1749 – 36-50 Cumberland Street, the Rocks Heritage Impact Statement November 2017

1749 – 36-50 Cumberland Street, The Rocks Heritage Impact Statement November 2017

1749 – 36-50 CUMBERLAND STREET THE ROCKS – HERITAGE IMPACT STATEMENT

Document Control

Version Date Status Author Verification

01 04.10.17 Draft Jennifer Hill Elizabeth Gibson Director, Registered Architect 4811 Associate, Senior Consultant 02 13.11.17 Draft Jennifer Hill Elizabeth Gibson Director, Registered Architect 4811 Associate, Senior Consultant 03 26.11.17 Final Jennifer Hill Elizabeth Gibson Director, Registered Architect 4811 Associate, Senior Consultant 04 27.11.17 Final Jennifer Hill Elizabeth Gibson Director, Registered Architect 4811 Associate, Senior Consultant

© COPYRIGHT This report is copyright of Architectural Projects Pty Ltd and was prepared specifically for the owners of the site. It shall not be used for any other purpose and shall not be transmitted in any form without the written permission of the authors.

1749 | 36-50 CUMBERLAND STREET THE ROCKS

CONTENTS 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 5 1.1. BACKGROUND ...... 5 1.2. SUMMARY OF HISTORICAL CONTEXT ...... 5 1.3. SUMMARY OF PHYSICAL CONTEXT ...... 6 1.4. THE PROPOSAL ...... 6 1.5. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE ...... 7 1.6. KEY RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT ...... 7 1.7. CONCLUSION ...... 7 2. INTRODUCTION ...... 9 2.1. BACKGROUND ...... 9 2.2. OUTLINE OF TASKS REQUIRED TO BE UNDERTAKE IN THE BRIEF ...... 9 2.3. DEFINITION OF THE STUDY AREA ...... 9 2.4. METHODOLOGY ...... 9 2.5. LIMITATIONS ...... 9 2.6. IDENTIFICATION OF AUTHORS ...... 10 2.7. EXTENT OF SEARCHES ...... 10 3. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE ...... 11 3.1. TIMELINE OF THE SIRIUS SITE AND BUILDING ...... 11 3.2. HISTORY OF SITE ...... 12 3.3. HISTORICAL THEMES OF THE ROCKS AREA ...... 14 4. PHYSICAL EVIDENCE ...... 16 4.1. THE CONTEXT ...... 16 4.2. THE SITE AND SETTING ...... 16 4.3. THE EXISTING BUILDING ...... 16 4.4. OTHER ASPECTS OF THE SITE ...... 16 5. ASSESSMENT OF CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE ...... 18 5.1. DEFINITION OF CURTILAGE ...... 18 5.2. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE ...... 19 5.3. SUMMARY STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE ...... 19 6. CONSTRAINTS AND OPPORTUNITIES ...... 21 6.1. CONSTRAINTS AND OPPORTUNITIES ARISING FROM THE CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE OF ITEMS IN THE VICINITY OF THE SITE ...... 21 6.2. CONSTRAINTS AND OPPORTUNITIES ARISING FROM HERITAGE PLANNING REQUIREMENTS ...... 21 7. STATEMENT OF CONSERVATION POLICY ...... 24 8. STATEMENT OF HERITAGE IMPACT ...... 25 8.1. THE PROPOSED SEPP AMENDMENT ...... 25 8.2. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE OF THE ROCKS CONSERVATION AREA ...... 25 8.3. ASSESSMENT OF HERITAGE IMPACT AGAINST THE HERITAGE POLICIES IN THE INVENTORY SHEET FOR THE ROCKS CONSERVATION AREA ...... 25 8.4. THE ASSESSMENT OF HERITAGE IMPACT AGAINST THE HERITAGE POLICIES IN THE ROCKS HERITAGE MANAGEMENT PLAN ...... 26

1749 | 36-50 CUMBERLAND STREET THE ROCKS

8.5. ALTERNATE ASSESSMENT OF HERITAGE IMPACT THE HERITAGE OFFICE GUIDELINES ...... 26 8.6. MITIGATION MEASURES AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT ON THE SITE ...... 27 8.7. CONCLUSION ...... 27 9. BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 28 10. APPENDICES ...... 29 APPENDIX A - HISTORY OF THE SITE ...... 30 APPENDIX B – HISTORY OF THE BUILDING ...... 38 APPENDIX C – DETAILED SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA ROCKS MANAGEMENT PLAN ...... 41 APPENDIX D – ILLUSTRATIONS ...... 45

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.1. BACKGROUND Architectural Projects were commissioned by the Department of Planning and Environment to prepare this Heritage Impact Assessment for the proposed State Significant Precinct (SSP) at 36-50 Cumberland Street (Sirius Site) to consider the potential impact any new development may have on heritage items in the vicinity.

