I I I
I I I I :1 PYRMONT POINT PRECINCT I Archaeological and Heritage Assessment ,I
Report prepared for I Property Services Group I Godden Mackay Pty Ltd I Howard Tanner and Associates Pty Ltd I I March 1993 I I I 'I ;1 ·1 :1.
, ~ :1 I I I I CONTENTS Page
I 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 1.1 Context of the Report 1 1.2 Objectives 1 I 1.3 Historical Context 1 1.4 Heritage Resources 2 1.5 Statutory Controls 3 I 1.6 Management Recommendations 3 2.0 INTRODUCTION 5 2.1 Background 5 I 2.2 Study Area 5 2.3 Author Identification 6 2.4 Methodology 6 I 2.5 Umitations 6
3.0 HISTORIC CONTEXT 8 I 3.1 The Development of Pyrmont 8 3.2 1788 - 1840 Early Settlement and the Macarthurs 9 3.3 Subdivision, Settlement and Community (1840 - 1910) 11 3.4 Reconstructing the Point: Port Wharfage (1910 -1970) 13 I 3.5 Derelict, Demolished, Developed (1970 - 1992) 14 I 4.0 LANDSCAPE 31 5.0 BUILT ENVIRONMENT 33
I 6.0 ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES 36 6.1 Preamble 36 6.2 The Value ofArchaeological Material 37 I 6.3 Existing Information 37 6.4 Potential Historical Archaeological Sites 38 6.5 Significance 39 I 6.6 Procedures 40 I I I I I I I I I I CONTENTS Page
7.0 ASSESSMENT OF SIGNIFICANT ITEMS 42 I 7.1 Recording Methodology 42 7.2 Basis for Assessment of Significance 42 7.3 Contribution to the Overall Significance of Pyrmont 45 I 7.4 Results 46 7.4.1 Heritage Items Recommendedfor the Retention, Conservation and Inclusion on the Heritage Schedule I ofREP 26 46 7.4.2 Items Which Contribute to the Overall Signifcance ofPyrmont 47 7.5 Review of Specific Items, with Reference to the State I Heritage Criteria 48
8.0 CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT 50 I 8.1 Context of this Report 50 8.2 Objectives 50 8.3 Existing Planning Controls 51 I 8.3.1 Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No.26 - City West (REP 26) 51 8.3.2 The Ultimo-Pyrmont Draft Urban I Development Plan 1991 51 8.3.3 Pyrmont/Ultimo Heritage Study 51 8.3.4 New South Wales Heritage Act 51 I 8.3.5 Statutory Authority Heritage Registers 52 CONTENTS Page I 8.0 CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT (cont'd) 50 8.4 Recommended Statutory Controls 52 8.4.1 Adequacy ofExisting Controls 52 I 8.4.2 Additions to Heritage Schedule ofREP 26 53 8.4.3 Ultimo-Pynnont Precinct Draft Urban Development Plan 53 I 8.4.4 Statutory Authority Section 170 Registers 53 8.5 Management Actions 54 8.5.1 Pyrmont PointPrecinct Master Plan 54 I 8.5.2 Development Consent Process 54 8.5.3 Archaeological Resources 55 8.5.4 Recording 55 I 8.6 Former Waterside Coldstores 56 8. 7 Site-specific Archaeological Investigetions 56 I I I --- I I I I I 9.0 BIBUOGRAPHY 61 I 10. APPENDICES 62 A. Study Brief B. Burra Charter ofAustralia ICOMOS C. Significance Evaluation Criteria NSW State Heritage I Inventory Project D. Heritage Items Recommended for Retention, Conservation and Inclusion on the Heritage Schedule of REP 26 I E. Items Which Contribute to the Overall Significance of Pyrmont F. Inventory ofPotential Archaeological Sites G. Historic Maps and Plans I H. Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 26 - City West Extract 1. Ultimo - Pyrmont Draft Urban Development Plan. Extract - Heritage and Conservation I J. Ultimo - Pyrmont Heritage Study. Extract - Policies Pertaining to Heritage Conservation. I I 'I I I' I I I II II I I I
GODDEN I MACKAY I I 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.1 Context of the Report I ownership The New South Wales Property Services Group is in the process of transferring West Development of land identified as the "Pynnont Point Precinct" to the City and disposal of this Corporation. The Corporation will be responsible for the redevelopment I with the land. Master planning for the precinct is in progress and, in accordance that the master requirements of the City West Regional Environmental Plan, it is intended and protection of plan will illustrate and explain proposals for heritage conservation I archaeological relics. Cox Richardson The master plan for the Pynnont Point Precinct is being prepared by Philip been prepared by I Taylor and Partners. This Archaeological and Heritage Assessment has input to the master Godden Mackay in association with Howard Tanner and Associates as I planning process.
1.2 Objectives objectives for I The study brief, which is reproduced as Appendix A, identifies the following the study: that are already (a) to assess the significance of heritage items in the study area I identified in the City West, REP; area which (b) to identify any other items of heritage significance in the study I contribute to the overall significance of Pyrmont; (c) to identify known or potential archaeological sites; achieve heritage (d) to outline policies and procedures which should be adopted to I the overall conservation and protection of archaeological relics, having regard to the study intention of the City West REP and the master plan being developed for I area.
1.3 Historical Context In December 1806 The Pyrmont area developed early in the history of Sydney's growth. I from Parramatta to The Sydney Gazette reported that guests on an aquatic excursion after ItBad Captain John Macarthur's estate at Cockle Bay christened the peninsula lt Pynnont Point area Pyrmont in Germany, an area famous for its medicinal springs. The I after whom Jones was initially granted to Thomas Jones, a soldier in the 102nd regiment, and remained Bay is named. However in 1797 the land was purchased by John Macarthur and 1840. I in the Macarthur family until subdivision by Edward Macarthur in 1839 industrial With the expansion of colonial Sydney, Pyrmont attracted various commercial, including a and residential activities. By 1850 there were 103 commercial enterprises flour milling and I shipyard and quarries. It was these industrial activities, combined with I 1 I I I GODDEN MACKAY I I
that were mainly other like industries and the general development of mercantile wharfage I slower to develop responsible for the high population density. Pyrmont Point itself was to be densely than adjacent areas to the south, but by the mid 1870s the precinct appears the opening of I! settled. It was the 1870s that saw a range of important initiatives including the Colonial Sugar pyrmont public baths and commencement of the construction of Refining Company co!llplex. of coal jetties along I Modem development commenced around the 1890s with the building developed with the the shore of the peninsula. By the turn of the century Pyrmont was fully the William Grant Maitland Brewing Company, The Wallarah Coal Company and 1910 The Sydney I Engineers and Iron Shipbuilders works occupying the foreshores. In wharves, which Harbour Trust resumed land to enable construction of additional finger the wharves and the were built between 1911 and 1919. At the time of their construction revolutionary and to associated railway and cargo handling facilities were considered to be I represent state of the art technologies for cargo handling. residential building From the turn of the century until the present there has been minimal I Ways Terrace within the precinct, apart from the notable exception of Leslie Wilkinson's constructed between 1923 and 1925. put forward for the I The later part of the Twentieth century has seen a variety of proposals buildings and redevelopment of Pyrmont, demolition of more than half the residential gradual cessation ofvarious industrial enterprises. I
1.4 Heritage Resources landscape elements The Pyrmont Point precinct contains an array of buildings, structures, I of the area from the and archaeological sites that provide physical evidence of the history mid nineteenth century until the present. I finger wharves, Major built elements include substantial structures such as the harbourside details but and associated coldstores. There are two hotels, now presented with federation now adapted as a originally constructed as Victorian buildings and one former hotel I residential buildings residence. Qearly the most architecturally significant of the remaining Street precinct is the Ways Terrace. A complex of small cottages in the Harris/Scott/Cross also forms part of the built environment of the area. I kerbing, palisade Landscape items include a solitary phoenix palm, sandstone and trachyte associated with the fencing, and a suite of cuttings, tunnels, bridges and other features I railway. some sub-surface In addition to the standing and evident elements, the precinct may contain and the material I archaeological features that provide evidence of the former structures its colourful history. culture of residents and workers in the precinct during I
2 I I I I GODDEN I MACKAY I I 1.5 Statutory Controls The major statutory controls which affect the heritage and archaeological resources of I Pyrmont Point precinct are . Regional Environmental Plan No.26 - City West (REP 26)
I The UltimolPyrmont precinct Draft Urban Development Plan I The New South Wales Heritage Act, 1977. REP 26 identifies nine heritage items within the Pyrmont Point area and includes provisions relating to their conservation and management and the development consent process. The I Draft Urban Development Plan provides additional objectives and principles relating to heritage and conservation.
REP 26 specifies that the impact of development on archaeological material must be I assessed for potential historical archaeological sites within the precinct; a process that is consistent with the recommendations of the Draft Urban Development Plan. The latter plan specifies an extensive area within the precinct as being "potential historical archaeological I sites". In addition archaeological resources within the area are automaticaHy protected by the" relics" provisions of the New South Wales Heritage Act which prevent excavation of land for the purpose of discovering, exposing or moving a relic which is more than fifty I years old without a permit issued by the Heritage Council of New South Wales.
This report supports the retention of all existing items on the Heritage Schedule of REP 26 I and the addition of a significant tree to that schedule. The report also recommends that a number of items, (predominantly comprising residential buildings in the Harris/Scott/Cross Street Group) be considered for retention and, if retained, added to the heritage schedule of I the REP. The report also provides a more precise indication of the potential archaeological sites to which the provisions of the Heritage Act should be applied. I It is further recommended that items of signifiance that are part of the operating railway within the precinct be retained in use and added to the State Rail Heritage Register.
The report concludes that the existing spectrum of statutory controls is appropriate for I achieving conservation of the significance of the precinct.
I 1.6 Management Recommendations The report identifies appropriate management actions for identified items of significance and archaeological sites. It is recommended that seven of the heritage items should be the I subject of a Conservation Plan, prior to development consent being granted.
One site, (the former waterside coldstores), though identified as significant, is concluded to I be incapable of adaptation for residential use in a manner which enables its significance to
I 3 I I I GODDEN MACKAY I I be retained. On this basis, it is recognised that the building will not be retained, but should I be recorded prior to demolition. In relation to items under the control and management of the State Rail Authority, it is I recommended that those which are to be retained in use should be included on the State Rail Authority Heritage Register. One item under State Rail control, (the railway shunting sidings) is recommended for recording prior to removal. I In relation to the archaeological sites it is concluded that all six should be monitored by an archaeologist during excavation and that in some cases particular provision for recording or investigation should be made in any project programming. (Similar provision should apply I to the sites of any heritage items which are demolished). I I I I I I I I I I I
4 I I I I
GODDEN I MACKAY I I 2.0 INTRODUCTION
I 2.1 Background residential purposes The Pyrmont peninsula has been used for a range of industrial and occurred since the early years of the Nineteenth Century. Its major period of development of Edward during the latter part of the Nineteenth Century, following subdivision I as part of Macarthur's estate. The area is currently subject to proposals for redevelopment Study and other the City West strategy. As a result of the Pyrmont and Ultimo Heritage items and potential I studies the precinct is known to contain a range of significant heritage archaeological sites. ownership The New South Wales Property Services Group is in the process of transferring Point Precinct" I of land at the northern end of the Pyrmont Point, identified as the "Pyrmont responsible for the to the City West Development Corporation. The Corporation is to be is in progress redevelopment and disposal of this land. Master planning for the precinct Plan (No. 26), it is I and, in accordance with the City West Regional and Environmental conservation intended that the master plan will illustrate and explain proposals for heritage I and protection of archaeological relics. and Partners. The The master plan is being prepared by Philip Cox Richardson and Taylor Mackay, in New South Wales Property Services Group has commissioned Godden and heritage association with Howard Tanner and Associates, to prepare this archaeological I and heritage assessment as input to that study. A copy of the brief for the archaeological objectives: assessment is included as Appendix A. The brief identifies the following I that are already (a) to assess the significance of heritage items in the study area identified in the City West REP; area which I, (b) to identify any other items of heritage significance in the study contribute to the overall significance of Pyrmont; (c) to identify known or potential archaeological sites; I achieve heritage (d) to outline policies and procedures which should be adopted to the overall conservation and protection of archaeological relics, having regard to the study I intention of the City West REP and the master plan being developed for area.
2.2 Study Area I 2.1. This area is The study area is the Pyrmont Point precinct which is shown in figure the west by Harris bounded to the north-east, north and north-west by wharves 19-25, to although it also Street, to the south by John Street and to the south-east by Jones Bay Road, I a railway cutting includes a small portion of land at the south-western corner bounded by I and the eastwood extension ofJohn Street. I 5 I I I GODDEN MACKAY I I I 2.3 Author Identification Mackay staff and This report has been prepared by a multi-disciplinary team of Godden Historical research, sub-consultants, in association with Roward Tanner and Associates. Tony Brassil, assisted I field survey and preparation of the inventory has been undertaken by was completed by by Roward Tanner and Megan lones. Additional historical research was prepared by Deborah Edward. The analysis of the built environment and landscape by Tony Brassil and I Roward Tanner. The archaeological field survey was undertaken itself, including Richard Mackay, wp.o prepared the archaeological assessment. The report has been prepared recommendations regarding conservation and management of heritage, I by Richard Mackay and reviewed by all members of the study team.
2.4 Methodology I In addition to overall This report has been undertaken in accordance with the study brief. primary research was contextual historical research, based largely on secondary sources, maps indicating the undertaken in order to obtain an adequate selection of early I sites over time. All development of the area and specific use of potential archaeological overall approach to places were inspected by at least two members of the study team. The Australia ICOMOS the study follows the methodology implicit in the Burra Charter of and understood I which requires that the significance of a place is researched, documented a copy of the Burra prior to management decisions being made. For ease of reference Charter and its associated guidelines are included as Appendix B. I developed as part of The significance assessment has been undertaken using criteria recently Project. An extract the New South Wales Department of Planning State Reritage Inventory of these criteria is from the relevant report, providing additional background to the use I included at Appendix C. I 2.5 Umitations constraints, relative The report has not been unduly constrained by any timing or budgetary that, apart from to its purpose and the questions being asked. It must be emphasised I detailed site-specific analysis of historic graphics used in archaeological assessment, no research, it is historical research has been undertaken. As is always the case with historical not prsented in this possible that further investigation will reveal relevant information I report. I I I
6 I ------__L I
I ~~ I ~ I· ,I. ~ DARLING 15LANC 'I~ I 1
I
I 7 ------I ------I
GODDEN I MACKAY I I 3.0 HISTORIC CONTEXT I 3.1 The Development of pyrmont The area of Ultimo and Pyrmont developed early in the history of Sydney's growth and attracted commercial and industrial activities with the expansion of colonial Sydney. By 1850 there were 103 commercial enterprises; including a shipyard and quarries. It was I these industrial activities, combined with flourmilling and other light industries, and the general development of mercantile wharfage, for overseas and coastal shipping at Pyrmont, Darling Harbour, Glebe Island, and elsewhere in Cockle Bay, that was mainly responsible I for the high population density of the inner western suburbs.
In 1855 an incorporated company was permitted by Act of Parliament to build a wooden "; bridge across Darling Harbour from Market Street to Pyrmont. The Act of Parliament stipulated that the bridge should have a movable panel "capable of admitting vessels to pass and repass through it". The bridge, which opened in 1858, connecting Pyrmont directly I with the City, linked the rural northwest to the city proper and with Glebe Island, Iron Cove, Gladesville and Figtree bridges and Victoria Road became known as "the Five Bridge Road" The first Pyrmont Bridge was replaced in 1902 by the present structure of I the same name. The modem development at Pyrmont began in 1891, with the building of coal jetties along the shore of the peninsula on the seaward side of the Pyrmont Bridge. The lower harbour, I eastward of the Harbour Bridge, has residential suburbs along its shores whilst the upper harbour, westward of the Bridge, is chiefly industrial and commercial along its southern shore. One reason for the different character east and west of the Harbour Bridge is railway I access, a distinct advantage for the bulk handling of export cargoes such as wheat and wool, which come from the inland, and of coal, sugar and timber, whether imported or exported.
I As the City of Sydney, in the limited municipal definition, is on the southern side of the Harbour, all the railroads from the west and south, and even from the north via the Meadowbank Bridge, were built to converge on the rail terminus established at Redfern I during the 1850s. From there, and from other points on the trunk line, branch lines serve Pyrmont, Rozelle, Glebe Island, and White Bay, with marshalling yards and facilities for I delivering trains of good wagons alongside vessels berthed at wharves. The first significant use of electricity in New South Wales was in 1863 and in 1904 the I Sydney Electric Ughting Station at Pyrmont was opened as a major facility. On the western side of the Pyrmont Peninsula is Johnston's Bay, where the principal water frontage is occupied by the large buildings of the C.S.R. sugar refinery, established there in 1878. Bulk sugar is brought to Pyrmont by sea, chiefly from Queensland and from the I northern parts of New South Wales. I I 8 I I I GODDEN MACKAY I I
largely for the During the 1939-45 war the cargo wharves at Pyrmont were used I shipment of large embarkation of troops going overseas on active service, and also for the passenger shipping quantities of war materials. Mter the war had ended, the first modem terminal in Australia was developed at Berth No. 13 Pyrmont. I and blocks of self The residential element of Pyrmont consists largely of terraced houses buildings. contained flats or home units scattered among bulky industrial and commercial located in the Inner I Traditionally, these have been the homes of those working in industry impressive City and Harbour areas. There are also some older houses and occasional built before 1890. Edwardian terraces in Pyrmont Bridge Road. Most of the houses were I
3.2 1788 ·1840 Early Settlement and the Macarthurs end of a broad The Pyrmont Point Precinct known as Pyrmont encompasses the northern I west of the peninsula on the western side of Darling Harbour and it is the first peninsula is the subject of promontory on which the city of Sydney was established. The area which the northern most this report is the north-eastern corner of the peninsula and includes I extremity, Pyrmont Point. Acting Governor This area is wholly contained within an early land grant, made by Jones. As was I Paterson on 14th March, 1795 to a soldier in the 102nd Regiment, Thomas to occupy the typical of such land grants to soldiers, Jones appears to have made no attempt 17%. Eleven land and sold it for ten pounds to his sergeant, Obadiah Ilkin in August, John Macarthur, months later, Ilkin sold it for a similar amount to his regimental captain, I Jones, having already well established as a landowner, merchant and administrator. Thomas of the murder of a given his name to Jones Bay, was, in 1799, arrested and convicted clergyman, Samuel Ash Clode and was subsequently hung.! I of the N.S.W. John Macarthur was a prominent and influential figure in the early history Bay, as Darling colony and was one of its largest land holders. The property at Cockle I fifty-five acres and Harbour was then known, was a relatively small acquisition, a mere significant degree. does not appear to have figured in the activities ofJohn Macarthur to any Sydney Gazette on The only recorded visit of Macarthur to this property is described in the I 21.12.1806: exclusive On Thursday a select party ofLadies and Gentlemen, twenty-one in umber, I ofattendonts, made an aquatic excursion from Parramatta to Captain Macarthur's a estate in Cockle Bay, being highly favoured by the uninterrupted serenity of the salubrious atmosphere; and after examining with inexpressible satisfaction I picturesque beauties which that romantic scene afforded, a handsome collation whose ushered in the evening's festivity, beneath the shelter ofa spreading fig tree, one of waving foliage whispered to refreshing breezes. To this enviable retirement, estate the fair visitors was pleased to give the appellation fIle Repos de I' Amite"; the I of"Pyrmount" (sic), from its pure and receiving at the same time the name I
9 I I I I GODDEN I MACKAY I
the uncontaminated spring, joined to the native beauties ofthe place; ofwhich I ofthe day.2 company took leave atfive, much gratified with the rational festivities to the mineral The name "Pyrmont" (Pyrmount or Piermont) appears to be a reference I in this period. springs at Pyrmont in Germany, well regarded for their restorative properties in the Sydney Gazette One other reference may also refer to this property, an advertisement that any persons found I of the 17th November, 1805, wherein a Mr McArthur "gives notice the Barracks" will be cutting and taking wood from his farm at "Blank Cove, opposite I prosecuted) to the Whilst there remains no record of the Macarthurs effecting any improvements ground of Pyrmont Pyrmont estate, it is known that a windmill was present on the high those Views of I Point, visible in a Joseph Lycett's 1824-25 Views in Australia, particularly Taylor's Panorama of Sydney From the North and From the Ughthouse, and in Major shown marked on the Sydney, painted from near the present Observatory in 1823. It is also of this mill, save its 1822 Plan of the Town and Suburbs of Sydney. Uttle is known I Selfe, writing at location, attributed to the later site of St Bartholemews Church. Norman by one of the the turn of the century, suggested that it was probably built and operated I Macarthur family4 advertisement from The Sydney Gazette of Sunday, 5th November, 1809, carries an which states: I Garnham Blaxcell, a prominent merchant, ship owner and magist!1lte, FIFTYPOUNDS STERLING REWARD morning, Mr. I Whereas on the night ofWednesday the 1stInstant, or early on Thursday Canvas Bags, Blaxcell's Windmill at Pynnont was broke into, and robbed ofSeven the trace of the containing Fifteen Bushells of Wheat, or thereabouts; which, from Bay. Ifany Footsteps, appears to have been taken away in some Boat opposite Cockle I so they can be Person or Persons will give information of the above Offenders, Reward of Fifty brought to Justice they shall receive, upon Conviction, the above I Pounds Sterling.
G. Blaxcell.5 I abandoned by the It is likely that this windmill, like most others in Sydney, had been in the city.6 It fails 1830s, by which time there were four steam-driven flour-mills operating to Mill Street, in its to be mentioned in the later subdivision, although giving a name I vicinity. John Macarthur, the Whilst the Thomas Jones grant remained intact in the hands of (24 acres on the 10th I contemporary grants elsewhere on the peninsula to John Malone 1894) appear December, 1794) and William Mitchell (18 acres, also on the 10th December, Harris had received 34 I to have lapsed or have been purchased by Surgeon John Harris. John
I 10 I I· I GODDEN MACKAY I I
of 12 3/4 acres in acres in 1803, with a further 144 acres in 1806, with a small addition the whole of I 1818. On these lands he established the Ultimo Estate, which encompassed this peninsula except Macarthur's Pyrmont Estate.? I 3.3 Subdivision, Settlement and Community (1840 -1910) resident in In 1836, subsequent to the death of John Macarthur, Edward Macarthur, A plan showing 102 England, organised for the subdivision and sale of the Pyrmont Estate. I was drawn up.8 blocks, with reservations for recreation, a church, a wharf and a fortification showing fifty-nine This plan was not acted upon and a second plan was drawn up in 1839, leases and other blocks. Auctions were held in December 1839 and June, 1940 and, with I sold or leased by purchases, most lots south of John Street and some to the north had been 186Os. 1843, with sales of individual allotments continuing into the 1850s and reasonable access, I The area saw two forms of development. Along the waterfrontages with established, whilst industry in the from of shipbuilding, timber yards and ironworks were housing. Waterfront the higher land around the ridges was generally utilised for residential and a number of I development was characterised by foreshore reclamation and timber jetties Steam Navigation large industries were established in the area, notably the Junter River established in 1846 Company's Shipyard, later the Australian Steam Navigation Company, Thomas Chowne I on Darling Island and expanded greatly by levelling the island in 1854. the 1840s. Charles and J.W. Russell were prominent shipbuilders, both established in Fife) established an Saunders established the Pyrmont Quarries in 1853 and John Fyfe (or Harbour was iron foundry in 1855 in Pyrmont. A ferry service operating across Darling I Street, Pyrmont. established during the 1840s, serving a wharf at the eastern end ofJohn Pyrmont Point Whilst these developments were underway around Pyrmont, the area around I area, was also the (then known as Macarthur's Point), which was the highest and steepest and the slowest to develop. Its topography was less suited to commercial development early 1870s, though major expansion in this area was for residences in the late 18608 and in the area was the I there were scattered houses from the 1850s. The most notable building August, 1849 and St Bartholomew's Anglican Church, its foundation stone laid in and its position completed the next year. It occupied the highest point of the peninsula accompanied by I generally matched that of the windmill of the 1820s. The church was soon subdivision and in a school hall and rectory. The land was donated by Macarthur in the on the grounds 1842, he refused a request for a land donation to the Presbyterian Church 0 I that he had already given land for the Anglican church.1 I I I
11 I I I I
GODDEN I MACKAY I
I By the end of the 1870s, Pyrmont Point's development matched that of the area south of John Street, with small scale residential housing on the ridges and some industry grouped on the foreshore. Michael Matthews, quoting the Sands Directory of 1875, gives the I occupations of a number of residents of Pyrmont Point. This list is reproduced below: I Sands Directory 1875 111 Bowman Street, John 01Toole. I 113 Bowman Street, James Cambridge, iron roller. 115 Bowman Street, Wilson, engineer.
I 14 Harris Street, Alexander Faser, fruiter. I 50 Harris Street, Henry Piper, grocer. 53 Point Street, Francisco Mazitiell, master mariner. I 55 Point Street, William J Pinkerton, tobacco twister.
57 Point Street, James Morrison, engineer.
I 59 Point Street, William Cooper, master mariner. I 61 Point Street, Thomas Hodfield, shipwright. 63 Point Street, William B. Simpson, joiner.
I 65 Point Street, William Kermode, carpenter. I 67 Point Street, Robert McDonald, blacksmith.ll Matthews also states that No. 50 Harris Street was built in 1872, used as a grocers shop, No's 46 and 48 Harris Street plus 1-5 Cross Street and 2-6 Scott Street date from 1878 and I the Pyrmont Arms Hotel and No. 52 Harris St. from 1879.12 Other sources indicate that No's 109 - 115 Bowman Street (demolished) dated from circa 1866, 117-119 Bowmand Street "(Demolished)" from 1875, 8 Scott Street from 1894 and I terraces 115-125 Point Street (demolished) from the 18708.13 Matthews also indicates that this area had four hotels, of which three survive, though only one retains its licence and ll function, the "Royal Pacificll on the corner of Hams and John Streets. The "Pyrmont Arms I now contains professional offices, 11 Caledonian", on the corner of Point and Herbert Streets, 4 is now a residence and the IIGreentreell was demolished for the railway cutting in 1916.1 I I 12 I - I I GODDEN MACKAY I I
the tip of Pyrmont In 1875, the Pyrmont Public Baths were opened in a timber enclosure on I end of Point Street Point. They were accessed by stairs down the escarpment at the north time, the ferry wharf and were a major social and sporting centre for the region. Around this Point wharf. This was relocated to a jetty adjacent to the baths, known as the Pyrmont I place on the route to service was operated from the 1870s by Mathew Byrnes as a stopping Co-operative Ferry Rozelle, Glebe and Annandale, being taken over by the Annandale opening of the tram Company in 1897 but closing down in 1901,15 co-incidental with the I route along Harris Street to Pyrmont Point terminating at John Street. Sugar Refining Also in 1875, construction commenced on a refinery for the Colonial from modest I Company, sited on the former shipyard of Thomas Chownes. This industry, the 1980s it owned beginnings, expanded enormously in the early twentieth century and by Saunder's Quarry much of Pyrmont and Ultimo west of Harris Street, as far south as the near Miller St. I Maitland Brewing By the turn of the century, Pyrmont Point was fully developed with the and Iron SHIP Company, the Wallorah Coal Company and the William Grant, Engineers I the Pyrmont Baths, Builders, works occupying the foreshores on the east of the point, with hosting a variety rebuilt in 1901, on the tip of the point. The western side of the point, from into an extensive of small waterfront industries, had been largely consolidated by this time I wharf and depot for the Goodlet and Smith timber company_ I 3.4 Reconstructing the Point: Port Wharfage (1910 -1970) Wharves 7 to 18 In 1910, the Sydney Harbour Trust, under whose direction the Pyrmont Walsh Bay, had already been rebuilt and redevelopment of wharfage in Darling Harbour, of wharf Sydney Cove and Woolloomoolooo Bay was underway, proposed a continuation I on March 29, 1911 reconstruction into Jones Bay. The necessary resumptions were enacted April 26, 1911. The and vested in the Commissioners for the Sydney Harbour Trust in Annual Report for June 30, 1911, states: I decided to In order to provide extra berthsfor overseas vessels, the Commissioners for this construct two extensivepiers in Jones Bay, west ofDarling Island, and I Baths has purpose the frontage from the Naval Victualling Stores to the Pyrmont with double been resumed. The plans which providefor 5 large berths, together and the workofrock decked sheds, railway connection and etc are nearly completed, I 16 excavation has been commenced. for wharves 19-23 The construction of these wharves was carried on from 1911 till 1919 side was quarried to I and the roadways were completed in 1920. The cliff face on the eastern A short section the alignment of Mill Street, and the spoil used for waterfront reclamation. of six floors with north of Bayview Street was indented and a refrigerated cold store enabling top floor I conveyor connection to both wharves was erected, the indentation foreshore roadways to connections to Point Street. Rail line connections were laid along the in 1916, wharves 19-22 and this work coincided with the Railways Department, I
13 I I I I GODDEN I MACKAY I
Bay Goods Yard I construction westwards through Wentworth Park and Glebe to the White at Ulyfield. new work was From 1920, these wharves were in operation as port wharfage. Uttle I clear that intention undertaken by the Sydney Harbour Trust from this time, although it was Bay when time remained to continue the foreshore wharfage around the Point into Elizabeth resumption of the and funding permitted. In 1929, the Sydney Harbour Trust announced the I causing extensive Pyrmont Baths, and a heavy dredge was tied up to its superstructure, and the Baths were damage. Local opposition to the loss of the Baths saw the plan deferred Amateur Swimming reconstructed by the local residents in 1930. In 1939, the Pyrmont I Services Board, Club moved its headquarters to Drummoyne and in 1945, the Maritime the structure1? The successor to the Sydney Harbour Trust from 1936, demolished the Point, to meet excavation of the cliff face for a foreshore roadway was continued around in this work, which I up with the wharfage in Elizabeth Bay. Berth's 24 and 25 were created 2418. During the was largely complete by 1949. In 1955, a cargo shed was erected on Berth Bay waterfrontage 1960s and 1970s, the M.S.B. gradually acquired control of the Elizabeth had also acquired I and lones Bay Road was connected to Hams Street. By 1980, the M.S.B. Streets, though the the terrace housing site along Point Street, north of Herbert and Bayview it was proposed to houses had been demolished in the late 1960s and 1970s, at a time when residential. I allow commercial and industrial development to take pre-eminence over buildings have been From the turn of the century until the present, no new residential City Council erected in Pyrmont Point with one notable exception, In 1916, the Sydney I St. Bartholomew's acquired the land fronting Point Street between Bayview Street and Parsonage. These Church, including the land occupied by the Schoolhouse and the of the buildings were removed and, following the completion of the reconstruction I Professor waterfront by the Sydney Harbour Trust in 1920, the City Council commissioned IIWays Terracell was Leslie Wilkinson to design a complex for working class housing. The award for public I designed in 1923 and opened in 1925 and it won a Council sponsored housing design in that year.l9
I 3.5 Der~lict, Demolished, Developed (1970 - 1992) redevelopment of Since thf 1970s, a variety of proposals have been put forward for the excepting the Pyrmobt, ranging from almost totally industrial and commercial (generally I Way~herrace) to predominantly public housing under the control of the State Government. Bowman Street WitH the exception of the Ways Terrace, and the terraces at 128-140 by squatters. A ren/aining nineteenth century houses are generally either vacant or occupied venture with the I pa,ttlcular plan, the Pyrmont Point Housing Project, was originally a joint 20 longer to proceed as City Council and the N.S.W. State Land Commission , but is now no with (in spirit) a Government project and will, under current proposals, will be proceeded developers. I through a co-operative liaison between the State Government and private I
I 14 I I I
GODDEN MACKAY I I
since the 1970s, I Whilst the Jones Bay Port Wharfage has remained stagnant and little used with their unique two significant changes occurred during the 1980s. Berths 22 and 23, and the sheds triangular jetty sheds, were appropriated for the site of the Sydney Heliport was closed due to I were demolished. This facility operated for only a few months before it by the helicopter residents in nearby Balmain complaining of the noise generated Also in the early operations.21 The cleared jetty has been used for storage since this time. the N.S.W. Water 1980s, as part of the redevelopment of the western side to Sydney Cove, I Bay. Virtually Police base was moved form Campbells Cove to the eastern side ofElizabeth occupy a number all existing buildings and structures were removed and the Water Police of demountable offices and sheds located around the site. I completed road The only other material change to Pyrmont Point has been the recently Streets. This is a bridge over the railway cutting, linking Point Street and Pyrmont I a considerable precursor to the impending redevelopment of the area and has produced for the future amount of excavation in its vicinity. It's provision is considered necessary traffic requirements consequent upon the redevelopment. I
Notes History Project, I 1. Matthews, M. R., Pyrmont and Ultimo -A History Pyrmont Ultimo 1982, p7. 21, 1806, 2. The Sydney Gazette and New South Wales Advertise, Sunday, December I Facsimile Edition, Angus and Robertson Ltd, Sydney, 1968. 3. ibid, Sunday November 17,1805. I 4. Fox, Len, Old Sydney Windmills, L. Fox, Sydney, 1978, pp33-35. November 5, 1809, 5. The Sydney Gazette and New South Wales Advertiser, Sunday, Facsimile Edition, Angus and Robertson Ltd, Sydney, 1968. I 6. Fox, Len, op.cit p.35. 7. Matthews, M. R., op cit. p9-13. I 1978. 8. Kelly, M & Crocker, R. Sydney Takes Shaped, Doak Press, Sydney Anglin Associates 9. Ashton, P. PyrmontlUltimo Heritage Study - Thematic History, I for the Sydney City Council/Dept of Planning, 1989. 10. Matthews, M. R. op cit p35-39. 11. ibid p28. I 12. ibid p27. 13. National Trust ofAustralia (NSW) - Usting Cards. I 14. Matthews, op cit. p32. 1984. 15. Prescott, A M. Sydney Ferry Fleets, Ronald H. Parsons, Magill, S.A I I 15 L I I I GODDEN I MACKAY I
I 16. Annual Report of the Commissioners for the Sydney Harbour Trust, June, 30, 1911, NSW. Government, cited in Bartes B. Fraser, S, Wharves 19, 20 & 21 Pyrmont, Undergraduates Thesis, School of Architecture, University of NSW, 1989. I 17. Matthews op cit p. 87-89. 18. Ashton op cit p38. I 19. National Trust of Australia (NSW) - listing Card "Ways Terrace", 1983. 20. Planning Workshop - Ultimo - Pyrmont Peninsula and Environs Study, Dept. of I Planning, NSW, 1985 p103. 21. National Trust of Australia (NSW) Heritage Study of 19th and Early 20th Century Trading Wharves in Sydney Harbour, The National Trust of Australia (NSW), 1989, I p34, 40. I I I I I I I I I I
I 16 I I I
,
'I' ''''''-..~ IJiIo .. ,.~)i:':I:....
