Heritage clash as Abbotsford Convent aged care plan sparks debate

Mercy Health’s proposal for a new senior living facility in Melbourne’s historic Abbotsford Convent precinct has drawn community concern, highlighting the broader challenges aged care providers face when building new facilities.

Modern aged care vision in a historic precinct

Residential aged care provider Mercy Health has unveiled plans to redevelop part of the heritage-listed Abbotsford Convent complex in Melbourne’s inner north-east. The proposal involves demolishing a defunct two-storey aged care home – originally a 1977 convent hostel later converted to a 92-bed nursing home – and replacing it with a new four-storey building containing 64 apartments for over-55s. Designed by Life Architecture and Urban Design, the development would include a basement level, communal spaces and landscaped gardens, aiming to provide modern senior living within the historic convent grounds.

According to the project’s heritage impact statement, the building’s mass is broken into two forms with increased setbacks to ‘provide much greater separation from the convent building and Good Shepherd Chapel than at present’. An internal atrium lobby is intended to frame views of the chapel’s spire from Clarke Street, and a new outdoor communal courtyard would adjoin the historic chapel. Externally, the architects have proposed a restrained palette of pale brick, shingles and metal detailing to complement the convent’s character. The landscape design, informed by a 2021 precinct masterplan, includes ornamental gardens, green walls, Indigenous planting, and even a small public pocket park to help the new facility blend into its cultural surroundings.

Community concerns over Heritage and Scale

The Abbotsford Convent Foundation (ACF) – custodians of the broader convent arts precinct – has come out strongly against the proposal. Justine Hyde, ACF’s CEO, told media the foundation is “deeply concerned” by the “serious implications” of Mercy Health’s plan. “The plans submitted outline a new block of buildings that will overshadow and dominate the National Heritage Listed convent and chapel, with the proposed four-storey build doubling the height of the current two-storey building,” Hyde noted. She characterised the 60-unit over-55 apartment project, complete with penthouses and 69 underground car parks, as “excessive in scale and certainly not in-keeping with the historically significant convent architecture”.

Local residents and convent stakeholders fear the development’s bulk and height will obstruct cherished views and impact the site’s amenity. Hyde pointed out it would add “another potentially 100 residents to Clarke Street,” increasing traffic and noise in the quiet enclave. There are also worries about construction impacts on the convent’s creative studios and popular community events. The Foundation recalls that two decades ago, a community campaign halted a luxury housing development on this very site, leading to the convent being saved for public use in 2004. To them, Mercy’s plan appears uncomfortably similar – a private residential project offering little broader public benefit in a much-loved cultural precinct.

Developer defends need and consults widely

Mercy Health, a not-for-profit Catholic care provider, insists the redevelopment is driven by genuine need. A Mercy Health spokesperson told Beat Magazine that the organisation is “responding to the needs of the local community, acknowledging the limited capacity and resources available for ageing community members in the area”. With the existing nursing home outdated and closed since 2023, Mercy sees an opportunity to create a “modern retirement offering that enables people to age safely and comfortably within their local community”. The spokesperson highlighted Mercy Health’s dedication to preserving the site’s heritage context and noted that extensive consultations are currently in progress with stakeholders, including Yarra Council, Heritage Victoria, and local residents. Wurundjeri Indigenous groups, and the Abbotsford Convent Foundation itself. “We will continue to consult as we progress,” the spokesperson said, adding that Mercy “welcomes community feedback” on the plans.

Crucially, Mercy Health has indicated that a certain scale is needed for the project to be feasible. The provider told authorities that roughly 60 units is the minimum for the redevelopment to be financially viable. In other words, keeping the new building to the convent’s preferred two-storey height (similar to the old 92-bed facility) would likely yield too few apartments to justify the investment. This economic reality sets the stage for a potential standoff between heritage conservation desires and the practical requirements of aged care provision.

A Microcosm of wider aged care development challenges

The tussle at Abbotsford Convent reflects broader challenges faced by aged care and retirement living providers across Australia. It is increasingly difficult to balance the “not in my backyard” concerns of local communities with the pressing need for more aged care accommodation. Providers frequently encounter community opposition over issues such as building height, density, traffic, and noise, especially in established suburban or heritage areas. In response, thorough community consultation has become a critical part of any development process, though even extensive engagement doesn’t always assuage residents’ fears.