1.2. SUMMARY OF HISTORICAL CONTEXT The Sirius Site is located on the traditional land of the Cadigal Aboriginal people. The site was developed from the 1820s.

The Rocks traditionally contained larger houses on the ridge that were substantial and well built. By the 1840s the area became a fashionable suburb. Following 1837, town houses similar to those existing in The Rocks area were erected on Bunker’s Hill (east of the site). A number of substantial blocks of townhouses were built at the northern end of Cumberland and Gloucester Streets, none of which remain today. The Myles Buildings (34-38 Cumberland Street), Goodsir’s Buildings (30-32 Cumberland Street) and Young’s Buildings (20-24 Cumberland Street) and Purchase’s single town house (18 Cumberland Street) were constructed. By the 1850s the area had declined considerably.

In November 1900 The Rocks Resumption Plan was announced. Most of The Rocks came into public ownership in 1900 following an epidemic of bubonic plague, when lands were resumed by the government and large areas of housing were demolished. An advisory board consisting of Messrs Hickson, Davis and Vernon submitted a scheme for the replanning of the area in 1903, which was the basis for the realignment of streets and redevelopment of The Rocks, which included development of terrace housing and residential ﬂat buildings. Prior to the First World War a limited redevelopment program for housing in The Rocks commenced and continued into the 1920s.

Following realignment of Cumberland Street, a number of housing board buildings were erected between 1913-1916. These consisted of bond stores, warehouses and government office buildings such as the Rowan Bond Stores at 36-50 Cumberland Street, and the Ajax Warehouse at 23 George Street North.

In January 1915, the first building in Sydney built of reinforced concrete was erected by the Public Works Department at 23 George Street .This occupied the northern part of the site. South of the 23 George Street, and the Ajax building warehouse, the Rowans Bond Store can be seen in a 1930 photo which indicates the construction of arches to the Sydney Harbour Bridge .

The construction of Sydney Harbour Bridge (1925—1932) split The Rocks peninsula along its spine and changed the street configuration and housing typology in the area, with the area west of the Sydney Harbour Bridge being identified as Millers Point. In the late 1950s, the construction of the Cahill Expressway across Circular Quay resulted in housing resumptions and extensive demolition, with up to one third of the area becoming vacant land. Most of the vacant land at the time was located south of the Cahill Expressway. With speculation of redevelopment, little effort was exerted in maintaining the remaining buildings in public ownership. The 1949 Sydney City Council site plan shows a change of use at 23 George Street North to a warehouse. It also shows Rowans Bond Store).

In 1964, the Housing Commission of NSW (HCNSW) conducted a survey of the residents within a section of The Rocks, primarily owned and operated by the Maritime Services Board. The report found that construction of flats within a 3-mile radius of the centre of the city was the best outcome to accommodate the needs of low income and displaced residents in the future.

The SCRA Scheme, introduced by Sydney Cove Redevelopment Authority, proposed to demolish a large proportion of the buildings in The Rocks area in place of high-rise buildings. This resulted in a Green Ban

| 5

being imposed by the Builders’ Labourers Federation (BLF) in December 1971. The Green Ban started from November 1971 and ended in December of that year and was the third Green Ban in NSW. In 1972 the Whitlam Labour Government came into power and played an interventionist role in urban affairs.

In June 1975, the Green Ban was lifted and allowed for the construction of public housing including the Sirius Building.

The Housing Commission enabled The Rocks Residents’ Group to have a large influence on the outcome of the Sirius site . They requested the following design elements: • A design which would ensure that people allergic to heights could be housed on lower levels whilst others, who had no reluctance in respect of heights could be given the advantage of extensive views and “not shut in by other buildings’’; • The inclusion of small “open areas” where families who had been used to small backyards could “continue their interest in growing a few flowers”; and • A design which would provide a building that was neither of orthodox square or rectangular style but which would blend in with the then existing skyline of that section of The Rocks.” Following completion of the Sirius site in 1980, the former ‘Rocks’ residents received preference in the allocation of units.

Contemporary comment at the time of opening of the Sirius building was very negative. According to Joseph Glascott, in an article entitled “Lump in The Rocks”, the National Trust said new development within the area should be sympathetic with the existing buildings. An article entitled Eyesore is a Welcome Sight for residents, National Trust has called it “lump in The Rocks”. The Building exceed the height of the Sydney Harbour Bridge. Norman Day described it as a disgrace as the building does not even try to harmonise with The Rocks buildings. R.L.Rawson called them ‘human filing cabinets’. Leslie Walford said the building was a positive experiment.