. t..MaJ.JrJ/'sr
" ~ I - .,' I I I . _ l' REFERENC S I_~"r' I~~ •. I-:J...... t~ .~".J'+.,..~ ". 'II:r-4.- ,~'r .fts..k~~ a~'~ .~~~"'I!-:_" , )J-"...,.,(~ " "'--'~ "~'Mo{ "~kJ..,.q,t; ~'.6IW~ I •~~ ":Pt .. '---~ "'~f'~: ,.~ ,...... , .. ,,1~"",,(~) ,,~ tl~ ,,4-;J..~ ..t..J;ft-.I ,~.~,,~~ 11 t---L"--' .. ':-<'''-d:.~ "_,,..~A.I[, , A'.tIL-VjI.,Jrp, "..uJ.., ~ "~_~ lI~~' ",,~,.IJ-t,.t..tJ~ , J-I.t.J4.- •" f&-.t L I I s~ \.~A c/V..0 3 z;~~ ,I· ~ I', I:,II I '. i.i 'I' j ! I i I I' I I '1 .I Ir ,.I.•\ .. ., I .1 . I . +. . "",r' I i 1. '." ;\." 1I' =" , r. .J. I I ! ,i '.1 •! i .r·! l . i ,I . .J 'i I I I j ,I ---to - .. _-_..... i l.t ! 0.; ... I i I,' I IJ='{J.~ , I i : -' i ' . I ., ·r. I I 'l ,i ., I ~ I . "\J' . ", I : ,..,,; i I I I .. t .,.; I --'... ';' "!;f .f i . ~ ,I '-'-=" I ~ !,~. '. \ ,..... ':;,; \ r.' /. I I, i I , . '·1 , j' I ~ ••••• _._--:-_... -• j. j. I ::. ( ./ "i I , ~C'.!'." . ~ , .. ! .1, ! . i·· --,_Y...... ,.. c"--- Figure 3.2 Plan of 55 Acres of land belonging to John Maearthur, Blq, divided into allotments of about 2 Acres each. Believed to date from 1832, this plan shows a subdivision proposed during John Maearthur's lifetime. It was not proceeded with (Archives Office of NSW). 18 I: I, ,.1 [j rd j' J if) 1.:<: / I ,' , ' i' \" , ~ ~ ~. \ \ ~ '1;, , ' :r . , . . .'i'\;1 1\.. t ..; " I. • ~ . ------~ ~ ':';i-:, I ~, '~' ~ ~ ~ ~;,';~ ~. 1,,",~,,;::-~,'h;~~ ~ fIl,.,~.tf),J] ,~~"" ~ ...... ;>""~~, ~ ,- i ~ ~~~. /~ 'I ~ " .... l' "I ~:>--f" ' ... ~' ...... " .' ,",e~..f _., ,."'~'" ~,~,.;;,,,,,,1<. ~},,""""____ ,...I" ~ ...~ .. ,~ .~...." ,. ~~~~u~_.~.:,.~,r~-"----"·----r---- ~'~~ . ~.,": .=-~~",1?" ~ o--~"":~·"-c~~.'~a1~~'.~~.. ~ .... , i ';:if: I; ~ ~,,'" '. 1--- .j- (~ "", ~~ ~,,,., "- .',0' ~.~.~. A.:'~i:' ~_'''''''I\l1.\..... I. '''. . ~ ., ,,:, , ,., " •. ~"., ~~.~ ~,~.:' ~ '~_~'",.~ .. @. .. .. "." ; Jo .=--""._.;" "- ...\J.l ~ .. \.. I- ~,,4 ~ ,,::"';. " ,,' I .' ;; ~ ~ .. (~ ~ "H ~ .'" ," '\l'\l'li .~ ~ ~ ~ 'A'<;.'i ./l ~ ~ ~ 'z ". " ~ ~ ~(). ~t',{!' ~.::J ' " ".;: ~" ~. '~,';:i" rA. ,A... "I t<: ~,~ ~ ~ ~ I \ '!"/: p, ." ,. 4:." a 1.\..,"..:: " "i l~V~".)W. . .,.•.\ ' , .... , ..\. ~'.....)~ "'~L:·;rl\o: I, / .. ,"" '.. --'.7:'":' -- ... \ .; ;,': "': I ':, " f::.)'~;:. '~ "r' ""\ .,. ~~:~~:~. I' ~ " ' ," . ~. . I , 'f' ';, ': . ;:'.. " I ~;~~5r':.:" , .;'':T~·~ I" 'I~'l~~l-';~ "'"1;~~~} ',l". ,.. ". .,~ ., '.' : ,', ... ,~ I r ~ . '~"IH-":.i:.".; ~," . ..:rp..r;r ~ \;~~ .;>: I .:::>. V::i~::·?~:~:/f: "'<:" <-::' ,. '; ,! '~~::l-:' 00:., ", ,'<." , .,: , '\ .. ' ~ ••••• f ". '7' ~ .~~:. I ._':' .:..,..... J:::L • ",: ..: ' "'.' \. r ./.. .""-M: . :" "< I ,~1;;~;tf',;~ > .':w. '/) I ~!-~~<:t; ,_ . ,, ~ ~.\ ', ~'j"1:';",r'''; ~'ti ~ ~ , 'I-~:" ;':V \\ .. ~ ",'.'..... ,.. I /,;.J ~ ~ .:.;;. ",'l~:y,,::~:,,; ", \.)' , ~ ~ , J' '',\ \ 10...~ , .• " '(, , ,.,:,,';'::~;'f~';::- ~.~. , ...... ~\J'i N ~ \" ",·r,,· "",1', ~ ~ Q' .' I.'.· I ~l;j .~ . ~~ .' '."',..; J ~ ~ ::~;. 4~ ." ~ ~. ~:. .'~' I Figure 3A Plan of Pyrmont Estate as divided1:\ into Building Allotments'.." for Sale by Auction by Mr Smart. This 1839 plan shows the first portion of the estate (south of John Street) offered for sale. This portion had the choice waterfront sites around Pyrmont Bay, which were quickly sold. (Mitchell Library). 'I 'I 20 I ~ \:::ji ,.-t.~1 ,·",'00 f;~.~ ~ .:::<\~IF«', '...-1 ~ ~ " ,! '...... ~)~ -<.~',' tl'1 >-., • ::;.... ' .• ...q)~,;.;... . ~ vI ~' >;,~r1'f\\ 8 , C'.I "'" 'gllJ oH fFa ~~W~p:{~ ~ ~',~'~ ~ 11 ....., ~r:; ~~ ~~ ~ ~ I::lt-;~~~ < <;::)'~~~~2 ~ '> c ~ " N, " (OJUJ. if) ~ ~ -~. ~ . '1 "l ~ '.J ~\ "'J?>!il~8 l o...~tt~ ~ .'=J ~ ~ \~i'?" ") ~. 'V" "-~ , ,,,, ~ <::::>'"' ~ \R.. ,,; 1~ , ~ ~ (, ~ '~r-==:' ~ '•. ..i ~ ~" ""~ ~ It ,i , tl-v' ,<, y~" Figure 3.5 Plan for 58 Allotments being the Second Portion of the Pyrmont Estate to be sold by Auction by Mr Smart on Monday, June the 29th, 1840. The remainder of the estate was offered for sale but was much slower to sell than the first portion. Many lots appear to have been purchased for speculative purposes and were not developed till the 18705. (Milchell Library). 21 .~~... ~ ~ /j ~ v l' i" '-I- I ,,( . o ,)~ "'.,..:,.. J: '" ! j I ! - ,r,,, \ JI~ l} :~l Figure 3.6 Map of the City of Sydney, Will'm Henry Wells, Land Surveyor. This map, produced for the first elected City Council in 1843, shows waterfront occupation of within the Study Area but no development elsewhere. (Mitchell Library). 22 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Figure 3.7 Woolcott and Clarke's Map of the City of Sydney, 1854. This map shows the waterfront I development present in the previous figure (Figure 7) with a wharf constructed into Elizabeth (now "Jones") Bay. Residential development has occurred between Church and John Streets and St Bartholomew's Church has been erected. (Mitchell Library). I I 23 I Figure 3.8 Plan Showing Proposed Improvements at Darling Island and Glebe Island; 1891. This plan shows proposed railway extensions and wharf reconstruction around Pyrmont and Jones Bays. The Study Area is I near fully developed for residential and commercial/industrial purposes. (Archives Office of NSW). I 24 I .... .\ .~ -; :.~ ,.-- ~~ -::. .~ ,-5 :'1., .~ -. ~:: ;' \ " ... ------I ..:::::.~ ~__l..JI,;~_~T_--=__:~:..._-.:~:- ~~__T__A_~':-'__~_.._.. __~.~~~.~.~~ Figure 3.9b Plan of the Pyrmont Estate, Perish of St. Andrews, City ofSydney, 1st tv"...ay, 1892. Sheet 2. A detailed plan of the Study Area, showing buildings, structures, land title information and waterfront I reclamations. (Archives Office of NSW). I 26 I ---- I ,..··.. ··0' : ~ .... )~:.:.:. '. ,:.,' . I I I I I I I I I I I I I I \" I , '" I Figure 3.10 Sydney Harbour Trust - Birds Eye View of General Wharfage Scheme West ofDawes Point as it I will appear when completed, 1914. This perspective was prepared as planning was completed for the construction of Wharves 19-23. Plans for areas west of Wharf 23 were largely dispensed with. (Mitchell Library). I 27 I I· I " \ ' \\ I \ \ \ I \\ .~. \I \\ \\ 'I. ,'.•••••• : I '1..\,.- , •• ---;. , I I --- Huo'ri: I I I ) I/ I / / / I I • l.ho-. I I I I I I Figure 3.11 Sydney Harbour Trust - Port Wharfage, 1919. The detail section of this plan shows the I wharfage nearing completion in lones Bay, with rail sidings and road works under construction. 28 I I I ~N~~\~\'~~~r.~- "/l '''''.~~ .1:~.~' :\ll'.!-~;,'. .H ~~:.,~~:~ .. '/ 1';_,..jl' '(,~,\~,.~'¥,. :- :.::Jf1j,~i "~"~:QI .~:-ti!~~W,;~~7. Or "', ~j,,~.~~...... ' . ~~.ifJ.' . ,:. I t..,;" :..... v •• r ..1.: ("'~'.::; ." .' ":'. "'; h'd~'. ' i., .9-\" . J;"( ~ ;~ ~., '~i'~ r" "1(. \ I:: '0 'to ~,' ~! .'..~:..A.Y.t.t: 1/'i' I ~~~~~... ./ ' l: ·:;:~:::~~..:~::.{~;~\:j:H{~1: . 1,-,~:;i:iY.41"···.... . '("-f, ~: " > ( • .,,:? ~. I u .. ~. c:. ~ : I ;j/ \}>-.;.:"..:~.:~~~ Vf' ~ , t~ I ',Itl·~i~ • ~'li1' I ~~-:.!~.:t" _... f \. ( ~ I c:. Y'-,: I I I I I I I I I I I I 29 I 1I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ·1 I I Figure 3.13 Pyrmont Point c. 1950. This photograph shows the area around the Point following the removal of the Pyrmont Baths. The Watel'Side Cold Stores arc completed but the demolition of Point Street Terrace I housing has not yet begun. I 30 I I I GODDEN I MACKAY I I 4.0 LANDSCAPE The landscape character of the Pyrmont Point Precinct is very distinctive, and contributory I to Sydney Harbuor and views from the city. While the bushland that once covered this peninsula has long gone, the rocky framework of the landscape remains apparent though, adapted between 1870 and 1930 into a series of terraces, or in more basic terms, as a series I of rock cuttings, retaining walls (and fences) and platforms..The profound and vigorous character of the lones Bay Road as provided by its western walls and railings, and enhanced by the fine elevated rivetted bridge linking wharves 19-21 to Bayview Street, is of great I scenic importance, in certain terms comparable with Hickson Road at Walsh Bay. On a lesser, more subtle scale are the dividing walls of Cross/Bowman Streets, and the terrace or embankment wall and railing to the east of wayts Terrace. There is another major wall and I cliff-face in parallel to the M.S.B. roadway adjacent to Wharf 25. The existing land modelling of this precinct, in particular the cliff faces and walls and fences are highly distinctive features, evocative ofVictorian and Edwardian Landscapes and I str~tseapes. The scale and vigour of the larger retaining walls, topped by characteristic iron railings (and gates, at Bayview Street) convey both history and pro forma visual interest. Existing buildings generally follow the topography, and thus reinforce the form of I the landscape. The major railway cutting, while of industrial interest, is not contributory to the general I landscape, but is a prominent local feature. Most of the precinct is bereft of trees and shrubs, there is the odd palm tree. Regeneration I of the planted landscape is required. Original kerbing, where found, indicates the historical context of street alignments and is a I significant streetscape element. Three types of kerbing occur in Pyrmont Point, sandstone, trachyte and concrete. Sandstone occurs only on the original alignments of those streets with the longest period of occupancy; trachyte was popular from around the turn of the I century and concrete has been used almost exclusively from the 19308. In a landscape such as Pyrmont, the earlier kerbing types provide evidence of historic development and are an effective, low-key form of illustrating the layers of development in I the area. I I I I. 31 \1 I I ---- I I I I I I /I I I I \EI:3 OIQJ . I ~'.,.,.. . ,.: ------I ...... --- .' . ' .. .~.-...... ------. " /"'------. ------::::----..---. I - ...... )\\) ~ ~.;;~- ';~:OSTONE I J\ n r-l \ ilt 1 . I I\ =a , e---- l \ .10' *", TRACHYTE - ....,- I I F'19ure 4.1 Location of kerbing types. I I 32 _I J I I I I I 5.0 BUILT ENVIRONMENT The specific area of this study, Pyrmont Point is a prominent piece of land form, clearly I visible from the city of Sydney. An air photo of this area taken in 1945 shows a dense combination of housing, warehousing (including the cold stores), industry and port facilities. The latter involved consideration cutting into the natural rock face, with resulting I cliffs and retaining walls, and level areas related to the wharves. More than half the housing shown in the photograph has been demolished, and some of the surviving cottages and terraces are in poor condition. A major warehouse at the end of Harris Street and a fine I Blacket-designed Anglican Church (1849-1970) in Church Street no longer exist. The original Anglican rectory was purchased by the City Council in 1916 and demolished to make way for Way's Terrace, an architecturally significant block of 'workers housing' 'I designed in 1923 by Professor Leslie Wilkinson, a leading architect A proponent of Mediterranean style architecture Wilkinson advocated 'Aspect not Prospect' and designed a highly pictorial and economical building (comprising 41 flats), enhanced by shutters, and ,I pergola'd balconies framing views to the harbour and the city. Apparently Wilkinson undertook plans for a second, similar building, to be located in parallel with the present structure - this was never realised. I This site is close to wharves 19-21, a very fine structure (known as Jones Bay wharf) built at a time when the Sydney Harbour Trust was seeking to confirm Sydney Harbour as the I 'fifth port of the Empire'. Jones Bay Wharf is an excellent example of the wharf development that occurred in Sydney in the early decades of the 20th century. It illustrates in many ways the change from the I "venacular'l wharfage of the previous century to formally engineered structures. The Sydney Harbour Trust was formed in 1901 to rationalise and control the development of the port and was dominated by the engineering profession who were responsible for planning, I as well as design and construction. The use of finger wharves was a continued on a larger scale, and also co-ordinated with a new road system to serve the wharves, generally I requiring two levels ofroad for the two levels ofwharf. Jones Bay Wharf is typical of the construction of the period, but with some peculiar and notable features. Uke all the wharves of the period it was founded on timber hardwood piles with two levels of structure. The lower level in part follows the construction practice '1 of filled ground behind precast walls. These precast sea walls were a very early use of I reinforced concrete and were originally developed to provide rat-proof walling under I I I 33 I. I I GODDEN MACKAY I I wharves following the bubonic plague outbreak early in 1900. It was typically in all the I early twentieth century wharf construction. What is unusual about the lower level is the use of reinforced concrete to the apron outside the building. Norman Rich in "Sydney - from settlement to City" - says of this type of construction - I Reinforced concrete decks wereprovidedfor the first time atJ ones Bay Wharves (1917-1991), possibly because they were the first to carry rail trucks on their aprons. I As late as 1924, however ChiefEngineerAdams in reporting to the SHT after an extensive tour ofEuropean andNorth Americanports, considered that the use of reinforced concrete in wharfconstruction '" may be said to be still in its I experimental stage. The upper floors of the sheds are of the familiar timber flooring, but unusually the supporting structure is of structural steel. The form of construction is similar to the timber I framing of Walsh and Woolloomooloo Bays using parallel chord and bowstring trusses, but with structural steel instead of hardwood for most members. This period saw greatly increased use of structural steel following the opening of BHP Steelworks in Newcastle in I 1915. Again the aprons and central roadway are of concrete, continuing the unusual use of this type of construction. The original drawings proposed arch plates for the aprons but a later decision was made to use trussed girders and reinforced concrete. The latticed steel I columns of the lower storey and the rivered girders of the access bridge are very distinctive elements of this imposing structure. I Wharves 23 and 24 feature utilitarian architecture derivative of Sydney's port traditions. Wharf 22 used to feature distinctive 'Y'-plan single storey SHT sheds. These were demolished in the 19705. I Adjacent are the Waterside Cold Stores, which are of industrial interest, in particular the massive column and plate structure of reinforced concrete. I The other built elements of this area are diverse: handsome sandstone walls, trachyte steps and kerbs, iron railings; an Edwardian pub, the Pyrmont Arms Hotel, now converted in housing; and an imposing restored corner hotel (now a house), of four levels with a I cantilevered first floor balcony at the junction of Bowman and Herbert Streets. Adjacent are standard Victorian terraces. Interesting 'survivors' include the cottages fronting Scott Street, Harris and Cross Streets, forming a group. I Michael Matthews in his PynnontAnd Ultimo: A History describes them thus: I By the early 1870s brickhadreplace sandstone for the construction ofworking men's homes. One last surviving pocket ofthis simple, functional housing is in the area bounded by Harris, Cross, Scott andBowman Streets. It is lots 18, 19, 20 and21 of I the 1836 subdivision. They are now a residential island occupied by squatters and are in the centre ofthe proposed Council andState Government PyrmontPoint I I 34 L I I I GODDEN I MACKAY I I housingproject. Hopefully they can all be preserved as a window on the past in the new development. I The four lots were leasedfrom the Macarthur's on 1 July 1853 for 99 year,s at£120 pa. George Wigram AlIen acquired the lease in the following year. In the early 1870s mostofthe existing houses in the block were built. Number 50 Harris Street I was built in 1872 and used as a grocers shop; in 1878, 46 and48 Harris Street along with houses in Cross Street andyoungStreet (later renamed as ScottStreet) were erected. In 1879 the PyrmontArms Hotel was built and the shop on the corner I ofHarris andScott streets. In 1915 the hotel was sold to John Boylan" (and extensively remodelled). I I I I I I I I I I I I 35 I I I I I I 6.0 ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES I 6.1 Preamble The archaeological component of the study, though covering the same geographical area, covers a different aspect of the precinct's heritage. The archaeological resources relate to I the fabric and physical evidence of human activity within the study area including not only sub-surface remains but also buildings, structures, works and relics, all of which provide tangible evidence of the history of the place and an opportunity to examine that history I using the record provided in the fabric rather than documentary sources alone. While the evidence provided by standing structures and features is readily apparent, other important features may be concealed or buried and their significance is difficult to assess in a specific manner without detailed research or archaeological excavation. Assessment of the I archaeological resources of the area is therefore largely based on informed prediction and development of appropriate procedures for ensuring that any significant features are I adequately conserved. The archaeological resource of the Pyrmont Point Precinct includes a diverse set of elements. The most dominant physical evidence is the range of buildings and structures I which are individually listed as heritage items in Appendices D and E. In their existing fabric many of these items provide a record of construction history and use. Analysis of this fabric and configuration can therefore yield information which is not available from I documentary sources. Some of the elements of the study area, particularly the wharves, coldstores and railway features are, or were until recently, working precincts and their machinery and fabric remains in articulated operating configuration. As with the building I elements this material can provide evidence of activities undertaken which may be available from no other sources. The main archaeological features which are not otherwise listed in Appendices D and E are sub-surface structures and deposits. The precinct has potential for the presence of archaeological deposits. These occur in three major forms. Areas of I unstratified fill will occur abundantly, particularly at sites where land reclamation has been made around the waterfront Artefact scatters relating to single events or processes may also occur. Most significant are stratified accumulations'of cultural material in contexts I such as sub-floor deposits, wells or rubbish pits. These are likely to be encountered in former residential or industrial sites where subsequent activity has not caused bulk excavation. Where such stratified accumulations remain undisturbed by later events they I have high scientific value, (Le. ability ot yield information). The archaeological resource of the study area is finite and fragile. Features relating to the I earliest phases of European occupation are likely to be rare indeed, and will probably have 'been disturbed by later work. The archaeological record represents layering of physical evidence of historical events and it is usual that later features impact upon earlier activity. I Sites which contain undisturbed early features would therefore be considered to be of greatest heritage value. I I 36 I I I GODDEN MACKAY I I I 6.2 The Value of Archaeological Material The Pyrmont Point Precinct includes sites and evidence that date back at least to the mid Nineteenth Century. The area includes the location of early industry, an understanding of I which can contribute to knowledge about industrial growth and economic history. While many aspects of this growth and history are recorded by documentary sources, some facets are not so recorded and archaeological evidence can provide an important complement to existing historic documentation. Of particular relevance in this regard would be any I remaining sites of early industrial enterprise around the waterfront. Archaeological sites can also include stratified deposits of material culture which can be I analysed to yield information about the history of the colony which is unavailable from other sources." Archaeological investigations can reveal much about technologies, economic and social conditions and taste and style. The features and artefacts extracted and analysed I can provide primary evidence about the way of life of previous generations through examinations of structural features, artefacts and detritus. Archaeological sites that contain these elements therefore have high scientific value. Of particular relevance in the I residential areas of Pyrmont Point is the potential of archaeological evidence to yield information that contributes to our knowledge of f1lifewaysfl. In the Pyrmont Point precinct this may well be the only socio-economic information about the people who have lived and I worked there. In this regard, archaeological evidence provides an otherwise unavailable insight into past historical processes and cultures. The investigation of such sites therefore is not oriented towards particular artefacts but is directed towards recovery of information I embodied in the fabric of the sites and the physical relation of the different artefacts and contexts within them. I 6.3 Existing Informati9n The archaeological sensitivity of areas within the Pyrmont Point precinct can be broadly broken into three groups: I Existing Heritage Items (refer Figures 8.3 and 8.4). I Sites which are now clear but which are known to have significant historical usage (refer Figure 8.2) I Sites in which bulk excavation or other twentieth century activity has destroyed any archaeological record. (The remaining areas) The Draft Urban Development Plan for the Pyrmont precinct identifies areas falling within I the first two groups as potential historical archaeological sites. Existing Heritage Items should be included in consideration of archaeological sensitivity I because in their own fabric they provide physical (ie archaeological) evidence relating to the history of the precinct and because at a sub-surface level it is unlikely that activity will have I 37 I I I I GODDEN I MACKAY !I 'I destroyed any historic deposits, wells or remnants of earlier usage than that for which the current structures were built. Statutory controls and management procedures pertaining to conservation of the archaeological resources of the area therefore need to be cognisant of I the value of the sites ofexisting heritage items. In addition to the standing items, there are a small number of places which have been I established by historic research to have contained residential or other structures which are of some historical interest in themselves, but which, more importantly, are likely to contain representative features containing material evidence that provides an opportunity to I examine aspects of the site1s history. There are a number of places within the study area where it is clear that bulk excavation or I other activity has removed any deposits and where no issue arises in relation to conservation ofarchaeological resources. This project has included site inspection of all vacant land and detailed examination of I historic maps. As a result of the field inspection, sites such as the former Anglican Church in Church Street were removed from the set of potential archaeological sites, owing to the obvious total removal of any archaeological features. A similar process was applied to I recent rail cuttings and roadworks and to waterfront areas which obviously contain only recent unstratified fill. I The outcome of the field survey narrowed the section of available sites to six, each of which was given more detailed historical examination, particularly through reference to historic maps. All six are considered to have potentially significant sub-surface features. Individual I inventory sheets for each site are included as Appendix F. 6.4 Potential Historical Archaeological Sites I Site A1, the location of now removed mixed housing and commercial activity, was originally part of the Macarthur estate and was developed in the period between 1860 and 1880. It is now an irregularly shaped land parcel, on two levels. The site may contain I structural evidence, sub-floor deposits and other features associated with its former domestic use. I Site A2 is also divided into two sections, an eastern portion around !.awson Street which was used for residential development between 1860 and 1880 and a western section which was developed as an industrial site. This area, now clear with the removal of the K.N. I Harris warehouse, may be one of few places within the Pyrmont Point study area that contains both domestic and industrial elements covering its late nineteenth and early I twentieth century usage. Site A3, the site of former housing on the lames Watkinson Reserve, was at the crown of the eastern escarpment and was part of the land resumed by the Sydney Harbour Trust in I 1911. It is believed that the area may have contained some isolated buildings dating from I 38 I "1 I GODDEN MACKAY I I as early as 1850. Today the area is grassed and contains playground equipment. It is I possible, (but unlikely), that some remnants of mid nineteenth century use remain. Site A4 is the location of a former G.J. Coles warehouse in John Street. As with other I potential archaeological areas, the land was originally part of the Macarthur estate. It was gradually developed between 1850 and 1880. Buildings on the site were demolished in 1916 for construction of a railway cutting, and a warehouse was subsequently built on the corner of Harris and John Street. It is considered possible that structural elements and yard I features such as wells or even sub-floor deposits may remain beneath the concrete slab that was formally a ground floor warehouse and which now covers the site. I Site AS is the location of nineteenth century terrace housing, generally built in the 1870s and demolished between the 1960s and 1980s. This small block of land is considered likely to contain structural, evidence, sub-floor deposits and yard features providing representative I evidence of domestic activity over a period ofa century. Site A6 comprises the northern verges to the railway cutting at Scott Street. This area was I gradually developed from 1850, predominantly for residential purposes and was part of a larger block. As with site A4, the original suite of buildings was demolished in 1916 for construction of the railway cutting. The existing narrow rectangular strip of land along the I northern side of the railway cutting may contain sub-surface evidence relating to late nineteenth century and early twentieth century domestic use, which may provide representative evidence of material culture and lifeways of the inhabitants ofPyrmont. I 6.5 Significance While the SIllP criteria that are outlined in section 7.2 provide an overall framework for 1 significance assessment, they are not specific with regard to archaeological sites. This is a matter that has been considered in an influential paper by Bickford and Sullivan, published in 1984. Bickford and Sullivan draw attention to the dilemma faced by archaeologists and I developer, in connection with sites that are destroyed as a result of development. They discuss effective means of assessing their heritage values. 'Archaeological significance has long been accepted elsewhere as directly linked to scientific research value and, in the I Australian situation, that value is defined according to three questions which can be used as a guide for assessing significance ofarchaeological sites within a relative framework: I 1. Can the site contribute knowledge that no other resource can? , 2. Can the site contribute knowledge that no other site can? I 3. Is this knowledge relevant to general questions about human history or other substantive problems relating to Australian history, or does it contribute to other major research questions? I I 39 I L 'I I I GODDEN I MACKAY I I Clearly the potential sub-surface features of the Pyrmont point peninsula meet each of these criteria. While some aspects of the history of Pyrmont are reasonably well documented, the recorded history emphasised prominent individuals, building programs and major sites. I Relatively scant regard is paid to the day to day life of workers and the conditions and manner in which they lived. The archaeological resource which provides first hand evidence of their material culture, including aspects such as diet, leisure, technology and I socio-economic status, can provide a useful complement to written records. While individually none of the sites identified as archaeologically significant (either I heritage items or potential historical archaeological sites) could be argued to contain information' that is not available at other places, as a group these sites form an important resource. Given the likely differential survival of archaeological features in different places I it is highly desirable that adequate monitoring programs be in place to ensure that where substantial deposits or features are present these are properly investigated and recorded. The knowledge likely to be gained through archaeological investigation and recording of I the sub-surface resource within the Pyrmont Point precinct is of great relevance to an understanding of the history of Pyrmont, and particularly aspects of social history and the lives of working class communities. The surviving archaeological features must be I regarded as a rare and fragile finite resource which, once destroyed will be irreplaceable. On balance the archaeological resources of the Pyrmont Point precinct, encompassing I heritage items and their sites and the six archaeological sites, are considered to be of sufficient significance to warrant monitoring during disturbance and provision for further archaeological excavation and recording if particularly important contexts or features are I encountered. 6.6 Procedures I Having regard to the above discussion, the following actions are recommended as an appropriate course of management of the archaeological resources of the Pyrmont Point, I Precinct 1. Archaeological sites Ai to A6, and all heritage inventory items (Appendix D and E), should be identified as sites of potential archaeological significance within the I Ultimo-Pyrmont Draft Urban Development Plans. Other areas currently shown as potential historical archaeological sites may be deleted from the plan. I 2. Development consent for these sites should be issued subject to a requirement that any sub-surface disturbance must be monitored by a qualified archaeologist, in I accordance with Division 9 of the New South Wales Heritage Act 3. In order to expedite the monitoring process, early liaison should occur with I Heritage Branch of the Department of Planning and application for the issue of an I 40 I I GODDEN MACKAY I I excavation permit pursuant to Section 145 of the New South Wales Heritage Act I should occur prior to monitoring programs commencing. 4. Provision should be made for more extensive recording and/or archaeological I investigation (ie excavation) in circumstances where significant features or contexts are encountered. I 5. It should be made clear to development proponents that the required archaeological procedures are an integral part ofany project and that responsibility for monitoring, recording, excavation and curation and management of any artefacts uncovered is the responsibility of the project proponent, and is a statutory I requirement. I I I I I I I I I I I 41 ------I I GODDEN I MACKAY I I 7.0 ASSESSMENT OF SIGNIFICANT ITEMS 7.1 Recording Methodology I All of the buildings, structures and places within the study area were inspected by the study team and considered in the light of the known history of the precinct. I In each place already identified as a heritage item, considered to be of heritage value itself or contributing to the overall heritage value of Pyrmont, a standard inventory sheet was I prepared. These sheets are included as Appendices D and E., In addition to this basic locational, historic and descriptive data each entry includes an assessment of the "intactness" of the original features of the item, mention of existing I heritage listings, an evaluation of significance based on criteria outlined in Section 7.2 below, and a statement of significance which answers the question "why is this item of heritage value?". I In addition, each entry includes specific recommendations for management actions or statutory controls which derive from the conservation and management considerations I addressed in Section 8.0. 