘significant impact’?","sectionType":"section","heading":"What is a ‘significant impact’?","content":"##### What is a ‘significant impact’?\n\nUnder the EPBC Act, the Memorial has a responsibility to avoid impacts to the environment. Heritage values are included in the EPBC definition of the environment.\n\nA ‘significant impact’ is defined as an impact to the environment that is ‘important, notable, or of consequence, having regard to its context or intensity’. If an action is likely to have a significant impact, this triggers the need to submit a ‘referral’ to the Department responsible for the EPBC Act. Before a referral is made, a HIA should be prepared and submitted with the referral.\n\nPlease note that approval of this form constitutes an internal approval only and does not necessarily constitute approval under any legislation. AWM staff should be aware that other statutory approvals may be required, or the advice of an external heritage consultant sought. This form does not constitute a HIA.","sortOrder":75},{"sectionNumber":"National Capital Authority Works Approva","sectionType":"section","heading":"National Capital Authority Works Approval","content":"##### National Capital Authority Works Approval\n\nThe AWM is located within a Designated Area, which are managed by the National Capital Authority (NCA). A Designated Area is an area within the ACT has been identified as having the ‘special characteristics of the National Capital’.\n\nIn accordance with the Australian Capital Territory (Planning and Land Management) Act 1988 (Cwth) (the PALM Act), the NCA is required to approve all ‘works’ within the Designated Areas. Any alteration to buildings or structures, demolition, landscaping or excavation works in these Designated Areas require the prior written approval of the NCA or 'Works Approval'. There are no exemptions for Works Approval under the PALM Act.\n\nPotential impact to heritage values is one aspect of a Works Approval application that the NCA will consider. For further information on NCA Works Approval and the National Capital Plan, refer to the Planning & Heritage section of the NCA’s website: [https://www.nca.gov.au/planning-heritage.](https://www.nca.gov.au/planning-heritage)","sortOrder":76},{"sectionNumber":"Self-Assessment of a Proposed Action—For","sectionType":"division","heading":"Self-Assessment of a Proposed Action—Form","content":"### ![](image.104.png) \nSelf-Assessment of a Proposed Action—Form\n\n| Date | |\n| ----------------------------------- | --- |\n| Name of Project | |\n| Person/Section Proposing the Action | |\n\nDescription of the Action\n\n| Location(Identify location of the proposed action and include maps, plans and photographs where relevant) | |\n| ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --- |\n| Duration(How long is the action expected occur) | |\n| Types of Work(Identify all types of work, such as demolition and new construction—refer to the Impact Assessment Guide attached to this form for guidance) | |\n| Description of Tasks(Provide a detailed description of the scope of works) | |\n| Associated Project/s(Is the action associated with another action or actions?) | |\n\nReason for the Action\n\n| Reason/s for the Action(What are the justifications for undertaking this action?) | |\n| ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | --- |\n| Alternatives Considered(What alternatives to this action were considered?) | |\n| Corporate Objectives(How does the action meet the Memorial’s corporate objectives? Is the action consistent with the policies in the HMP?) | |\n\nConsultation\n\n| Details of Consultation(Who has been involved or consulted about the action?) | |\n| ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --- |","sortOrder":77},{"sectionNumber":"Impact Assessment Guide","sectionType":"division","heading":"Impact Assessment Guide","content":"### ![](image.104.png) \nImpact Assessment Guide\n\nThis guide provides questions against types of actions that should be considered in an impact assessment. Please note that it is not an exhaustive list.\n\n| TYPES OF ACTION | QUESTIONS |\n| ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |\n| Demolition of building, structure, element or component in part or as a whole | Are the heritage values attributed to the actual physical fabric of the building/structure/element/component being demolished, or are they more associated with other aspects such as form, relationship, colour, material selection, etc?Have all options other than demolition been considered?Is demolition essential? Is this supported by independent advice?Are there options to protect the heritage values and/or retain or salvage the heritage attributes? |\n| Change or loss of use | Does the use contribute to the significance/heritage values?Why does the use need to change or be removed? |\n| New construction (including additions) | Will the new construction interfere with the ability to interpret or understand the heritage values of an adjacent building/structure/element/component?Will the new construction damage the heritage values or attributes?Has the new construction been designed to be sympathetic to the adjacent/nearby heritage values?Can the new construction be located elsewhere? |\n| New development | Will the new development interfere with the reading or understanding of the heritage values of an adjacent building/structure/element/component?Why is the development needed adjacent to/near a heritage place?Has the new development been designed to be sympathetic to adjacent/nearby heritage values?Will site users and visitors still be able to appreciate the heritage values? |\n| Refurbishment | Will the refurbishment works damage or interfere with the heritage values?Are the refurbishment works reversible?How will surrounding heritage fabric be protected during the works?Can heritage conservation works be undertaken as part of the refurbishment? |\n| New services | Do the existing services contribute to the heritage values of the place?Are the new services essential?Can the new services be installed in a manner that avoids or minimises impacts to the heritage values?How will the surrounding heritage fabric be protected during installation? |","sortOrder":78},{"sectionNumber":"Appendix C—EPBC Regulations Compliance C","sectionType":"division","heading":"Appendix C—EPBC Regulations Compliance Checklist","content":"### ![](image.102.png) \nAppendix C—EPBC Regulations Compliance Checklist\n\nThis Heritage Management Plan (HMP) addresses and fulfils the requirements of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 and the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Regulations 2000.","sortOrder":80},{"sectionNumber":"National Heritage—Regulation 10.01C","sectionType":"section","heading":"National Heritage—Regulation 10.01C","content":"##### National Heritage—Regulation 10.01C\n\nRegulation 10.01C of the Regulations states that:\n\nA plan for a National Heritage place, made under section 324S of the Act, must address the matters set out in Schedule 5A.\n\nThe following table lists the requirements contained in Schedule 5A and the relevant sections of this HMP that address each listed item.\n\n```html\n