Following criticism about the Sirius building, the project architect Tao Gofers, argued that the development was in harmony with its surrounding context. The intended colour of the building was white to match the Opera House, however this was changed to a sandstock brick colour to reduce costs. The NSW Housing Commission did not expect the level of negative community feedback considering the extent of consultation.

1.3. SUMMARY OF PHYSICAL CONTEXT The Site The site is an irregular trapezoid adjoining Cumberland Street to the West and Gloucester Walk to the east. The residential building complex contains 79 apartments and consists of repetitive geometric (cubic) elements stacked on top of each other that step to a height of 11 storeys. The maximum building height of the existing building as it stands is RL 61.70. The central portion of the building sits above the level of the Sydney Harbour Bridge walkway. The building is finished in off-form concrete and render finish. The building dates from 1977 when it began construction.

1.4. THE PROPOSAL The draft SEPP amendment proposed the following controls: • A B4-Mixed Use zone across the site; • Maximum building height ranging from RL+41.41 at the northern end of the site, RL+39.81 to RL+38.21 at the southern part of the to open up views to and from the Sydney Harbour Bridge and Sydney Opera House (two – four storeys); • Maximum Gross Floor Area of 8,420m2 (approximately 85 residential apartments); and • Active street frontage along Cumberland Street for commercial or retail development (approximately 670m2); • Provisions ensuring that the existing building continues to be permissible in its current built form; and

| 6

• Design excellence provisions applying to development of any new building or alternations to the existing building, including a requirement for a design competition.

Any future redevelopment of the site under these controls would form the backdrop to terraces at Playfair Street (east of the site) and other heritage items along George Street, and would be visible to the south-west of heritage items fronting George Street. The proposed SEPP amendment provides for a built form that is lower in height than the existing building, which provides a maximum building height of RL+45.6 (11 storeys). The proposed controls would allow a building of lower height and scale, being more consistent with adjoining development at 88 Cumberland Street. This would provide a more uniform view line along Gloucester Walk and Cumberland Street, having a lesser overall impact on surrounding heritage items and conservation areas than the existing building.

1.5. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE The Rocks Conservation Area Inventory Sheets provides an overview of the significance of The Rocks area as follows: The Rocks, with its complex layering of significant fabric, uses and associations, is a precinct of national cultural significance. The Rocks is valued as a place of major social history, reflecting more than two centuries of significant activity; including European invasion, early contact between Aboriginal people and European settlers, and colonial settlement. The drama of cross cultural encounters reflects The Rocks' focal location as a place linking continental, colonial, city and maritime histories. The Rocks was saved through fierce battles for its conservation, and by government ownership. Despite ongoing incremental change in The Rocks, continuity and authenticity remain major themes, manifest in increasingly rare and fragile relics of original topography and built fabric, remnants of history and a living community.1

1.6. KEY RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT It is recommended that during detailed design stage for any future development on the Sirius site, consideration and respect should be given to the historic pattern of streets, lanes and pathways. Detailed design work should also consider any impact of views to and from The Rocks, Conservation Areas and individual Heritage Items in The Rocks. Any proposed development on the Sirius site should have regard to the visual and historic setting of The Rocks, including its characteristic built form, fine grain and human scale. New development should respect the form, scale, character and texture of The Rocks. The rich history of the site should be interpreted both on and off-site, through a diverse range of detailed design considerations. Consultation with the community and relevant stakeholders is also recommended to inform the development of interpretative messages for the future development on the site.

1.7. CONCLUSION It is considered that the proposed reduction of building height on the Sirius site provides for a more uniform building form is more compatible with the overall height and scale of The Rocks, ensuring there is minimal impact to the character of the area and heritage items. Given the heritage significance of The Rocks Conservation Area and individual items in the vicinity, it is recommended that the above measures are implemented as part of any new development on the Sirius site. This will ensure that the significance of The Rocks Conservation Area and surrounding heritage items are adequately protected.

It is noted that the overall reduction of building height will provide a more uniform built form. A maximum gross floor area control and design excellence provision, coupled with relevant Apartment Design Guidelines will minimise impact to the significance of The Rocks area and surrounding heritage items.

1 The Rocks Conservation Area. Extracted from www.environment.nsw.gov.au on 06/09/2017

| 7

The proposed building envelope is more consistent with the surrounding development and wider Rocks area, providing a more sensitive built form to the heritage significance to the surrounding area.

| 8

2. INTRODUCTION 2.1. BACKGROUND Architectural Projects were commissioned by the Department of Planning and Environment to prepare this Heritage Impact Assessment for the proposed State Significance Precinct (SSP) State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) amendment at 36-50 Cumberland Street (Sirius Site). The assessment considered the suitability of the proposed SEPP amendment and any potential impacts on heritage items in the vicinity of the site.

