DOCSLIB.ORG

Central Sydney Planning Committee Or the Council

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Central Sydney Planning Committee Or the Council Draft Conservation Management Plan AMP Building / 33 Alfred Street, Circular Quay December 2012 URBIS STAFF RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS REPORT WERE: Director Stephen Davies, B Arts Dip. Ed., Dip. T&CP, Dip. Cons. Studies Senior Consultant Fiona Binns, B Arts, M Arts (Curatorial Studies) Consultant Pam Lofthouse B Sc, Dip Ed, MBA, MHeritCons (Hons), MA Job Code SH267 Report Number 01 xdisclaime rx © Urbis Pty Ltd ABN 50 105 256 228 All Rights Reserved. No material may be reproduced without prior permission. While we have tried to ensure the accuracy of the information in this publication, the Publisher accepts no responsibility or liability for any errors, omissions or resultant consequences including any loss or damage arising from reliance in information in this publication. URBIS Australia Asia Middle East urbis.com.au TABLE OF CONTENTS 0. Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................ 5 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 7 1.1 Brief.................................................................................................................................... 7 1.2 Site Location ....................................................................................................................... 7 1.3 Methodology ....................................................................................................................... 7 1.4 Author Identification and Acknowledgements ...................................................................... 8 1.5 Limitations .......................................................................................................................... 8 2 Site Description ........................................................................................................................... 9 2.1 Site Location, Access and Setting ....................................................................................... 9 2.2 Curtilage ........................................................................................................................... 11 2.3 Condition Assessment ...................................................................................................... 11 2.4 33 Alfred Street, Circular Quay – Structural ....................................................................... 11 2.5 33 Alfred Street, Circular Quay – the Exterior .................................................................... 12 2.6 33 Alfred Street, Circular Quay – the Interior ..................................................................... 16 2.6.1 Services and Finishes ....................................................................................................... 16 2.6.2 Sub Basement .................................................................................................................. 17 2.6.3 Basement ......................................................................................................................... 18 2.6.4 Ground Floor .................................................................................................................... 22 2.6.5 Level 1.............................................................................................................................. 23 2.6.6 Levels 2-4 ......................................................................................................................... 24 2.6.7 Levels 5 – Former Staff Cafeteria...................................................................................... 25 2.6.8 Level 6 – former kitchen/ executive dining room ................................................................ 27 2.6.9 Levels 7-8 ......................................................................................................................... 29 2.6.10 Levels 9-12 ....................................................................................................................... 30 2.6.11 Level 13 – Plant Room ...................................................................................................... 31 2.6.12 Levels 14-23 ..................................................................................................................... 32 2.6.13 Level 24 – Former Head Office Suites ............................................................................... 33 2.6.14 Level 25 – Executive Floor ................................................................................................ 35 2.6.15 Level 26 – Former Observation Deck ................................................................................ 37 2.6.16 Service Levels 27-28 ........................................................................................................ 40 3 History ....................................................................................................................................... 41 3.1 Historical Sources ............................................................................................................. 41 3.2 Historical Overview ........................................................................................................... 41 3.2.1 The Former Governor’s domain ........................................................................................ 41 3.2.2 Early Land Grants and Occupation ................................................................................... 42 3.2.3 Consolidation of ownership ............................................................................................... 42 3.2.4 Construction of the mort & Co wool stores ........................................................................ 44 3.2.5 Construction of the AMP Building ...................................................................................... 48 3.2.6 Interiors ............................................................................................................................ 58 3.2.7 Alterations and additions since 1962 ................................................................................. 63 3.3 Historical Themes ............................................................................................................. 71 4 Comparative Analysis ............................................................................................................... 72 4.1 Office Towers ................................................................................................................... 