Regulation Ref.

Schedule 5A—A Management Plan must:

Report Section

Schedule 5A (a)

Establish objectives for the identification, protection, conservation, presentation and transmission of the National Heritage values of the place;

Sections 6.0

Schedule 5A (b)

Provide a management framework that includes reference to any statutory requirements and agency mechanisms for the protection of the National Heritage values of the place;

Section 1.4-1.5

Section 5.2 Appendix A and B

Schedule 5A (c)

Provide a comprehensive description of the place, including information about its location, physical features, condition, historical context and current uses;

Section 1.3

Section 2.0

Section 3.0

Schedule 5A (d)

Provide a description of the National Heritage values and any other heritage values of the place;

Section 4.0

Schedule 5A (e)

Describe the condition of the National Heritage values of the place;

Section 5.3

Schedule 5A (f)

Describe the method used to assess the National Heritage values of the place;

Section 4.2

Schedule 5A (g)

Describe the current management requirements and goals, including proposals for change and any potential pressures on the National Heritage values of the place;

Section 5.0

Schedule 5A (h)

Has policies to manage the National Heritage values of the place, and include in those policies guidance in relation to the following:

Section 6.0;

(i) the management and conservation processes to be used;

Section 6.0. Policies 1 and 2

(ii) the access and security arrangements, including access to the area for Indigenous people to maintain cultural traditions;

Section 6.0. Policy 7

(iii) the stakeholder and community consultation and liaison arrangements;

Section 6.0 Policy 3

(iv) the policies and protocols to ensure that Indigenous people participate in the management process;

Section 6.0. Policy 3.1

(v) the protocols for the management of sensitive information;

Section 6.0. Policy 7.5

(vi) planning and managing of works, development, adaptive reuse and property divestment proposals;