2.2. OUTLINE OF TASKS REQUIRED TO BE UNDERTAKE IN THE BRIEF This Heritage Impact Assessment (HIS) is prepared in accordance with the Office of Environment and Heritage (NSW) (OEH) guidelines and specially assesses the following: • conservation area boundaries; • heritage items in the vicinity of the site; • listings on the Heritage Inventory of the local authority; • listings on the Heritage Inventory as a component of a Conservation Area; • listings on any other Heritage Inventory; • the heritage significance of The Rocks area; • history of The Rocks area; • relevant Conservation Management Plans and Inventory Sheets of the area; • relevant Conservation Management Plans and Inventory Sheets of the Heritage Items in the Vicinity; • significance of The Rocks area and Heritage Items in its Vicinity; • impact of the proposed SEPP amendment in relation to the Significance of the area and Heritage Items in the Vicinity; and • the potential impact of the proposed SEPP amendment in relation to policies of any relevant Conservation Management Plans/ Inventory Sheets.

Note: The HIS only considers the impact of the proposed SEPP amendment on surrounding Heritage Items and wider area. It does not consider the heritage significance of the existing Sirius building.

2.3. DEFINITION OF THE STUDY AREA The Assessment relates to a study area defined by The Rocks with specific focus on 36-50 Cumberland Street, The Rocks.

2.4. METHODOLOGY The Assessment has been prepared in accordance with the methodology outlined in The Conservation Management Plan by Dr James Semple Kerr (7th Edition 2013). The report complies with the principles of the Australian ICOMOS Charter for the Conservation of Places of Cultural Significance (the Burra Charter) and its Guidelines. The methodology used in the evaluation of the place / assessment of impact is recommended by the Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH). This report seeks to identify any historic, aesthetic, social and technological values of the study area through documentary and physical evidence, and to determine the level of representatives or rarity with other identified examples. The analysis also looks at the overall character of the adjoining area to determine if the proposed SEPP amendment contributes to a characteristic grouping or cohesive streetscape that is unique or of sufficient importance, to require protection. The report has been structured to be consistent with the framework of The Rocks Heritage Management Plan (adopted February 2002 and revised 2010).

2.5. LIMITATIONS A time frame of four weeks was established for the preparation of the Report. Access was given to the site and Council records held by the applicant and Council. No physical intervention was undertaken to prepare this report. No historical archaeological work was commissioned for this report.

| 9

2.6. IDENTIFICATION OF AUTHORS The report has been prepared by a team consisting of the following key members: • Jennifer Hill – Architectural Projects Pty Ltd – Heritage Architect • Elizabeth Gibson – Architectural Projects Pty Ltd – Heritage Architect • Alice I’Anson - Architectural Projects Pty Ltd – Admin Research • Ana Borges - Architectural Projects Pty Ltd – Admin Research • Roxie Weaver - Architectural Projects Pty Ltd – Admin Research

2.7. EXTENT OF SEARCHES Information searches have occurred with the following organisations: • The National Library of Australia (TROVE) • The Mitchell Library, State Library of NSW • NSW Land and Property Information • Sydney Water Archives • Council Archives • Commonwealth Archives • Australian Heritage Council • National Trust of Australia (NSW) • Heritage Council of NSW • State Heritage Inventory, Office of Environment and Heritage(NSW) (OEH) • AIA Register of Significant Architecture • Art Deco Society of NSW Heritage Inventory

| 10

3. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE 3.1. TIMELINE OF THE SIRIUS SITE AND BUILDING The following table provides a timeline overview of the Sirius site, prior to and following development of the building that is located there today.

1972 • Kings Parking Company proposed to build the East Rocks Car Park, eight storeys at the northern end of Cumberland Street, however this proposal did not proceed. • SCRA article ‘rehousing program for the East Rocks tenants’ published. • Demolition of Rowan’s Bond Store, and demoloition of the southern half of the warehouse built by the Housing Board including the former shipping office. 1974 • The Laurels precursor to the Sirius Building (type BFS.74) was approved in 1974 and built at Ritchie Street, Sans Souci in 1978. A similar modular stacked development of interlocking unit type was proposed for the Sirius Building. 1975 • NSW Housing Commission and Sydney Cove Redevelopment Authority (SCRA) agreed on the need to provide public housing in The Rocks Redevelopment Area. • Sirius Apartments was designed. • Plans and a model of the Sirius project placed on public exhibition in February 1975 at SCRA and NSW Housing. • The tenants of No 1 – 11 Gloucester Street asked to vacate by July 1975. 1977 • Images of the proposed design for Sirius feature in the Housing Commission’s Annual Report of 1977. • Final designs were submitted to the Sydney Cove Redevelopment Authority in 1977. • Application lodged to erect a new block of residential flats buildings for social housing at 36- 50 Cumberland Street, submitted in December 1977. 1979 • Repairs were undertaken to Gloucester Walk. • Modification of original design to reduce costs – saving $200,000 by deletion of white cement in concrete. • Cost savings were also achieved by redesign of the public art in foyers from recessed concrete reliefs to stacked timber panels • Extensive negative media comment regarding the completed building. 1980 • Sirius Apartments were completed. • The first tenants of the new housing block moved in.