72 4.2 Peddle Thorp & Walker, Architects .................................................................................... 76 5 Significance ............................................................................................................................... 89 URBIS 33 ALFRED ST_CMP. V 4 REVISED 5.1 What is Heritage Significance? ......................................................................................... 89 5.2 Levels and Grading of Significance ................................................................................... 89 5.3 Significance Assessment .................................................................................................. 89 5.4 Statement of Significance ................................................................................................. 93 5.5 Schedule of Significant Elements ...................................................................................... 94 5.6 Archaeology and Aboriginal Cultural Heritage ................................................................... 97 5.6.1 Aboriginal Cultural Heritage .............................................................................................. 97 5.6.2 Historical Archaeological Potential .................................................................................... 98 6 Heritage Listings and Statutory Obligations............................................................................ 99 6.1 Heritage Listings ............................................................................................................... 99 6.2 Statutory Obligations ........................................................................................................ 99 6.2.1 Commonwealth Legislation ............................................................................................... 99 6.2.2 NSW Legislation ............................................................................................................. 100 6.2.3 Commonwealth Policies.................................................................................................. 101 6.2.4 State Government Policies.............................................................................................. 101 6.2.5 Local Government Policies ............................................................................................. 102 6.3 Non Statutory Listings ..................................................................................................... 103 6.4 Management Plans and Guidelines ................................................................................. 104 7 Conservation Policies ............................................................................................................. 105 7.1 What is a Conservation Policy?....................................................................................... 105 7.2 Statutory Obligations .....................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Multiplex SITES Trust, Multiplex Funds Management Limited, Has Also Changed Its Name to Brookfield Multiplex Funds Management Limited
    18 March 2008 The Manager Company Announcements Office Australian Securities Exchange 20 Bridge Street SYDNEY NSW 2000 Dear Madam MULTIPLEX SITES – REPEAT CONFERENCE CALL Due to technical difficulties relating to the high volume of calls for the Multiplex SITES teleconference on 17th March some investors were unable to access the conference call. Brookfield Multiplex Funds Management Limited apologises for any inconvenience and will be holding a second conference call on Wednesday 19th March at 4.30pm AEST for investors. Details of this call will be supplied to the ASX later today and posted on the Brookfield Multiplex website, www.brookfieldmultiplex.com.au. An outline script on which the presentation for the Multiplex SITES teleconference on the 17th March was based is attached and is also available on the above website, www.brookfieldmultiplex.com.au. Yours faithfully Brookfield Multiplex Funds Management Limited Bob McKinnon Director For further details contact: Vivienne Bower Investor Relations + 61 (0)431 487 025 SITES Conference Call – 17 March 2008 Outline script Welcome Bob McKinnon Multiplex Group change of name • On 11 June 2007, the Multiplex Group entered into an implementation agreement with Brookfield Asset Management Inc. in relation to the acquisition of all Multiplex Group stapled securities. • The compulsory acquisition process was completed in December 2007 and the Multiplex Group stapled securities ceased trading on the ASX on 20 December 2007. On 1 January 2008 the Multiplex Group became wholly owned by Brookfield BidCo (Australia) Pty Ltd, a wholly owned subsidiary of Brookfield Asset Management Inc.. • Following the completion of the acquisition: i. Multiplex Limited changed its name to Brookfield Multiplex Limited; and ii.
    [Show full text]
  • Urban Design in Central Sydney 1945–2002: Laissez-Faire and Discretionary Traditions in the Accidental City John Punter
    Progress in Planning 63 (2005) 11–160 www.elsevier.com/locate/pplann Urban design in central Sydney 1945–2002: Laissez-Faire and discretionary traditions in the accidental city John Punter School of City and Regional Planning, Cardiff University, Cardiff CF10 3WA, UK Abstract This paper explores the laissez faire and discretionary traditions adopted for development control in Central Sydney over the last half century. It focuses upon the design dimension of control, and the transition from a largely design agnostic system up until 1988, to the serious pursuit of design excellence by 2000. Six eras of design/development control are identified, consistent with particular market conditions of boom and bust, and with particular political regimes at State and City levels. The constant tensions between State Government and City Council, and the interventions of state advisory committees and development agencies, Tribunals and Courts are explored as the pursuit of design quality moved from being a perceived barrier to economic growth to a pre-requisite for global competitiveness in the pursuit of international investment and tourism. These tensions have given rise to the description of Central Sydney as ‘the Accidental City’. By contrast, the objective of current policy is to consistently achieve ‘the well-mannered and iconic’ in architecture and urban design. Beginning with the regulation of building height by the State in 1912, the Council’s development approval powers have been severely curtailed by State committees and development agencies, by two suspensions of the Council, and more recently (1989) by the establishment of a joint State- Council committee to assess major development applications.