Section 6.0 Policies 1-2 and

Section 6.3

\n```","sortOrder":81},{"sectionNumber":"Commonwealth Heritage—Regulation 10.03B","sectionType":"section","heading":"Commonwealth Heritage—Regulation 10.03B","content":"##### Commonwealth Heritage—Regulation 10.03B\n\nRegulation 10.03B of the Regulations states that:\n\nA plan for a Commonwealth Heritage place, made under section 341S of the Act, must address the matters set out in Schedule 7A.\n\nThe following table lists the requirements contained in Schedule 7A and the relevant sections of the HMP that address each listed item.\n\nSchedule 7A Management Plans for Commonwealth Heritage Places\n\n| Regulation Ref. | Schedule 7A—A Management Plan must: | Report Section |\n| --------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------- |\n| Schedule 7A (a) | Establish objectives for the identification, protection, conservation, presentation and transmission of the Commonwealth Heritage values of the place; | Sections 6.0 |\n| Schedule 7A (b) | Provide a management framework that includes reference to any statutory requirements and agency mechanisms for the protection of the Commonwealth Heritage values of the place; | Section 1.4-1.5Section 5.2 Appendix A and B |\n| Schedule 7A (c) | Provide a comprehensive description of the place, including information about its location, physical features, condition, historical context and current uses; | Section 1.3Section 2.0Section 3.0 |\n| Schedule 7A (d) | Provide a description of the Commonwealth Heritage values and any other heritage values of the place; | Section 4.0 |\n| Schedule 7A (e) | Describe the condition of the Commonwealth Heritage values of the place; | Section 5.3 |\n| Schedule 7A (f) | Describe the method used to assess the Commonwealth Heritage values of the place; | Section 4.2 |\n\nAustralian War Memorial—Heritage Management Plan—Appendix C, March 2022\n\nii","sortOrder":82},{"sectionNumber":"MAJOR WORKS APPROVAL","sectionType":"part","heading":"MAJOR WORKS APPROVAL","content":"# ![](image.106.png)![Australian Government National Captial Authority Logo](image.105.png)MAJOR WORKS APPROVAL\n\nApplication information checklist\n\nThe following information is mandatory for all works applications:\n\n • A Locality Plan which identifies the site and its context.\n • A written description of the works proposed.\n • Plans or drawings describing the works with drawing numbers.\n • Authorisation from the land owner/lessee or land custodian to lodge the application on theirbehalf (Please use the Authorisation Form available from the NCA Website).\n\nFailure to submit the above information will result in your application not clearing the completeness check stage. Failure may result in the applicant being provided with the Notice to resubmit the application not in accordance with the Australian Capital Territory (Planning and Land Management) Act 1988. This notice incurs a cost of $300.00 in accordance with the Australian Capital Territory (Planning and Land Management) Regulations.\n\nMajor applications may require the submission of one set of hard copy plans. The assessing officer will contact you if this is required.\n\n![](image.107.png) \n\nExamples of Major applications include, mixed use developments, residential buildings or major road works. Major works approval applications will need to provide thefollowing:\n\n![Check box](image.108.png) 1\\. Planning Report which addresses the relevant design and planning matters in accordance with the provisionsof the National Capital Plan. Advice in relation to how obligations have been met under other legislation including the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, Copyright Amendment (Moral Rights) Act 2000 or relevant Territory legislation should be included.\n\n![Check box](image.109.png) 2. Schedule of Proposed Works which gives details of the works proposed including extent of earthworks,\n\noff-site work requirements and works associated with service connections. It should also describe the quantitative characteristics of the proposed development such as:\n\n • gross floor area\n • site coverage\n • building height\n • building setbacks from property line\n • external materials and colours (a sample board may be required)\n • on-site and off-site car parking provision.\n\n![Check box](image.109.png) 3. Quantity Surveyor’s Certificate of Costs for all proposals over $2 million. The Certificate of Costs must:\n\n • be prepared and signed by a registered quantity surveyor\n • itemise the quantities of materials and labour for the proposed works inclusive of GST for the purpose of calculating Works Approval fees.\n\nNote: Quantity Surveyor’s Certificate of Costs are subject to review by the Authority.","sortOrder":84},{"sectionNumber":"MINOR WORKS APPLICATION INFORMATION CHEC","sectionType":"part","heading":"MINOR WORKS APPLICATION INFORMATION CHECKLIST","content":"# ![](image.121.png)![Australian Government National Captial Authority Logo](image.120.png) MINOR WORKS APPLICATION INFORMATION CHECKLIST\n\nThe following information is required for all works applications:\n\nTwo sets of all plans /drawings are required to be provided.\n\n • A Locality Plan which identifies the site and its context.\n • A written description of the works proposed.\n • Plans or drawings describing the works with drawing numbers.\n • Authorisation from the land owner/lessee or land custodian to lodge the application on their behalf (Please use the Authorisation Form available from the NCA Website).\n\nFailure to submit the above information will result in your application not clearing the completeness check stage. Failure may result in the applicant being provided with the Notice to resubmit the application not in accordance with the Australian Capital Territory (Planning and Land Management) Act 1988. This notice incurs a cost of $300.00 in accordance with the Australian Capital Territory (Planning and Land Management) Regulations.