1988 • The Sydney Cove Redevelopment Authority leased Sirius to Land and Housing Corporation for a period of 99 years. 1996 • NSW Department of Housing’s Section 170 Heritage and Conservation Register was completed. The Sirius Building was one of some 3000 items included. • The Rocks block plan indicates the Sirius building at 36-50 Cumberland Street.

2002 • Sirius Building features in ‘A History of Public Housing Design’ published by the Department of Housing. Its architect, Tao Gofers is not noted in the publication as one of the key designers of public housing in NSW. 2010 • SHFA’s ‘The Rocks Heritage Management Plan Volume 1’ published in April 2010 states that the Sirius apartments stand as a prominent reminder of the period of the Green Bans. 2013 • The Heritage Council commissioned ‘The Modern Movement in NSW – A Thematic Study and Survey of Places’ which identifies Sirius within a political and social context of the Modern movement. 2014 • National Trust (NSW) issues a Position Paper on Millers Point – Heritage Conservation. • National Trust (NSW) lists Sirius Apartments on its Register (non-statutory). • A forum on the Sirius Building was held in November, hosted by Sophie Cotsis MLC (Labour) and Jan Barham MLC (Greens) at Parliament House.

| 11

• Heritage Division advises Land and Housing Corporation that it has received a nomination from the National Trust (NSW) for the State listing of the Sirius Apartments in December. 2015 • At its meeting of 1 July, 2015, the Heritage Council resolved to give formal notice of its intention to consider listing the Sirius Building on the State Heritage Register. • On 15 July, 2015, the Heritage Council publishes its notice of intention to consider listing in accordance with S33(1)(b) of the Heritage Act, and invites submissions from all interested parties by 8 September, 2015. 2016 • On 31 July 2016 the Minister for Heritage announced that the NSW Government would not proceed with listing the Sirius building on the State Heritage Register (SHR). 2017 • On 8 June 2017 the Minister for Planning agreed to investigate the Sirius site an SSP on the basis that updating the planning controls for the site is a matter of State planning significance. • The 2016 decision of the Minister for Heritage was subsequently challenged by the Environmental Defenders Office (EDO) NSW, on behalf of the Miller Point Community Association in the Land and Environment Court on 6 and 7 of April 2017. A decision in favour of the EDO was handed down on 25 July 2017 requiring that the Minister for Heritage must remake the decision as to whether to list the Sirius Building on the SHR. • On 25 October 2017 the Minister for Heritage announced that the NSW Government would not proceed with listing the Sirius building on the State Heritage Register.

3.2. HISTORY OF SITE The Sirius site is located on the traditional land of the Cadigal Aboriginal people. The Cadigal Aboriginal people were displaced during European settlement in 1788. The site has gradually been developed since the 1820s. Captain Bunker, was granted the land at The Rocks (including the site) by Governor King, known as Bunker's Hill. In 1791, Captain Bunker established a wattle and daub cottage, which was later replaced by a stone villa and store buildings in 1820 with views to both sides of Bunker’s Hill. This building was demolished in 1909.2 Although The Rocks resumed area was considered by many as a slum, the area traditionally contained larger houses on the ridge and smaller terraces for workers in the back lanes. Many of the smaller houses were substandard, however the larger houses were substantial and well built. The area had once been home to prominent men such as David Scott Mitchell, Edmund Barton and William Bede Dalley.3 By the 1840s the area became a fashionable suburb with larger town houses that were built to rent to the newly emerging class of professional men and men who were not of convict origin, who had chosen to come to the colony. 4 Following the introduction of building regulations in Sydney in 1837, town houses similar to those in The Rocks area were erected on Bunker’s Hill, George Street North, Lower Fort Street and Dalgety Terrace at Millers Point. A number of substantial blocks of townhouses were built at the northern end of Cumberland and Gloucester Streets, none of which remain today. The Myles Buildings (34-38 Cumberland Street), Goodsir’s Buildings (30-32 Cumberland Street) and Young’s Buildings (20-24 Cumberland Street) and Purchase’s single town house (18 Cumberland Street) were also constructed following introduction of building regulations in 1837.5