    [Show full text]
  • Accelerating Net-Zero High-Rise Residential Buildings in Australia
    Accelerating Net-Zero High-Rise Residential Buildings in Australia Final Report transport | community | mining | industrial | food & beverage | carbon & energy Prepared for: City of Sydney Client representative: Chris Derksema Nik Midlam Date: 31 August 2016 In association with: Inspired thinking embracing the challenges of a changing world. Acknowledgement pitt&sherry would like to acknowledge the organisations and individuals who made this project possible. Firstly the Carbon Neutral Cities Alliance (CNCA) and philanthropies which funded this work in recognition of the global imperative for net-zero buildings as an essential part of a low-carbon and prosperous future. The City of Sydney for scoping and commissioning this work, with assistance from the City of Melbourne. Also the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage, The Green Building Council of Australia, the Property Council of Australia, the NSW Department of Planning and Environment, members of the City of Sydney Residential Stakeholders Working Group and staff and others who have all provided input to this report. Very considerable contribution was made to this report by Mike Rainbow and Jan Talacko of ark resources, particularly in Chapters 3 and 4. We would like to acknowledge the developers whose actual buildings in Sydney and Melbourne were modelled, Ecove Pty (Australia Towers) and Innovative Construction & Development Pty Ltd (EQ Tower). Finally, we would like to acknowledge the large number of excellent comments received on the draft report from a wide range of stakeholders, which we have done our best to reflect in this final report. Prepared by: Philip Harrington Date: 31 August 2016 Reviewed by: Mark Johnston Date: 31 August 2016 Authorised by: Philip Harrington Date: 31 August 2016 Revision History Rev Description Prepared by Reviewed by Authorised by Date No.
    [Show full text]
  • Modern Design, Construction and Maintenance of Structures - Hanoi, Vietnam, December 2007
    EJSE Special Issue: Selected Key Note papers from MDCMS 1 1st International Conference on Modern Design, Construction and Maintenance of Structures - Hanoi, Vietnam, December 2007 Modern design, construction and maintenance of composite steel- concrete structures: Australian experiences B. Uy University of Western Sydney, Sydney, Australia Abstract: Modern design, construction innovation and maintenance issues have been extensively utilised for composite steel-concrete building structures in Australia. This paper provides an overview of the design codes, innovative construction applications and maintenance issues for steel-concrete composite members in Australia. The paper initially provides an overview of the various codes of practice for steel-concrete com- posite members in Australia. In identifying construction innovation significant projects to adopt composite construction techniques are considered. Many of these projects have found that the national codes of practice have been lacking in guidance. This has thus been the focal point for much of the research into the area of steel-concrete composite members over the last two decades. The paper concludes with research that is cur- rently being carried out which considers materials and solutions in composite structural forms which promote the concepts of sustainability and will inevitably be prominent in improved maintenance of steel structures in the future. Keywords: composite construction; construction; design; maintenance; modern design; structural design 1 INTRODUCTION 2.2. Composite
    [Show full text]
  • Knight Frank Valuations August 2015 Sydney Office Market Yield Trend Analysis in Historical Context
    Knight Frank Valuations August 2015 Sydney Office Market Yield Trend Analysis in Historical Context The purpose of this paper is to provide some context around historical yield trends in the Sydney CBD and suburban office markets over the last 12-15 years (depending upon the extent of the data between markets). It also includes an approximate measure of standard deviation over the analysed period in an attempt to define trading bands and volatility in the respective markets analysed. This paper was originally drafted prior to the IPG/CIC transaction. Given the initial analysis of this transaction has now been undertaken by Knight Frank Valuations (as distributed 6th August), we have included the general parameters indicated by this transaction within our analysis. KEY POINTS – SYDNEY CBD - Prior to the IPG sale, the prime CBD market indicated yield compression of 40 - 50 basis points over 2014/2015. The IPG portfolio sale indicates further compression, although the unique portfolio aspects need to be considered (as discussed within our market update paper 6th August). - Yields for well located secondary stock in the Sydney CBD have compressed by 50-75 basis points over the past 6-12 months. - Prime and secondary stock within the Sydney CBD now trading below their 10 year average. The IPG sale in particular would tend to indicate that the prime market is now at or close to 2007 peak levels. - Only the Sydney secondary market remains trading within its longer term standard deviation, although is expected to breach this in the near term. - Yield convergence between prime and secondary is gaining initial momentum, but remains far from the margins seen at previous 2007 peak levels.