\n\n![](image.122.png)\n\nExamples of minor applications include tree removals, installation of low impact structures (lighting, flag poles, bollards etc) and signage.\n\nIn addition to the mandatory documentation, minor works approval applications will need to provide the following:\n\n![check box](image.123.png)Plans showing the works proposed\n\n![check box](image.124.png)Details and specifications of items to be installed (signs, pits, poles, lights etc)\n\n![check box](image.125.png)Existing site photos\n\n![check box](image.124.png)Work schedule and proposed timing\n\n![check box](image.126.png)Examples of colours and materials proposed\n\n![check box](image.127.png)ACT Government Agency Clearances\n\n • Transport Canberra and City Services Directorate (TCCS) \\- Works on Unleased Territory Land such as road reserves, public parks and nature reserves may be required to review applications. TCCS will also provide Temporary traffic management authorisation, advice on urban tree management, driveway works and verge management.\n • Environment and Planning Directorate (EPD) – EPD may be required to provide leasing advice, advice on ACT heritage listed sites, Environmental protection requirements, and advice on the conservation of flora and fauna in the ACT.\n\nPlease contact Access Canberra on 13 22 28 to contact the relevant areas of these ACT Government directorates.\n\nBUILDING THE NATIONAL CAPITAL IN THE HEART OF ALL AUSTRALIANS ABN 75 149 374 427","sortOrder":85},{"sectionNumber":"Australian War Memorial, Campbell and Mi","sectionType":"part","heading":"Australian War Memorial, Campbell and Mitchell, ACT","content":"## Australian War Memorial, Campbell and Mitchell, ACT","sortOrder":91},{"sectionNumber":"Indigenous Cultural Heritage Assessment","sectionType":"subdivision","heading":"Indigenous Cultural Heritage Assessment","content":"#### Indigenous Cultural Heritage Assessment\n\nMarch 2008\n\n![Navin Officer Heritage Consultants logo, hand print and cog.](image.134.jpeg) \n\nNavin Officer\n\nheritage consultants Pty Ltd\n\nacn: 092 901 605\n\nNumber 4\n\nKingston Warehouse 71 Leichhardt St.\n\nKingston ACT 2604","sortOrder":92},{"sectionNumber":"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY","sectionType":"subdivision","heading":"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY","content":"#### EXECUTIVE SUMMARY\n\n  The Australian War Memorial is currently developing the Australian War Memorial Heritage Register in conjunction with Australian War Memorial’s existing collection management database (MICA). The Register is a list of places and place elements which have been identified as having Commonwealth Heritage value.\n\n  Navin Officer Heritage Consultants Pty Ltd was commissioned by Godden Mackay Logan to undertake an indigenous cultural heritage assessment of the Campbell and Mitchell precincts of the Australian War Memorial. The study included literature review, consultation with representative local Aboriginal groups and field surveys within the Campbell and Mitchell Precincts.\n\n  The main objectives of this heritage study were to:\n\n  Identify Aboriginal heritage within the study areas;\n\n  Assess the significance of Aboriginal heritage sites within the study areas;\n\n  Identify those sites that warrant permanent conservation and are a permanent constraint to disturbance within the study areas;\n\n  Identify areas where further information is required to make an assessment on the heritage value of a site; and\n\n  Provide management recommendations to achieve protection for those sites that warrant it.\n\n  The study determined that:\n\n  No Aboriginal sites have been previously identified within the study areas;\n\n  No Aboriginal sites or areas of archaeological potential/sensitivity were identified in the Australian War Memorial Mitchell Precinct study area in the course of the current investigation. There are no indigenous heritage assets or constraints relating to the Australian War Memorial Mitchell Precinct; and\n\n  One Aboriginal site, isolated find, AWM1, was identified in the Australian War Memorial Campbell Precinct study area in the course of the current investigation. The site has low archaeological values, but is valued by the local Aboriginal community and as such it meets Criterion (i) of the Commonwealth Heritage Listing criteria.\n\n  It is recommended that:\n\n  Site AWM1 be listed on the Australian War Memorial Heritage Register and ACT Heritage Register; and\n\n  Impact to site AWM1 should be avoided, if disturbance is anticipated potential activities around the periphery of the site should be managed and the site fenced where appropriate to demarcate site boundary and to control access.