Local government planning processes and heritage overlays add further complexity. In this case, because the site falls within a state-heritage listed precinct, Mercy Health must secure approval from Heritage Victoria and comply with the City of Yarra’s heritage overlay rules before any construction can proceed. Navigating these layers of scrutiny can be a time-consuming process. Indeed, a recent report by the Retirement Living Council revealed that nearly 70% of applications for new senior living projects take over a year to be decided, and 23% take more than two years. Much of the delay is attributed to protracted planning disputes. Industry experts note an over-reliance on tribunals like the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) to settle contested developments, as councils often defer to vocal objectors. This dynamic can add significant cost and uncertainty for aged care providers trying to expand services.

Heritage sensitivities can particularly constrain projects. Developers may need to modify designs to preserve sightlines or maintain a low profile, as seen with Mercy’s recessed lobby for the chapel view. In some cases, proposals are scaled back or rejected outright for being incompatible with neighbourhood character – for example, VCAT famously blocked a three-storey Ryman Healthcare village in Mount Martha, Victoria, deeming it “too big and overwhelming” for a low-rise coastal area. Such outcomes illustrate the fine line providers must walk to satisfy planning authorities and community expectations.

Meanwhile, aged care operators face mounting funding and viability pressures. Building contemporary care facilities (with private rooms, accessibility, infection control, etc.) is capital-intensive. Government funding is largely focused on care delivery rather than construction, so providers must ensure new developments make financial sense. Many in the sector argue that a critical mass of beds or units is needed for a site to be sustainable. Aged care accountants have long identified a “sweet spot” of roughly 60–90 beds as optimal for viability in a residential aged care home. This creates tension when planning constraints or community preferences call for smaller-scale developments. If forced to significantly shrink a project, the provider may find it economically unviable to proceed, potentially leaving an area with no new facility at all. Mercy’s stance that 60 apartments is the minimum for the Abbotsford project underscores this common challenge of scale versus suitability.

Insights and lessons for aged Care leaders

Aged care leaders watching the Abbotsford Convent saga can glean several insights. Firstly, early and genuine community engagement is essential. Transparent consultation and collaboration with local stakeholders, as Mercy Health has initiated, can help identify concerns and refine designs before positions harden. Even if consensus isn’t reached, being responsive and showing respect for local values (for instance, preserving a heritage sightline or adding a public pocket park) may ease some opposition and build goodwill.

Secondly, providers should be prepared for long planning timelines and potential appeals. Factoring in the possibility of council refusals and VCAT hearings (or equivalent tribunals in other states) is now a prudent part of project planning. This means budgeting extra time and resources for legal and community relations efforts. Engaging reputable heritage consultants and urban planners can strengthen a proposal’s case that it meets all regulatory requirements, which will be vital evidence if the project ends up before a review panel.

Thirdly, the Abbotsford case highlights the importance of articulating the social value of aged care developments. Opponents have argued the convent plan offers no benefit except to its future residents. Aged care operators can counter such perceptions by emphasising how new facilities enable local seniors to remain in their community, create jobs, and sometimes provide shared amenities (like cafes, gardens or meeting spaces that neighbours can also enjoy). Communicating a project’s broader community benefit can be key to winning public support or at least understanding.

Finally, striking the right balance between scale and setting is crucial. Aged care providers might consider more flexible design approaches – for example, breaking up massing into smaller pavilions, or opting for two to three storeys spread over a larger footprint if land is available – to reduce visual impact. While smaller projects may challenge financial viability, innovative partnerships or staged developments could help square the circle. In some instances, providers have paired aged care with retirement living units or other services on one site to improve viability, effectively cross-subsidising the care component.

As Australia’s population ages, the need for new aged care infrastructure is undeniable. The Mercy Health vs. Abbotsford Convent debate encapsulates the tensions between meeting the needs of the elderly and preserving the heritage and character of the community. The outcome, which now rests with Heritage Victoria and the Yarra City Council (and possibly VCAT thereafter), will be closely watched by the sector. Regardless of the final decision, this case serves as a learning opportunity. Aged care leaders are reminded that success in developing new facilities requires not just sound financing and design, but also diplomacy, patience, and a willingness to adapt plans in response to community and planning feedback. By proactively addressing these challenges, providers can better navigate the rocky road from proposal to groundbreaking – and ultimately deliver much-needed services to Australia’s seniors in a way that respects and enriches local communities.