2 Mary Suttor 2015 'The Sirius Legacy - A Conversation 3 Rice, Jean. 23 George Street North. Concrete Warehouse: Conservation Management Plan. June 2012. P.35. 4 Rice, Jean. 23 George Street North. Concrete Warehouse: Conservation Management Plan. June 2012. P.31. 5 Rice, Jean. 23 George Street North. Concrete Warehouse: Conservation Management Plan. June 2012. P.25

| 12

By the 1850s an increasing number of businessmen, such as Charles John, Royle of Randwick, owned numerous rental properties in The Rocks, however never lived there. During this time, the area had declined considerably. 6 Around 1880, the sisters of St Joseph of the Sacred Heart moved to the northern end of Cumberland Street, The Rocks, until the official resumption of their complex by the State Government. In November 1900 The Rocks Resumption Plan was announced. By 1900 demolition of Youngs Building, located north of Sirius site had occurred. By 1905, The Rocks Resumption area had been renamed Observatory Hill Resumed Lands. Residential and business leases were being offered for 99 year leases for land located closest to the CBD area. The Sydney Harbour Trust obtained 152 properties to administer.7 In 1908, the intersection of George Street North and Gloucester Street was altered and Cumberland Street was realigned. As part of the alteration, several public houses/hotels were rebuilt including: the Australian Hotel, the Glenmore Hotel, the Harbour View Hotel and the Mercantile Hotel, which is located opposite the Sirius site. The hotels were rebuilt on irregular corner sites created by the road alignments. A new bridge over the Argyle Cut, as well as a new staircase and garden were built at the northern end of Cumberland Street and was later renamed York Street North. New hotels were not designed by the Public Works Department. Following realignment of Cumberland Street, a number of housing board buildings were erected between 1913-1916. These consisted of bond stores, warehouses and government office buildings such as the Rowan Bond Stores at 36-50 Cumberland Street, and the Ajax Warehouse at 23 George Street North. In January 1915, the first building in Sydney built of reinforced concrete was erected by the Public Works Department at 23 George Street. By the 1920s there was considerable criticism regarding the number of commercial buildings in the Observatory Hill Resumed area compared to the number of units required for rehousing tenants in The Rocks area by the Housing Board. In 1924, the Housing Board was disbanded and as such the only public housing built in Sydney were the blocks built by Sydney City Council for that decade.8 In August 1927 the Sydney Harbour Trust took over management for a number of properties within the Observatory Hill / Rocks Resumed Area. These were previously managed by the Housing Board. In 1936, many of the properties in the Observatory Hill Resumed Area were transferred to the Maritime Services Board, a new Government agency. In 1964, the Housing Commission of NSW (HCNSW) conducted a survey of the residents located on housing primarily owned and operated by the Maritime Services Board within The Rocks. 9 The report found that construction of flats within a 3-mile radius of the centre of the city was the ideal outcome to accommodate the needs of low income and displaced residents in the future10. In 1970 all government-owned properties within The Rocks were transferred to the Sydney Cove Redevelopment Authority (SCRA)11, which was introduced along with the SCRA Scheme, which outlined development for The Rocks area. The Maritime Services Board continued to manage the residential properties in Millers Point and Dawes Point. The SCRA Scheme proposed to demolish a large proportion of the buildings in The Rocks area in place of high-rise buildings. This resulted in a Green Ban being imposed by the Builders’ Labourers Federation (BLF) in December 1971. The Green Bans started from November 1971 and ended in December of that year and were the third Greens Ban in NSW. In 1972 the Whitlam Labour Government came into power and played an interventionist role in urban affairs. The Green Bans were lifted in June 1975 and allowed for the construction of public housing including the Sirius Building. The Housing Commission enabled The Rocks Residents’ Group to have a large influence on the outcome of the Sirius site, they requested the following design elements:

6 Rice, Jean. 23 George Street North. Concrete Warehouse: Conservation Management Plan. June 2012. P.31. 7 Rice, Jean. 23 George Street North. Concrete Warehouse: Conservation Management Plan. June 2012. P.37. 8 Rice, Jean. 23 George Street North. Concrete Warehouse: Conservation Management Plan. June 2012. P.47 9 NSW Heritage Act 1977, section 33(2)(a)---(d) 10Housing Commission of NSW (1964) “Rocks” Area Redevelopment Scheme: Report on Survey of occupants of dwelling sin area proposed for redevelopment together with a schedule setting out details relating to the family groups residing in the area as at 30 June 1964. 3 Ibid pp 7---8. 11 Sydney Cove Redevelopment Authority (1978) Annual Report, pp 9-11.