\n\n~ o0o ~","sortOrder":93},{"sectionNumber":"TABLE OF CONTENTS","sectionType":"subdivision","heading":"TABLE OF CONTENTS","content":"#### TABLE OF CONTENTS\n\n INTRODUCTION............................................................1\n\n [Report Outline.............................................................1](#_TOC_250027)\n ABORIGINAL PARTICIPATION.................................................4\n STUDY METHODOLOGY.....................................................4\n\n [Literature and Database Review...............................................5](#_TOC_250024)\n [Fieldwork................................................................5](#_TOC_250023)\n [Project Personnel..........................................................5](#_TOC_250022)\n [Recording Parameters.......................................................5](#_TOC_250021)\n ENVIRONMENTAL CONTEXT..................................................7\n\n [Campbell Precinct..........................................................7](#_TOC_250019)\n [Mitchell Precinct...........................................................8](#_TOC_250018)\n ABORIGINAL CONTEXT.....................................................10\n\n [Tribal Boundaries and Ethnohistory............................................10](#_TOC_250016)\n [Regional Background for the Campbell Precinct...................................10](#_TOC_250015)\n [The Campbell Precinct......................................................11](#_TOC_250014)\n [Regional Background for the Mitchell Precinct.....................................12](#_TOC_250013)\n [The Mitchell Precinct.......................................................13](#_TOC_250012)\n [RESULTS................................................................14](#_TOC_250011)\n\n [Aboriginal Sites...........................................................14](#_TOC_250010)\n [Survey Coverage and Visibility Variables........................................15](#_TOC_250009)\n SIGNIFICANCE ASSESSMENT................................................16\n\n [Commonwealth Heritage Assessment Criteria.....................................16](#_TOC_250007)\n [Significance.............................................................17](#_TOC_250006)\n STATUTORY INFORMATION..................................................18\n\n [Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999........................18](#_TOC_250005)\n [Environment and Heritage Legislation Amendment Act (No 1) 2003.....................19](#_TOC_250004)\n CONCLUSIONS AND MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS............................21\n\n [Conclusions.............................................................21](#_TOC_250002)\n [Recommendations........................................................21](#_TOC_250001)\n [REFERENCES............................................................22](#_TOC_250000)\n\nAPPENDIX 1 ABORIGINAL PARTICIPATION FORM................................24","sortOrder":94},{"sectionNumber":".","sectionType":"subdivision","heading":".","content":"#### .\n\n![Study Methodology Heading](image.141.png)\n\n1. Literature and Database Review\n\nA range of documentation was reviewed in assessing archaeological knowledge for the Campbell and Mitchell study areas and surrounds. This literature and data review was used to determine if known Aboriginal sites were located within the area under investigation, to facilitate site prediction on the basis of known regional and local site patterns, and to place the area within an archaeological and heritage management context.\n\nAboriginal literature sources included the Heritage Online database (HERO) maintained by the ACT Heritage Unit, and associated files and catalogue of archaeological reports.\n\nSearches were undertaken of the following heritage registers and schedules:\n\n The National Heritage List (Australian Heritage Council);\n\n The Commonwealth Heritage List (Australian Heritage Council);\n\n The Register of the National Estate (Australian Heritage Council);\n\n The Heritage Register (ACT Heritage Council); and\n\n Register of the National Trust of Australia (ACT).\n\n1. Fieldwork\n\nFieldwork was conducted over one day in February 2008. Field survey was conducted on foot and involved inspection of all areas of ground surface visibility within the Campbell and Mitchell study areas.\n\n1. Project Personnel\n\nField survey was undertaken by archaeologists Rebecca Yit and Nicola Hayes. Sites Officers Mr Don Bell (Buru Ngunawal), Grahame Riley (Ngarigu) and Justin Williams (CBAC) were also in attendance. Craig Seaton (AWM) provided assistance at the AWM Campbell Precinct.\n\nThis report was prepared by Rebecca Yit.\n\n1. Recording Parameters\n\nThe archaeological survey aimed at identifying material evidence of Aboriginal occupation as revealed by surface artefacts and areas of archaeological potential unassociated with surface artefacts. Potential recordings fall into three categories: isolated finds, sites and potential archaeological deposits.\n\nIsolated finds\n\nAn isolated find is a single stone artefact, not located within a rock shelter, and which occurs without any associated evidence of Aboriginal occupation within a radius of 60 metres. Isolated finds may be indicative of:\n\n Random loss or deliberate discard of a single artefact;\n\n The remnant of a now dispersed and disturbed artefact scatter; and\n\n An otherwise obscured or sub-surface artefact scatter.","sortOrder":95},{"sectionNumber":"..","sectionType":"subdivision","heading":"..","content":"#### ..\n\n![Environmental Context Heading](image.143.png)\n\nThe Australian War Memorial study area comprises two precincts, situated at Campbell and Mitchell in northern ACT.\n\n1. Campbell Precinct\n\nThe Campbell precinct study area consists of the National Memorial and Grounds and comprises an area of approximately of 14 hectares. The Campbell study area is contained by the major arterial roads of Limestone Avenue to the southwest and Fairbairn Avenue to the south. Treloar Crescent encloses the northern and eastern boundaries of the study area. The site houses four buildings including the Australian War Memorial, the CEW Bean Building, the Administration Building and the Outpost Café. The grounds of the precinct have been extensively landscaped to contain memorials, plaques, a parade garden and commemorative and landscape plantings (Figure 4.1).