7.2 Basis for Assessment of Significance I The NSW Department of Planning, defines heritage significance as "historic, scientific, cultural, social, archaeological, architectural, natural or aesthetic significance". This definition is broadly consistent with the NSW Heritage Act and with definitions used by I other organisations, including the Australian Heritage Commission, The National Trust of Australia (NSW) and Australia ICOMOS. Most approaches to significance emphasise the value of an item to future generations, as well as to the present community. I The terms "cultural significance" and "heritage value" embrace the concept that a place or item has an intrinsic value which cannot be expressed solely in financial terms. Assessment of Cultural Significance endeavours to establish why a place or item is considered important I and is valued by the community. Cultural significance is embodied in the fabric of a place, (including its setting and relationship to other items), the records associated with the place and the response that the place evokes in the community or individuals to whom it is I important. Assessment of cultural significance can be undertaken in a number of ways. The Burra I Charter of Australia ICOMOS breaks significance into aesthetic, historic, scientific, and social categories. J.S. Kerr, in The Conservation Plan (National Trust of Australia NSW, Third Edition, 1990) considers the concept of cultural significance according to three I qualities; the ability of a place to demonstrate a process, event, custom or style, associational (historical) links for which there mayor may not be surviving evidence, and I formal or aesthetic qualities. I 42 I I I GODDEN MACKAY I I The NSW Department of Planning's Heritage Assessment Guidelines (Department of Planning, Sydney, 1990) advocate a staged assessment process whereby Stage 1 is the I identification of values under headings such as historic, scientific, cultural, social, architectural, aesthetic, archaeological, natural and aboriginal; Stage 2 interprets the comparative value of the item in relation to its rarity, integrity, representativeness, landmark I qualities and relationships within a group; Stage 3 involves an assessment of the degree of significance of the time in terms of its value to the local, regional, state, national or world community. I Any of these and other approaches provide useful frameworks within which to assess cultural heritage significance. One of the most useful approaches is that defined by J I Domicelj in a recent study for the N.S.W. Department of Planning's State Heritage Inventory Project. pomicelj analysed the criteria currently used by the Australian Heritage Commission, in conjunction with the headings and values defined by the NSW Department I of Planning, and produced the following eight criteria, divided into two groups according to whether they address the nature or the degree of significance. Group 1: Nature ofSignificance I Criterion 1 (historic): significant in the evolution and pattern of the history of New South Wales. I This criterion identifies the role of the item or place in the context of the community's overall development, whether important or seminal events have taken place, the relationship between the place or item and the event and whether the events are reflected in the fabric of I the place or item. ' Criterion 2 (aesthetic): significant in possessing a high degree of creative or technical I achievement for the time in the locality, region or state. This criterion identifies places or items which express a high quality of creativity or accomplishment, or otherwise add to or enhance the qualities of their physical or I intellectual environment. Items may express innovation, a high degree of technical accomplishment or an exceptional integrity in their expression of human activity. Examples range from influential architecture or engineering to cultural landscapes. I Criterion 3 (social): Significant through associations with a community in NSW for social, cultural or spiritual reasons. I This criterion identifies places or items which are held in high regard by some or all parts of a community, for its associations with some event, activity or belief important to that group. I It includes those places or items for which a community would normally have a special regard, such as churches, cemeteries and social centres. I Criterion 4 (scientific): Significant for the potential to yield information contributing to an understanding of the history of NSW. I 43 I I I I GODDEN I MACKAY I I This criterion identifies places or items which are significant as a subject for research which would provide information valuable to the community, especially where such information could not be obtained from other sources. It includes the potential to illustrate or uncover evidence of a place, item or event which has some other cultural value to the community. I Archaeology, geology, ecology, sociology and technology may all be represented. Criterion 5 (other): Significant for some other value to past, present or future generations I in NSW. This criterion identifies those places or items with a special cultural value not represented in I the previous criteria. It allows for special cultural values and includes the ability of a site, even where its specific cultural values are not high, to be useful in illustrating or I demonstrating those values. Group 2: Degree ofSignificance Criterion 6 (rare): Significant in possessing rare, endangered or uncommon aspects of the I history of NSW. This criterion identifies those places or items which are rare and through such rarity, have some value, whether they are rare by their nature or having been once common, are now I rare though subsequent historical processes. It includes places or items which have an unusual degree of originality or integrity in their surviving physical fabric. . I Criterion 7 (representative): Significant in demonstrating the characteristics of a class of cultural places or items in NSW. I This criterion identifies those places or items which are examples of their type and have value for representing the principal characteristics of that type, illustrating variations occurring within the type or demonstrating aspects of the development of the type. It I includes places or items that are a part of a representative collection within a type or those which represent a type within a larger collection. Examples range from architectural styles and building functions to technological characteristics, landform manipulation or patterns of I historical development. Criterion 8 (associative): Significant for association with people, activities phases or I events in the history of NSW. This criterion identifies places and items which, either historically or physically, are strongly associated by the community with a historically or otherwise significant person, I activity, phase or event. It primarily includes those places or items which physically express or demonstrate a feature or range of features relevant to the association. Examples range from early settlement sites, convict barracks and colonial mansions to squatters' I housing from the Great Depression era, war time military sites and examples of obsolete technology. I I 44 I I I GODDEN MACKAY I I Matrix In the individual entries for identified heritage items (Appendices D and E) a matrix I indicates which of the above criteria each item is considered to meet. In order to be included, an item must satisfy one of the "nature" criteria (historic, aesthetic, social, scientific, other) at one of the levels of "degree" (rare~ representative, associative). In I addition an attempt has been made to accord a relative judgement of level of significance in terms of value to local (L), regional (R), or ~tate (S) communities. I For example, an item assessed as follows: Historic Aesthetic Social Surplus Other I Rare R Associative I Representative L L I would have rare aesthetic values at a regional level and be locally representative of historic events or process and an item valued by the local community. I 7.3 Contribution to the Overall Significance of Pyrmont The Pyrmont Ultimo Heritage Study provides the following detailed summary statement of significance for the Pyrmont and Ultimo peninsula: I The Pynnont and Ultimo peninsula is of heritage significance for its outstanding collective representation of the character of nearly two centuries ofSydney's inner I suburban lifestyle and industrial development. The Pynnont and Ultimo peninsula demonstrates environmental significance for its I display ofhuman intervention and modification ofthe visually prominent, dramatic harbourisde topography which has been utilised and exploited for industrial and suburban uses. Remnant historic plantings or indigenous species are of historical I significance. It demonstrates historical and cultural significance as Pyrmont and Ultimo contain I virtually intact precincts ofmid-Victorian residential streets and commercial areas which are physical records both oflocal social relationships and the closely forged links between housing and industry of these inner Sydney working class suburbs in tke late 19th and early 20th centuries. The collective character ofthese areas, and I their archaeologicalpotential are ofinterpretive significance. Pyrmont and Ultimo demonstrate environmental and architectural significance in the I diversity and variety ofbuiltforms, materials andscale spanning from 1850 to 1930. I 45 I I I I GODDEN I MACKAY I Of particular note are the terraces, the late-Victorian ClVlC and institutional I buildings and the expansive wool stores ofthe early 20th century. Aesthetic significance is demonstrated in the residential and industrial areas. The I cohesive and collective character found in the repetition ofform, scale.-and detail of· the mid-Victoria terrace row housing and turn ofthe century wool warehouses is of I note, many ofwhich remain virtually intact. Physical evidence ofscientific. archaeological and technological significance remain intact in the structure and mechanisms ofthe wool stores and other industrial sites. I Early 20th century MSB wharfage am:l sheds contain exemplary scientific and technological innovations and their time. I The mix ofuses, residentia~ commercia~ industrial and transport is ofhistorical and cultural significance. In considering items other than those already included on the heritage schedule of I REP 26 in their own right, particular regard has been paid to the above attribute and I to the way in which individual places and items contribute to these values. 7.4 Results The outcome of the assessment is two lists of items, those recommended for retention, I conservation and inclusion on the heritage schedule of REP 26 and other items which contribute to the overall significance of Pyrmont. I 7.4.1. Heritage Items Recommended for Retention, Conservation and Inclusion on Heritage Schedule ofREP 26. I Buildings I B1 Pyrmont Arms Hotel 42-44 Hams Street B2 Cottage 4 Ways Terrace B3 The Ways Terrace 12-20 Point Street I B4 Terrace ofTen Houses 120-138 Bowman Street B5 Terrace of Three Houses 140 Bowman Street (83-85 Point Street) I B6 Royal Pacific Hotel 59 Harris Street B7 Pyrmont Wharf 19 - 21 lones Bay Road I Lanscape Items -I L1 Phoenix Palm Tree Adjacent Ways Terrace ;1 46 I I I GODDEN MACKAY I I Structures I Sl Pike and Rail Fence Bowman Street/Cross Street S2 Escarpment, Pike Rail Fence and Railway Cutting Jones Bay Road I 7.4.2. Items Which Contribute to the Overall Significance ofPyrmont I Buildings B8 Pyrmont Wharf 22-23 Jones Bay Road I B9 Former Wharfeside Coldstores 2 - 10 Point Street BlO Terrace ofTwo Houses 2 - 2A Ways Terrace I Groups Harris/Scott/Cross Street Group I G1 Group Entry (B1 Pyrmont Arms Hotel - Refer Appendix D) I G1 - 1 Former Shop and Residence 46 Harris Street G1 - 2 Cottage 48 Harris Street I G1 - 3 House 50 Harris Street G1 - 4 Former Corner Shop and Residence 52 Harris Street I G1- 5 Semi-detached Pair of Houses 2 - 4 Scott Street G1 - 6 Cottage 6 Scatt Street I G1 - 7 Cottage 8 Scott Street G1 - 8 Terrace ofThree Houses 1'- 5 Cross Street I Railway Structures Group I G2 Group Entry G2 - 1 Railway Tunnel (east portal) G2 - 2 Railway Cutting I G2 - 3 Road Overbridge G2 - 4 Railway Shunting Sidings I (S2 - Railway Cutting to Wharves - Refer Appendix D). I 47 I L I I I GODDEN I MACKAY I The location and extent of each item is shown on the individual entries for each in I Appendices D and E and in Figures 8.3 and 8.4. I 7.5 Review of Specific Items, With Reference to State Heritage Criteria Pynnont Point is a significant piece of Sydney's geography with a number of very distinctive man-made elements. These elements are as listed below, and are of significance I from both a design and social history point of view. Most can be shown to be significant in the evolution and pattern of history in New South Wales (Criterion 1 : Historic). Technical ' accomplishment can be seen in the wharves, and related railways and cuttings, while creative accomplishment (Criterion 2 : Aesthetic) can be seen in Ways Terrace, an I important design by Professor Leslie Wilkinson. Social and community associations (Criterion 3 : Social) can be linked to the wharves and CSR and an associated labour force, and a social-welfare housing scheme provided by the City Council (Ways Terrace) as well I as the public houses. Scientific endeavour (Criterion 4) is represented by the development of cold stores on the waterfront. I Representative items of the evolution of the precinct are listed below: Nineteenth-Century Cottages and related shops (G1, B1, G1-1 to G1-8) Hams, Cross I and Scott Streets. An unusual surviving vernacular group, comprising 4 cottages, 3 semis, 1 terrace house and 2 shops, all in poor condition, but clearly demonstrating I patterns of early settlement and construction. Victorian Public House (B5) corner of Bowman and Point Streets, a competently restored building, large, with interesting ltalianate details and a cantilevered balcony. I Victorian Terrance Houses (B4) 120-138 Bowman Street, characteristic of terrace house development throughout late Victorian Sydney. I Retaining Walls andIron Palisade Fencing (S1) to Bowman/Cross Streets. Edwarding Public Houses (B1, B6) being the former Pynnont Arms Hotel and the I Royal Pacific Hotel. Both are in fact 19th century hotels, extensively built over in the Edwardian period. The former Pyrmont Arms features bayed balconies and decorative pediments, the Royal Pacific has, at its centre, a stone two storey building I with characteristic splayed entrance at the corner, capped off with a projecting cornice. The upper storey and side extensions are Edwardian and later. I Edwarding WharfStructures (B?) comprising wharves 19, 20, 21, an innovative two storey concrete, steel and hardwood structure, and including the rivetted access I bridge, and iron posts and gates to Bayview Street. Edwarding Cuttings, Walls and Palisade Fences (S2, G2-2) usually related to wharf I or housing improvements, in particular fronting lones Bay Road and the related I 48 I I I GODDEN MACKAY I I railway track, the M.S.B. roadway adjacent to wharf 25, the terracing to the east of I Ways Terrace. c.1920 Cold Store (B9) fronting Point Street and Jones Bay Road, and the M.S.B. I Roadway. Innovative reinforced concrete framework, and important maritime/industrial function. Demonstrates developing technology. 1920s Mediterranean Style Workers Housing (B3) known as Ways Terrace. Artfully I modelled and grouped with very interesting detailing, a valuable prototype of enlightened design and housing management for any era. I I I I I I I I I I I I 49 I L-...... -· - I I I I I I 8.0 CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT I 8.1 Context of This Report The NSW State Government is embarked upon a program of urban redevelopment within the City West area which will ultimately see major change to inner city areas including I Ultimo-Pyrmont, Glebe Island - White Bay - Rozelle Bay and Central - Eveleigh. The Ultimo - Pyrmont area is the first part of a larger re-zoning and redevelopment program, in which Pyrmont is to become a new residential community supported by employment and I recreational opportunities throughout the peninsula. Master planning for the Pyrmont Point Precinct is proceeding with the intention of introducing a substantially increased residential population through the sensitive design of I new dwellings at a significantly increased density. The statutory framework for the proposed development is provided by the City West REP I and its supporting and associated documents including the Draft Urban Development Plan and the Ultimo Pyrmont Heritage Study. ·1 As required by the project brief, this report and its recommendations have been prepared with the context of an existing decision that redevelopment of the study area for medium I and high density residential purposes is to proceed. 8.2 Objectives The heritage assessment and management strategy prepared for Stage One of the City West I Development project by Wendy Thorp analyses the conservation and planning documents which pertain to the Ultimo-Pyrmont area and derives a set of overall objectives for treatment of heritage items and archaeological sites. Those objectives are considered I appropriate and pertinent to the current study and the Pyrmont Point precinct. They are: Protection, conservation and sensitive development around identified heritage sites I or items I The adaptation and recycling ofolder buildings where feasible The identification and responsible management ofsignificant archaeological sites Appropriate docwnentation and notification ofrelevant authorities in the event ofthe I proposed development ofa heritage item I Respectfor andpossible statutory protection ofthe topography and foreshores. I I so I I I GODDEN MACKAY I I I 8.3 Existing Planning Controls 8.3.1 Sydney Rew.onal Environmental Plan No.26 - City West (REP 26) REP 26 was adopted by the Minister for Planning on October 14,1992. The plan applies to I the entire Ultimo-Pyrmont precinct incorporating the study area. The overall aims of the plan are: I To establish planningprinciples ofregional significance for City West as a whole with which development in City West should be consistent; and I To establish planningprinciples and development controls ofregional significance for development in each precinct created within City West by this plan and by subsequent amendments ofthis plan; and I To promote the orderly and economic use and development ofland within City West. I The plan includes specific planning principles relating to heritage: The items and areas ofheritage significance ofCity West are to be conserved and enhanced. New development is to restrict the character ofheritage items and I conservation areas.. The re-use ofheritage buildings through adaptation and modification is to be encouraged. I Division 6 within the REP deals specifically with heritage conservation. The relative clauses are reproduced as Appendix H. I 8.3.2 The Ultimo-Pyrmont Draft Urban Development Plan 1991, This plan applies to the entire Ultimo-Pyrmont precinct and has been prepared in accordance with REP 26 as a supplementary guideline document. The plan provides more I specific requirements in rela~on lo heritage items. The relevant clauses are reproduced in AppendixH. I In addition to these guidelines the Draft Urban Development Plan provides a map showing Jt.l) " t, .. t '1 '.' • potential historical archaeological sites. This map is reproduced as Figure 8.1. 8.3.3 Pyrmont/Ultimo Heritage Study I The Pyrmont/Ultimo Heritage Study which was completed as input to REP 26 in 1989 includes a detailed policy statement which itself recommends various provisions and procedures for heritage items. The policies of greatest relevance to the considerations of I heritage conservation within the Pyrmont Point precinct are included as Appendix 1. 8.3.4 New South Wales Heritage Act I The New South Wales Heritage Act includes provision for the making of a range of conservation instruments that control demolition, alteration, excavation or other harmful I 51 I l ~ I I I GODDEN I MACKAY I to "relics". At I activity at an affected place or to an affected item, and provisions relating the Pyrmont Point present none of the heritage items or potential heritage items within However, most precinct are subject to a conservation instrument made pursuant to the Act. provisions. The I of the historic fabric within the study area would be subject to the relics Act defines a relic as: the area that "I Any deposit, object or material evidence relating to the settlement of is fifty or comprises New South Wales, not being Aboriginal settlement and which more years old. I of discovering Sections 139 to 145 of the Act prevent the excavation ofland for the purpose by the Heritage exposing or moving a relic except in accordance with a permit issued would only be Council of New South Wales. Under normal circumstances such permits I project that is issued to a qualified archaeologist in relation to an archaeological excavation demonstrated to be necessary. proponents I Under the provisions of the Act, it is clearly the responsibility of development in accordance within the Pyrmont Point precinct to ensure that excavation is undertaken included within the with the requirements. Given that the majority of affected fabric is when excavation I definition of relic, and the extreme likelihood of encountering relics permit prior to occurs, it is clearly desirable that application be made for an excavation on the site of any commencement ofexcavation (whether archaeological or for construction) I heritage item or any potential historical archaeological site. 8.3.5 Statutory Authority Heritage Registers which own Section 170 of the New South Wales Heritage Act requires statutory authorities I to an order pursuant an item that is of sufficient heritage value that it might be made subject Of those items to the New South Wales Heritage Act to keep a register of such items. register: the heritage I considered by this study, only wharves 19 to 21 are included in such a register of the New South Wales Maritime Services Board. there is a clear Inclusion on such a register imposes no direct legal control. However, Department of I understanding between the Heritage Branch of the New South Wales action prejudicial to Planning and the various state government authorities involved that no consultation. I the heritage significance of the place so listed will be taken without prior it is considered In view of the significance of a number of railway items within the area, I desirable that these be added to the heritage register of the State Rail Authority. 8.4 Recommended Statutory Controls 8.4.1 Adequacy ofExisting Controls I New South Wales The spectrum of effective statutory controls provided by REP 26 and the Urban Heritage Act, together with the guidelines offered by the Draft Ultimo-Pyrmont means of I Development Plan are considered to provide an effective and appropriate I S2 I I 1 GODDEN MACKAY I' I in this study. achieving the conservation of items of environmental heritage identified I of changes be However, in order to do so, it is considered desirable that a small number made to the schedules of items covered by respective instruments. I This section of the report outlines the changes recommended. 8.4.2 Additions to Heritage Schedule ofREP 26 I are buildings B1, The items already listed on REP 26 should continue to be so listed. These that one landscape B2, B3, B4, B5, B6, B7 and Structure S1 and S2. It is recommended to the Heritage item L1, the Phoenix Palm Tree adjacent to the Ways Terrace be added I schedule ofREP 26. of other items This report recommends that consideration be given to the possible retention B8, B9, B10, I which contribute to the overall heritage of Pyrmont. These include buildings made to retain any and the Harris/Scott/Cross Street Group (G1-1 to G1-8.) If a decision is to include them of these items as part of the master planning process it would be desirable statutory in the heritage schedule of REP 26 so that they may be afforded appropriate I protection and consideration as redevelopment and adaptation proceeds. 8.4.3 Ultimo-Pyrmont Precinct Draft Urban Development Plan I the findings of the The existing Figure map 6 of this plan should be amended to reflect of Ilpotential archaeological assessment undertaken as part of this study. Presentation ll combine the sites historical archaeological sites within the Pyrmont Point precinct should I shown in Figures 8.2 and 8.3. 8.4.4 _Statutory Authority Section 170 Registers of the Maritime I Wharves 19 to 21 should continue to be listed on the heritage register Services Board, until such time as their ownership is transferred. should be I Rail items which are identified and recommended for continued operation Railway Structures included on the State Rail Authority heritage register. There are the (Structure 81). Group (G2 and items G2-1 to G2-4) and the Railway Cutting to the wharves I I I I I S3 I I I I GODDEN I MACKAY I I 8.5 Management Actions 8.5.1 Pyrmont Point Precinct Master Plan I The master plan should provide for retention of the following heritage items: I BuildingBl former Pyrmont Arms Hotel BuildingB2 Cottage I BuildingB3 The Ways Terrace BuildingB4 Terrace of Ten houses I BuildingB5 Terrace ofThree houses I BuildingB6 Royal Pacific Hotel BuildingB7 Pyrmont Wharves 19-21 I Structure Si Pike and Rail fence Structure S2 Escarpment, Pike and Rail fence and Railway Cutting to Wharves I Landscape Item Ll Phoenix Palm Tree The master planning process should include consideration of the retention and conservation I of all other heritage items. identified in this study; (as scheduled in Appendix E). 8.5.2 Development Consent Process I In accordance with the provisions of Section 31 of REP 26, the consent authority should require the preparation of a conservation plan to accompany an application for development I consent relating to the following items: BuildingBl former pyrmont Arms Hotel I BuildingB2 Cottage BuildingB3 The Ways Terrace I BuildingB4 Terrace ofTen houses I BuildingB5 Terrace of Three houses BuildingB6 Royal Pacific Hotel I BuildingB7 pyrmont Wharves 19-21 \1 54 ~, ,I I I GODDEN MACKAY I I plans for Consideration should still be given to the possible completion of the conservation I redevelopment. any other heritage items identified in this study which are proposed for 8.5.3 Archaeological Resources I report should be The procedures for archaeological monitoring and recommended· in this all heritage items followed with respect to potential historical archaeological sites and identified in the schedule at Appendix D. These procedures are: I D and 1. Archaeological sites Al to A6, and all heritage inventory items (Appendix within the E), should be identified as sites of potential archaeological significance shown as I Ultimo-Pyrmont Draft Urban Development Plans. Other areas currently potential historical archaeological sites may be deleted from the plan. that 2. Development consent for these sites should be issued subject to a requirement I in any sub-surface disturbance must be monitored by a qualified archaeologist, accordance with Division 9 of the New South Wales Heritage Act. I occur with 3. In order to expedite the monitoring process, early liaison should issue of an Heritage Branch of the Department of Planning and application for the Act excavation permit pursuant to Section 145 of the New South Wales Heritage I should occur prior to monitoring programs commencing. archaeological 4. Provision should be made for more extensive recording and/or features or I investigation (ie excavation) in circumstances where significant contexts are encountered. the required I 5. It should be made clear to development proponents that archaeological procedures are an integral part of any project and that responsibility of any for monitoring, recording, excavation and curation and management a statutory artefacts uncovered is the responsibility of the project proponent, and is I requirement. 8.5.4 Recording I sidings) is not One heritage item identified in this study; Structure S5 (railway shunting This site considered to be of sufficient significance to warrant retention and conservation. should be recorded by drawing and photograph prior to removal. I is recognised The former Waterside Coldstores, though identified as an item ofsignificance, be subject to as being incapable of successful adaptation. The building should oral history, a I comprehensive recording prior to removal. This recording should include drawings. historical outline, a function description, black and white photographs and this study which is I Recording should also be made of any other heritage identified in of measured proposed for removal. Recording of such items should comprise completion drawings and a comprehensive black and white photographic study. I ss I lj I I GODDEN I MACKAY .1 I 8.6 Former Waterside Coldstores challenge to the Building B15, the former waterside coldstores, has presented a particular heritage I study team. The assessment undertaken suggests that it is an item of considerable to demonstrate its significance. However this significance relates primarily to its ability internal fit out and own history and operations - attributes that are strongly linked to its that conversion configuration. Consideration of the building as part of this study indicates I would prevent for residential purposes, as would be required by the overall master plan, ofthe place retention ofinternal fit-out and configuration, thereby lessening the significance On this basis it is to such an extent that conservation would be no longer worthwhile. I conservation and recognised that there is no practical means of achieving the long term and removal adaptation ofthe building in a meaningful way. Recording prior to demolition I is consequently recommended. 8.7 Site-specific Archaeological Investigations as part of this I Notwithstanding the additional research and clarification that has occurred as sites of s.tudy, a significant portion of the Pyrmont Point Precinct remains identified proceeds, it potential historical archaeological importance. As detailed master planning locations of major may well be the ca....<:e that some of these sites are identified as being at I the archaeological importance to future proposals. The question of the nature and extent of recording would resource and the likely impact of monitoring and/or excavation and additional site become a matter of great relevance. It would be possible to undertake I and businesses, specific research including title searches, historical research into occupants greater certainty to and possibly test trenching (ie excavation) which would introduce far of such additional the subsequent planning and/or excavation process. The completion I is at a more studies is a matter that would best be considered once planning for the precinct I advanced stage. I I I I l' 'I\. I S6 I ·1 I I i i I l.J \ I I I I I I I I I I I LEGEND I MAP 6 I POTENTIAL HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES I ULTlMO-PYRMONT PRECINCT URBAN DEVELOPMENT PLAN I o 100 200 Metr•• I Figure 8.1 Potential Historical Archaeological Sites shown in The Ultimo • Pyrmont Draft Urban Development Plan. I I 57 L..- _ ·1 I I I I I i'J ~ ~ I ...... -...... ~ ~ I trJ ~ "-3 I :J:: ~o I I I I I'--.> ;0 ;0 '---''--.S..c:. -:.I'.(;; ., I jr-----~ '~ I I I Figure 8.2 Proposed "Potential Historical Archaeological Sites" for inclusion in The Ultimo - Pyrmont Draft I Urban Development Plan, (in addition to heritage items shown in Figures 8.3 and 8.4). I 58 I "1 I, I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I: Figure 8.3 Items ofEnvironmental Heritage. 1\ I S9 I I I 1 I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I :1 Figure 8.4 Items which Contribute to the Overall Significance ofPyrmont. 'I 60 'I /1'.1..