    [Show full text]
  • UTS: Annual Report 2004, Review of Operations
    2004 ANNUAL REPORT CHANGE THINK DO CHAN THINK CHANGE THINK DO THINK CHANGE DO CHANGE DO DO THINK.CHANGE.DO THINK CHANGE CHANGE DO THINK DO THINK THINK DO DO (UTS:THINK2004) ) The Hon. Carmel Tebbutt, MLC Minister for Education and Training Parliament House Sydney NSW 2000 Dear Minister On behalf of the Council of the University of Technology, Sydney, I have the honour of presenting to you, for tabling in Parliament, the report of the proceedings and fi nancial reports of the University for the year ended 31 December 2004, prepared in accordance with the Annual Reports (Statutory Bodies) Act 1984. In December 2004, Sir Gerard Brennan retired from the position of Chancellor. Sir Gerard has been an extraordinary champion for UTS and his infl uence on the University’s culture and values will be profound and lasting. The University’s excellent international standing was confi rmed in 2004 when The Times Higher Education Supplement listed UTS as one of the world’s top 200 universities. We were also ranked equal fi rst in Australia with the University of Melbourne on the quality of our undergraduate student intake, as measured by the median University entrance score by the Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research. Although the University continues to be affected by funding constraints, our new strategic plan for 2005-08 provides the blueprint for how we intend to entrench UTS’s reputation as a leading provider of high impact research and practice-oriented education through contemporary professional practice. Yours faithfully Professor
    [Show full text]
  • Concept Plan—University of Technology, Sydney (UTS) Broadway Heritage Impact Statement
    Concept Plan—University of Technology, Sydney (UTS) Broadway Heritage Impact Statement Report prepared for the University of Technology, Sydney April 2009 Report Register The following report register documents the development and issue of the report entitled Concept Plan— University of Technology, Sydney (UTS) Broadway—Heritage Impact Statement, undertaken by Godden Mackay Logan Pty Ltd in accordance with its quality management system. Godden Mackay Logan operates under a quality management system which has been certified as complying with the Australian/New Zealand Standard for quality management systems AS/NZS ISO 9001:2000. Job No. Issue No. Notes/Description Issue Date 08-0366 1 Draft report January 2009 08-0366 2 Draft final report February 2009 08-0366 3 Final report February 2009 08-0366 4 Final report version 2 March 2009 08-0366 5 Final report version 3 April 2009 Contents Page 1.0 Introduction ..........................................................................................................................................1 1.1 Preamble..........................................................................................................................................1 1.2 Methodology ....................................................................................................................................1 1.3 Background......................................................................................................................................1 1.4 Documentation.................................................................................................................................2
    [Show full text]
  • Latitude East: Sydney, Australia
    This article was published in High Performing Buildings, Summer 2010. Copyright 2010 American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc. Posted at www.hpbmagazine.org. This article may not be copied C A S E S T U D Y LATITUDE EAST and/or distributed electronically or in paper form without permission of ASHRAE. For more information about High Performing Buildings, visit www.hpbmagazine.org. A Positive Sydney’s Latitude East ranks among Australia’s five most efficient buildings. Latitude East’s performance stems from relatively standard building systems that are designed, implemented and controlled for maximum energy savings rather than green bells and whistles such as trigeneration, wind power or solar photovoltaics. LatitudeBY SCOTT WALKDEN-BROWN AND GODFREY FREDERICK he National Australian BUILDING AT A GLANCE Built Environment Rating System (NABERS) gave Name Latitude East Latitude East its top rat- Location Ting, five out of five stars. Its energy- 52 Goulburn Street, Sydney, Australia saving strategies have led to a build- Owner Brookfield/Credit Suisse Real ing that emits 40% less carbon diox- Estate Fund International (CSREFI) ide than the benchmark required for Principal Use Commercial Office the top NABERS rating. Employees/Occupants 1,400 (approx.) Latitude East is the final building Conditioned Space 247,578 ft2 built at World Square near the heart Substantial Completion/Occupancy of Sydney’s commercial business 2007 district. World Square is a city block Occupancy 100% bounded by George Street, Liverpool Street, Pitt Street and Goulburn Street. The site consists of a large multilevel underground parking operational efficiency requirements area, a shopping center, restaurants, to receive a 4.5 NABERS rating.
    [Show full text]
  • Sydney Cbd Office Market Overview March 2017
    RESEARCH SYDNEY CBD OFFICE MARKET OVERVIEW MARCH 2017 HIGHLIGHTS A record 239,057m² of existing Low vacancy rates have resulted The overall vacancy rate in the office stock in the Sydney CBD has in the Sydney CBD’s prime and Sydney CBD office market is been withdrawn for conversion to secondary gross effective rents forecast to decline to circa 5.0% alternative uses or redevelopment in increasing by 16.3% and 21.0% and 3.5% over the next 12 and 24 the year to January 2017. respectively over the past year. months respectively. KEY FINDINGS SUPPLY & DEVELOPMENT Gross office supply in the Sydney CBD office market A record 239,057m² of existing will be significantly constrained over the next two years, office stock in the CBD market, largely secondary grade, has exacerbated by an increase in stock withdrawal. been removed in the year to Withdrawal of office space for conversion stemming from the completion of the final January 2017. to alternative uses or redevelopment two Barangaroo towers, T3 and T1 Absorption of prime office space continues to be a major theme in the adding a combined NLA of 181,000m² measured 100,166m² over the Sydney CBD with 128,326m² of existing (circa 70% occupied). New additions over 2016 calendar year, almost stock taken offline over the six months to the past six months also included 333 double the 10-year annual average January 2017. Of this amount, 61,609m² George Street (12,500m²—fully leased) of 59,490m². was withdrawn permanently. On an and One Wharf Lane at 161 Sussex annual basis, a record 239,057m² of Street (6,700m²—56% committed).