\n\nThe study area consists predominantly of the lower southwest facing basal slopes of the Mount Ainslie and Mount Pleasant ridgeline water catchment. An unnamed tributary draining into Lake Burley Griffin is located along the eastern boundary of the study area.\n\nThe bedrock geology of the Campbell precinct is dominated by the Ainslie volcanics which consists of Devonian rocks including rhyolite, dacite, tuff, and quartz porphyry (Canberra 1:250,000 geological map 2nd Ed 1964). Soils within the area typically include red earths and red and yellow podzolic soils. Massive earths of a red or brown colour occur on the fan deposits flanking Mount Ainslie (Walker 1978).\n\nThe Campbell study area is characterised by a constructed undulating landscape where extensive landscaping and modification has subsumed the original landscape topography. Vegetation at the Campbell site represents contemporary plantings since the 1940s (pers. comm. Craig Seaton, AWM). Plantings of eucalypts and wattles have been developed on the eastern portion of the study area, appearing as an extension of the Mount Ainslie vegetation (Figure 4.2). Exotic species of deciduous and coniferous trees (Figure 4.3) have been developed on the western portion of the site (Australian Heritage List #105889 Australian War Memorial and the Memorial Parade, Anzac Pde, Campbell, ACT).\n\nExtensive landuse impacts and modification to the Campbell site has resulted in widespread disturbance of the upper soil layers within the study area. The types of landscape disturbance which are evident within the study area include:\n\n Original clearance of the native tree cover and understorey;\n\n Construction of memorial buildings and associated structures, access tracks and roadways;\n\n Construction of public utility easements (for example, gas pipelines, communication cables and power lines);\n\n Major earthworks associated with contour mounding and creekline realignments; and\n\n Creation and maintenance of exotic and native plantings including ripping of soils.\n\nChanges in vegetation cover will have had considerable impact on the upper soil profile throughout the study area. The removal of native vegetation would have prompted erosion and surface instability on the valley slopes and the sedimentation of the valley floor.\n\nThis land use history will have significantly impacted the survival and integrity of the prehistoric archaeological record. It is probable that any possible surface scatters of artefacts which occur within the uppermost soil layers will have undergone varying degrees of horizontal and vertical disturbance particularly from the removal of vegetation and extensive plantings. However, unless impact has been wholesale, (such as in excavation, filling or recontouring) it is frequently possible to identify a remnant scatter of disturbed artefacts which mark such sites.","sortOrder":96},{"sectionNumber":"APPENDIX 1","sectionType":"subdivision","heading":"APPENDIX 1","content":"#### APPENDIX 1\n\nABORIGINAL PARTICIPATION FORMS","sortOrder":101},{"sectionNumber":"Stakeholder and Community Consultation","sectionType":"section","heading":"Stakeholder and Community Consultation","content":"###### Stakeholder and Community Consultation\n\nA stakeholder is defined by the Memorial as someone who is interested in, who can influence, or may be impacted by heritage matters at the AWM. These stakeholders may be from within the Memorial, individuals or community groups, as listed below.\n\nThe AWM Heritage Strategy, Heritage Management Plan or any future works, projects or activities may be of interest to stakeholders. The Memorial’s Building and Services Section determine who the relevant stakeholders are for consultation in relation to heritage matters. This occurs on a case-by-\n\ncase basis and would be determined where the stakeholders’ interests, skills or expertise, matches\n\nthe heritage matter being considered and requiring consultation.\n\nConsultation involves stakeholder engagement in the most suitable forum for the matter or project being considered, and is based upon an understanding of already identified understanding, familiarity and appreciation of heritage matters.\n\nThe Memorial undertakes consultation to ensure all stakeholders have a genuine opportunity to engage with the particular heritage-related matter or project. The Memorial’s consultation aims to reflect their particular expertise, or aspirations and to ensure the Stakeholders are aware, informed and engaged with the conservation of the National and Commonwealth Heritage values of the AWM.","sortOrder":103},{"sectionNumber":"Stakeholder Identification","sectionType":"section","heading":"Stakeholder Identification","content":"###### Stakeholder Identification\n\nKey heritage stakeholder groups include:\n\n AWM visitors;\n AWM staff and volunteers;\n Department of Defence and Department of Veterans Affairs;\n Veterans associations and advocacy groups;\n Veterans and families;\n Indigenous bodies (national, regional and local);\n Registered Aboriginal Organisations (local to the ACT);\n Heritage authorities (Commonwealth and ACT) and interest groups, such as Australia ICOMOS, National Trust of Australia (ACT and the National Council);\n Heritage experts and Academics;\n Government;\n Neighbours;\n Community Action Groups;\n Media;\n Partners and sponsors; and\n General Public—the local community, and the national community.