------I GODDEN I MACKAY I I 9.0 BIBUOGRAPHY Andrews, G, Port Jackson 200, Reed Books, Sydney, 1985. City Council and I Anglin Associates, Pyrmont Ultimo Herita~e Study, report for the Sydney the NSW Department of Planning. Associates for the Ashton, P. Pyrmont - Ultimo Heritage Study - Thematic HistOIY, Anglin I Sydney City Council and the N.S.W. Dept. ofPlanning, 1989. Conservation Bartos, B, & Fraser, S, Wharves 19, 20 & 21 Pyrmont; Thesis for Building Course, School of Architecture; University of N.S.W., 1989. I Historic Sites in S. A. Bickford and Sullivan, Assessing the Research Significance of in Australian Sullivan and S. Bowdler (eds) Site Surveys and Significance Assessment Prehistory), Archaeology, (proceeding of the 1981 Springwood Conference on Australian I Australian National Department of Prehistory, Research School of Pacific Studies, The University, Canberra, 1984. Criteria and J. Domicelj, State Herita~e Inventory Status and Scope Evaluation I 1990. Applications Guidelines, report prepared for the NSW Department of Planning, Fox, L., Old Sydney Windmills, Len Fox, Sydney, 1978 I Study, report for Godden D. & Associates, Pyrmont Industrial Archaeology - Heritage Phillip Cox, Richardson Taylor & Partners, Sydney, 1978 to Evelei~h Herita~e I Godden Mackay Pty Ltd, White Bay to Blackwattle Bay Central Study, report for the NSW Department of Planning, 1990. Comprisin~ Berths 19 -21 A Howard Tanner & Associates, Jones Bay Wharf, Pyrmont. Sydney, 1992 I Herita~e and Re-use Study, Report for the N.S.W, Property Services Group, Kelly M. & Cracker, R, Sydney Takes Shape, Doak Press, Sydney, 1978 Project, Sydney, I Mathews, M.R. Pyrmont and Ultimo -A History, Pyrmont Ultimo History 1982. Early 20th Century National Trust of Australia (N.S.W.) Herita~e Study of 19th and 1989 I Tradin~ Wharves in Sydney Harbour, National Trust of Australia (N.S.W) Sydney, National Trust of Australia (N.S.W.) - Listing Cards for Pyrmont Report for the I Planning Workshop, Ultimo - Pyrmont Peninsula and Environs Study, N.S.W. Dept. ofEnvironment and Planning, Sydney, 1985. Prescott, A Sydney Ferry Fleets. Ronald H. Parsons, Magill, S.A,1984 I 1-10, Angus and The Sydney Gazette and N.S.W. Advertiser, Facsmilie Edition, Vols, I RObertson, Sydney, 1968. II 11 61 I. __ J ------I I GODDEN I MACKAY I I 10.0 APPENDICES I I I I I I I I I ,I I I il :1 ! I :1 62 Ifl I I I I 1 Appendix A. Study Brief I I I I [I I I I I I I I' I I I I --- -\ I ! I PROPERTV SERVICES GROUP CITY WEST DEVELOPMENT CON.PORATION - I STAGE IT MASTER PLAN - PYRMONT POINT BRIEF FOR ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HERITAGE ASSESSMENT. I I 1.0 BACKGROUND The Property Services Group is in the process of transferring ownership of the land whioh is currerttly owned by tht;: State Government in the Pynnont Point precinct to the I City West Development Corporation, who will be responsible for the redevelopment and disposal ofthis land. I The Property Services Group are also undertaking the master planning tor the precinct and as a requirement ofthe City West REP, this must illustrate and explain proposals for I heritage conservation and protection ofarchaeological relics. The Consultant chosen to carry out this commission must work closely with the project team and pt'ovide input to the master planning process in accordance with the established I timetable. The Consultant must also work within the parameters already established by the City I West REP, and existing State Goverrunent policy that Pynnont Point be intensively I developed for residential purposes. I 2.0 OBJECTIVES The objectives ofthe commission are:- I a to assess the significance of heritage items in the study area that are already identified in the City West REP; b to identify any other items ofheritage significance in the study area which I contribute to the overall significance ofpynnont; I c to identify known or potential archaeological sites; d to outlina policies and procedures which should be adopted to achieve heritage conservation and protection of archaeological relics, having I regard to the overall intention of the City West REP and the master plan __ I being dtweloped for the study area. I I I 12Q192SS 1 I I 3.0 PROCESS I 3.1 Consolidation of Information I Existing information is available including the followin~ reports:- (a.) CSR pynnont Heritage Study I Godden & Mackay and PhiHp Cox, Richardson & Taylor (b) Pyrmonl & Ultimo Heritage Study I Anglin Associates December 1989 (c) Piers 19-21 Heritage Study; Roward Tanner and Associates I This information needs to be consolidated and any other information required should be identified Md programmed for either immediate or future action. I 3/1 Field Survey I Undertake necessary (bul reasonably limited) field survey to document significant places. I 3.3 Significance Assessment I Assessment ofindividual plal.:e~ using NSW Stae Heritage Inventory Project Criteria. 3.4 PreparaUoIl uf Rcpol·t I The report will iIlusll'att= the major findings of the work and be documented in a fonn suitable to DOP. The issues should address the following:- I • Historical overview I • Inventory ofsites and significance ofeach. • Appropriate planning controls. I • Future work. • Other as appropriate. I 3.5 Programme I The psa wish~s to undertake the project work immediately. The current assessment is that the project will take a "core" work period of 16 weeks with a further 4 weeks for I discussion and negotiation with authorities. . This commission needs to work in with this overall programme. I I 120192SS 2 I L I ------~~~~~~~~~------~~~------~------. I 1I 4.0 SUBMISSION The Submission should outline your understanding of the i~~ues raised above and should 'I provide a lump sum tee to carry out the work. II II il 11 II il 1I I 'I I I I I I I I I 120192SS 3 I I I I I ~ ~.J------' I I ". I I I I I :1 ~ I• J --I-...-) I '. .. I ~ .. _---~------_.~- I I I I I Appendix B. Burra Charter of Australia ICOMOS I I I I I I I I I I I I I I :1 I1 !I 1 THE AUSTRALIA ICOMOS CHARTER FOR THE CONSERVATION OF PLACES I OF CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE I (The Burra Charter) Preamble Explanatory Notes Having regard to the International Charter for the These notes do not form part of the Charter and may be added to by I Conservation and Restoration of Monuments and Sites Australia ICOMOS. (Venice 1966), and the Resolutions of 5th General Assembly of the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) (Moscow 1978), the following I Charter was adopted by Australia ICOMOS on 19th August 1979 at Burra Burra. Revisions were adopted on I 23rd February 1981 and on 23 April 1988. Definitions I Article 1. For the purpose of this Charter: 1.1 Place means site, area, building or other work, Article 1.1 group of buildings or other works together with Place includes structures, ruins, archaeological sites and landscapes associated contents and surroundings. modified by human activity. I 1.2 Cultural significance means aesthetic, historic, scientific or social value for past, present or future generations. I 1.3 Fabric means all the physical material of the place. 1.4 Conservation means all the processes of looking after a place so as to retain its cultural significance. It includes maintenance and may according to I circumstance include preservation, restoration, reconstruction and adaptation and will be commonly a combination of more than one of I these. 1.5 Maintenance means the continuous protective care Article 1.5 of the fabric, contents and setting of a place, and The distinctions referred to in Article 1.5, for example in relation to is to be distinguished from repair. Repair involves roof gutters, are: I restoration or reconstruction and it should be maintenance - regular inspection and cleaning of gutters treated accordingly. repair involving restoration - returning of dislodged gutters to their place I repair involving reconstruction - replacing decayed gutters. 1.6 Preservation means maintammg the fabric of a place in its existing state and retarding deterioration. 1.7 Restoration means returning the EXISTINGfabric I of a place to a known earlier state by removing accretions or by reassembling existing components without the introduction of new material. I 1.8 Reconstruction means returning a place as nearly as possible to a known earlier state and is distinguished by the introduction of materials (new or old) into the fabric. This is not to be confused I with either re-creation or conjectural reconstruction which are outside the scope of this Charter. 1.9 Adaptation means modifying a place to suit I proposed compatible uses. 1.10 Compatible use means a use which involves no change to the culturally significant fabric, changes I which are substantially reversible, or changes which ... require a minimal impact. I 1 I I Conservation Principles Article 2. The aim of conservation is to retain the cultural Article 2 I significance of a place and must include provision for its Conservation should not be undertaken unless adequate resources are available to ensure that the fabric is not left in a vulnerable state and security, its maintenance and its future. that the cultural significance of the place is not impaired. However, it must be emphasised that the best conservation often involves the least I work and can be inexpensive. Article 3. Conservation is based on a respect for the Article 3 I existing fabric and should involve the least possible The traces of additions, alterations and earlier treatments on the fabric physical intervention. It should not distort the evidence of a place are evidence of its history and uses. provided by the fabric. Conservation action should tend to assist rather than to impede their interpretation. I Article 4. Conservation should make use of all the disciplines which can contribute to the study and safe I guarding of a place. Techniques employed should be traditional but in some circumstances they may be modern ones for which a firm scientific basis exists and which have been supported by a body of experience. I Article 5. Conservation of a place should take into con I sideration all aspects of its cultural significance without unwarranted emphasis on anyone aspect at the expense of others. I Article 6. The conservation policy appropriate to a place Article 6 must first be determined by an understanding of its An understanding of the cultural significance of a place is essential to I its proper conservation. This should be achieved by means of a thorough cultural significance. investigation resulting in a report embodying a statement of cultural significance. The formal adoption of a statement of cultural significance is an essential prerequisite to the preparation of a conservation policy. I Article 7. The conservation policy will determine which Article 7 uses are compatible. Continuity of the use of a place in a particular way may be significant I and therefore desirable. Article 8. Conservation requires the maintenance of an Article 8 I appropriate visual setting: e.g., form, scale, colour, New construction work, including infiIl and additions, may be texture and materials. No new construction, demolition acceptable, provided: or modification which would adversely affect the setting it 'does not reduce or obscure the cultural significance of the place should be allowed. Environmental instrusions which it is in keeping with Article 8. I adversely affect appreciation or enjoyment of the place should be excluded. I Article 9. A building or work should remain in its Article 9 historical location. The moving of all or part of a building Some structures were designed to be readily removable or already have a history of previous moves, e.g. prefabricated dwellings and poppet I or work is unacceptable unless this is the sole means of heads. Provided such a structure does not have a strong association ensuring its survival. with its present site, its removal may be considered. If any structure is moved, it should be moved to an appropriate setting and given an appropriate use. Such action should not be to the detriment I of any place of cultural significance. Article 10. The removal of contents which form part of I the cultural significance of the place is unacceptable unless it is the sole means of ensuring their security and preservation. Such contents must be returned should I changed circumstances make this practicable. I 2 I I Conservation Processes I Preservation Article 11. Preservation is appropriate where the existing Article 11 state of the fabric itself constitutes evidence of specific Preservation protects fabric without obscuring the evidence of its I cultural significance, or where insufficient evidence is construction and use. available to allow other conservation processes to be The process should always be applied: carried out. where the evidence of the fabric is of such significance that it must not be altered. This is an unusual case and likely to be appropriate I for archaeological remains of national importance; where insufficient investigation has been carried out to permit conservation policy decisions to be taken in accord with Articles 23 to 25. I New construction may be carried out in association with preservation when its purpose is the physical protection of the fabric and when it is consistent with Article 8. I Article 12. Preservation is limited to the protection, Article 12 maintenance and, where necessary, the stabilization of Stabilization is a process which helps:keep fabric intact and in a fixed the existing fabric but without the distortion of its cultural position. When carried out as a part of preservation work it does not introduce new materials into the fabric. However, when necessary for I significance. the survival of the fabric, stabilization may be effected as part of a reconstruction process and new materials introduced. For example, grouting or the insertion of a reinforcing rod in a masonry wall. I Restoration Article 13. Restoration is appropriate only if there is Article 13 sufficient evidence of an earlier state of the fabric and See explanatory note for Article 2. only if returning the fabric to that state reveals the I cultural significance of the place. Article 14. Restoration should reveal anew culturally significant aspects of the place. It is based on respect for I all the physical, documentary and other evidence and stops at the point where conjecture begins. Article 15. Restoration is limited to 'the reassembling of displaced components or removal of accretions in I accordance with Article 16. Article 16. The contributions of all periods to the place must be respected. If a place includes the fabric of I different periods, revealing the fabric of one period at the expense of another can only be justified when what is removed is of slight cultural significance and the fabric which is to be revealed is of much greater cultural I significance. I Reconstruction Article 17. Reconstruction is appropriate only where a place is .incomplete through damage or alteration and where it is necessary for its survival, or where it reveals I the cultural significance of the place as a whole. Article 18. Reconstruction is limited to the completion of a depleted entity and should not constitute the majority I of the fabric of a place. Article 19. Reconstruction is limited to the reproduction of fabric, the form of which is known from physical I and/or documentary evidence. It should be identifiable on close inspection as being new work. I Adaptation Article 20. Adaptation is acceptable where the conserva tion of the place cannot otherwise be achieved, and where I the adaptation does not substantially detract from its cultural significance. I I 3 ------_._--- - I Article 21. Adaptation must be limited to that which is essential to a use for the place determined in accordance I with Articles 6 and 7. Article 22. Fabric of cultural significance unavoidably removed in the process of adaptation must be kept safely I to enable its future reinstatement. Conservation Practice I Article 23. Work on a place must be preceded by professionally prepared studies of the physical, documentary and other evidence, and the existingJabric recorded before any intervention in the place. I Article 24. Study of a place by any intervention in the Jabric or by archaeological excavation should be under taken where necessary to provide data essential for I decisions on the conservation of the place and/or to secure evidence about to be lost or made inaccessible through necessary conservation or other unavoidable I action. Investigation of a place for any other reason which requires physical disturbance and which adds substantially to a scientific body of knowledge may be permitted, provided that it is consistent with the I conservation policy for the place. Article 25. A written statement of conservation policy Article 2S must be professionally prepared setting out the cultural The procedure will include the conservation processes referred to in I significance and proposed conservation procedure Article 1.4 and other matters described in Guidelines to the Surra Charter: Conservation Policy. together with justification and supporting evidence, including photographs, drawings and all appropriate samples. I Article 26. The organisation and individuals responsible for policy decisions must be named and specific respon sibility taken for each such decision. I Article 27. Appropriate professional direction and supervision must be maintained at all stages of the work and a log kept of new evidence an9 additional decisions I recorded as in Article 25 above. Article 28. The records required by Articles 23, 25, 26 and 27 should be placed in a permanent archive and made I publicly avail,able.. Article 29. The items referred to in Articles 10 and 22 should be professionally catalogued and protected. I Words in italics are defined in Article 1. I I I I I I 4 I I I' GUIDELINES TO THE BURRA CHARTER: CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE These guidelines for the establishment of cultural study are not common. It cannot be assumed that significance were adopted by the Australian national anyone practitioner will have the full range of skills committee of the International Council on Monuments required to assess cultural significance and prepare I and Sites (Australia ICOMOS) on 14 April 1984 and a statement. Sometimes in the course of the task revised on 23 April 1988. They should be read in it will be necessary to engage additional I conjunction with the Burra Charter. practitioners with special expertise. Contents 1.5 Issues not considered 1.0 Preface The assessment of cultural significance and the 1.1 Intention of guidelines preparation of a statement do not involve or take I 1.2 Applicability account of such issues as the necessity for con 1.3 Need to establish cultural significance servation action, legal constraints, possible uses, 1.4 Skills required structural stability or costs and returns. These issues 1.5 Issues not considered will be dealt with in the development of a con I servation policy. 2.0 The Concept of Cultural Significance 2.1 Introduction 2.2 Aesthetic value 2.0 THE CONCEPT OF CULTURAL I 2.3 Historic value SIGNIFICANCE 2.4 Scientific value 2.1 Introduction 2.5 Social value In the Burra Charter cultural significance means I 2.6 Other approaches "aesthetic, historic, scientific or social value for 3.0 The Establishment of Cultural Significance past, present or future generations". 3.1 Introduction Cultural significance is a concept which helps in 3.2 Collection of information estimating the value of places. The places that are I 3.3 The assessment of cultural significance likely to be of significance are those which help an 3.3.1 Extent of recording understanding of the past or enrich the present, and 3.3.2 Intervention in the fabric which will be of value to future generations. 3.3.3 Hypotheses Although there are a variety of adjectives used in I 3.4 Statement of cultural significance definitions of cultural significance in Australia, the 4.0 The Report adjectives "aesthetic", "historic", "scientific" and 4.1 Content "social", given alphabetically in the Burra Charter, I 4.2 Written material can encompass all other values. 4.3 Graphic material The meaning of these terms in the context of 4.4 Sources cultural significance is discussed below. It should 4.5 Exhibition and adoption I be noted that they are not mutually exclusive, for example, architectural style has both historic and 1.0 PREFACE aesthetic aspects. I 1.1 Intention of guidelines These guidelines are intended to clarify the nature 2.2 Aesthetic value of professional work done within the terms of the Aesthetic value includes aspects of sensory percep Burra Charter. They recommend a methodical tion for which criteria can and should be stated. I procedure for assessing the cultural significance of Such criteria may include consideration of the form, a place, for preparing a statement of cultural scale, colour, texture and material of the fabric; the significance and for making such information smells Cl:nd sounds as~ociated with the place and its I publicly available. use. 1.2 Applicability 2.3 Historic value The guidelines apply to any place likely to be of Historic value encompasses the history of aesthetics, cultural significance regardless of its type or size. science and society, and therefore to a large extent I underlies all of the terms set out in this section. 1.3 Need to establish cultural significance A place may have historic value because it has The assessment of cultural significance and the influenced, or has been influenced by,. an historic I preparation of a statement of cultural significance, figure, event, phase or activity. It may also have embodied in a report as defined in section 4.0, are historic value as the site of an important event. For essential prerequisites to making decisions about the any given place the significance will be greater where future of a place. evidence of the association or event survives in situ, I or where the settings are substantially intact, than 1.4 Skills required where it has been changed or evidence does not In accordance with Article 4 of the Burra Charter, survive. However, some events or associations may I the study of a place should make use of all relevant be so important that the place retains significance disciplines. The professional skills required for such regardless of subsequent treatment. I 5 I I 2.4 Scientific value The validity of the judgements will depend upon The scientific or research value of a place will the care with which the data is collected and the I depend upon the importance of the data involved, reasoning applied to it. on its rarity, quality or representativeness, and on In assessing cultural significance the practitioner the degree to which the place may contribute further should state conclusions. Unresolved aspects should substantial information. be identified. I 2.5 Social value Whatever may be considered the principal Social value embraces the qualities for which a place significance of a place, all other aspects of has become a focus of spiritual, political, national significance should be given consideration. I or other cultural sentiment to a majority or minority group. 3.3.1 Extent of recording - In assessing these matters a practitioner should 2.6 Other approaches record the place sufficiently to provide a basis for I The categorisation into aesthetic, historic, scientific the necessary discussion of the facts. During such and social values is one approach to understanding recording any obviously urgent problems the concept of cultural significance. However, more endangering the place, such as stability and security, I precise categories may be developed as understand should be reported to the client. ing of a particular place increases. 3.3.2 Intervention in the fabric - 3.0 THE ESTABLISHMENT OF CULTURAL Intervention in, or removal of, fabric at this stage I SIGNIFICANCE should be strictly within the terms of the Burra 3.1 Introduction Charter. In establishing the cultural significance of a place I it is necessary to assess all the information relevant 3.3.3 Hypotheses - to an understanding of the place and its fabric. The Hypotheses, however expert or informed, should task includes a report comprising written material not be presented as established fact. Feasible or and graphic material. The content~ of the report possible hypotheses should be set out, with the I should be arranged to suit the place and the evidence for and against them, and the line of limitations on the task, but it will generally be in reasoning that has been followed. Any attempt two sections: first, the assessment of cultural which has been made to check a hypothesis should significance (see 3.2 and 3.3) and second, the be recorded, so as to avoid repeating fruitless I statement of cultural significance (see 3.4). research. 3.2 Collection of information Information relevant to the assessment of cultural 3.4 Statement of cultural significance I significance should be collected. Such information The practitioner should prepare a succinct statement concerns: of cultural significance, supported by, or cross referenced to, sufficient graphic material to help (a) the developmental sequence of the place and its identify the fabric of cultural significance. I relationship to the surviving fabric; (b) the existence and nature of lost or obliterated It is essential that the statement be clear and pithY, fabric; expressing simply why the place is of value but not (c) the rarity and/or technical interest of all or any restating the physical or documentary evidence. I part of the place; (d) the functions of the place and its parts; 4.0 THE REPORT (e) the relationship of the place and its parts with its setting; 4.1 Content I (f) the cultural influences which have affected the The report will comprise written and graphic form and fabric of the place; materiafand will present an assessment of cultural (g) the significance of the place to people who use significance and a statement of cultural significance. I or have used the place, or descendants of such In order to avoid unnecessary bulk, only material people; directly relevant to the process of assessing cultural (h) the historical content of the place with significance and to making a statement of cultural particular reference to the ways in which its significance should be included. I fabric has been influenced by historical forces See also Guidelines to the Burra Charter: or has itself influenced the course of history; Procedures for Undertaking Studies and Reports. (i) the scientific or research potential of the place; I U) the relationship of the place to other places, for example in respect of design, technology, use, 4.2 Written material locality or origin; The text should be clearly set out and easy to follow. (k) any other factor relevant to an understanding In addition to the assessment and statement of I of the place: cultural significance as set out in 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4 it should include: 3.3 The assessment of cultural significance (a) name of the client; The assessment of cultural significance follows the (b) names of all the practitioners engaged in the I collection of information. task; ,I I IGUIDELINES TO THE BURRA CHARTER: CONSERVATION POLICY These gl,lidelines, which cover· the development of 1.3 Need to develop conservation policy conservation policy and strategy for implementation of The development of a conservation policy, I that policy, were adopted by the Australian national embodied in a report as defined in Section 5.0, is committee of the International Council on Monuments an essential prerequisite to making decisions about and Sites (Australia ICOMOS) on 25 May 1985 and the future of the place. 'revised on 23 April 1988. They should be read in 1.4 Skills required I conjunction with the Burra Charter. In accordance with the Burra Charter, the study of a place should make use of all relevant disciplines. Contents The professional skills required for such study are I 1.0 Preface not common. It cannot be assumed that anyone 1.1 Intention of guidelines practitioner will have·the full range of skills required 1.2 Cultural significance to develop a conservation policy and prepare the 1.3 Need to develop conservation policy appropriate report. In the course of the task it may 11.4 Skills required be necessary to consult witl1 other practitioners and 2.0 The Scope of the Conservation Policy organisations. 2.1 Introduction 12.2 Fabric and setting 2.0 THE SCOPE OF THE CONSERVATION 2.3 Use POLICY 2.4 Interpretation 2.1 Introduction 2.5 Management The purpose of the conservation policy is to state 12.6 Control of physical intervention in the fabric how the conservation of the place may best be 2.7 Const"raints on investigation achieved both in the long and short term. It will be 2.8 Future developments specific to that place. 12.9 Adoption and review The conservation policy will include the issues listed 3.0 Development of Conservation Policy below. 3.1 Introduction 3.2 Collection of information 2.2 Fabric and setting 1 3.2.1 Significant fabric The conservation policy should identify the most 3.2.2 Client, owner and user requirements and appropriate way of caring for the fabric and setting resources of the place arising out of the statement of 3.2.3 Other requirements and concerns significance and other constraints. A specific I 3.2.4 Condition of fabric combination of conservation actions should be 3.2.5 Uses identified. This mayor may not involve changes to 3.2.6 Comparative information the fabric. I 3.2.7 Unavailable information 2.3 Use 3.3 Assessment of information The conservation policy should identify a use or 3.4 Statement of conservation policy combination of uses, or constraints on use, that are I 3.5 Consequences of conservation policy compatible with the retention of the cultural 4.0 Implementation of Conservation Policy significance of the place and that are feasible. 5.0 The Report 2.4 Interpretation 5.1 Introduction The conservation policy should identify appropriate I 5.2 Written material ways of making the significance of the place 5.3 Graphic material understood consistent with the retention of that I 5.4 Sources significance. This may be a combination of the treatment of the fabric, the use of the place and the 1.0 PREFACE use of introduced interpretative material. In some instances the cultural significance and other Intention of guidelines 1.1 constraints may preclude the introduction of such 1 These guidelines are intended to clarify the nature uses and material. of professional work done within the terms of the Burra Charter. They recommend a methodical 2.5 Management procedure for development of the conservation The conservation policy should identify a I policy for a place, for the statement ofconservation management structure through which the conserva policy and for the strategy for the implementation tion policy is capable of being implemented. It of that policy. should also identify: (a) those to be responsible for subsequent I 1.2 Cultural significance conservation and management decisions and The establishment of cultural significance and the for the day-to-day management of the place; preparation of a statement of cultural significance (b) the mechanism by which these decisions are to 1 are essential prerequisites to the development of a be made and recorded; conservation policy (refer to Guidelines to the Burra (c) the means of providing security and regular ma.intenance for the place. I Charter: Cultural Significance). 1 8 r------I (c) authorship of the report; 4.4 Sources (d) date; All sources used in the report must be cited with I (e) brief or outline of brief; sufficient precision to enable others to locate them. (f) constraints on the task, for example, time, It is necessary for all sources consulted to be listed, money, expertise; even if not cited. (g) sources (see 4.4). All major sources or collections not consulted, but I 4.3 Graphic material believed to have potential usefulness in establishing Graphic material may include maps, plans, cultural significance, should be listed. drawings, diagrams, sketches, photographs and In respect of source material privately held the name tables, and should be reproduced with sufficient and address of the owner should be given, but only quality for the purposes of interpretation. with the owner's consent. Al! components discussed in the report should be I identified in the graphic material. Such components should be identified and described in a schedule. 4.5 Exhibition and adoption Detailed drawings may not be necessary. A diagram The report should be exhibited and the statement I may best assist the purpose of the report. of cultural significance adopted in accordance with Graphic material which does not serve a specific Guidelines to the Burra Charter: Procedures for purpose should not be included. Undertaking Studies and Reports. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 2.6 Control of physical intervention in the fabric 3.2.3 Other requirements and concerns - I The conservation policy should include provisions Investigate other requirements and concerns likely for the control of physical intervention. It may: to affect the future of the place and its setting (a) specify unavoidable intervention; including: (b) identify the likely impact of any intervention (a) federal, state and local government acts, I on the cultural significance; ordinances and planning controls; (c) specify the degree and nature of intervention (b) eommunity needs and expectations; acceptable for non-conservation purposes; (c) locational and social context. I (d) specify explicit research proposals; (e) specify how research proposals will be assessed; 3.2.4 Condition of fabric - (f) provide for the conservation of significant Survey the fabric sufficiently to establish how its fabric and contents removed from the place; physical state will affect options for the treatment I (g) provide for the analysis of material; of the fabric. (h) provide for the dissemination of the resultant information; (i) specify the treatment of the site when the 3.2.5 Uses - -I intervention is complete. Collect information about uses, sufficient to determine whether or not such uses are compatible 2.7 Constraints on investigation with the significance of the place and feasible. The conservation policy should identify social, I religious, legal or other cultural constraints which 3.2.6 Comparative information - might limit the accessibility or investigation of the Collect comparative information about the place. conservation of similar places (if appropriate). I 2.8 Future developments The conservation policy should set guidelines for 3.2.7 Unavailable information - future developments resulting from changing needs. Identify information which has been sought and is unavailable and which may be critical to the I 2.9 Adoption and review determination of the conservation policy or to its The conservation policy should contain provision implementation. for adoption and review. I 3.0 DEVELOPMENT OF CONSERVATION 3.3 Assessment of information POLICY The information gathered above should now be assessed in relation to the constraints arising from 3.1 Introduction the statement of cultural significance for the I In developing a conservation policy for the place purpose of developing a conservation policy. it is necessary to assess all the information relevant In the course of the assessment it may be necessary to the future care of the place and its fabric. Central to collect further information. I to this task is the statement of cultural significance. The task includes a report as set out in Section 5.0. 3.4 Statement of conservation policy The contents of the report should be arranged to The practitioner should prepare a statement of suit the place and the limitations of the task, but conservation policy that addresses each of the issues I it will generally be in three sections: listed in 2.0, viz.: (a) the development of a conservation policy (see - fabric and setting; 3.2 and 3.3); -use; I (b) the statement of conservation policy (see 3.4 - interpretation; and 3.5); - management; (c) the development of an appropriate strategy for - contr 4.0 IMPLEMENTATION OF CONSERVATION (b) names of all the practitioners engaged in the POLICY task, the work they undertook, and any I separate reports they prepared; Following the preparation of the conservation (c) authorship of the report; policy a strategy for its implementation should be (d) date; prepared in consultation with the client. The (e) brief or outline of brief; I strategy may include information about: (f) constraints on the task, for example, time, (a) the financial resources to be used; money, expertise; (b) the technical and other staff to be used; (g) sources (see 5.4). (c) the sequence of events; I (d) the timing of events; 5.3 Graphic material (e) the management structure. Graphic material may include maps, plans, The strategy should allow the implementation of the drawings, diagrams, sketches, photographs and I conservation policy under changing circumstances. tables, clearly reproduced. Material which does not serve a specific purpose 5.0 THE REPORT should not be included. I 5.1 Introduction 5.4 Sources The report is the vehicle through which the All sources used in the report must be cited with conservation policy is expressed, and upon which sufficient precision to enable others to locate them. I conservation action is based. All sources of information, both documentary and See also Guidelines to the Burra Charter: oral, consulted during the task should be listed, Procedures for Undertaking Studies and Reports. whether or not they proved fruitful. I 5.2 Written material In respect of source material privately held, the Written material will include: name and address of the owner should be given, but (a) the statement of cultural significance; only with the owner's consent. (b) the development of conservatLon policy; I (c) the statement of conservation policy; 5.5 Exhibition and adoption (d) the strategy for implementation of conservation The report should be exhibited and the statement policy. of conservation policy adopted in accordance with I It should also include: Guidelines to the Burra Charter: Procedures for (a) name of the client; Undertaking Studies and Reports. I I I I I I I I I ------1 IGUIDELINES TO THE BURRA CHARTER: PROCEDURES FOR UNDERTAKING STUDIES AND REPORTS These guidelines for the preparation of professional (n) the condition under which the report may be studies and reports were adopted by the Australian published or distributed by the client, the practitioner I national committee of the International Council on or others; Monuments and Sites (Australia ICOMOS) on 23 April (0) the procedure for any required exhibition of the 1988. They should be read in conjunction with the Burra report; Charter. (p) the basis for comment upon the report and any 1 consequent amendment; (q) the responsibility for effecting archival storage in Contents accordance with Article 28 of the Burra Charter. 1.0 Preface 1 2.0 Agreements between client and practitioner 3.0 Responsibility for content of report 3.0 Responsibility for content of report 4.0 Draft report The content of the report is the responsibility of the I 5.0 Urgent action practitioner. The report may not be amended without the 6.0 Additional work agreement of the practitioner. 7.0 Recommendations for further investigations 8.0 Exhibition and comment 4.0 Draft report I 9.0 Adoption and review of report It is useful for the report to be presented to the client in 10.0 Further evidence draft form to ensure that it is understood and so that the 111.0 Accessibility of information practitioner may receive the client's comments. 5.0 Urgent action 1.0 Preface If the practitioner believes that urgent action may be These guidelines make recommendations about necessary to avert a threat to the fabric involving, for I professional practice in the preparation of the studies and example, stability or security, the practitioner should reports within the terms of the Burra Charter. immediately advise the client to seek specialist advice. Attention is also drawn to the advice about ethical, procedural and legal matters provided in the practice 6.0 Additional work 1notes issued by various professional bodies. Where it becomes clear that some aspect of the task will require more investigation or more expertise than has been allowed within the budget or the terms of the I 2.0 Agreements between client and practitioner agreement, the practitioner should advise the client Before undertaking a study or report, the client and the immediately. practitioner should agree upon: (a) the extent of the task, for example, up to the 7.0 Recommendations for further investigations I preparation of a statement of significance, up to the In respect of major unresolved aspects of cultural preparation of a statement of conservation policy or significance, conservation policy or of strategies for up to the preparation of a strategy for implementation of conservation policy, recommendations implementation; for further investigation should be made only where: I (b) the boundaries of the place; (a) the client has been informed of the need for such (c) any aspect which requires intensive investigation; investigation at the appropriate stage and it has been (d) the dates for the commencement of the task, impossible to have it undertaken within the budget submission of the draft report and submission of the and time constraints of the task; I final report; (b) further information is anticipated as a result of (e) the fee and the basis.upon which fees and disburse- intervention in the fabric which would not be proper ments will be paid; at this stage, but which will become appropriate in I (f) the use of any joint consultant, sub-consultant or the future. other practitioner with special expertise; Such recommendations should indicate what aspects of (g) the basis for any further investigation which may be cultural significance, conservation policy or required, for example, within the terms of 7.0 below implementation might be assisted by such study. 1 or section 3.3 of Guidelines to the Burra Charter: Conservation Policy; (h) the representative of the client to whom the 8.0 Exhibition and comment practitioner will be responsible in the course of the The report for any project of public interest should be 1 task; exhibited in order that interested bodies and the public (i) the sources, material or services to be supplied by the may comment and reasonable time should be allowed for client including previous studies or reports; the receipt and consideration of comment. Where public exhibition is not appropriate, comment should be sought I U) any requirements for the format or reproduction of the report; from relevant individuals, organisations and specialists. (k) the number of copies of the report to be supplied at each stage; 9.0 Adoption and review of report 1 (1) copyright and confidentiality; Recommendations should be made for the formal (m) how the authorship will be cited; adoption of the report and for any subsequent review. I 11 I I 10.0 Further evidence 11.0 Accessibility of information If after the completion of the report further evidence is All material relating to' the cultural significance of the I revealed, for example, by intervention in the fabric or place should be made readily available to increase the information from other sources, it is desirable for this common pool of knowledge. Publication by the client evidence to be referred to the original practitioner so that and/or practitioner should be encouraged. I the report" may be amended if necessary. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Appendix C. Significance Evaluation Criteria NSW State Heritage Inventory Project STATE HERITAGE INVENTORY S TAT USA N DSC 0 P E FIN AL REP 0 R T Stage 1 of the State Heritage Inventory Project December 1989 PREPARED BY JOAN IXMlCEW - FOR THE NSW DEPARTMENT OF PLANNlOO I I :3 . 3 THE EVALAOTION CRITERIA I INTERPRETATION I In this docurrBnt, unless the context indicates otherwise - I "the Locality" rre.ans an individual local governrrent area, be it shire, ro..micipality or city and includes l:oth land and waterways; "the Region" rre.ans any region identified in the 'State Historical I Guidelines' study and includes associated coast or waterways; "the State" rre.ans the State of New South Wales and rosy encompass I broader areas such as Australia, the continental shelf of Australia or beyond. I (e.g. . significant in the history of the State' incorp::>rates the concept of significance in Australian history or, for example, in world colonial history). I "History" rre.ans cultural history and includes neither prehistory nor natural history; I "alltural significance" rre.ans historic; aesthetic, social, scientific or other special value for past, present or future generations; I "fIeritage" rre.ans all places of cultural significance within the State. It is the collective tenn. I "Place" means an 'item' or 'precinct' as referred to or defined in the N. S.W. Heritage Act 1977, It describes a component of the State's heritage. I "alltural landscape" means those parts of the land surface which have been m:xiified by human activity. I I A place is eligible for entry on the State Heritage Inventory if its attrib.1tes :- - fall within one or trore of the following Criteria 1 to 5 relating to the nature of significance AND - fulfill one or rrore of the following Criteria 6 to 8 relating to the degree of that significance. I .,.,,-" ...... ------, I I I Criterion 1 (HISTORIC): SIGNIFICANT IN THE EVOLUrION AND PATTERN OF THE HISTORY OF NEW I SOUTH WALES la. Importance in the density or diversity of cultural features I illustrating the human occupation and evolution of the ~ity, the Region or the State or importance in relation to a figure, event, phase or activity I of historic influence in the Locality, the Region or the State. Inclusion guidelines - I NarE ; Assessrrent should refer to the Historic Guidelines. places, such as cultural landscapes I whose elerrents illustrate the layering of activities or even~s in a single I locality or the rela~ionship tetween landfonn and human history. plaCes representing influential, seminal or other 'landmark' activities, phases I events or figures in "the hisror:Y" of "the I ~ality, Region or State. These include places whose fabric, location or context expresses, for example I a significan-c event or aspect of the productive life of a prominent person, I Exclusion guidelines - places whose diversity spans only a -limi.ted. area or time, I places whose asscx::::iation with the significan"t activity" phase, event or person's life or work is tenuous, brief, transitory, incidental or unsubstantiated.; I places associated with activities, phases, events or lives whose significance in the evolution or developmen~ of the ~ality, Region or State is dubious; or places so altered that I the integrity of the asscx::::iation is degraded. Example of an e1 igible place under this criterion - I BRADLEY'S HEAD, SYDNEY HARBOUR Significant in the cultural pattern of the State:- I A cultural landscape which, amongst other attrib..1tes, incorporates diverse elements which illustrate the layering of distinct h1:lman developnents, phases and events (mariti..tre, military, conservation and reCreational), across time, over a I prominent coastal landfonn. I I" I I I 35. ~~~~~~~~~~._------_ .. - ~I I Criterion 2 (AESTHETIC): I SIGNIFICANT IN POSSESSIt-K; , OR cotITRIBOTING TO, CREATIVE OR TECHNICAL Accct1PLISHMENT IN NEW SOUTH WALES I Importance in dem::mstrating a high degree of creative or ~.I tedmical achievement for the ti.m8 in the Locality, the Region or , the State. Inclusion guidelines NOTE ; Assessrrent should refer to the Historic Guidelines. I . places, being any humanly created or affected place, which - derronstrate appropriate and conceptually strong solutions to a I technical problem, by expanding established or developing new technology; are creative either through their innovative departure from, ,I or their perfection of, established. nonns in some field of design or the arts; display a high degree of integrity in their technical or aesthetic qualities. I improve a site by their presence - e. g. landmarks or well-sited structures. ~'I Exclusion guidelines - . places which are the work of a highly regarded designer but are :' ' 'I not in themselves creatively or technically . outstanding; ~~ . places, the integrity of whose technical or aesthetic qualities is no longer intact. ~I ExamPle of an eligible place under this criterion NCOROO GARDEN, MOUNT WILSON Significant in contriooting to the creative accomplishrrent of landscape design in the Blue Mountains area of New South Wales. A cultural landscape' which, amongst other attributes, derronstrates a high degree of creative garden design in the rrountainous terrain of its region. 3G. ,/,... '.. " " I I I Criterion 3 (SOCIAL) : SIGNIFICANT THROOOH ASSOCIATIONS WITH A cct1MUNITY IN NEW SOUTH I WALES FOR SCCIAL, CULTURAL OR SPIRITUAL REASONS IIr\POrtance as places highly valued for reasons of social, cultural, religious, spiritual, aesthetic or educational I associations by a corrm.mity in the Locality, the Region or the State. I Inclusion guidelines - NarE ; Assessrrent should refer to the Historic Guidelines. places which are held in high esteem by the corrroJIlity or by I some significant and identifiable segment of that community, such esteem being demonstrated to be beyond the normal regard felt by any corm.unity for its familiar surroundings; I places whose strong association with the co!lIIl.lIlity is demonstrated "to be of C:. social, cuitural , spiritual or educational nature ( including cultural landsca:Pes or townsca:Pes I critical to a corrmmity-s sense of place). Exclusion guidelines - I places whose high regard cannot be derronstrated to be either held by the con:m.mity or strongly held by an identifiable group within it; I places in which the significant association with an identifiable group in the corrmm.ity is acknowledged by no other conmmity grot,.lp; I places whose association with the conmmity arises only from its assessrrent of their other values. (In such a case, the place should be assessed under the other criteria; "the results of that I assessment may alter the cormunity-s esteem for the place.) Example of an eligible place Wlder this criterion I DUNBAR WRECK SITE, SOUTH HEAD, SYDNEY Significant because of its social, cultural and educational I associations with the Begion-s conmm.i.ty. I I I I I 31. I r------ Cri-rerion 4 (SCIENTIFIC) : SIGNIFICANT FOR THE POTENTIAL TO YIELD INFORMATION CONTRIBUTING TO AN ONDERSTANDING OF THE HISTORY OF NEW SOUTH WALES Importance for its p::rtential to yield information contrib.lting to a wider understanding of the history of human occupation of the Locality, the Region or the State. Inclusion guidelines - NOI'E ; Assessment should refer to the Historic Guidelines. places for which there is a strong presumption of research potential in one of a wide variety of fields which may contrihrte to the understanding of local, regional or State history; places with physical evidence likely to be of specified technological or cultural value, where that evidence is not available through other research techniques; Exclusion guidelines - . places for which there is no presumption of research potential; places valued for unusual features rrent:]..oned in docurrentar'Y sources rot no longer part of the surviving fabric; places of a type, already well studied and documented, and not requiring additional research; places whose research potential is exhausted. (They may becorre eligible under other criteria, through the research results. ) Example of an eligible place under this criterion FIRST GOVEBNMENT HOUSE SITE, SYDNEY Significant for i"CS potential to yield information . aoout various aspects of the colonial period. of gove:rnrrent in the State. An archaeological site which, aro::mgst other attrihltes, has revealed and DEintains the potential to reveal, through historical and archaeological investigation, infonration a"OOut significant phases of the lrom:m occupation of New South Wales and. of the City of Sydney. I I I Criterion 5 (arHER): SIGNU'ICANT FOR sct1E OTHER VALUE TO PAST, PRESENT OR FUTURE I GENERATIONS IN NEW SOUTH WALES Importance for some other special cultural value to the LcxJa1ity, I the Region or the State. Inclusion guidelines I NOTE ; Assessrrent should refer to the Historic Guidelines. places which demonstrably possess some significant cultural I value not included in any of the above four evaluation criteria. places which, through their accessibility, setting, integrity and/or other attributes are suitable for public education through on site interpretation. I \ Kv£lusioo guidelines I places whose differen"C cultural values are not significan"C or, being significant, cannot be established or, derronstrated. I . places whose educational attributes are rocxiest. I No example is given of an eligible place under this criterion, ,I I 'I I I I I I I I I :1 Criterion 6 (RARE): I SIGNIFICANT IN POSSESSING RARE, ENDANGERED OR UNCOMMON ASPECTS OF THE HISTORY OF NEW SOUTH WALES -I Importance in dero:mstrating a distinctive way of life, custom, process, land-use, ftmction or design no longer practised in the Locality, the Region or the State, in danger of t:eing lost or of I exceptional interest to the Locality, the Region or the State. Inclusion guidelines - I NOTE ; Assessrrent should refer to the Historic Guidelines. places of established scarcity, either as the result of a 'I process which produced few such places or as the result of subsequent destruction or decay; place~ offering unusually accura-re evidence of a particular iIDrnan activity, through the in-regrity of their surviving I charac-reristics. ~xclusion guidelines - I . places whose rarity is suspected, through the absence of survey information to the contrary, bJ.t has not Ceen established; places of a currently nl.U'09rous class which are potentially :1 , under threat. ;1 RY4mPle of an eligible place under this criterion - - i i OITERY ARSENIC MINE Significant as a rare aspect of the mining history of the State. 11 Works, structures and surroundings which, amongst other attribJ.tes, derronstrate a distinctive mining process of ;1 exceptional world interest. il I 11· 1 1I i I I ...... ~. 10· I I I I I I Criterion 7 (REPRESENTATIVE): SIGNIFICANT IN DEMONSTRATING THE CHARACTERISTICS OE' A CLASS OF I CULTURAL PLACES OR ENVIRONMENTS IN NEW SOUTH WALES Importance in dem::>nstrating the principal characteristics of the I range of human activities (including way of life, philosophy, custom, process, land-use,function, design or technique) in the enviroI1.ID9nt of the Locality, the Region or the State. I Inclusion guidelines - NOTE ; Assessment should refer to the Historic Guidelines. I . places which are good examples of their type by combining the most indicative characteristics of the type; as significant variants of the type; I as par:t of a group of places collectively illustrating a range 6f variation within the "CYP8;or by representing the -r-ype's seminal or optirral develoI;m8nt. places which, amongst a number of their type, stand out for I their integrity, condition or association with their setting. I Exclusion guidelines - places which do not represent well the combination of characteristics which make up an established type or a I sigI'lificant variant of it. Example of an eligible place tmder this criterion I KINCHEGA WOOLSHED Significant in derronstrating the characteristics of a class of I cultural places in its Region. A b.li.lding which, together with its contents and surroundings, demonstrates, amongst other attribJ.tes, activities associated I with the wool industry in the Darling River enviroI1.ID9nt. I I t: I I 41. I ...------~--- I I Crirerion 8 (ASSOCIATIVE) : I SIGNIFIC~r FOR ASSOCIATION WITH PEOPLE. ACTIVITIES, PHASES OR EVEt-;'TS IN THE EVOLUTION OF NEW SOUTH WALES I Itap:Jr'tance for association with the life or works of inmviduals or groups or with activities, phases or events which have played. I a significant role in the human occupation and evolution of the Locality, the Region or the State. Inciusion guidelines - I NOTE ; Assessment should refer to the Historic Guidelines. places representing significant activities, phases, events, I lives or works in the social, economic, political or cultural development of the Locality l Region or State; . places:whose fabric, location or context expresses or evokes a I significant aspect of the productive life of a prominent person or a significant event, phase or activity. " Exclusion guidelines - I places whose association with the significant activity, phase, event or person-s life or work is tenuous, brief, transitory, incidental or unsubstantiated.; . I places associated. with activities, phases, events or lives whose significance in the fn.mEn occupation and evolution of the Locality, Region or State is dubious; I . places so altered. that .. :the aspects of the environment important to the association have 'been seriously degraded. or are better rep~~ented. by physical evidence elsewhere. I Exa~le of an eligible place under this criterion - HYDE PARK BARRACKS, SYDNEY I Significant in the pattern of the cultural history of the State:- A b.tilding with contents and surrounds which, arrongst other I attributes, is associated with early Euro:pean settlement of the colony and convictism and which is a major work of the prominent convict architect, Francis Greenway.' I I i I I i I ...... -...... _--_ .. - ... - .. _-. 4Z. "or I I APPENDIX D. HERITAGE ITEMS RECOMMENDED FOR RETENTION, CONSERVATION I AND INCLUSION ON HERITAGE SCHEDULE OF REP 26. Buildings I B1 Pyrmont Arms Hotel 42-44 Hams Street B2 Cottage 4 Ways Terrace B3 The Ways Terrace 12-20 Point Street I B4 Terrace ofTen Houses 120-138 Bowman Street B5 Terrace ofThree Houses 140 Bowman Street (83-85 Point Street) I B6 Royal Pacific Hotel 59 Hams Street I B7 Pyrmont Whart 19 - 21 lones Bay Road Structures/Features I S1 Pike and Rail Fence Bowman Street/Cross Street S2 Escarpment Pike and Rail Fence I and Railway Cutting lones Bay Road Landscape Items I L1 Phoenix Palm Tree Adjacent Ways Terrace I I I I I I I I I I I I -----~-~------. I PYRMONT POINTARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HERITAGE ASSESSMENT -1993 NAME Pyrmont Arms Hotel (former) HERITAGE ITEM: Building (also part ofgroup) I OTHERNAMES Part ofHarris/Scott/Cross St Group REFERENCE NO. Bl LOCAliTY PYRMONT POSTCODE 2009 BOUNDARY/ IDENTIFICATION I STREETADDRESS 42-44 Hams Street PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTlCS/lllSTORICAL NOTES. SEE OVER ~A~ I ~~ STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE A substantial and well-proportioned former SITE CONDITION I hotel on a corner site which, whilst having the early twentieth century detailing of its (original Features) renovation, retains significant aspects of its earlier form. Important member of the Intact . HarrislScott/Cross Street Group and of social significance as a local social venue, the Minor Alteration X hotels being important centres in working-class society. It's relationship to the Group Major Alteration X I is symbolic of many of the social relations associated with the nineteenth century - Sympathetic .x development ofthe Point. See also under "Harris/Scott/Cross St Group". - Unsympathetic .x Removed (site only) . I EVALUATION Historic Aesthetic Social ScientifIC Other Rare Associative L I Representative L L L RECOMMENDED STATUTORY CONTROLS: MANAGEMENT ACTION: Retain, conserve, adapt. I Retain on Heritage Schedule REP 26. Encourage preparation ofa Conservation Plan. I I I I I I I I PHOTOGRAPHS DATE OFSURVEY B&W ROLL: 92-104/2 Neg No. Frame No. 37 February, 1993 I STUDY TEAM: Richard Mackay, Tony Brassil, Howard Tanner, Megan Jones SURVEYORTony Brassil Godden Mackay Pty Ud- 200 Commonwealth Street, Surry Hills 2010 (02) 281 8599 I I I PYRMONT POINT ARCHAEOLOGICALAND HERITAGEASSESSMENT -1993 I REFERENCE NO.B1 PERIOD DATE OF Pre -1800 CONSTRUCTION 1879, alterations circa 19205 I HERITAGE LISTINGS 1801- 1825 ARCHITECT/ Register of the National Estate (ARC) 1826-1850 DESIGNER Register of the National Trust (NSW) X 1851-1875 unknown I Within National Trust Conservation Area X 1876 -1900 X BUILDER REP 26 Heritage Schedule X 1901-1925 unknown UltimolPyrmont Heritage Study X 1926-1950 HISTORICAL 1951-1975 THEMES: I Local Amenity Post -1975 I mSTORICAL NOTES: Hotel built in 1879. Sold in 1915 to John Boydon. Building altered in the 19205. Licence abandoned 19705 and building refurbished as professional offices. INFORMATION SOURCES: I Written: Mathews, M.R. Pyrmont and Ultimo -A History, Sydney, 1982. Oral: Graphic: I PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS: Materials: Exterior: Rendered brick, corrugated iron roof I Interior: Styles: DESCRIPTION: Three storey rendered brick hotel with hipped-gable roof of corrugated iron, on corner site, with I faceted return to corner. Harris Street frontage has three-facet balcony projections with recessed verandahs in two bays to each upper floor, with triangular pediments with decorative mouldings above each bay. Eaves are corbelled and projecting string courses delineate floor and sill levels. .1 I I I MODIFICATION: Third level added and facades remodelled during th~ 19205. I I I GODDEN MACKAY PrY LTD 200 Commonwealth Street, Sorry ~ NSW 2010 (02) 281 8599 I I I I I I PYRMONT POINT ARCHAEOLOGICALAND HERITAGE ASSESSMENT -1993 NAME Cottage HERITAGE ITEM: I Building OTHERNAMES REFERENCE NO. B2 I LOCALITY PYRMONT POSTCODE 2009 BOUNDARY/ STREETADDRESS 4 Ways Terrace ID~~~ I t>'~«~\.~ PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS/HISTORICAL NOTES· SEE OVER ~'" I . 