| 13

• A design which would ensure that people allergic to heights could be housed on lower levels whilst others, who had no reluctance in respect of heights could be given the advantage of extensive views and “not shut in by other buildings’’; • The inclusion of small “open areas” where families who had been used to small backyards could “continue their interest in growing a few flowers”; and • A design which would provide a building that was neither of orthodox square or rectangular style but which would blend in with the then existing skyline of that section of The Rocks.” 12 Following completion of the Sirius site building in 1980, the former ‘Rocks’ residents received preference in the allocation of units. The Housing Commission noted the following key points following public consultation: • The 79 unit project was on target to be completed by the end of the year. • The allocation process, which ensured bona fide current and former residents of The Rocks received allocation preference, was underway. • Criticism had been received about the height of the building in relation the Harbour Bridge.

The Housing Commission consulted extensively with local residents prior to submitting plans for approval of the Sirius building. The Housing Commission obtained approval from The Rocks Resident Action Committee, Sydney Cove Redevelopment Authority, Builders Labourers Federation and Heights of Buildings Committee prior to the calling of tenders. The proposal was publicly exhibited and a model of the project was displayed in The Rocks Information Centre. Following criticism received during public exhibition regarding the Sirius building, the project architect Tao Gofers, argued that the development was in harmony with its surrounding context, in particular its colour. The architect noted that the building of reinforced concrete with precast window panels, was finished in a sandstock brick colour to reflect the historic origins and materials of the area. It was noted that the building was designed with variable heights to reflect the irregular roof shapes of the buildings and the resultant sculptural quality was in harmony with the dominant forms of the Sydney Harbour Bridge, Sydney Opera House and mixture of different building types in The Rocks itself, from small terraces to large bond stores. The Architect noted that the community was concerned the different building heights made the building appear larger in bulk scale than in reality. NSW Housing Commission was not expecting the extent of negative feedback given the amount of consultation that was undertaken for the Sirius building.

Contemporary comment at the time the Sirius building was completed, was very negative. According to Joseph Glascott, in an article entitled “Lump in The Rocks”, the National Trust said new development within the area should be sympathetic with the existing buildings. In an article entitled Eyesore is a Welcome Sight for residents, The National Trust called it “lump in The Rocks”. Architect, Norman Day described it as a disgrace as the building does not even try to harmonise with The Rocks buildings. R.L.Rawson called them ‘human filing cabinets’. Leslie Walford said the building was a positive social experiment. Following criticism about the Sirius building, the project architect Tao Gofers, argued that the development was in harmony with its surrounding context. The original development building was intended to be white to match the Sydney Opera House, however to save cost was redesigned to be a sandstock brick colour.

3.3. HISTORICAL THEMES OF THE ROCKS AREA The following table provides an overview of the key historical themes of The Rocks area in an Australian and state context. The numbers below are not chronological and refer to the standard themes numbers.

12 1975 Housing Commission Report

| 14

Australian Theme New South Wales Theme (abbrev) 2. Peopling the Convict - Activities relating to incarceration, transport, reform, continent accommodation and working during the convict period in NSW (17881850) (does not include activities associated with the conviction of persons in NSW that are unrelated to the imperial 'convict system').

3.Economy - Commerce - Activities relating to buying, selling and exchanging goods and Developing local, services. regional and national economies

3. Economy - Environment (cultural landscape) - Activities associated with the interactions Developing local, between humans, human societies and the shaping of their physical regional and national surroundings. economies

3. Economy Industry - Activities associated with the manufacture, production and distribution Developing local, of goods. regional and national economies

4.Settlement Towns, suburbs and villages - Activities associated with creating, planning and Building settlements, managing urban functions, landscapes and lifestyles in towns, suburbs and towns and cities villages.

7.Governing Government and Administration - Activities associated with the governance of local areas, regions, the State and the nation, and the administration of public programs includes both principled and corrupt activities.13

13 The Rocks Conservation Area. Extracted from www.environment.nsw.gov.au on 06/09/2017

| 15

4. PHYSICAL EVIDENCE 4.1. THE CONTEXT 4.1.1. The Rocks Heritage Management Plan The Rocks Heritage Management Plan – Volume 1 provides the following heritage context of The Rocks area: The principal item on display in The Rocks is the place itself. Its lanes, modest and grand structures, its variety of building materials and fabrics, and its vistas, both inwards and outwards, mark it out as a special place of life and contemplation. Some visitors will readily imagine what living in The Rocks might have been like in the 1860s or even the 1960s.14 Situated on a rocky promontory projecting into Sydney Harbour on the western side of Sydney Cove, The Rocks is bounded by the Harbour foreshore, the southern approaches to the Harbour Bridge, the edge of Dawes Point Park and Grosvenor Street to the south.