\n\n![](image.163.png) \n\nStakeholder & Community Consultation Guidelines, May 2020 Page 1","sortOrder":104}],"analysis":{"flash_summary_failed":{"failed":true,"reason":"Unauthenticated. Configure AI_GATEWAY_API_KEY or use a provider module. Learn more: https://ai-sdk.dev/unauthenticated-ai-gateway","source":"analysis-cron"},"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":7,"scope_assessment":{"changed":true,"description":"Compared with earlier conservation management plans cited in the document, this 2022 HMP broadens scope from a traditional conservation plan to an active regulatory and project‑management instrument. It incorporates: (a) an updated Heritage Register for the Memorial and the Mitchell precinct (Section 1.5); (b) a formal decision‑making framework and mandatory self‑assessment/HIA processes that translate EPBC obligations into everyday project controls (Appendix A and B; Sections 6.1–6.2); and (c) explicit integration of the Australian War Memorial Development Project 2019–2028 and its EPBC approval conditions as binding implementation constraints (Sections 2.5, 5.9, 6.2 and Appendix K). Those additions move the document beyond retrospective conservation guidance into forward‑looking governance of major works, approvals and stakeholder engagement, increasing its operational reach and the range of regulatory interactions the Memorial must manage."},"complexity_factors":["Lengthy, multi‑part document with detailed site descriptions, history, values and policies (many sections: 1.0–8.0 plus extended appendices)","Multiple defined terms and specialised abbreviations (dedicated Abbreviations and Definitions pages)","Extensive cross‑referencing to external statutes and instruments (EPBC Act and Regulations, Australian War Memorial Act 1980, National Capital Plan, PALM Act, NCA requirements)","Layered approvals and conditional workflows (internal CMG thresholds, self‑assessment form, HIA requirement, EPBC referral trigger for 'significant impact', NCA works approvals — see Sections 5.3.2, Appendix A, Appendix B, Appendix D)","Detailed schedules and nested policy tables with timing priorities and actions for different site components (Section 6.2, 6.3 — many conditional actions)","Multiple appendices that operate as operational tools (Heritage Register, EPBC compliance checklist, HIA form, NCA checklists, EPBC approval conditions) which must be used in practice","Site‑specific technical material (landscape and tree management, dioramas, Roll of Honour, Aboriginal artefact AWM1) that draw in archaeological, environmental and curatorial considerations (Sections 3.0, 4.0, 5.4, Appendix I)","Stakeholder and consultation obligations involving Indigenous representative bodies and many stakeholder groups (Sections 1.6, 5.7, Appendix J)","Policy provisions that mix statutory compliance requirements with discretionary managerial decisions (e.g. updating national citations, timing priorities, CMG discretion)"],"plain_english_summary":"**What this document is and does (mechanically)\n\n- This is a Heritage Management Plan (HMP) prepared for the Australian War Memorial (AWM) to meet obligations under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (the EPBC Act) and its Regulations. It is an operational rulebook for how the Memorial will identify, protect, conserve, present and monitor the place’s National and Commonwealth heritage values (see Executive Summary; Sections 1.1, 4.1).\n\n- The HMP sets out: objectives and conservation policies; who within the Memorial is responsible for implementation; an approval and decision‑making workflow for works; a self‑assessment and Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) process; monitoring and timing priorities; and a set of appendices with the Heritage Register, checklists, NCA (National Capital Authority) works advice and the EPBC approval conditions for the AWM’s 2019–2028 development project (see Sections 6.0–6.3; Appendix A–K).\n\n- It operates as both a compliance document (to show how the Memorial meets specific regulatory requirements in Schedules 5A and 7A of the EPBC Regulations) and as an internal governance manual that guides day‑to‑day maintenance, conservation work and major development projects (see Appendix C; Sections 6.1–6.2).\n\nWho it affects\n\n- The Memorial’s managers and staff: Corporate Services Branch, Buildings & Services and the Corporate Management Group have primary duties to follow the HMP and to use the decision frameworks for proposed works (Sections 6.1, 5.3.2).\n- Contractors, consultants and designers engaged on site: any party proposing works must complete the self‑assessment form and, where necessary, commission an HIA and follow the HMP policies (Appendix B; Section 5.3.2).\n- Commonwealth decision‑makers and regulators: the Department responsible for the EPBC Act (DAWE/Minister for the Environment) will be involved if an action is likely to have a “significant impact”; the NCA must approve works in the Designated Area under the PALM Act / National Capital Plan (Appendix B; Appendix D; Sections 1.4, 5.2).\n- Indigenous representative organisations and other stakeholders: the HMP requires consultation with local Aboriginal groups on actions likely to affect Indigenous values, and sets out stakeholder engagement arrangements (Section 1.6; Sections 5.7, 6.0 policy 3 and Appendix J).\n- The broader public and interest groups (veterans, families, visitors): the HMP constrains changes to the Memorial’s fabric and how commemorative areas are used or adapted (Section 4.3; Sections 6.2–6.3).\n\nWhy it matters (purpose claims and practical tests)\n\n- The HMP claims to provide a single, practical framework to conserve and manage the AWM’s listed heritage values while allowing the Memorial to function and evolve (Executive Summary; Section 6.2). That purpose is implemented by turning statutory obligations into internal processes: objectives, specific policies by site component (e.g. Commemorative Area, Pool of Reflection), an approvals ladder and templates for assessment (Sections 6.2–6.3; Appendix A–C).