'I... ~~ \ ' I STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE Rare survivor of a mid to late nineteenth SITE CONDIDON century cottage in a spectacular location. The house, with the adjacent semi-detached (Original Features) pair (No's 2 and 2A) predates the cliff face excavation below it and is a relic of the Intact X originallandform and type of housng characteristic of the area in the late nineteenth Minor Alteration X I century. The building provides interesting contrasts with the industrial area below it Major Alteration . and the municipal housing development, The Ways Terrace, adjacent. - Sympathetic . - Unsympathetic . I Removed (site only) . EVALUATION Historic Aesthetic Social Scientifzc Other Rare L Associative Representative L RECOMMENDED STATUTORY CONTROLS: MANAGEMENTACTION: Retain, conserve and I Retain on Heritage Schedule of REP 26, if retained prepare Conservation Plan I I I I I I I I PHOTOGRAPHS DATE OF SURVEY I B&WROLL: 92-104/6 NegNo.3 Frame No. 12 February, 1993 STUDY TEAM: Richard Mackay, Tony Brassil, Howard Tanner, Megan Jones SURVEYORTony Brassil I Godden Mackay Pty Ltd 200 Commonwealth Street, Sun-y Hills 2010 (02) 281 8599 I I PYRMONT POINT ARCHAEOLOGICALAND HERITAGE ASSESSMENT -1993 I REFERENCE NO. B2 PERIOD DATE OF Pre -1800 CONSTRUCTION Unknown I HERITAGE LISTINGS 1801- 1825 ARCmTECT/ Register of the National Fstate (ARC) 1826-1850 DESIGNER . Register of the National Trust (NSW) X 1851-1875 X Unknown Within National Trust Conservation Area X 1876-1900 BUILDER I REP 26 HeritageSchwwe X 1901-1925 Unknown Ultimo/pyrmont Heritage Study X 1926-1950 mSTORICAL 1951-1975 THEMES: I Post -1975 Workers dwellings . mSTORICAL NOTES: I I INFORMATION SOURCES: Written: Oral: I Graphic: PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS: Materials: I Exterior: Rendered brick and corrugated iron Interior: Styles: I DESCRIPTION: Small rendered brick cottage of Georgian proportions with hipped corrugated-iron roof. Walls are lined to simulate ashlar construction. Symmetrical facade with central entry door. Door and window openings are rectangular. .1 I I MODIFICATION: It is presently boarded up and vacant. I I I I GODDEN MACKAY PTY LTD 200 Commonwealth Street, Surry IIDls NSW 2010 (02) 2818599 I I I I I I PYRMONT POINTARCHAEOLOGICALAND HERITAGE ASSESSMENT -1993 NAME The Ways Terrace HERITAGE ITEM: I Building OTHERNAMES REFERENCE NO. B3 I LOCAliTY PYRMONT POSTCODE 2009 STREETADDRESS 12-20 Point Street I PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTlCS/HISTORICAL NOTES· SEE OVER STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE Ways Terrace is an effective architectural SITE CONDITION composition in which the large scale of the complex is minimised and its visual (Original Features) I impact varied by the sophisticated arrangement of building alignments, rooflines, Intact. .x verandahs and projecting bays. It is the only such essay in a large scale working class Minor Alteration . public housing project by the eminent architect Professor Leslie Wilkinson. It has a Major Alteration . I prominent location on high ground, and is close to both the 18705 cottages of the - Sylnpathetic . Cross Street Group and the Italinate terrace at 120-138 Bowman Street. These - Unsympathetic . buildings together form a valuable museum of contrasting working-class housing Removed (site only) . I styles from the 18705 to 1925. EVALUATION Historic Aesthetic Social ScientifIC Other Rare S S Associative S R I RepresenJaJive R RECOMMENDED STATUTORY CONTROLS: MANAGEMENTACTION: Retain, conserve and I Retain on Heritage Schedule of REP 26, if retained prepare Conservation Plan. I I I I I I I I '. PHOTOGRAPHS DATE OFSURVEY B&W ROLL: 92-104/6 Neg No. Frame No. 26 February, 1993 I STUDY TEAM: Richard Mackay, Tony Brassil, Howard Tanner, Megan Jones SURVEYORTony Brassil I Godden Mackay Pty Ltd 200 Commonwealth Street, SUlTY Hills 2010 (02) 281 8599 I I PYRMONT POINTARCHAEOLOGICALAND HERITAGE ASSESSMENT -1993 REFERENCE NO. B3 PERIOD DATE OF Pre-1800 CONSTRUCTION 1925 HERITAGE liSTINGS 1801- 1825 ARcmTECT/ Register of the National Estate (AHC) x 1826-1850 DESIGNER Register of the National Trust (NSW) X 1851-1875 Prof. Leslie Wilkinson and Joseoh Fowell Within National Trust Conservation Area X 1876-1900 BUILDER REP 26 Heritage Schedule X 1901-1925 X Unknown Ultimo/Pyrmont Heritage Study X 1926-1950 HISTORICAL 1951-1975 THEMES: Post-1975 Workers housing. Gentrification. I HISTORICAL NOTES: Land resumed by Sydney City Council in 1916, during wharf construction on the waterfront and co-incidental with the construction of the railway goods line. Designed in 1923 by Professor Leslie Wilkinson in conjunction with Joseph Fowell. The scheme won the City Councils 'Housing Project Competition' of I 1923. Building completed and occupied in 1925 as public housing. INFORMATION SOURCES: I Written: National Trust Listing Card (see Bibliography as well) Oral: Graphic: I PHYSICAL CHARACfERlSTICS: Materials: Exterior: Brick, terracotta tile Interior: I Styles: DESCRIPTION: This is a large four storey painted brick complex comprising five wings on differing alignments, I passing over a lane at the north end. The building has a Mediterranean character with a shallow pitched tiled roof, wide eaves, and projecting bays with arched porches and flat-roofed upper balconies supported on squat columns. Narrow verandahs on the main wings have scalloped timber barge boards, and there are picturesque cantilevered balconies flanking the arch over the lane at the northern end. Windows are small paned. The building is set on I high ground with harbour views. I I MODIFICATION: I I I GODDEN MACKAY YfY LTD 200 Commonwealth Street, SutTy Hills NSW 2010 (02) 2818599 I I I I/J -----~~~------.I I PYRMONT POINT ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HERITAGE ASSESSMENT - 1993 NAME Terrace ofTen Houses HERITAGE ITEM: I Building OTHERNAMES REFERENCE NO. B4 LOCAliTY PYRMONT POSTCODE 2009 I STREETADDRESS 120-138 Bowman Street I PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS/lllSTORICAL NOTES· SEE OVER STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE Good example of a late-nineteenth century SITE CONDmON I working-class terrace with few decorative elements. It is in good condition, intact (Original Features) and occupied and an important element in the local built environment. A relic of Intact X former working-class residential character of the area in the nineteenth century and Minor Alteration .x provides useful contrasts with both the HarrislScott/Cross Street Group and the Major Alteration . I "Ways terrace" nearby. - Sympathetic . - Unsympathetic . I Removed (site only) . EVALUATION Historic Aesthetic Social ScientijIC Other RJJre Associative I Representative L L RECOMMENDED STATUTORY CONTROLS: MANAGEMENTACTION: Retain, conserve and I Retain on Heritage Schedule of REP 26, ifretained prepare Conservation Plan I I I I I I I PHOTOGRAPHS DATE OF SURVEY I B&W ROLL: 92-10412 Neg No. Frame No. 25 February, 1993 STUDYTEAM: Richard Mackay, Tony Brassil, Howard Tanner, Megan Jones SURVEYORTony Brassil I Godden Mackay Pty Ltd 200 Commonwealth Street, Sorry mus 2010 (02) 281 8599 I L..... I ~ _ I PYRMONT POINTARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HERITAGEASSESSMENT - 1993 I REFERENCE NO. B4 PERIOD DATE OF Pre-l800 CONSTRUCTION HERITAGE liSTINGS 1801- 1825 ARcmTECT/ I Register ofthe National Estate (ARC) 1826-1850 DESIGNER Register of the National Trust (NSW) x 1851-1875 Unknown Within National Trust Conservation Area X 1876-1900 X BUILDER I REP 26 Heritage Schedule X 1901-1925 Unknown Ultimo/Pyrmont Heritage Study X 1926-1950 mSTORICAL 1951-1975 THEMES: Post-1975 Workers dwellings I lDSTORICAL NOTES: I INFORMATION SOURCES: Written: . Oral: I Graphic: PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS: I Materials: Exterior: Rendered brick/corrugated ironlterracotta tiles Interior: Styles: I DESCRIPTION: A terrace of ten houses, all virtually identical, set in two groups, separated by a change of level and a projecting rue-wall. The two-storey houses have a terracotta tiled gable roof and corrugated-iron skillion roofs over the upper floor verandahs, which have cast-iron lace balustrades of identical patterns. Chimneys are set I between the houses and have triple terracotta pots. Lower. floor level is below road level and access is by stairs from the street to the ground floor. I I I MODIFICATION: Several houses have had upper verandahs enclosed, each unsympathetic and inconsistent with the others. I I I I GODDEN MACKAY PTY LTD 200 Commonwealth Street, Sorry HllIs NSW 2010 (02) 2818599 I I I I I -1993 I PYRMONT POINT ARCHAEOLOGICALAND HERITAGE ASSESSMmrf HERITAGE ITEM: NAME Terrace ofThree Houses Building I REFERENCE NO. B5 OTIIERNAMES Former Caledonian Hotel LOCALITY PYRMONT POSTCODE 2009 I STREETADDRESS 140 Bowman St and 83/85 Point Street. OVER I PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS/HISTORICAL NOTES - SEE residential SITE CONDffiON STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE Significant as a relic of the former I former social (Original Features) and commercial character of the area. As a hotel, it is a relic of the residential Intact X importance of such establishments and their proliferation in working-class and detailing Miilor Alteration X areas. Despite its conversion to housing, it is representative of the form Major Alteration . ofa late-nineteenth-century suburban hotel. 1 - Sympathetic X - Unsympathetic . 1 Removed (site only) . ScienJifzc Other EVALUATION Historic Aesthetic Social Rare Associative L ~I Representative L L ACTION: Retain, conserve and RECOMMENDED STATUTORY CONTROLS: MANAGEMENT 11 Plan. Retain on Heritage Schedule of REP 26, if retained prepare Conservation I I -<"'/-' ~ -.": / . / / 1 / I I I I I NegNo. Frame No. 2 lones SURVEYORTony Brassil STUDY TEAM: Richard Mackay, Tony Brassil, Howard Tanner, Mcgan Hills 2010 (02) 281 8599 I GOOden Mackay Pty lid 200 Commonwealth Street, Surry I I I PYRMONT POINT ARCHAEOLOGICALAND HERITAGEASSESSMENT -1993 I REFERENCE NO. B5 PERIOD DATE OF Pre -1800 CONSTRUCTION HERITAGE USTlNGS 1801- 1825 ARClDTECT/ I Register of the National Estate (ARC) 1826-1850 DESIGNER Register of the National Trust (NSW) x 1851-1875 Unknown Within National Trust Conservation Area X 1876-1900 X BUILDER I REP 26 Heritage Schedule X 1901-1925 Unknown Ultimo/Pyrmont Heritage Study X 1926-1950 HISTORICAL 1951-1975 THEMES: Post -1975 LocaJ. Amenity, I Gentrification Redevelopment I HISTORICAL NOTES: INFORMATION SOURCES: I Written: Mathews, M. Pyrmont and Ultimo - History, PUHP, 1982 Oral: Graphic: I PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS: Materials: Exterior: Rendered brick/corrugated iron I Interior: Styles: DESCRIPTION: A rendered brick former hotel, now divided into three attached dwellings. Of two storeys, with I basement floor and attic rooms, it turns around a bend in the road alignment and entry to ground level is by short bridges over the light well to basement level. First floor has a cantilever balcony with cast iron lace balustrades and open work columns. Roof is of corrugated ron with weatherboard windows. I I I MODIFICATION: Extensive restoration nearing completion. I I I I I GODDEN MACKAY PTY LTD 200 Commonwealth Street, Sorry Hills NSW 2010 (02) 2818599 I I I I I PYRMONT POINT ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HERITAGE ASSESSMENT -1993 NAME Royal Pacific Hotel HERITAGE ITEM: I Building OTHERNAMES REFERENCE NO. B6 LOCAliTY PYRMONT POSTCODE 2009 I STREETADDRESS 59 Harris Street I PHYSICAL CHARACfERISTlCS/lllSTORICAL NOTES· SEE OVER I STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE A fine and typical early twentieth century SITE CONDmON suburban hotel which occupies an important corner of the Harris St/John Street (Original Features) intersection, once an important junction and the terminus of the Pyrmont tram Intact . service. It is evidence of the former social imporlance of such facilities in a working Minor Alteration .x I class environment. It appears relatively original and in fair condition. Major Alteration . - Sympathetic .x - Unsympathetic . I Removed (site only) . EVALUATION Historic Aesthetic Social Scientijzc Other Rare I Associative Representative L L L RECOMMENDED STATUTORY CONTROLS: Retain MANAGEMENTACTION: Retain, conserve and I on Heritage Schedule ofREP 26, if retained prepare Conservation Plan. ..~~~. I .~ .. --~ ~ I I I I I I DATE OF SURVEY I NegNo. Frame No. 2 February, 1993 STUDY TEAM: Richard Mackay, Tony BrassiI, Howard Tanner, Megan Jones SURVEYORTony BrassiI I Godden Mackay Pty Ltd 200 Commonwealth Street, SUITY Hills 2010 (02) 281 8599 I I I PYRMONT POINT ARCHAEOLOGICALAND HERITAGEASSESSMENT ~ 1993 I REFERENCE NO. B6 PERIOD DATE OF Pre -1800 CONSTRUCTION 1913 I HERITAGE USTINGS 1801- 1825 ARCIDTECT/ Register of the National Estate (ARC) 1826-1850 DESIGNER Register of the National Trust (NSW) 1851-1875 Unknown I Within National Trust Conservation Area x 1876-1900 X BUILDER REP 26 Heritage Schedule X 1901-1925 X Unknown Ultimo/pyrmont Heritage Study X 1926-1950 IDSTORICAL 1951-1975 THEMES: I Local amenity Post-1975 I mSTORICAL NOTES: Built and opened in 1913, but may incorporate earlier structure shown on historic maps (see Map 11, 1882, Map 14, 1895, Map 15, 1892). INFORMATION SOURCES: Written: I Oral: Graphic: I PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS: Materials: Exterior: Rendered Brick: Interior: I Styles: DESCRIPTION: Three storey corner hotel of sandstone rendered brick, lined to simulate ashlar. It has a substantial parapet with short rectangular projections, between which recessed panels contain a relief moulded I inscription of the hotel's name, one such inscription facing each street frontage. The corner facet has a moulded cornice as coping, with a cartouch containing the building's date of commission (or extension) below it. There is a heavy moulded cornice as a string course between floors and an extensive suspended flat awning shelters the I footpaths around the ground floor. The lower floors may incorporate fabric from an earlier sandstone structure. I I I MODIFICATION: I I I I GODDEN MACKAY PTY LTD 200 Commonwealth Street, Surry lnI1s NSW 2010 (02) 2818599 '., I ; I I I I PYRMONT POINT ARCHAEOLOGICALAND HERITAGE ASSESSMENT -1993 NAME Pyrmont Wharf 19-21 HERITAGE ITEM: I OTHERNAMES REFERENCE NO. B7 LOCALITY PYRMONT POSTCODE 2009 BOUNDARYI I STREETADDRESS Jones Bay Road I PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS/HISTORICAL NOTES· SEE OVER STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE These early 20th centry finger wharves are SITE CONDITION unique in Sydney because of the early use of concrete in their construction. There is (Original Features) use of natural features most noticeably in the exploitation of topography which Intact... X I required extensive excavation and use of concrete reinforcement and bridges to Minor Alteration X provide for free movement ofwagons for loading and unloading and in the light wells MajorAlteration . of the sheds which provide natural daylight to the totally enclosed lower level. The - Sympathetic . railway goods line to Darling Harbour Goods Yard links the wharves to the railway - Unsympathetic . I system of New South Wales and is a visual link beween the two transport Removed (site only) . technologies. Finger wharves such as these are a major visually unifying feature, I other than natural foliage, around Sydney Harbour. EVALUATION Historic Aesthetic Social Scientifzc Other Rare S S Associative R L I Representative S S L S RECOMMENDED STATUTORY CONTROLS: MANAGEMENTACTION: Retain, conserve and adapt I Retain on Heritage Schedule ofREP 26 in accordance with Conservation Plan. I ------I I I I I I I PHOTOGRAPHS DATE OF SURVEY B&W ROLL: 92-104/6 Neg No. Frame No. 5 February, 1993 I STUDY TFAM: Richard Mackay, Tony Brassil, Howard Tanner, Megan Jones SURVEYORTony Brassil I Godden Mackay Pty Ltd 200 Commonwealth Street, Sorry Hills 2010 (02) 281 8599 I '------~ ------I PYRMONT POINTARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HERITAGEASSESSMENT -1993 I REFERENCE NO.B7 PERIOD DATE OF Pre-l800 CONSTRUCTION Completed 1920 HERITAGE USTINGS 1801- 1825 ARClllTECT/ I Register of the National Estate (ARC) 1826-1850 DESIGNER Register of the National Trust (NSW) x 1851-1875 Sydney Harbour Trust Within National Trust Conservation Area X 1876-1900 BUILDER I REP 26 Heritage Schedule X 1901-1925 X Sydney Harbour Trust Ultimo/Pyrmont Heritage Study X 1926-1950 HISTORICAL Other: MSB Section 170 Register Sydney and Middle 1951-1975 THEMES: Harbours REP Post-1975 Industrialisation I HISTORICAL NOTES: These wharves were constructed between 1911 and 1919 with modem passenger I terminal built in 1971. Work was planned in 1911 and rock excavation commenced in that year. Interruptions from shortage of funds and dislocation of filling for the central roadway was completed and part of the reinforced wall on the eastern side was completed. The solid fill was excavated from a quarry in Pyrmont which closed when adequate materials were obtained. Wharves were constructed on a site which had difficult access, and were part of an overall I improvement ofwharf facilities available for expanding overseas trade before World War I. The wharves remain in use for layup and causal berths but with changed shipping technology and size of ships they are used less now than in the past. I INFORMATION SOURCES: Written: National Trust listing Card Oral: I Graphic: PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS: Materials: I Exterior: Timber/concrete/steellcorrugated iron Interior: Timber/steel Styles: I DESCRIPTION: Early 20th century fmger wharf and sheds, overall length ofwharf being 1200ft and 263ft wide. Solid filled roadway (50ft wide, and approx. 100ft long) flanked by ferro concrete cylinder piles enclosing turpentine piles on 12ft centres driven butt end first. Foundations carried 360ft beyond the central roadways on the I east side and 245ft on the western side, measured from inshore end. Outer flanking of timber fender piles and longitudinals of 14"x14" hardwood. There are 18"x1S" concrete face girders encasing 16"x16" RSJ and 3O"x12" concrete beams encasing 12" x 6" RSJs. Sheds of two stories with structural steelwork to lower storey and timber to upper level. Roof trussing is timber with oregon rafters and roof of galvaniszed iron. Concrete bridges link at I lower level to Jones Bay Road and to Bayview and Point Streets at upper level with an elevated centre roadway along wharf at upper level and centre roadway at lower level sunk 4ft for easy loading ofwagons. Railway lines to Darling Harbour Railway Yards from No. 21 (originally also from 19 and 20 but removed when sea wall moved 12" and was removed). Originally there was a concrete sea wall. There are unique light wells covered with metal mesh I for protection of glass and faced with white glazed tiles to provide natural lighting for lower level roadway sheds. A modem passenger terminal has been built in No. 20. I MODIFICATION: I I I GODDEN MACKAY PTY LTD 200 Commonwealth Street, Sorry Hills NSW 2010 (02) 2818599 I I I I I PYRMONT POINTARCHAEOLOGICALAND HERITAGEASSESSMENT _1993 NAME Pike and Rail Fence HERITAGE ITEM: Structure OTHERNAMES I REFERENCE NO. SI LOCALITY PYRMONT POSTCODE 2009 I STREETADDRESS Bowman and Cross Streets I PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS/HISTORICAL NOTES. SEE OVER STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE A major visual item in the streetscape of the SITE CONDffiON vicinity and a component of a feature which unifies a number of different views around Pyrmont Point. A relic of the diverse activities of the Sydney Harbour Trust Intll.ct x I and illustrative ofthe comprehensive planning and development undertaken as part of Minor Alteration . the reconstruction of port facilities by the Sydney Harbour Trust. Major Alteration . - Sympathetic . I - Unsympathetic . Removed (site only) . EVALUATION Historic Aesthetic Social ScientiFu: Other I Rare Associative L L Representative L I RECOMMENDED STATUTORY CONTROLS: MANAGEMENTACTION: Retain and Conserve. Maintain on Heritage Schedule ofREP 26 I I I ~ ...---- '.. -J.!...::....: " ~ ... . '.:~'~~ I I I I I PHOTOGRAPHS DATE OF SURVEY I B&W ROLL: 92-104/ Neg No. 6 Frame No. 23 February, 1993 STUDY TEAM: Richard Mackay, Tony Brassil, Howard Tanner, Megan Jones SURVEYORTony Brassil I Godden Mackay Pty Ltd 200 Commonwealth Street, Sun-y Hills 2010 (02) 281 8599 I I I PYRMONT POINT ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HERITAGEASSESSMENT - 1993 I REFERENCE NO. SI PERIOD DATE OF Pre -1800 CONSTRUCTION c.l920 I HERITAGE liSTINGS 1801- 1825 ARClllTECT/ Register ofthe National Estate (ARC) 1826-1850 DESIGNER Register of the National Trust (NSW) X 1851-1875 Sydney Harbour Trust. Sydney City Council. I Within National Trust Conservation Area X 1876-1900 BUILDER REP 26 Heritage Schedule X 1901-1925 x Ultimo/Pyrmont Heritage Study 1926-1950 mSTORICAL I 1951-1975 THEMES: Post -1975 Local Amenity I mSTORICAL NOTES: Presumed to have been erected by the Sydney Harbour Trust c. 1920 as part of improvements to the road access to the upper level of Wharf 19-21 and the cold stores. It is similar to the fence along Mill Street and Jones Bay Road. I INFORMATION SOURCES: Written: Oral: I Graphic: PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS: Materials: I Exterior: Cast Iron. Sandstone. Interior: Styles: I DESCRIPTION: A cast-iron palisade fence, six feet (approx 2m) high, on a plinth of sandstone with cement rendered square end-posts. It runs along the top of the retaining wall that separates the two levels of Cross and Bowman Streets. I I I MODIFICATION: I I I I GODDEN MACKAY PrY LID 200 Commonwealth Street, Sorry Hills NSW 2010 (02) 2818599 I I I I I I PYRMONT POINTARCHAEOLOGICALAND HERITAGE ASSESSMENT - 1993 NAME &carpment, Pike and Rail Fence and Railway Cutting to Wharves HERITAGE ITEM: Structure I OTHERNAMES REFERENCE NO. S2 LOCAliTY PYRMONT POSTCODE 2009 I STREETADDRESS Eastern Boundary ofMill Street/Jones Bay Road I PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS/lllSTORICAL NOTES - SEE OVER STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE A major visual feature of the views to the SITE CONDITION I Pyrmont escarpment and around the wharf areas of Pyrmont Point. It is a major (Original Features) component of a unifying feature of views around the Point. It is associated with the Intact. x construction of the Jones Bay wharves and the general reconstruction of the Port Minor Alteration . wharfage of Sydney Harbour, undertaken by the Sydney HarboUr Trust. The cutting Major Alteration . I is a representative example ofearly twentieth century excavation techniques. - Sympathetic . - Unsympathetic . I Removed (site only) . EVALUATION Historic Aesthetic Social ScientifIC Other Rare R Associative R I Representative R L RECOMMENDED STATUTORY CONTROLS: MANAGEMENTACTION: Retain and conserve. I Maintain on Heritage Schedule ofREP 26 Some modification and adaptation may be possible. I I I I I I I I PHOTOGRAPHS DATE OF SURVEY B&W ROLL: 92-104/4 Neg No. Frame No. 25 February, 1993 I STUDY TEAM: Richard Mackay, Tony Brassil, Howard Tanner, Megan lones SURVEYORTony Brassil 200 Commonwealth Street, Sorry Hills 2010 (02) 2818599 I Godden Mackay Pty Ltd ;j ..._------,I I PYRMONT POINTARCHAEOLOGICALAND HERITAGEASSESSMENT -1993 I REFERENCE NO. S2 PERIOD DATE OF Pre-1800 CONSTRUCTION c.l920 HERITAGE USTlNGS 1801- 1825 ARcmTECT/ I Register of the National Estate (AHq 1826-1850 DESIGNER Register of the National Trust (NSW) 1851-1875 Sydney Harbour Trust Within National Trust Conservation Area x 1876-1900 BUILDER I REP 26 Heritage Schedwe X 1901-1925 x Sydney Harbour Trust Ultimo/Pyrmont Heritage Study 1926-1950 mSTORICAL 1951-1975 THEMES: I Post-1975 Local Amenity Local Transit mSTORICAL NOTES: Railway Goods Line constructed from Darling Harbour through Pyrmont, Glebe and Annandale to Rozelle, from 1914 to 1916. Sidings to wharves 19-23 completed circa 1920 to coincide with I completion of construction of the wharves. This cutting served sidings to wharves 19,20,21 and 22 and the Waterside Cold Stores. The pipe and rail fence was constructed as barrier fencing to the precipices created by the construction of Jones Bay Road on the Foreshores of Pyrmont. It is similar to other such fences erected by the Sydney Harbour Trust in Millers Point. I INFORMATION SOURCES: Written: Oral: I Graphic: PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS: I Materials: Exterior: Cast iron, sandstone. Interior: Styles: I DESCRIPTION: The Railway cutting exists as an extension of the foreshore roadway created by cutting off the escarptment to vertical face and filling of waterfront to form a level bank around the foreshore. The rail lines lie between the roadway and the cliff face. To the south it is enclosed on the eastern side of the ramp of Jones Bay I Road, which turns and crosses over the rail lines by a concrete bridge. The upper section of the cliff is built up to level by sections of concrete retaining walls and fill. It is surmounted by a cast iron palisade fence on a sandstone plinth, approximately six feet (2m) high running along the top of the cliff face fronting Jones Bay Road. A similar I section runs on the western side of the Jones Bay Road approach ramp to the bridge over the railway lines. I MODIFICATION: I I I I GODDEN MACKAY PTY LTD 200 Commonwealth Street, Sorry Hills NSW 2010 (02) 2818599 I I I I I I PYRMONT POINTARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HERITAGE ASSESSMENT -1993 NAME Phoenix Palm Tree HERITAGE ITEM: I Landscape OTIlERNAMES REFERENCENO. L1 LOCALITY PYRMONT POSTCODE 2009 BOUNDARY/ IDENTIFlC TION I / ).:1'\\. STREETADDRESS Point Street, West ofthe Ways Terrace ,.." . ~'. I PHYSICAL CHARACTERlSTICS/lllSTORlCAL NOTES. SEE OVER STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE A tall mature palm tree which is a prominent SITE CONDITION feature of the Point Street visual catchment. It is associated with the occupation of (Original Features) I the Ways Terrace and has some historic interest as an example of exotic species Intact.. x plantings in the early-twentieth-century. Minor Alteration . Major Alteration . I - Sytrlpathetic....•...... - Unsympathetic . Removed (site only) . I EVALUATION Historic Aesthetic Social ScientifIC Other Rare L Associative . L I Representative L RECOMMENDED STATUTORY CONTROLS: MANAGEMENT ACTION: Retain and conserve. I Add to Heritage Schedule ofREP 26 I I I I I I I I PHOTOGRAPHS DATE OF SURVEY B&WROLL: 92-104/6 NegNo. Frame No. 13 February, 1993 I STUDY TEAM: Richard Mackay, Tony Brassil, Howard Tanner, Megan Jones SURVEYORTony Brassil Godden Mackay Pty Ud 200 Commonwealth Street, SUITy Hills 2010 (02) 281 8599 I .._.1 iJ I PYRMONT POINT ARCHAEOLOGICALAND HERITAGE ASSESSMENT - 1993 I REFERENCE NO. L1 PERIOD DATE OF Pre -1800 CONSTRUCTION HERITAGE LISTINGS 1801- 1825 ARClllTECT/ I Register of the National Estate (AHC) 1826 -1850 DESIGNER Register of the National Trust (NSW) 1851-1875 Within National Trust Conservation Area 1876-1900 BUILDER I REP 26 Heritage Schedule 1901-1925 Ultimo/pyrmont Heritage Study 1926-1950 X lllSTORICAL 1951-1975 THEMES: I Post-1975 Gentrification HISTORICAL NOTES: Planted some time following the completion of the Ways Terrace in 1925. Species is I generally rare in this vicinity. INFORMATION SOURCES: Written: I Oral: Graphic: I PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS: Materials: Exterior: Interior: I Styles: DESCRIPTION: A Phoenix Palm tree (phoenix Dactylifera) planted as a single decorative planting. It stands I within a small grassed yard on the western side of the most southern bay ofthe Ways Terrace. I I MODIFICATION: I I I I I GODDEN MACKAY PrY LTD 200 Commonwealth Street, Surry Hills NSW 2010 (02) 281 8599 I I I I I I APPENDIX E. ITEMS WHICH CONTRIBUTE TO THE OVERALL SIGNIFICANCE OF I PYRMONT BUildings I B8 Pyrmont Whart 22-23 Jones Bay Road B9 Former Waterside Coldstore 2 - 10 Point Street I B10 Terrace ofTwo Houses 2 - 2A Ways Terrace Groups I Harris/Scott/Cross Street Group G1 Group Entry I (B1 Pyrmont Arms Hotel - Refer Appendix D) I G1-1 Former Shop and Residence 46 Harris Street G1-2 Cottage 48 Harris Street I G1-3 House 50 Harris Street I G1-4 Former Corner Shop and Residence 52 Harris Street G1-5 Semi-detached Pair of Houses 2-4 Scott Street I G1-6 Cottage 6 Scott Street G1-7 Cottage 8 Scott Street I G1-8 Terrace ofThree Houses 1-5 Cross Street Railway Structures Group I G2 Group Entry G2-1 Railway Tunnel (east portal) I G2-2 Railway Cutting I G2-3 Road Overbridge G2-4 Railway Shunting Sidings I (82 Railway Cutting to wharves - Refer AppendiX D) I I I I I -~ .. __....-..._-- ...... '"-'" / I J {o' I PYRMONT POINT ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HERITAGE ASSESSMENT -1993 NAME Pyrmont Wharf'22/l3 HERITAGE ITEM: Building I OTHERNAMES REFERENCE NO. B8 LOCALITY PYRMONT POSTCODE 2009 30UNDARYI I STREETADDRESS Jones Bay Road PHYSICAL CHARACTERlSTlCS/lllSTORlCAL NOTES· SEE OVER I ~. '\ / STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE Although greatly reduced in significance with SITE CONDIDON the loss of the wharfshed in the early 19805, these wharves remain an important prt (Original Features) I of the Jones Bay Wharfage scheme constructed by the Sydney Harbour Trust. It Intact .. remains the only triangular wharf construted by the Sydney Harbour Trust and was Minor Alteration . the last wharf completed under the Sydney Harbour Trust programme. It retains Major Alteration X features such as rail connections and concrete decking and is visually and physically - Sympathetic . I a part of the group ofwharfage facilities on the eastern side of Pyrmont Point. - Unsympathetic X Removed (site only) : I EVALUATION Historic Aesthetic Social Scientifzc Other &zre Associative R I Representative L L RECOMMENDED STATUTORY CONTROLS: MANAGEMENTACTION: Consider retention and I NIL conservation through adaptation. I I I I I I I I PHOTOGRAPHS DATEOF SURVEY B&W ROLL: 92-104/6 Neg No. Frame No. 37 February, 1993 STUDY TEAM: RichaId Mackay, Tony Brassil, Howard Tanner, Megan Jones SURVEYORTony Brassil I Godden Mackay Pty Ud 200 Commonwealth Street, Sorry Hills 2010 (02) 281 8599 I I I PYRMONT POINTARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HERITAGE ASSESSMENT -1993 I REFERENCE NO. B8 PERIOD DATE OF Pre -1800 CONSTRUCTION Completed 1920 I HERITAGE LISTINGS 1801- 1825 ARClllTECT/ Register ofthe National Estate (AHq 1826-1850 DESIGNER Register ofthe National Trust (NSW) x 1851-1875 Sydney Harbour Trust Within National Trust Conservation Area X 1876-1900 BUILDER I REP 26 Heritage Schedule X 1901-1925 X Sydney Harbour Trust Ultimo!pyrmont Heritage Study 1926-1950 mSTORICAL Other: MSB Section 170 Register, 1951-1975 THEMES: I Sydney Middle Harbour REP Post-1975 Industrialisation mSTORICAL NOTES: The land clearance and excavation for this wharf was commenced in 1912 and the jetty I construction commenced 1914, completed circa 1917. Sheds built 1917-1920. Operated originally for timber trade, then later for general cargo. Little used by 19708 and sheds removed in 1983 for Heliport, a function lasting only a couple ofmonths. I INFORMATION SOURCES: Written: National Trust Ustilig Card Oral: I Graphic: PHYSICAL CHARACI'ERISTICS: MBterials: I Exterior: Timber, concrete Interior: Styles: I DESCRIPTION: The present structure consists of an extensive, flat triangular concrete wharf deck on timber piles. There is a rail connection to wharf No 22. I I I MODIFICATION: I I I I GODDEN MACKAY PTY LTD 200 Commonwealth Street, Sorry Hills NSW 2010 (02) 2818599 I I I I ------. I PYRMONT POINTARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HERITAGE ASSESSMENT - 1993 I NAME Fonner Waterside Coldstores HERITAGE ITEM: Building I OTHER NAMES REFERENCE NO. B9 LOCAUTY PYRMONT POSTCODE 2009 BOUNDARYI IDENTIFICATION STREETADDRESS 2-10 Point Street \" \\;6\,.: ...... ' I ,..:1. ''\ PHYSICAL CHARACfERISTICS/HISTORICAL NOTES. SEE OVER I -n .~ STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE A substantial, purpose-built refridgerated SITE CONDITION warehouse which was once an important facility in the meat export trade from the (Original Features) Port of Sydney. It is a relic of the turn of the century movement for government Intact X I ownership and responsibility for a wide range of port facilities. It contains some Minor Alteration . technological equipment of its period and, between its two sections, illustrates the Major Alteration . development of construction techniques from timber to reinforced concrete, within a - Sympathetic . relatively narrow time gap. It is part of a group of facilities in Jones Bay which - Unsympathetic X I together are evidence ofearly-twentieth-century material handling technology. Removed (site only) . EVALUATION Historic Aesthetic Social ScientifIC Other I Rare L 1 Associative Representative L I RECOMMENDED STATUTORY CONTROLS: MANAGEMENTACTION: Recording prior to NIL. demolition. I I- I I I I I I PHOTOGRAPHS DATE OFSURVEY I B&W ROLL: 92-10414 Neg No. Frame No. 24 February, 1993 STUDY TEAM:- RichaId Mackay, Toay Brassil, HowaId Tanner, Megan Jones SURVEYORTony Brassil I Godden Mackay Pty Ud 200 Commonwealth Street, Sorry Hills 2010 (02) 281 8599 I I PYRMONT POINT ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HERlTAGEASSESSMENT - 1993 I REFERENCE NO. B9 PERIOD DATE OF Pre -1800 CONSTRUCTION 19208 and 19308 HERITAGE USTlNGS 1801- 1825 ARClllTECTj I Register of the National Estate (ARC) 1826-1850 DESIGNER Register of the National Trust (NSW) 1851-1875 Unknown Within National Trust Conservation Area 1876-1900 BUILDER I REP 26 Heritage Schedule 1901-1925 X Unknown Ultimo!Pyrmont Heritage Study 1926-1950 X lllSTORICAL 1951-1975 THEMES: Post -1975. Industrialisation I lllSTORICAL NOTES: Built in two stages, the first stage completed with the completion of the Wharves 19-23 I Jones Bay, and the second (northern stage) completed during the 19308. Built specifically for handling refridgerated meat for export, it was leased to major meat export companies (including "Walkers") who fitted it out. Abandoned for this use in late 19608 and 19708, and many fittings removed. Now largely vacant, the top floors are leased to general commercial enterprises. I INFORMATION SOURCES: Written: Sydney Harbour Trust Handbook, c.1919. Oral: B. Cowan - Integrain Pty Ltd (Tenants). I GrapWc: PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS: Materials: I Exterior: brick/concrete Interior: timber/concrete Styles: I DESCRIPTION: A six level warehouse built in two sections. The southern section is earlier and has brick walls with timber posts and floors internally. The northern section is concrete framed with brick infill panels with mushroom head concrete columns supporting concrete slab floors. Intermediate floors have no windows. The top I floor has a row of roller shutter doors to Point Street, and there are extensions to the south along the Point Street Frontage. Ground level is formed as an open area with loading docks and a rail siding to the northern section. The rail siding includes a small, winch driven traverser for access to the connecting sidings I I I I MODIFICATION: I GODDEN MACKAY PTY LTD 200 Commonwealth Street, Sorry Hills NSW 2010 (02) 2818599 I -1993 PYRMONT POINT ARCHAEOLOGICALAND HERITAGE ASSESSMENT I HERITAGE ITEM: NAME Terrace of two houses NO. B10 OTIlERNAMES REFERENCE I LOCALITY PYRMONT POSTCODE 2009 STREETADDRESS 2-2A Ways Terrace PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTlCS/IllSTORICAL NOTES· SEE OVER SITE CONDITION STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE A fair example of a late nineteenth-century relic of the (Original Features) terrace which is largely intact, though in need of renovation. It is a occupies a Intact...... •...... nineteenth-century residential character of the Pyrmont locality and (No 4 Ways Minor Alteration ...... •..X spectacular site overlooking Jones Bay.With the adjacent cottage Jones Bay Major Alteration . Terrace) it is a rare survivor of ninteenth century housing along the of the - Sympathetic...•...... •... escarpment. With other surviving residences in Pyrmont, it provides evidence - UnsYmpathetic .x range ofbuilding types once found in the locality. Re~oved (site only) . Scientifu: Other ,I EVALUATION Historic Aesthetic Social Rare L Associative Representative L ACTION: Consider retention and RECOMMENDED STATUTORY CONTROLS: MANAGEMENT I Add to Heritage Schedule of REP 26, if retained conservation. I- I I I I DA,TE OF SURVEY PHOTOGRAPHS I February, 1993 B&W ROLL: 92-104/ Neg No. 2 FrameNo. 