    [Show full text]
  • Latitude East Brookfield Secured Bonds Series A: Latitude East
    Brookfield Secured Bonds Series A: Latitude East www.brookfieldsecuredbonds.com Brookfield Secured Bonds Series A Prospectus ISSUER: BrookfieldS ecured Bonds Series A Issuer Limited (ABN 38 136 866 969) Brookfield Secured Bonds Series A are mortgage debentures for the purposes of section 283BH of the Corporations Act Arrangers, Joint Lead Managers and Joint Bookrunners A Latitude East A Important notices Corporate directory About this Prospectus The Corporations Act prohibits any person from passing Credit ratings This Replacement Prospectus relates to the offer by Brookfield an Application Form on to another person unless it is None of BSB-sA, the Issuer and the Guarantor Security Secured Bonds Series A Issuer Limited (ACN 136 866 969) attached to or accompanied by a printed copy of this Providers are rated. The Property is leased to the (Issuer) of Brookfield Secured Bonds Series A (BSB-sA). Prospectus or a complete and unaltered electronic Commonwealth of Australia which is rated AAA by BSB-sA are mortgage debentures for the purposes of section version of this Prospectus. Standard & Poor’s, Aaa by Moody’s and AAA by Fitch. 283BH of the Corporations Act which are secured by the Electronic access to the Prospectus These credit rating references are current as at the date of Security, including a first ranking mortgage over the Property The following conditions apply if this Prospectus is accessed this Prospectus but may be revised, withdrawn, suspended or Owner’s 50% interest in the Property. electronically. downgraded by the relevant credit rating agency at any time. The liability of the Issuer and the Guarantor Security Providers – You must download the entire Prospectus.
    [Show full text]
  • Heritage Impact Statement and Archaeological Assessment Wanda One Sydney Ssd 8110 - Demolition of Buildings to Ground Level
    HERITAGE IMPACT STATEMENT AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT WANDA ONE SYDNEY SSD 8110 - DEMOLITION OF BUILDINGS TO GROUND LEVEL 20 FEBRUARY 2017 SH904 FINAL PREPARED FOR WANDA URBIS STAFF RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS REPORT WERE: Director Stephen Davies, B Arts Dip. Ed., Dip. T&CP, Dip. Cons. Studies Senior Consultant Karyn Virgin, B Arts (Adv.) (Hons Archaeology) Report Number SH904 © Urbis Pty Ltd ABN 50 105 256 228 All Rights Reserved. No material may be reproduced without prior permission. You must read the important disclaimer appearing within the body of this report. urbis.com.au CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................. i 1.1. Methodology ......................................................................................................................................... 2 1.2. Author Identification .............................................................................................................................. 3 1.3. The Proposal ......................................................................................................................................... 3 2. Site Description ..................................................................................................................................... 7 2.1. Site Location, Access and Setting ........................................................................................................ 7 2.2. Individual Elements
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Alfred Street, Sydney
    HERITAGE IMPACT STATEMENT WANDA - 1 ALFRED STREET, SYDNEY 27 OCTOBER 2016 SH904 FINAL PREPARED FOR PTW ARCHITECTS URBIS STAFF RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS REPORT WERE: Director Stephen Davies, B Arts Dip. Ed., Dip. T&CP, Dip. Cons. Studies Associate Director Fiona Binns, B Arts, M Arts (Curatorial Studies) Senior Consultant Karyn Virgin, B Arts (Adv.) (Hons Archaeology) Report Number SH904 © Urbis Pty Ltd ABN 50 105 256 228 All Rights Reserved. No material may be reproduced without prior permission. You must read the important disclaimer appearing within the body of this report. urbis.com.au CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................. i 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 2 1.1. Methodology ......................................................................................................................................... 3 1.2. Author Identification .............................................................................................................................. 3 1.3. The Proposal ......................................................................................................................................... 3 2. Site Description ....................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]