\n\n- Costs and compliance burden: the Plan imposes recurring administrative tasks (self‑assessments, HIAs, monitoring, five‑year updates, inspections) and layered approval steps (section/CMG submission thresholds; NCA Works Approval; EPBC referrals where 'significant impact' is possible). These create direct project costs (consultants, surveys, mitigation) and possible programme delays for works (see Sections 5.3.2, 6.1.1; Appendix B, Appendix D).\n\n- Incentives and trade‑offs: the HMP favours conservation outcomes as the dominant decision factor (1.1.2). That raises a trade‑off where the Memorial’s operational objectives (more gallery space, visitor amenities) may be constrained by heritage protection requirements. Where developers propose change, design choices will be steered toward mitigation, avoidance or reversible works (Sections 5.5, 6.2; Impact Assessment Guide in Appendix B).\n\n- Opportunity costs and substitution effects: space or design solutions that would be cheaper or faster but that materially affect listed values will be discouraged; as a result projects may choose more costly technical solutions (e.g. glazed links, relocation of storage to Mitchell precinct) or off‑site options (Sections 2.5, 5.5, 5.8).\n\n- Implementation risk and bureaucratic discretion: the HMP relies on several discretionary decision points — the Memorial’s CMG; Head, Buildings & Services; NCA for works; and the Environment Minister for referrals. The legal trigger of a 'significant impact' under the EPBC Act can be fact‑sensitive; that uncertainty creates litigation/referral risk and places a premium on conservative decision‑making (Sections 1.1, 5.3.2; Appendix A, Appendix B).\n\n- Effects on private actors and markets: the HMP does not directly regulate markets, but it affects private contractors and professional service providers through procedural compliance and bespoke technical requirements for works on site. It can increase delivery costs for built work within the AWM precinct and limit options for third‑party investors or commercial uses inside the listed area (Sections 6.3, Appendix D).\n\n- Concentrated benefits, diffuse costs: benefits from stronger protection (maintaining commemorative fabric, visitor experience, veteran associations) are concentrated among specific constituencies (veterans, cultural heritage professionals). Costs (higher project budgets, administrative overhead, possible slower roll‑out of new exhibitions) are borne by the Memorial’s project budgets and ultimately by public funds (see Executive Summary; Sections 5.8–5.9).\n\nBottom line in plain terms\n\n- This HMP converts the EPBC Act listing of the Australian War Memorial into a practical internal compliance and conservation regime. It binds the Memorial to defined policies, staged approvals, monitoring routines and consultation obligations, and it frames how the approved 2019–2028 development project and any future work must be designed and delivered so heritage values are avoided, mitigated or documented (Sections 6.0–6.3; Appendix K). The plan raises the cost and procedural bar for change at the site, thereby protecting heritage attributes but also adding administrative and project delivery burdens for the Memorial, its contractors and regulators."},"kimi_summary":{"_metrics":{"completionTokens":586},"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":6,"scope_assessment":{"changed":true,"description":"The plan has expanded significantly beyond a simple conservation document to incorporate a major development project (replacement of ANZAC Hall, new glazed link, research centre). The 2019-2028 Development Project, approved under separate EPBC Act referral, is now embedded throughout — particularly Sections 2.5, 5.9 and 6.2. This represents substantial scope growth from the 2011 predecessor plan, reflecting both legislative changes and the Memorial's evolving operational needs."},"complexity_factors":["Multiple overlapping statutory frameworks (EPBC Act, Australian War Memorial Act 1980, National Capital Plan)","Extensive cross-referencing between sections and appendices","Conditional logic for approval processes based on scale of works (minor/medium/significant)","13 versions tracked through report register with multiple stakeholder review cycles","Integration of approved development project (2019-2028) with existing heritage obligations","Multiple heritage listings with different boundaries (National Heritage List, Commonwealth Heritage List, Parliament House Vista)","Detailed policy tables with nested actions and timing requirements"],"plain_english_summary":"The 2022 Heritage Management Plan for the Australian War Memorial (prepared to meet EPBC Act requirements) sets out how the Memorial will protect and manage its National and Commonwealth Heritage values. It provides conservation policies and processes to assess and approve changes so buildings, commemorative spaces and landscapes are preserved while enabling necessary development.\n\nIt affects the Memorial, anyone proposing works (staff, contractors, developers), and visitors and communities who value the site — ensuring significance is retained amid expansion and heavy public use."}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/australian-war-memorial-heritage-management-plan-2022","history":"/api/acts/australian-war-memorial-heritage-management-plan-2022/history","analysis":"/api/acts/australian-war-memorial-heritage-management-plan-2022/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/australian-war-memorial-heritage-management-plan-2022/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/australian-war-memorial-heritage-management-plan-2022/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/australian-war-memorial-heritage-management-plan-2022/documents"}}