3 Jones SURVEYORTony Brassil STUDY TEAM: Richard Mackay, Tony Brassil, Heward Tanner, Megan Hills 2010 (02) 281 8599 I Godden Mackay Pty Ltd 200 Commonwealth Street, Sorry I I I - 1993 PYRMONT POINT ARCHAEOLOGICALAND HERITAGE ASSESS:MENT I OF REFERENCE NO.B10 PERIOD DATE Pre-l800 CONSTRUCTION circa 1890 I HERITAGE liSTINGS 1801- 1825 ARClDTECT/ DESIGNER Register of the National Estate (ARC) 1826-1850 Unknown Register of the National Trust (NSW) 1851-1875 BUILDER National Trust Conservation Area X 1876-1900 X I Within Unknown REP 26HerimgeSchooille 1901-1925 HISTORICAL Ultimo/Pyrmont Heritage Study X 1926-1950 1951-1975 THEMES: I Post-1975 Workers dwellings I HISTORICAL NOTES: INFORMATION'SOURCES:' Written: I Oral: Graphic: PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS: I Materials: Exterior: Brick and Corrugated Iron Interior: I, Styles: brick with corrugated iron roof behind a high DESCRWTION: A two storey pair of semi-detached houses, of and stucco coping and cornice. Chimneys parapet with central semi-circular pedvient, finials to the outer corners I and south wall are rendered with triple terracotta chimney pots. I I I railings. MODIFICATION: Presently vacant and boarded up - verandahs lack I I I I NSW 2010 (02) 2818599 I GODDEN MACKAY PTY LID 200 Commonwealth Street, Sorry mus I I I I I PYRMONT POINT ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HERITAGE ASSESS~T- 1993 NAME Harris/Scott/Cross Street Group HERITAGE ITEM: (includes items B1, G1-1 to 01-8) Group I OTHER NAMES Cross Street Group I-:::RE=FEREN===-=C=E::":N=-=O-.-G-I--I LOCAliTY PYRMONT POSTCODE 2009 BOUNDARY/ IDENTIFICATION I STREETADDRESS Harris, Scott, Cross and Bowman St j.~ I PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS/HISTORICAL NOTES· SEE OVER ~;~,/ STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE Rare, surviving group of late-nineteenth SITE CONDITION I century workers housing and associated commercial buildings. There is some variety (Original Features) in building types and the group is representative of the form and class of buildings Intact X. characteristic of the Pyrmont area in the late nineteenth century and common in Minor Alteration .x similar working-class areas in Sydney. This type of building furthermore, is that Major Alteration X I which rarely survives, particularly as a group. The buildings, therefore, aid in - Sympathetic X appreciation ofnineteenth century building techniques at the most basic level. - Unsympathetic .x I Removed (site only) . EVALUATION Historic Aesthetic Social Scientifu: Other Rare I Associative L Re resentative L L L RECOMMENDED STATUTORY CONTROLS: MANAGEMENTACTION: Consider retention and I Include on Heritage Schedule ofREP26, ifretained conservation I I ------I I I I I I PHOTOGRAPHS DATE OF SURVEY B&W ROLL: 92-104/6 Neg No. Frame No. 15 February, 1993 I STUDY TFAM: Richanl Mackay, Tony Brassil, Howanl Tanner, Mcgan Jones SURVEYORTony Brassil Godden Mackay Pty Ltd 200 Commonwealth Street, SulTY Hills 2010 (02) 281 8599 I I I PYRMONT POINTARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HERITAGEASSESSMENT - 1993 I REFERENCE NO•.G1 PERIOD DATE OF Pre -1800 CONSTRUCTION 18708 I HERITAGE liSTINGS 1801- 1825 ARcmTECT/ Register of the National Estate (ARC) 1826-1850 DESIGNER Register of the National Trust (NSW) x 1851-1875 Various Within National Trust Conservation Area X 1876-1900 X BUILDER I REP 26 Heritage Schedule 1901-1925 Various Ultimo/Pyrmont Heritage Study x 1926-1950 mSTORICAL 1951-1975 THEMES: I Post -1975 Workers dwellings J:IISTORICAL NOTES: Land part of grant to Thomas Jones, acquired by John Macarthur and subdivided by his I son Edward in 1839. Initial development around waterfrontages for industry, followed by progressive development of workers housing around the ridges. This area was built upon during the 1870's with mixed residential and commercial (shops and hotel). Surviving group of nineteenth century working class housing which has been virtually derelict for some decades but has lately seen some restoration as well as demolition. I INFORMATION SOURCES: Written: Mathews, M.R. Pyrmont and Ultimo -A History, Sydney, 1982 I Oral: Graphic: PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS: I Materials: Exterior: Brick and rendered brick walls, corrugated iron roofs Interior: Styles: I DESCRIPTION: An almost square block of land bound on four sides by roadways, containing an L-shaped lane way for rear access to most properties. The five buildings along the Harris Street frontage vary from the three I storey corner hotel to a single storey cottage with the two storey buildings between and on the Scott Street corner. The Scott Street frontages, from the two stroey corner shop to Harris Street, has a two storey terrace then a pair of ofsingle storey cottages which abut a row of single storey terraces to Cross Street. The Bowman Street frontage is ofvacant land as the two stroey terraces along this street have been demolished. I I MODIFICATION: Two storey terraces along Bowman Street, No's 113-119, demolished between 1960 and 1985 I - These sites now vacant. To date, only the former hotel has been renovated, other buildings generally dilapidated. I I GODDEN MACKAY pry LTD 200 Commonwealth Street, Sorry IDlls NSW 2010 (02) 2818599 I I I I I PYRMONT POINT ARCHAEOLOGICALAND HERITAGE ASSESSMENT - 1993 NAME Former Shop and Residence HERITAGE ITEM: Building - Part ofGroup I OTHERNAMES Part of the Harris/Scott/Cross Street Group REFERENCE NO. 61-1 LOCAUTY PYRMONT POSTCODE 2009 BOUNDARY/ IDENTIFICATION I STREETADDRESS 46 Harris Street W\~~~\ .~~ I PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS/HISTORICAL NOTES· SEE OVER .\.~ , r/ STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE See under "Harris/Scott/Cross Street Group". SITE CONDmON I A representative example of a small scale shop front and residence of the late (Origipal Features) nineteenth century. It appears to retain many original details intact. Intact.:...... •...... X Minor Alteration . Major.; Alteration . I - Sympathetic . - Unsympathetic . I Removed (site only) . EVALUATION Historic Aesthetic Social ScientiflC Other Rare AssociDtive I Representative L RECOMMENDED STATUTORY CONTROLS: MANAGEMENTACTION: Consider retention and I Add to Heritage Schedule of REP 26, ifretained conservation. I I I I I I I I PHOTOGRAPHS DATE OFSURVEY B&WROLL: 92-104/1 NegNo. Frame No. 2 Februll:IY,1993 I STUDYTEAM: RichaId Mackay, Tony Brassil, Howard Tanner, Megan lones SURVEYORTony Brassil Godden Mackay Pty Ltd 200 Commonwealth Street, SDITY Hills 2010 (02) 281 8599 I I I PYRMONT POINTARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HERITAGEASSESSMENT - 1993 I REFERENCE NO.Gl-1 PERIOD DATE OF Pre -1800 CONSTRUCTION 1878 I HERITAGE USTINGS 1801- 1825 ARClllTECT/ Register of the National Estate (ARC) 1826-1850 DESIGNER Register of the National Trust (NSW) x 1851-1875 Unknown Within National Trust Conservation Area X 1876-1900 X BUILDER I REP 26 Heritage Schedule 1901-1925 Unknown UltimolPyrmont Heritage Study X 1926-1950 HISTORICAL 1951-1975 THEMES: I Post -1975 Workers dwellings. Local Amenity. I HISTORICAL NOTES: Believed to have been built in 1878. INFORMATION SOURCES: Written: National Trust Listing Card, Mathews, M. Pyrmont and Ultimo -A History, PUHU, 1982. I Oral: Graphic: I PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS: Materials: Exterior: Rendered brick and corrugated iron Interior: I Styles: DESCRIPTION: Two storey rendered brick building with ground floor shopfront window with early timber I frame intact. gabled corrugated-iron roof, terracotta chimney pots. Ground floor has semi-circular·arched entrance to rear. I I I I MODIFICATION:, I I I GODDEN MACKAY PTY LTD 200 Commonwealth Street,-Surry Hills NSW 2010 (02) 2818599 I I I I I I PYRMONT POINTARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HERITAGE ASSESSMENT .1993 NAME Cottage HERITAGE ITEM: Building - Part ofa group I OTHERNAMES Part of the Harris/Scott/Cross Street Group REFERENCE NO. G1-2 LOCAUTY PYRMONT POSTCODE 2009 I STREETADDRESS 48 Harris Street I PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS/HISTORICAL NOTES· SEE OVER STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE See under "Harris/Scott/Cross St Group". An I interesting example of a residence of the lowest order of size, design and materials and as such, an important reminder of the social conditions of the working class in I nineeenth century Australia. I EVALUATION Historic Aesthetic Social Scientiju: Other Rare Associative I Representative L L RECOMMENDED STATUTORY CONTROLS: MANAGEMENTACTION: Consider retention and I Add to Heritage Schedule ofREP 26, if retained conselVation I I I I I I I I PHOTOGRAPHS DATE OF SURVEY B&W ROIL: 92-104/1 Neg No. Frame No. 3 February, 1993 I STUDY TEAM: Richard Mackay, Tony Brassil, Howard Tanner, Megan Jones SURVEYORTony Brassil I Godden Mackay Pty Ud 200 Commonwealth Street, Sorry Hills 2010 (02) 281 8599 I I PYRMONT POINTARCHAEOLOGICALAND HERITAGEASSESSMENT - 1993 I REFERENCE NO. Gl-2 PERIOD DATE OF Pre -1800 CONSTRUCTION 1878 HERITAGE liSTINGS 1801- 1825 ARCHITECT! I Register of the National Estate (ARC) 1826-1850 DESIGNER Register of the National Trust (NSW) x 1851-1875 Unknown Within National Trust Conservation Area X 1876 -1900 X BUILDER I REP 26 Heritage Schedule 1901-1925 Unknown Ultimo/Pyrmont Heritage Study X 1926-1950 mSTORICAL 1951-1975 THEMES: I Post-1975 Workers dwellings mSTORICAL NOTES: Believed to have been built in 1878. I INFORMATION SOURCES: Written: National Trust Listing Card; Mathews, M. Pyrmont and Ultimo -A History, PUHP, 1982. Oral: I Graphic: PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS: I Materials: Exterior: Weatherboard, Corrugated-iron roof Interior: Styles: I DESCRIPTION: Single storey narrow fronted weatherboard house with corrugated-iron roof. Facade has three bays and twelve pane windows. Sandstone foundations. I I I MODIFICATION: I I I I I GODDEN MACKAY PTY LTD 200 Commonwealth Street, Sorry llills NSW 2010 (02) 2818599 I I I I I I PYRMONT POINTARCHAEOLOGICALAND HERITAGE ASSESSMENT -1993 NAME House HERITAGE ITEM: Building - Part of Group I OTHERNAMES Part of the Harris/Scott/Cross Street Group REFERENCE NO. Gl-3 LOCALITY PYRMONT POSTCODE 2009 I STREETADDRESS 50 Harris Street I PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS/IllSTORICAL NOTES - SEE OVER STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE See under "Harris/Scott/Cross Street Group. SITE CONDffiON I An example of the form ofworking-class housing characteristic of the locality around the turn of the century. Intact.. . Minor Alteration . Major Alteration .x I - Sympathetic . - Unsympathetic X I Removed (site only) . EVALUATION Historic Aesthetic Social ScientifIC Other Rare Associative I Representative L RECOMMENDED STATUTORY CONTROLS: MANAGEMENTACTION: Consider retention and I Add to Heritage Schedule ofREP 26, ifretained. conservation I I I I I I I I PHOTOGRAPHS DATE OF SURVEY B&W RO~ 92-104/1 Neg No. Frame No. 4 February, 1993 I STUDY TEAM: Richard Mackay, Tony Brassil, Howard Tanner, Megan Jones SURVEYORTony Brassil I Godden Mackay Pty Ltd 200 Commonwealth Street, SUITY Hills 2010 (02) 281 8599 I I PYRMONT POINT ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HERITAGE ASSESSMENT - 1993 I REFERENCE NO. 01-3 PERIOD DATE OF Pre -1800 CONSTRUCTION circa 1872 HERITAGE liSTINGS 1801- 1825 ARcmTECT/ I Register of the National Estate (ARC) 1826-1850 DESIGNER Register of the National Trust (NSW) X 1851-1875 X Unknown Within National Trust Conservation Area X 1876-1900 BUILDER I REP 26HerimgeSchoowe 1901-1925 Unknown Ultimo/Pyrmont Heritage Study X 1926-1950 mSTORICAL 1951-1975 THEMES: Post -1975 Workers dwellings I HISTORICAL NOTES: Believed to be built between 1871 and 1873. Occupied in 1875 by Henry Piper, Grocer. I INFORMATION SOURCES: Written: Mathews, M Pyrmont and Ultimo -A History, PUHP, 1982, National Trust Listing Card Oral: I Graphic: PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS: I Materials: Exterior: Brick, corrugated iron Interior: Styles: I DESCRIPTION: Two storey brick house with sandstone foundations and corrugated-iron roof. Upper level verandah is infilled. Brickwork is in colonial bond. I I I MODIFICATION: Upper level verandah has been infIlled. New door and ground level fence. Roof is presently I missing and ground floor openings boarded up. I I I I GODDEN MACKAY PTY LTD 200 Commonwealth Street, Surry HllIs NSW 2010 (02) 2818599 I I I I --::I=------~~"-~·. I PYRMONT POINTARCHAEOLOGICALAND HERITAGE ASSESSMENT -1993 NAME Former Corner Shop and Residence HERITAGE ITEM: Building - Part of Group I OTHERNAMES Part of the Harris/Scott/Cross St Group REFERENCE NO. 01-4 LOCALITY PYRMONT POSTCODE 2009 I STREETADDRESS 52 Harris Street I PHYSICAL CHARACTERlSTICS/lllSTORICAL NOTES· SEE OVER STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE See under "Harris/Scott/Cross Street Group". SITE CONDmON I An important element in the group is a significant location. Typical of this type of (Original Features) corner shop with residence from the period. Intact . Minor Alteration . I Major Alteration~ X. - Sympathetic . - Unsympathetic X I Removed (site only) . EVALUATION Historic Aesthetic Social Scientifu: Other Rare Associative I Representative L RECOMMENDED STATUTORY CONTROLS: MANAGEMENTACI10N: Consider retention and I Add to Heritage Schedule ofREP 26, ifretained conservation I I -I I I I I PHOTOGRAPHS DATE OF SURVEY I B&WROLL: 92-104/6 Neg No. Frame No. 8 FebroarJ,1993 STUDY TEAM: Richard Mackay, Tony Brassil, Howard Tanner, Mcgan Jones SURVEYORTony Brassil I Godden Mackay Pty Ltd 200 Commonwealth Street, SUITY Hills 2010 (02) 281 8599 I I I PYRMONT POINT ARCHAEOLOGICALAND HERITAGE ASSESSMENT -1993 I REFERENCE NO. G1-4 PERIOD DATE OF Pre -1800 CONSTRUCflON 1879 HERITAGE USTINGS 1801- 1825 ARCHITECT/ I Register ofthe National Estate (AHC) 1826-1850 DESIGNER Register ofthe National Trust (NSW) x 1851-1875 Unknown Within National Trust Conservation Area X 1876-1900 X BUILDER I REP 26 Heritage Schedule 1901-1925 Unknown Ultimo/Pyrmont Heritage Study 1926 -1950 IllSTORICAL 1951-1975 THEMES: Post-1975 Workers Dwellings. I Local amenity. I 'mSTORICAL NOTES: Believed to have been built in 1879. INFORMATION SOURCES: Written: Mathews, M. Pyrmont and Ultimo - A History PUHP, 1982; National Trust Listing Card. I . Oral: Graphic: PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS: I Materials: Exterior: Brick and corrugated-iron. Interior: I Styles: DESCRIPTION: Two storey brick corner shop and residence with gabled roof of corrugated iron. Brickwork is in F1emish Bond. I I I MODIFICATION: Roof has been partly removed and the lower floor openings boarded-Up, It appears to be in I very poor condition. I I I I GODDEN MACKAY PTY LTD 200 Commonwealth Street, Sorry IDlls NSW 2010 (02) 2818599 I I I I r-=------.._ .._-- I I PYRMONT POINTARCHAEOLOGICALAND HERITAGE ASSESSMENT - 1993 NAME Semi-detached pair of houses HERITAGE ITEM: Buildin - art of u I OTHER NAMES Part of the Harris/Scott/Cross St Group. REFERENCE NO. G1-5 LOCAliTY PYRMONT POSTCODE 2009 BOUNDARY/ IDENTIFICATION I STREETADDRESS 2-4 Scott Street (also known as Nos 4 and 5) ~ '~'d"~ I PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS/IllSTORICAL NOTES· SEE OVER ~~ .~;; STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE See under "Harris/Scott/Cross Street Group" SITE CONDITION I of significance as an unusual example of a workers residence in Georgian style. (Original Features) Contributes to the streetscape. Intact. . Minor Alteration . Major Alteration...... •....x I - Sympathetic . - Unsympathetic X Removed (site only) .. I EVALUATION Historic Aesthetic Social ScientijIC Other Rare Associative I Representative L L MANAGEMENT ACTION: Consider retention and RECOMMENDED STATUTORY CONTROLS: \ I Add to Heritage Schedule of REP 26, if retained conservation I I I I I I I I PHOTOGRAPHS DATE OFSURVEY B&W ROLL: 92-104/2 Neg No. Frame No. 3 February, 1993 I STUDY TEAM: Richard Mackay, Tony Brassil, Howard Tanner, Megan Jones SURVEYORTony Brassil Godden Mackay Pty Ud 200 Commonwealth Street, SUITY Hills 2010 (02) 281 8599 I I I PYRMONT POINTARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HERITAGEASSESSMENT - 1993 I REFERENCE NO.G1-5 PERIOD DATE OF Pre -1800 CONSTRUCTION 1875 -1878 I HERITAGE LISTINGS 1801- 1825 ARCIllTECT/ Register of the National Estate (ARC) 1826-1850 DESIGNER Register of the National Trust (NSW) x 1851-1875 X Unknown Within National Trust Conservation Area X 1876-1900 X BUILDER I REP 26 Heritage Schedule 1901-1925 Unknown Ultimo/Pyrmont Heritage Study X 1926-1950 mSTORICAL 1951-1975 THEMES: I Post -1975 Workers dwellings mSTORICAL NOTES: Believed to have been built between 1875 and 1878. I INFORMATION SOURCES: Written: Mathews, M. Pynnont and Ultimo -A History, PUHP, 1982/National Trust Listing Card. I Oral: Graphic: PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS: I Materials: Exterior: Brick and Corrugated iron. Interior: Styles: I DESCRIPTION: A two storey semi-detached pair of houses of brick in colonial bond with hipped-gable corrugated iron roof. Ground floor brickwork formerly rendered, with rendered masonry windows. Some surviving I 12-pane windows. Ground floor skillion verandah with concrete coping to end wall of brick. I I I MODIFICATION: Poor condition at present but intact. I I I I GODDEN MACKAY PTY LTD 200 Commonwealth Street, Sorry Hills NSW 2010 (02) 2818599 I I I I ~ - I -1993 I PYRMONT POINT ARCHAEOLOGICALAND HERITAGEASSESSMENT HERITAGE ITEM: NAME Cottage Building - Part of Group REFERENCE NO. Gl- 6 I OTHERNAMES Part of the Harris/Scott/Cross St Group 2009 BOUNDARY/ LOCALITY PYRMONT POSTCODE IDENTIFICATION ',J,'¥ \ I STREETADDRESS 6 Scott Street /'\ .".,.: .-y. NOTES· SEE OVER ~J{ I PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTlCSjHISTORICAL Street Group" SITE CONDmON STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE See under"Harris/Scott/Cross residence in (Original Features) I This building is of significance as an unusual example of a workers Intact.., X Georgian style. It contributes to the streetscape. Minor Alteration .x Major Alteration . I - Sympathetic . - Unsympathetic . Removed (site only) . I Social ScientiFIC Other EVALUATION Historic Aesthetic Rare Associative I Representative L L ACTION: Consider retention and RECOMMENDED STATUTORY CONTROLS: MANAGEMENT I Add to Heritage Schedule of REP 26, if retained conservation. I I I I I I I I DATE OF SURVEY PHOTOGRAPHS Fcbrumy,1993 B&W ROLL: 92-104/2 Neg No. Frame No. 5 Jones SURVEYORTony Brassil I STUDY TEAM: Richard Mackay, Tony Brassil, Howard Tanner, Mcgan 200 Commonwealth Street, SUITY Hills 2010 (02) 281 8599 I Godden Mackay Pty Ltd I I -1993 PYRMONT POINTARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HERITAGEASSESSMENT I DATE OF REFERENCE NO. G1-6 PERIOD Pre -1800 CONSTRUCflON 1875-1878 I ARCIDTECT/ HERITAGE USTINGS 1801- 1825 DESIGNER Register ofthe National Estate (ARC) 1826-1850 Unknown Register of the National Trust (NSW) X 1851-1875 X BUILDER I Within National Trust Conservation Area X 1876-1900 1901-1925 Unknown REP 26 Heritage Schedule 1926-1950 msTORICAL Ultimo/pyrmont Heritage Study X 1951-1975 THEMES: I Post -1975 Workers dwellings. I IDSTORICAL NOTES: I I INFORMATION SOURCES: Trust Listing Card. Written: Mathews, M. Pyrmont and Ultimo - A History, PUHP, National I Oral: Graphic: PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS: I Materials: Exterior: Brick, Corrugated Iron. Interior: Styles: I roof of corrugated iron. Brickwork of DESCRIPTION: Small brick single-storey cottage with hipped gable door. Sandstone window sills. colonial bond on sandstone foundation. Twelve pane windows and four-panelled I I MODIFICATION: I I I I NSW 2010 (02) 281 8599 GODDEN MACKAY pry LTD 200 Commonwealth Street, Sorry Hills I I I I I I PYRMONT POINTARCHAEOLOGICALAND HERITAGE ASSESSMENT· 1993 NAME Cottage HERITAGE ITEM: Building - Part of Group I OTHERNAMES Part of Harris/Scott/Cross St Group REFERENCE NO. Gl-7 LOCAliTY PYRMONT POSTCODE 2009 I STREETADDRESS 8 Scott Street (Also known as No. 7) I PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS/lllSTORICAL NOTES· SEE OVER STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE See under "Harris/Scott/Cross Street Group". SITE CONDITION I This building is significant as an unusual example ofa workers residence in Georgian (Original Features) style. It contributes to the significant streetscape. Intact X Minor Alteration .x Major Alteration . I - Sympathetic . - Unsympathetic . Removed (site only) . I EVALUATION Historic Aesthetic Social Scientifre Other Rare ASSQciative I Representative L L RECOMMENDED STATUTORY CONTROLS: MANAGEMENTACTION: Consider retention and I Add to Heritage Schedule of REP 26, if retained conservation I I I I I I I I PHOTOGRAPHS DATE OFSURVEY B&W ROLL: 92-104/2 Neg No. Frame No. 8 February, 1993 I STUDY TFAM: Richard Mackay, Tony Brassil, Howard Tanner, Megan Jones SURVEYORTony Brassil Godden Mackay Pty Ltd 200 Commonwealth Street, SUlTY Hills 2010 (02) 281 8599 I I I PYRMONT POINTARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HERITAGE ASSESSMENT - 1993 I REFERENCE NO.Gl-7 PERIOD DATE OF Pre -1800 CONSTRUCTION circa 1894 I HERITAGE LISTINGS 1801- 1825 ARCIDTECT/ Register of the National Estate (ARC) 1826 -1850 DESIGNER Register of the National Trust (NSW) X 1851-1875 Unknown Within National Trust Conservation Area X 1876-1900 X BUILDER I REP 26 Heritage Schedule 1901-1925 Unknown Ultimo/Pyrmont Heritage Study X 1926-1950 mSTORICAL 1951-1975 THEMES: I Post -1975 Workers dwellings mSTORICAL NOTES: Believed to have been built in 1894. I INFORMATION SOURCES: Written: Mathews, M. Pyrmont and Ultimo - AHistory, PUHP, 1982, National Trust Listing. I Oral: Graphic: PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS: I Materials: Exterior: Brick, Corrugated Iron Interior: Lathe and plaster walls Styles: I DESCRIPTION: Single storey asymetric brick cottage with hipped gable roof ofcorrugated-iron. Sandstone window sills. Interior walls oflathe and plaster I I I I I MODIFICATION: I I I GODDEN MACKAY pry LTD 200 Commonwealth Street, Sorry HiUs NSW 2010 (02) 2818599 I I I I I I I I I .I II -1993 PYRMONT POINTARCHAEOLOGICALAND HERITAGE ASSESSMENT HERITAGE ITEM: NAME Terrace of three houses Building - Part of Group I REFERENCE NO. Gl-8 OTHERNAMES Part ofHarris/Scott/Cross St Group 2009 I LOCAIlTY PYRMONT POSTCODE STREETADDRESS 1-5 Cross Street OVER I PHYSICAL CHARACTERlSTlCS/HISTORlCAL NOTES· SEE Street Group". SITE CONDmON STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE See under "Harris/Scott/Cross (Original Features) A typical example ofVictorian worker housing. I Intact. X Minor Alteration X Major·Alteration . - Sympathetic . I - Unsympathetic...... •... Removed (site only) . ScientifIC Other I EVALUATION Historic Aesthetic Social Rare Associative I Representative L ACTION: Consider retention and RECOMMENDED STATUTORY CONTROLS: MANAGEMENT I Add to Heritage Schedule of REP 26, if retained conservation. I I I I I I I I DATE OF SURVEY PHOTOGRAPHS February, 1993 B&W ROLL: 92-104/2 Neg No. Frame No. 11 lones SURVEYORTony Brassil STUDY TEAM: Richard Mackay, Tony Brassil, Howard Tanner, Megan I 2010 (02) 2818599 Godden Mackay Pty Ltd 200 Commonwealth Street, SUITY mus I I I -1993 PYRMONT POINTARCHAEOLOGICALAND HERITAGEASSESSMENT I DATE OF REFERENCE NO. Gl-8 PERIOD Pre -1800 CONSTRUCTION circa 1875 - 1878 I ARCIllTECT/ HERITAGE liSTINGS 1801- 1825 DESIGNER of the National :Estate (ARC) 1826-1850' Register Unknown Register of the National Trust (NSW) X 1851-1875 BUILDER I Trust Conservation Area X 1876-1900 X Within National Unknown REP 26 Heritage Schedule 1901-1925 1926-1950 IllSTORICAL Ultimo/Pyrmont Heritage Study X 1951-1975 THEMES: I Post -1975 Workers dwellings Fabric indicates the three were built at I mSTORICAL NOTES: Believed to have been built 1875 - 1878. different times or at least as different buildings. INFORMATION SOURCES: I National Trust Listing Caret Written: Mathews, M. Pyrmont and Ultimo - A History, POOP, 1982; Oral: Graphic: I PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS: Materials: Exterior: Brick, weatherboard, corrugated iron. I Interior: Styles: one of weatherboard, with gable roof of DESCRIPTION: Single storey terrace of three houses, two of brick and I these having moulded coping. there corrugated-iron. Skillion verandah with brick partition walls between houses, No 1 (weatherboard) is carried on timber is a double partition wall between thehouses No's 3 and 5. Verandah to posts. ·1 I I I MODIFICATION: I I I NSW 2010 (02) 281 8599 I GODDEN MACKAY PlY LTD 200 Commonwealth Street, Surry lIDls I I I I I. PYRMONT POINT ARCHAEOLOGICALAND HERITAGE ASSESSMENT -1993 NAME Railways Structures Group HERITAGE ITEM: (Includes items G2-1 to G2-4 and item S2) Group I OTIlERNAMES REFERENCE NO. G2 LOCAliTY PYRMONT POSTCODE 2009 BOUNDARY/ IDENTIFICATION I STREETADDRESS Jones Bay Road area I PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS/IllSTORICAL NOTES· SEE OVER STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE The provision of railway connections to the SITE CONDITION I Pyrmont wharfage made this waterfront one of the most important areas of the Port of (Onginal Features) Sydney for bulk and heavy goods loading and unloading and illustrates the early Intact. . twentieth-century port facilities at their most developed. The relationship between Minor Alteration x I rail and wharfage is easily identifiable from the relics. A number of rarely seen MajOr Alteration x features, such as electric capstan shunting facilities and traversers, add interest. - Sympathetic x - Unsympathetic x I Removed (site only) . EVALUATION Historic Aesthetic Social ScientifIC Other Rare Associative I RepresenJative RECOMMENDED STATUTORY CONTROLS: MANAGEMENTACTION: Retain in use where I Add to State Rail Heritage Register possible otherwise adapt or record prior to demoltion. I I I I I I I I 'PHOTOGRAPHS DATE OF SURVEY B&W ROLL: 92-104/4 Neg No. Frame No. 2 February, 1993 I STUDY TEAM: Richard Mackay. Tony Brassil. Howard Tanner, Megan Jones SURVEYORTony Brassil I Godden Mackay Pty lid 200 Commonwealth Street, SUITY IlllIs 2010 (02) 281 8599 I I PYRMONT POINTARCHAEOLOGICALAND HERITAGEASSESSMENT. 1993 I REFERENCE NO. G2 PERIOD DATE OF Pre -1800 CONSTRUCTION I HERITAGE LISTINGS 1801- 1825 ARCIDTECT/ Register of the National Estate (ARC) 1826-1850 DESIGNER Register of the National Trust (NSW) 1851-1875 NSW Government Railways I Within National Trust Conservation Area 1876-1900 BUILDER REP 26 Heritage Schedule 1901-1925 NSW Government Railways UltimoJPyrmont Heritage Study 1926-1950 IDSTORICAL I 1951-1975 THEMES: Post -1975 Local Transit I mSTORICAL NOTES: Railway Goods Line built 1916. Sidings to whalVes completed 1920. INFORMATION SOURCES: I Written: Oral: Graphic: I PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS: Materials: Exterior: I Interior: Styles: DESCRIPTION: I This group includes the Railway Cutting(G2-1) Railway Tunnel (G2-2) Road Overbridge (G2-3) Railway Cutting to whatves (S2) Shunting sidings (G2-4) and the ral connections to the wharf aprons. It broadly includes all structures and features associated with the railway Iinesto the whatves and along the goods line through the study area. I I I I MODIFICATION: Rail connections to the whatvcs are abandoned and deteriorated. Switch points were removed from the sidings in February, 1993. I I I I GODDEN MACKAY PTY LTD 200 Commonwealth Street, Sorry IDlls NSW 2010 (02) 2818599 I I I I I PYRMONT POINT ARCHAEOLOGICALAND HERITAGE ASSESSMENT· 1993 NAME Railway Tunnel (east portal) IIElUTAGE ITEM: Structure - Part of Group I OTHERNAMES Part of Railway Structures Group REFERENCE NO. G2-1 LOCALITY PYRMONT POSTCODE 2009 I STREETADDRESS NearJohn Street ,.. . PHYSICAL CHARACTERlSTICS/HISTORICAL NOTES· SEE OVER ..'f'Z~.'.' "i;:;,; ... ,. ~ ...'" .. Iis-- I .- -+_;,,,.._)0~ ,. O~"'__"'oA:.---_t STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE Under "Railway Structures Group". A good, SITE CONDIDON representative example of early twentieth century rail tunnel construction. (Original Features) Intact X I Minor Alteration .. Major Alteration .. - Sympathetic . - Unsympathetic .. I Removed (site only) .. EVALUATION Historic Aesthetic Social ScientifIC Other I Rare Associative L i Representative L RECOMMENDED STATUTORY CONTROLS: MANAGEMENTACTION: Site may be adapted for Add to State Rail Heritage Register. other use also I I I I I I I I PHOTOGRAPHS DATE OFSURVEY I B&W ROLL: 92-104/5 Neg No. Frame No. 9 February, 1993 STUDY TEAM: Richard Mackay, Tony Brassil, Howard Tanner, Megan Jones SURVEYORTony Brassil I Gadden Mackay Pty Ltd 200 Commonwealth Street, Sorry Hills 2010 (02) 281 8599 I I I PYRMONT POINTARCHAEOLOGICALAND HERITAGE ASSESSMENT -1993 I REFERENCE NO. G2-1 PERIOD DATE OF Pre -1800 CONSTRUCTION 1916 HERITAGE liSTINGS 1801- 1825 ARcmTECT/ I Register of the National &tate (ARC) 1826-1850 DESIGNER Register of the National Trust (NSW) 1851-1875 NSW Government Railwavs I Within National Trust Conservation Area X 1876-1900 BUILDER REP 26 Heritage Schedule 1901-1925 X NSW Government Railways UltimoJPyrmont Heritage Study 1926 -1950 mSTORICAL I 1951-1975 TIIEMES: Post -1975 Local transit I mSTORICAL NOTES: Railway goods line constructed form Darling Harbour through Pyrmont, Glebe and Annandale to Rozelle from 1914-1916. In use from 1916 to circa 1990 for goods taffic only. It is not electrified. I INFORMATION SOURCES: Written: Oral: Graphic: I PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS: Materials: Exterior: Brick I Interior: Styles: I DESCRIPTION: The eastern portal of a brick-lined tunnel through the Pyrmont Peninsula's western end. It is presently heavily concealed by hanging overgrowth from above. It is entirely of brick, forming a segmental arch over two lines of rail. I I I MODIFICATION: I I I I GODDEN ~CKAY PrY LTD 200 Commonwealth Street, Sorry Hills NSW 2010 (02) 281 8599 I I I I I I PYRMONT POINTARCHAEOLOGICALAND HERITAGE ASSESSMENT· 1993 NAME Railway Cutting HERITAGE ITEM: Structure Part of Group I OTHER NAMES Part of Railway Structures Group REFERENCE NO. G2-2 LOCALITY PYRMONT POSTCODE 2009 I STREETADDRESS Near Harris Street I PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICSjIllSTORICAL NOTES· SEE OVER STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE See under "Railway Structures Group". A SITE CONDmON I representative example of early twentieth century excavation techniques. A dramatic (Original Features) and visually prominent local feature. Intact. . Minor Alteration ..•...... Major Alteration . I - Sympathetic . - Unsympathetic . I Removed (site only) . EVALUATION Histom Aesthetic Social ScientifIC Other Rare Associative L I Representative L RECOMMENDED STATUTORY CONTROLS: MANAGEMENTACTION: Retain in use. Site may be I Add to State Rail Heritage Register adopted for other use also. I ~ -Si f. : I -~-- =.w - I I I I I I PHOTOGRAPHS DATE OFSURVEY B&W ROLL: 92-104/5 Neg No. Frame No. 13 Februmy,1993 I STUDY TEAM: RichaId Mackay, Tony Brassil, Howard Tanner, Megan Jones SURVEYORToay Brassil 200 Commonwealth Street, SUlT)' Hills 2010 (02) 281 8599 I Godden Mackay Pty Ltd I I -1993 PYRMONT POINTARCHAEOLOGICALAND HERITAGEASSESSMENT I OF REFERENCE NO. G2-2 PERIOD DATE Pre -1800 CONSTRUCTION 1916 I HERITAGE liSTINGS 1801- 1825 ARCIDTECT/ DESIGNER Register of the National Estate (ARC) 1826-1850 NSW Government of the National Trust (NSW) 1851-1875 Register Railways I 1876-1900 BUILDER Within National Trust Conservation Area X 1901-1925 X NSW Government REP 26 Heritage Schedule Railwavs mSTORICAL UltimoJPyrmont Heritage Study 1926-1950 I 1951-1975 THEMES: Post-1975 Local Transit I through Pyrmont, Glebe and Annandale to mSTORICAL NOTES: Railway Goods line from Darling Harbour only and is not electrified. Rozelle constructed 1914-1916. In use till circa 1990, for goods trains I INFORMATION SOURCES: Written: Oral: I Graphic: PHYSICAL CHARi\CTERISTICS: Materials: I Exterior: Interior: Styles: I rail line through sandstone bedrock. Walls DESCRIPTION: A deep vertical sided excavation for two tracks of Street by a new road bridge (and the cutting show numerous drill lines. The cutting is bridged at Point St/Pyrmont at Harris Street. West of Harris Street the to the south-east of this has also been covered by concrete slabs) and I cutting becomes a brick lined tunnel. I I enclosed by concrete slbas, preparatory to MODIFICATION: The cutting south-east of Point St Bridge has been I proposed constructions over the airspace. I I I I Hills NSW 2010 (02) 2818599 GODDEN MACKAY PTY LID 200 Commonwealth Street, Surry I I I I I PYRMONT POINTARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HERITAGE ASSESSMENT - 1993 NAME Road Overbridge HERITAGE ITEM: Structure - Part of Group I OTHERNAMES Part of Railway Facilities Group REFERENCE NO. G2-3 LOCAliTY PYRMONT POSTCODE 2009 I STREETADDRESS Harris Street I PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTlCS/lllSTORICAL NOTES. SEE OVER ,.. ~ STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE See under "Railway Facilities Group". A SITE CONDITION I good representative example of early twentieth-century railway bridge technology. It (Original Features) is a dramatic and prominent local feature. Intact., . Minor Alteration . I Major'Alteration . - Sympathetic . - Unsympathetic...... •.. I Removed (site only) . EVALUATION Historic Aesthetic Social SCientijl£ Other Rare Associative L I RepresentaLive L MANAGEMENTACTION: Retain in use. Site may be I adaoted for other use also. _ I I I I I I I 92-104/5 Neg No. Frame No. 14 Fcbruary,l993 I STUDY TEAM: Richard Mackay, Tony Brassil, Howard Tanner, Mcgan Jones SURVEYORTony Brassil Godden Mackay Pty lid 200 Commonwealth Street, Sun-y Hills 2010 (02) 281 8599 I I I I PYRMONT POINT ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HERITAGEASSESSMENT - 1993 I REFERENCE NO. G2-3 PERIOD DATE OF Pre -1800 CONSTRUCTION 1916 HERITAGE USTlNGS 1801- 1825 ARcmTECT/ I Register of the National Estate (ARC) 1826 -1850 DESIGNER Register of the National Trust (NSW) 1851-1875 NSW Government Railways. I Within National Trust Conservation Area X 1876-1900 BUILDER REP 26HeriWgeSchrowe 1901-1925 X NSW Government Railways Ultimo/Pyrmont Heritage Study X 1926-1950 mSTORICAL I 1951-1975 THEMES: Post -1975 Local Transit I mSTORICAL NOTES: Railway Goods Line constructed from Darling Harbour through Pyrmont, Glebe and Annandale to Rozelle from 1914-1916. In use till circa 1990 for goods traffic only. It is not electrified. I INFORMATION SOURCES: Written: Oral: Graphic: I PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS: Materials: I Exterior: Brick, concrete Interior: Styles: I DESCRIPTION: A brick segmental arched bridge over the Railway Goods line, the bridge set at normal operating clearance above the line and the brick side walls extending above containing fill and a roadway surface. The side walls extend above the roadway to form boundary walls to the road and footpaths. Brickwork is plain, with seven course forming the arch and a raised keystone. I I I MODIFICATION: I I I I I GODDEN MACKAY PTY LTD 200 Commonwealth Street, Snrry Hills NSW 2010 (02) 2818599 I I J'~ I - 1993 I PYRMONT POINT ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HERITAGE ASSESSMENT HERITAGE ITEM: NAME Railway Shunting Sidings Structure - Part of Group REFERENCE NO. G2-4 I OTHERNAMES Part ofRailway Facilities Group 2009 LOCAliTY PYRMONT POSTCODE I STREETADDRESS lones Bay Road, adjacent to cold stores OVER I PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS/HISTORICAL NOTES - SEE Group". A SITE CONDITION STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE See under "Railway Facilities technology. (Original Features) I good representative example of early twentieth century railway operating and a rare Intact X The only manual shunting sidings adjacent to wharfage in Sydney Harbour example of Minor Alteration . item to be accessible to the public. A dramatic and easily understood Major Alteration . early twentieth century waterside materials handling technology. I - Sympathetic . -U nsympathetic .x Removed (site only) . I SociLzI Scientifu: Other EVALUATION Historic Aesthetic Rare L Associative L I Representative ACTION: Record prior to removal. RECOMMENDED STATUTORY CONTROLS: MANAGEMENT I NIL I I I I I I I I DATE OF SURVEY PHOTOGRAPHS February;l993 B&W ROLL: 92-104/4 Neg No. Frame No. 7 lanes SURVEYORTony Brassil I STUDY TEAM: Richard Mackay, Tony Brassil, Howard Tanner, Megan Hills 2010 (02) 281 8599 Godden Mackay Pty 4d 200 Commonwealth Street, Surry I I I -1993 PYRMONT POINT ARCHAEOLOGICALAND HERITAGEASSESSMENT DATE OF REFERENCE NO. G2-4 PERIOD PIe -1800 CONSTRUCTION circa 19308 1825 ARCIDTECT/ I HERITAGE liSTINGS 1801- DESIGNER Register of the National Estate (AHC) 1826-1850 NSW Government of the National Trust (NSW) 1851-1875 Register Railwavs BUILDER I Within National Trust Conservation Area x 1876-1900 1901-1925 X NSW Government REP 26 Heritage Schedule Railwavs IDSTORICAL UltimolPyrmont Heritage Study 1926-1950 I 1951-1975 THEMES: Post -1975 Local Transit I construction ofJones Bay Wharfage and cold mSTORICAL NOTES: Sidings created 1920s-1930s following the Sidings include one dead end and one loading Stores. Present structure associated with extension to cold stores. capston. siding to Cold Store, the two linked by a traverser driven by an electric I INFORMATION SOURCES: Written: Oral: I Graphic: PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS: I Materials: Exterior: Steel, concrete Interior: Styles: I ground floor of the Cold Stores and the other DESCRIPTION: Two dead end sidings, one passing through the pit, with a welded steel traverser frame and running parallel outside the buildings. They both end at a traverser the one to the outer siding remains intact. A electric capstan winch intact. Timber buffers acted as end stops and I of carriages on the sidings. second capston at the south end of the Cold Store was available for shunting I I I MODIFICATION: I I I Hills NSW 2010 (02) 281 8599 I GODDEN MACKAY PTY LTD 200 Commonwealth Street, Surry I I I 'I I I I I APPENDIX F. INVENTORY OF POTENTIAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES I AI Site of Mixed Housing and Commerical 101-133 Point Street A2 Site of Mixed Housing and Commerical 100-118 Bowman Street I A3 James Watkinson Reserve/Site of Housing Mill Street, western side A4 Site of former G. J. Coles Warehouse 88-100 John Street I A5 Site of 19th Century Terrace Housing 113-115 Bowman Street I A6 Northern Verges to Railway Cutting Scatt Street I I I I I I I I I I 1 I' 'I ,I PYRMONT POINT ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HERITAGE ASSESSMENT - 1993 Name: SITE OF MIXED HOUSING AND Archaeological Site Reference COMMERCIAL No. Al I Locality: PYRMONT Post Code: 2009 Boundary/ldentification: ~~~~~rnro~~ ". ~ I Historical Notes: Land part of Macarthur Estate, \.\~ \~ 1880 in vicinity. Terraces 115-125 Point Street shown in 1842, -!. ';." \ with two semi-detached pairs and one single cottage shown to ~ "\ ,I Cross Street. Buildings shown adjacent to stone wall, later a .....:. .: .' foundry at this position. All buildings removed in 1960s and J\' ':'\~..." 1980s. r'/'" ~ __ " >---- Ke Sources: Ma s 9, 15 and 19 ~ ,v/"" . 'I~:~~:.·· I Description: An odd shaped parcel of land containing two levels, the one on the north and being at Point Street level. The southern section is at Cross Street level. Point Street is retained by alar e retainin wall of rusticated sandstone ashlar at this section. No buildin s remain. II Assessment: Site is likely to contain structural evidence, subfloor deposit;g, wells drains and other features associated with 1840s - 1980s domestic use. Recommended Statutory Control: Identify as Recommended Management Actions: I Potential Archaeological site in REP 26. Note Monitoring of excavation by archaeologist. re uirements ofNSW Herita e Act rmits etc. Provision for recordin or investi ation. I I I I I I I I JI I I Photographs: Surveyor: RMffB Ne No: 92-104/3 Frame No: 21 Stud Team: R. Macka , T. Brassil, H. Tanner & M. Jones Date Surve : Februa 1993 I GODDEN MACKAY PTY LTD 200 COMMONWEALTH ST SURRY HILLS NSW 2010 I I PYRMONT POINTARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HERITAGE ASSESSMENT - 1993 I Name: SITE OF MIXED HOUSING AND COMMERCIAL Locality: PYRMONT Post Code: 2009 I Street Address: 100-118 Bowman Street Historical Notes: Site contains two sections: the eastern I section around Lawson Street which developed residential houses between 1860 - 1880 and the western section developed as an industrial site, first occupied by John Kellick, then Henry I Hawkins and David Rodge Circa 1920, K.N. Harris built a three store brick warehouse. All structures are now removed. Ke Sources: Ma s 6,8,9,10,13,15 and 19 I Description: A gently sloping site from south down to north, terminating in short retaining wall above Jones Bay Road. The site is clear, with the K.N. Harris warehouse removed recently. From the western side of the site; some building rubble is scattered across this area. The eastern I side of the site is bisected by the pavement of the now-closed Lawson Street. It is otherwise smooth and ssed over. Assessment: Site is likely to contain both domestic and industrial structural features and deposits I coverin late nineteenth and twentieth centu usa e. Recommended Statutory Control: Identify as Recommended Management Actions: Potential Archaeological site in REP 26. Note Action: monitoring of excavation by I requirements of NSW Heritage Act, (Permits etc). archaeologist, provision for recording or investi ation. I I I I I I I I I Photographs: Surveyor: RM/TB I Ne No: 92-104/6 Frame No: 35 Stud Team: R. Macka ,T. Brassil, H. Tanner & M. lones Date Surve: Februa 1993 I GODDEN MACKAY PTY LTD 200 COMMONWEALTH ST SURRY fiLLS NSW 2010 L I [ PYRMONT POINT ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HERITAGE ASSESSMENT - 1993 Name: JAMES WATKINSON RESERVE/SITE OF HOUSING r Locality: PYRMONT Post Code: 2009 Street Address: MILL STREET, WESTERN SIDE I Historical Notes: Land typically developed from the 1870s 1890s although some isolated buildings may have existed in II~ this area from 1850. This land was the crown of the eastern escarpment and some buildings associated with waterfront industries below. Resumption by Sydney Harbour Trust in 1911. Most houses demolished and cliff face excavated. [ Further resumption and demolition for the Ways terrace, 1916 1925. Park later created between Mill Street and the Ways Terrace. I Ke Sources: Ma s 9, 15 and 19 Description: A flat area of land bound on the east by the pavement of Mill Street and on the West by an excavated and built-up retaining wall to the Ways Terrace level. Site is grassed and JI_ contains playground equipment. The southern half of the former reserve is now alienated by new excavation work, and not included in this listin . Assessment: Possible, but unlikel survival of si ifieant late nineteenth centu features e well. I~ Recommended Statutory Control: Identify as Recommended Management Actions: Potential Archaeological site in REP 26. Note Excavation to be monitored by archaeologist :1- r uirements of NSW Herita e Act ermits etc. -I' I. I .1 ,:1 'I Itl' ,B 'I Photographs: Surveyor: RMlTB Ne No: 92-104/3 Frame No: 5 'I Stud Team: R. Macka , T. Brassil, H. Tanner & M. Jones Date Surve: Februa 1993 GODDEN MACKAY PTY LTD 200 COMMONWEALTH ST SURRY ffiLLS NSW 2010 ,I I -1 J Locality: PYRMONT Post Code: 2009 ]1 !o Street Address: 88-100 JOHN STREET Historical Notes: Land part of the Macarthur Estate, subdivided 1840; this area gradually developed from 1850, J mostly for residential purposes, 1860-1880. Was a block bound by Harris, John, Point and Church Streets, containing ~II Plostly terrace housing. Original lessees were Arthur Trasey, W. Parkhill, W. Agnew, G.J. Wells and J. Duncan. All buildings demolished 1916 for construction of railway cutting. ]: Warehouse built on corner Harris and John Streets, used most recentl b G. J. Coles Ltd demolished c. 1980s. Ke Sources: Ma s 6, 8, 9, 15 and 19 ~I Description: A loosely triangular piece of land between John Street and the Railway Cutting, clear of buildings but overgrown with weeds. A rectangular concrete slab covers most of the ground, being the former ground floor of the "Coles Warehouse". Ground surface elsewhere has some buildin rubble scattered across it. -I Assessment: Possible survival of structural elements, and yard features (eg well) or some sub- floor de sits. Recommended Statutory Control: Identify as Recommended Management Actions: I Potential Archaeological Site in REP 26. Note Monitoring of excavation by archaeologist. re uirements of NSW Herita e Act ermits etc . Provision for recordin and investi ation. I ~II I' I I It 11 1 1:I /: 1\.'\ 1o. Photographs: Surveyor: RMfI'B I Ne No: 92-104/5 Frame No: 7 1 Stud Team: R. Macka , T. Brassil, H. Tanner & M. Jones Date Surve : Februa 1993 GODDEN MACKAY PTY LTD 200 COMMONWEALTH ST SURRY HILL NSW 2010 I I I I PYRMONTPOINT ARCHAEOLOGICALAND HERITAGEASSESSMENT-1993 Name: SITE OF NINETEENTH CENTURY TERRACE Archaeological Site Reference HOUSING No. AS I Locality: PYRMONT Post Code: 2009 Bounda Street Address: 113-119 BOWMAN STREET I Historical Notes: Land part of Macarthur Estate, subdivided in 1840, settlement north ofJohn Street occurring after 1850, with most buildings in this block erected in the I 1870s. This area along Bowman Street occupied by small terrace houses of two storeys. Nos. 113-115 demolished c. 1960s No. 117-119 demolished c. 1980s. ~ ,..- ~ I Ke Sources: Ma s 9, 15, 11 and 19 Description: A small square block of land bound by Bowman Street, Cross Street and the rear of properties facing Scott and Harris Streets. It has some mature trees near the boundaries of the area and ound surface is rou h over own and covered b buildin rubble and: arked cars. I Assessment: Probable survival of structural evidence, sub-floor deposits and yard features wells/drains illustratin domestic use c1870s - cl880s. Recommended Statutory Control: Identify as Recommended Management Actions: I Potential Archaeological Site in REP 26. Note I re uirements of NSW Herita e Act ermits etc . I I I I I I I I I I. Photographs: Surveyor: RMlTB Ne No: 92-104/2 Frame No: 16 Stud Team: R. Macka , T. Brassil, H. Tanner & M. Jones Date Surve : Februa 1993 I GODDEN MACKAY PTY LTD 200 COMMONWEALTH ST SURRY HILLS NSW 2010 I ------I- PYRMONT POINT ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HERITAGE ASSESSMENT· 1993 I Name: NORTHERN VERGES TO RAILWAY CUTTING Archaeological Site Reference No. A6 Locality: PYRMONT Post Code: 2009 Boundary/ldentificati~n: I Street Address: SCOTT STREET Historical Notes: Land part of the Macarthur Estate, I subdivided 1840; this area gradually developed from 1850, mostly for residential purposes, 1860-1880. Was part of a block bound by Harris, John, Point and Church Streets, I containing mostly terrace housing. Original lessees were Arthur Trasey, W. Parkhill, W. Agnew, G.J. Wells and J. Duncan. All buildings demolished 1916 for construction of I railway cutting. The western section of Church Street obliterated and Cross Street extended parallel to Scott Street. Some small houses occupied the land now bordering the railwa cuttin till 1916. I Ke Sources: Ma s 6, 8, 9, 15 and 19 Description: A narrow rectangular strip of land along the south side of the railway cutting, bordered on the north by Scott Street. It is presently very overgrown, with a narrow bitumen I foot ath connectin Scott and Point Streets. Assessment: Possible survival of sub-surface evidence relating to late nineteenth and early twentieth centu domestic use. I Recommended Statutory Control: Identify as Recommended Management Actions: Potential Archaeological Site in REP 26. Note Excavation to be monitoried by re uirements of NSW Herita e Act ermits etc. archaeolo ·st. I I I I I I 1I 11.I 11 Photographs: Surveyor: RM;TB I Ne No: 92-104/5 Frame No: 17 Stud Team: R. Macka , T. Brassil, H. Tanner & M. Jones Date Surve: Februa 1993 GODDEN MACKAY PTY LTD 200 COMMONWEALTH ST SURRY HILlS NSW 2010 11 I, I I I I I APPENDIX F. HISTORIC MAPS AND PLANS 1. Plan of 55 Acres of land belonging to John Macarthur Esqu're, M.C. divided into I allotments of about 2 acres each, c. 1832, Surveyor General Sketch Book No. 3, Folio 63, Archives Office of NSW Surveyor General's Sketch Book Reel 2779. I 2. Plan of Pyrmont Estate as divided into Building Allotments for Sale oy Auction by Mr. Smart, c.1839. Mitchell Library. 3. Plan of 50 Allotments being the second portion of the Pyrmont Estate to be sold by I Auction by Mr. Smart, Monday June 29th, 1840. Mitchell Library. 4. Plan of Pyrmont, New South Wales, the Property of Edw'd Macarthur Esqu're, divided I into allotments for building, 1836, S. B. Vol. 5, Folio 21, Archives Office of NSW, Surveyor Generals Sketch Book, Reel 2779. I 5. Map of the City of Sydney, dedicated to the Mayor (et. al) by William Henry Wells, c. 1843, Mitchell Library. I 6. Smit.i. and Gardiner's map of Sydney and Suburbs, 1855. Mitchell Library. 7. Trigonometric Survey of Sydney by. T. L. Mitchell, 1853. Mitchell Library. I 8. Woolcott and Qarke's Map of the City ofSydney, 1854. Mitchell Library. I 9. Council of the City ofSydney - Block Plans, 1865. Sydney City Council Archives. 10. Survey of the Southern Share of Johnstones Bay from Macarthur's Point to A. S. N. I Co. Works, Pyrmont, 1876. Archives Office of NSW Reel 4779, P. 31. 574. 11. Plan showing the Survey of that Port of Pyrmont included in the Macarthur's Estate of I 55 acres, Sheet 3, 1882. Archives. 12. Extract from Survey ofPyrmont Point for Public Baths, August 1st, 1887, Sydney City I Council Archives. 13. Pyrmont, Sheet X, 2, from Metropolitan Water Sewerage and Drainage Board Survey, 1890, Water Board of NSW Archives. I 14. City of Sydney, Sheet B, 3, from Metropolitan Water Sewerage and Drainage Board Survey, 1895. Water Board of NSW Archives. I 15. Plan of the Pyrmont Estate, Parish of St, Andrew, City of Sydney, 1st May, 1892. Mitchell Library. I I I I I I I 16. Plan Show Proposed Improvements at Darling Island and Glebe Island, 1891. I Archives Office of NSW, Plan 1114. 17. Sydney Harbour Trust, Birds Eye View of General Wharfage Scheme West of Dawes I Point as it will appear when completed, 1914. MitchelI Library. 18. Sydney Harbour Trust, Plan of Port Wharfage showing work completed and in I progress, 1919. MitchelI Library. 19. Sydney Harbour Trust, Birds Eye View Showing New Wharves and Approaches, Jones I Bay, Pyrmont, 1919. MitchelI Library. I '---"" I I I I I I I I I I 1.: 1 I 1 I I I I I APPENDIX G. HISTORIC MAPS AND PLANS 1. Plan of 55 Acres of land belonging to John Macarthur EsquIre, M.C. divided into I allotments of about 2 acres each, c. 1832, Surveyor General Sketch Book No. 3, Folio 63, Archives Office of NSW Surveyor General's Sketch Book Reel 2779. I 2. Plan of Pyrmont Estate as divided into Building Allotments for Sale by Auction by Mr. Smart, c.1839. Mitchell Library. 3. Plan of 50 Allotments being the second portion of the Pyrmont Estate to be sold by I Auctiqn by Mr. Smart, Monday June 29th, 1840. Mitchell Library. 4. Plan of Pyrmont, New South Wales, the Property of Edw'd Macarthur EsquIre, divided I into allotments for building, 1836, S. B. Vo!. 5, Folio 21, Archives Office of NSW, Surveyor Generals Sketch Book, Reel 2779. I 5~ Map of the City of Sydney, dedicated to the Mayor (et. al) by William Henry Wells, c. I ',_I 1843, Mitchell Library. I 6. Smith and Gardiners map of Sydney and Suburbs, 1855. Mitchell Library. 7. Trigonometric Survey ofSydney by. T. L Mitchell, 1853. Mitchell Library. I 8. Woolcott and Oarke's Map of the City ofSydney, 1854. Mitchell Library. I 9. Council of the City of Sydney - Block Plans, 1865. Sydney City Council Archives. 10. Survey of the Southern Share of Johnstones Bay from Macarthur's Point to A. S. N. I Co. Works, Pyrmont, 1876. Archives Office of NSW Reel 4779, P. 31. 574. 11. Plan showing the Survey of that Port of Pyrmont included in the Macarthur's Estate of 55 acres, Sheet 3, 1882. Archives~, I 12. Extract from Survey ofPyrmont Point for Public Baths, August 1st, 1887, Sydney City Council Archives. I ~ Pyrmont, Sheet X, 2, from Metropolitan Water Sewerage and Drainage Board Survey, , 1890, Water Board of NSW Archives. I f!Y City of Sydney, Sheet B, 3, from Metropolitan Water Sewerage and Drainage Board Survey, 1895. Water Board of NSW Archives. I 15. Plan of the Pyrmont Estate, Parish of St, Andrew, City of Sydney, 1st May, 1892. Mitchell Library. I I I I I I I 16. Plan Show Proposed Improvements at Darling Island and Glebe Island, 189l. Archives Office of NSW, Plan 1114. I 17. Sydney Harbour Trust, Birds Eye View of General Wharfage Scheme West of Dawes Point as it will appear when completed, 1914. Mitchell Library. I 18. Sydney Harbour Trust, Plan of Port Wharfage showing work completed and in progress,1919. Mitchell Library. I 19. Sydney Harbour Trust, Birds Eye View Showing New Wharves and Approaches, Jones Bay, Pyrmont, 1919. Mitchell Library. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I _I t .------_. - _. --- - _._. IiIIII - - ::' P rJAN. I OF I I PY[lM](lNT [E~TATE o • i' ...:.... " I I l '_.r'" t :1. '. ...'(. N ,.. ·0 • j ~ ~ t: ~, r I .' i • -0 .. '!\. d r . .; {. Jil~• .:TA" iUUldlindJ' rYJ1rl.r~,..J"mt~nllleJ .•," . ..'f .n.."..~J' ~,,~ .dfI,~k ':"l'i,/, if' ~e-? .",.:~ . I ,/"''''"y tl"r,~"'"..·or :} ...... __ •. ':... ".: '::.:...::.~~::;,.' :' ';. J . f" t:! '.':0" .-'; -c-_ _ 't' ~.:.} ,!:. ~~...,.~ .:>c;-~..' \'.; •_ ,-l,~;f;f;~:~~::;J :rt~:~:';i::Tt/- ...... :.T.. ·.:.·.-.·:~.:· ;::~:.~.~.~.·~L:·:·:;·:·.!:.~:·.·::.·.:-::~.~_.~:·.?:~.·.·:~.:."':':~,,~.;.:':~.~-~_~:._;:~::'::':'~":,!,:~:~~.::.:: ::~.::.:~,., ~ :.:.;~ ~ ~ ~.,~.:-,~,~:;:.~.::~:·.:,:~:.~.:~::.·.:.~~.::::-:~~~:~.·:~I:.: ~_~·:·,~:~.·.·.~:·.;.::.L.~.:.~.·.~.:;.~.~.~.·.~.~:~.;:.,~.;.:.;.:::t_~.~.·.~r;:;·_~~.::.>;::~::~:;.:.:::.~::.;:~:-.:~.;.: :r::.:.,~ ~.:;: :~~._~.~~:_~.r:~"-.:~L_·"·'~::'·:·i·'~"_.:.::~;·,:.·::.~::::~:!.::.~.~.1:~:.·.~.:._ :.-.~:;~.~.~.~."'.'.::.. ~.' :·~~t ~~~~.~. ~"~~~ ~~ .~ ~ ~ ._: .-,...:.:.-..L:;::.,.·:,:.._.~. ---Eo'.. ~'...... •..~ ..:_:..>-.•:....:..•:.::.. ..:..,..:..•.:•...•..'..:•...... • .. •. •.~.•.. ..·..:·.:.. .~ .--- ..:.!.. ..-.. ~:-..:.:...... :.. ..-:':.·::_ :.. ..: ;.;:':::.·:1f:..:.. .. _.: ~ ..'.:.':..:.. .. '.::~: ,:..)<.':~.>~~~ :·:/~~}~tr.t~{~1.~~q}~\;;~}'~~&~~~~lw;':d~}~;.~~:.:.~... S-vl,"~Cv- ~e.-~, I I I. ~~~ c27t'1 I •• •I I .. •. . t • ._.., I,,,'~-' I ~o y;'?:r~ L 3 ::'" •••• 1- s'eo l.SA I '0. ~ I 'I ~. 'I • I' ~ !! j I" ' ~ i I " I ' "'I I I j: I i ! It I '" I ~J , j. I' I ; " .jj ~.~~. ;i " ~. ' ...... ~. 1,'1 , I ,I " II of I: I :-'... be]?j~Q.l))8 it , 1.\." ;,' 55Acrr:s of. Land to = , i, ; :,.~h t, \,»£e~r{1U,?~ lPi:/t;':;f1,.<'~. ': fVlCJ ed' jll'd,o all t)t.n"le~~", <.,t about t i I '. ,<.'I A 1_ . I I "., ,Z,. cres ea-er' ,, ~ p I ). " I : .' i 1 : . 1 l... , . I I !. r I. .' , ---i"-.. __.... -, "i i 1 I I i ..i - :; I :; I . :' I~ I Ij. ~ !. 11 I '. '", ! I 1 I I ~ -r:~ 'I I I ~.,- .. I I I : .....,. , --'. d' ;1 I -'-.... I ~:: ~~. ~ I I, ;1.::." r . ~- '.. .:~- I' .... : .>., I i" I 1•• J \ I, I I' I ," ,., 1 : i" I , I j' -~ , I .... "-"'!--... - " • j' ... ,j : ( L I c..~ •, i ~ .1 :.. ~.. I j . ;u __ , ...y.... A. d:·- -z- '~-- •. ;. ~'1 ,s ''\'-) • ,.1 , ~ _ ,, .. CA..-,yo I i MAP 1 I _. . -;: _.- .~ ------...-: .. ral/on 'nd :" .;,: .~ MAP3~ ~1. -+i:tI~':====~U==~.N, J C.lJt~;nJ 1 .J'cale ..;J:IgtI;l;;!=:;1 .... ~ : I. _. I ~. ("' I ·1 JU r.J L ...... - ~<, :!' i , . '; I·.. L .<) [j YfJ/ j' ! ! . '1 -to /.'2./ ~~: : .:~ ! .. '"., I .~.. .; OF P}"R)!O:'1t' '1',' ~ 'If.~~ .. ,. \' ." '.. " ~. ,.;. .- \ ,-\ ~. ... i· ,. ~. to ~ I' -.' I 11 /1 (I I' /( -- 11 ./ (; :," I. n .1 11 :'. .j ----~------,rALa '1~~,:~~:"'====='5===¥l:: tt--"-:-Jn•.J••••••••_ ••••••••• • 0:. J"'..~~ ...-" .... I ! .1 i ·1 i '-: :-! \:) , .....L, ":...:.. ... ... ~ ... ." .' L_---=~~=---.:....------~---MAP5 ______--, .... -~~';('W"C'_.uo~r,.-~ ------.I - ... ------,---._ .._.-._'-' _..:._"- '.' : ..... " :' .' !. \ .... _-- ._- ...---" .. '"c. GM::: 1964 ~ Iof...... -... pU'e -- rl I I I I I I I I I I I I I III ', ..' I .. I ·.. I '. ...'.'.:. . '. ~. . ; :":',.. -. I . . ',' . ·········· I . . "•'' ~I' ~ • . '.' .'...... ' .. '" .. ' I . ':.- .. \ ...... ' .' .! . I -. _. _.- -- - ! .! i ..! -----______0.'--':' . IL~. \ _. I:... --, _0' :._"'::- ...... .:~-'.- ,- . - ~ 09:/.. .r:::.::-.:';; . .~. '!J! \. ~..F-1ts---. ('if"# ;. ···if "- Ix...... l...... ,. ri. I u .. MJ-,i " ....f ..,:- ...... ~.. ,' ·, n· ••· ....,.- · I-I ·'1. "''''';..... ,... ·'.~ ,.,I.... ,.'" :: ~~;:: .-0' .. : ru' ·. ".,."" . .- .. ~..i .- ..,. '". .-,.o.a ,. .... l·.; '_H'...... - .~- .. ~ · ...' ... ·..... -,V". .-.~ · "J' ••p f> -"'; .- .;. ·.. .~ .. ...-1_ .-... \" .. . " .~ .. ...11II,,' ..... p- ~~z. I ,·u. od ...... ~ .. ""...... - 1'1'.- .. r--\ .~ '.. .- .. -". .. \W%Iut·,• .-...... -'"...... ,...... ".'t•• . l~ (.l' . " .~ ! 1 :.\~MAP ~ I ...... , (9 ....." ------", ------ .. ~.• - j :: MAP)] .-: t. !. , ." )~~{:!)\.:.:~:.'::'i ... ~~.: .! .::'" . . ,. , -' ".;' :.~ . '.' · . -' ; ..... _.- ....-: .. : . A f};zl< d'S"""y )ut"'« /- /887 Ldl ,':' . ' ,. . " '... \ ... '" l~ • ~:. '. '} \. 1 ~~~, .. ' l' .: " \ •...' l~• ---~"-'I• Jt_ . · ~ · . - . ______._... __-.._ r"""'...... ,._ ...... - -. ~:l..~~};r.~~;:.~l .. ~::,.. ·.~.. \" :-~..:~:.._. '.0301 .S:: .;~~~".:~:\., •. ;;;~.,:~. -::.. ~.f~':,.,...~ .... I (;jq~ tA~:.~3~b MAP 13 "l. I I\. -~. , tal ~ , ai1' , SHEET B' ~/. ',... fj -. ~.... • ~"'1. ~ ... tI-· " f '=1 ;: ~~ , ~i §1 5wcn I' =-: =: ai ~1 .1I ~~. ~! :: ~ ~~ ~f =;_.:- I1 ::! ~r ::: Ii ;: §i ==~ _'...:i- ; i 1: I' !! \ !I- .. < J-a...--_...... -w--..-_ ...... "2 ~--.~ :.: ...... ; 11 .. : :- ~. :.. '%. :: . . ":l '." "I .~.:~,",. 'j ...,..,...... i $...... ·...7 :,.,t, 11 14. t 1~ .: • ~~. :~ ~--::-_·_:~.I" < :...-...... l~ }:~ .;~. .~ .../ :-~ ...... :. ~. . :f. U.·._ .. ITaUT ...,,~J~I' •• _____~J,.,.~,,__"r.. L~. j''''''lil . I 14 Lq= ------~------ 1 , IIS.t\.....MIay!,"1 8'9If:..,1)' £. l z A B T \\ , B A Y ,-J ~ ... i ... .---' , ~ I I I ~ :'>. ~..-l, " ~ ,t:" ..~,!t::.:~~ ~...... ::. __.. ;.o__~':'!'=,,':"""~~,... ____ 0 .. _._.~_~.__.... :'~ ...... ::..L:!: .. .: .... I ' ., , " I I "------. I ...... i !~!-;-;;;!;-!-!--;-;;;;::~~---_'::':----_':"_:"~-,;f~,,""''''-_':'-::-'~~;::~~;;~~~~..... ;. .:'?~:~;,: """ -(i;'; ~ ~. - - If .._--_...... ,.-·..._c...... I ~ • , I I • • "'.:' •• I .. ~ ...... :.!" - I:',':: ;.... ', ',{' " I I I I I I I I I 11 I I I _.-MAP 17 I - ---·--1 I \ ',\ \\ \\ I , \ \ \ ,I \\ '\ '. \, I .J \.. \ _..-" ..... , \\,\ \\ 1 I '\ .')\ ~ . .\ ---~ ' ~~.Yreacocks - Pol:n1:. H I I ..... \ I I I • Lhot. ------i \ WHITe BAV I I I 0" .... .' :.- . ' .. iV., ",:' . . ,.: ~.. \ ," : .. ,"::" ;.... '. -.: -... - ..... :.:·.. :i~.~,i.f.!.H~t~if~:· :! , .' ~.~,_.-.... 1_.9·t~ I I I I I Appendix H• Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No.26 • City West Extract. I Division 6 • Heritage conservation Heritage items are identified on Map 4 and described in Schedule 4. conse.rvation areas are I identified on Map 4. General considerations 29. Development of or including a heritage item, in the vicinity of a heritage item, or within I a conservation are, must be compatible with the conservation of the heritage significance of I the item or the character of the conservation area. Duty of consent authority 30. Before granting consent to any such development, the consent authority must consider I the heritage significance of the item or conservation area and: I the relevant architectural features of the item; or the character of the conservation area I Conservation plans 31. The consent authority may require a conservation plan to accompany an application for I development consent relating to a heritage item. Demolition of heritage items I 32. Before granting consent to development which includes demolition of a heritage item, the consent authority must seek the views of the Heritage Council of New South Wales and consider any such views received within 28 days of the day. on which notice of the proposed I development was given to the Heritage Council. The views of the Heritage Council need not be sought if; the development concerned consists only ofa partial demolition ofa heritage item; I and in the opinion of the consent authority, the partial demolition will be of a minor nature and I will not adversely affect the heritage significance of the item. I I I I I I I I I Appendix I: Ultimo-Pyrmont Draft Urban Development Plan. Extract - Heritage and Conservation I Principle - Heritage and Conservation I Modification and extensions to heritage items are to reflect their significance. Controls I Extensions and additions to heritage items are to be designed to complement their style, form, proportions, materials and colours and the overall heritage context of their setting. Preferably, where heritage items are built to the street alignment, vertical extensions should I be on that same alignment where this would not compromise the amenity of adjoining residential areas or public spaces. I Where vertical extensions are set back from the facades, the form and treatment of the extension should have regard to sightlines when viewed from significant locations in the I adjoining street and public domain system. Ground level uses and treatment of a heritage building should be compatible with its conservation, including decisions regarding the provision of awnings or colonnades, and I provision for car parking and servicing and associated access. I It is recommended that early investigations of the likelihood that archaeological material will be found on a development site be undertaken , and the necessary excavation permit I required under the Heritage Act be obtained before siteworks commence. Map 6 indicates locations which are most likely to contain such archaeological material. I I I I I I I I I I I I Appendix J- Ultimo-Pyrmont Heritage Study I Extract - Policies Pertaining to Heritage Conservation. I Buildings and Structures 4A The items identified in this study should be conserved and protected by statutory planning instruments. I 4B Given the historical significance of the development of the study area as an industrial base, opportunities for compatible re-use of identified items and buildings needs to be I actively encouraged. 4C The sectoral differentiation of the Victorian scale and street pattern should be consciously preserved. The amalgamation of existing sites to facilitate large scale I developments should be discouraged where this action will affect the heritage significance ofthe district. I 4D A Conservation Plan should be a reqll1Tem ent prior to development application particularly in the case of significant multi-storey warehouses/industrial buildings or large development sites. I (The plan should follow the requirements of the ICOM08 Australia Burra Charter and Conservation Plan by J8 K.err, published by the National Trust) I 4E The development proponents should be financially responsible for the preparation of the Conservation Plan to be completed by an independent heritage consultant and the Council I should appoint a Liaison Officer for the project. 4F In determining development or building applications for residential building works, the Council should consider common design features, context'and the proposed change to the I public facades in the first instance. , Natural and Cultural Landscape I 4G The introduction of street trees should be balanced with environmental heritage aims and objectives. It is necessary to review the impact of the matured species in order to assess the impact ofany proposal. I 4H Future development on the peninsula should respond to and re-inforce the natural topography. Assessments of development proposals should include views to and from the I CaD and the harbour. 41 The existing escarpments should be protected and consideration should be given I statutory protection (sic). I I I I I I 4J A foreshore scenic protection area and foreshore building line should be introduced for I harbour edges of pyrmont. Heritage Streetscapes I 4K The streetscape criteria for the streetscape and conservation areas, should be published and issued to development proponents to assist with the understanding of that area in which they intend to introduce new developments. I 4L Scheduled heritage streetscapes should be retained and any new developments in these areas should be respectful of the nearby heritage buildings' forms and styles. I 4M Good quality new design that honestly expresses modernity whilst relating to the historic or architecturally significant character of the streetscape or context should be I encouraged in heritage streetscapes and conservation areas. Conservation Areas 4N It should be a general objective of the Council to protect and conserve the architectural, I historic, residential and social character of the conservation areas. 40 In conservation areas, all proposed building or landscape works should be assessed in I terms of their contributory character and their potential effect on adjoining properties and the area as a whole. I Special Precincts 4P It is critical that the Council of the City of Sydney and the relevant State Government authorities ensure that a conservation plan is prepared to ascertain the heritage significance I of the special precincts. 4Q It is recommended that any application for new development or demolition in a special I precinct be deferred until such time as the conservation plan is complete. 4R The study area's current demographic composition should be assessed as a part of the planning strategy for the study area. I Archaeological Sites 4S The Areas ofArchaeological Sensitivity identified should be subject to a further detailed I assessment to refine the identification of sites and areas of no archaeological potential, and to formulate an overall policy and research design to co-ordinate individual archaeological investigations within the study area. I I I I I