4.2. THE SITE AND SETTING The Sirius site is located at 36 – 50 Cumberland Street, The Rocks (Lot 100 DP 264.104) and has an area of 3,640m2. The site is an irregular trapezoid adjoining Cumberland Street to the west and Gloucester Walk to the east. The lot boundary includes the following dimensions: • Approximately 75m to Cumberland Street • Approximately 25 and 55m to Gloucester Walk • Approximately 10m to south and approximately 25m to north • The site falls from RL 27.760 to RL 26.526 to RL 26.100 along Cumberland Street. • The site falls from RL 25.101 to RL 24.997 to RL 24.029 along Gloucester Walk. • The site falls from RL 27.760 to RL 25.10 on the north boundary. • The site falls from RL 26.526 to RL 24.02 on the south boundary.

4.3. THE EXISTING BUILDING The Sirius building contains 79 residential apartments in the form of a residential flat building. The built form design includes repetitive geometric (cubic) elements stacked on top of each other. The maximum building height of the existing building as it stands is RL 61.70. The highest part of the building sits above the level of the Sydney Harbour Bridge walkway. The building is finished in off-form concrete and render finish with faded purple planters located on the residential balconies. The building was initially intended to have a white finish to echo the Sydney Opera House. This did not proceed due to budget constraints. The floors are concrete slabs and the window frames are acid- etched. The apartment mix ranges from 1-4 bedrooms, mostly on one level. Some apartments are split over two or three levels. The upper level apartments in the central portion of the building are serviced by lifts. Apartments that service aged residents are located in the tower portion of the building where no stairs are required for access. The building also comprises two community lounges, in addition to service rooms and on-site parking. A number of the apartments open onto private balconies, with ground floor apartments opening onto ground level courtyards. A communal garden is located on the 8th floor. The main foyer has a slatted ‘waving’ timber ceiling and three-dimensional wood sculptures of European cave art figures. These are based on the original artwork designed by the architect Penny Rosier for recessed concrete relief.

4.4. OTHER ASPECTS OF THE SITE 4.4.1. Evidence of Archaeological Potential Given the history of site disturbance/development from the late twentieth century, the site is unlikely to reveal archaeological remains except in isolated areas where no development has occurred. This report did not locate or assess potential or known archaeological sub-surface deposits on the subject site or elsewhere.

14 The Rocks Heritage Management Plan Vol 1 April 2010, p.4.

| 16

4.4.2. Evidence of Aboriginal Heritage Potential Given the history of site, the site is unlikely to reveal Aboriginal heritage potential. This report did not investigate potential Indigenous associations with the subject site.

4.4.3. Evidence of Natural Heritage Potential Given the extent of site disturbance/development from the late twentieth century the site is not known to have heritage significance for its natural features.

4.4.4. Evidence of Moveable Context No significant moveable items exist.

| 17

5. ASSESSMENT OF CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE 5.1. DEFINITION OF CURTILAGE 5.1.1. Background There are different types of Heritage Curtilage that relate to the history and significance of the site. The following sections outline relevant curtilage definitions relating to the Sirius site and its heritage significance. Lot Boundary Heritage Curtilage The most common type of heritage curtilage comprises the boundary of the property containing the heritage item, or items. The property may also contain associated buildings, gardens and other significant features, including walls, fences, driveways or tennis courts, all which may contribute to the heritage significance of the property. Reduced Heritage Curtilage This type of heritage curtilage is less than the lot boundary of the property. It arises where the significance of the item may not relate to the total lot, but to a lesser area. In the case of rural properties this may be due to growth of vegetation and wind breaks, which reduce views into the site and from the site. This is often only defined when development occurs. Expanded Heritage Curtilage There may be circumstances where the heritage curtilage may need to be greater than the property boundary. Depending on the topography, an expanded curtilage may be required to protect the landscape setting or visual catchment of a heritage item. Composite Heritage Curtilage This type of curtilage applies to heritage conservation areas and defines the boundaries of land required to identify and maintain the heritage significance of an historic district, village or suburban precinct.

5.1.2. Heritage Curtilage There are two curtilages relevant to the site, the lot boundary heritage curtilage and the composite heritage curtilage. The lot boundary heritage curtilage has been associated with the lot since 1975. The composite heritage curtilage relates to The Rocks Conservation Area including significant views to The Rocks from key vantage points such as the Sydney Opera House.

5.1.3. Curtilage and Setting The Rocks Heritage Management Plan - Volume 1 includes the following information regarding the curtilage and setting of The Rocks area: The Cahill Expressway is a strong physical barrier that may be interpreted as redefining The Rocks as a smaller area to the north of it. Observatory Hill was originally viewed as part of The Rocks area. However, the strong physical form and the permanence of the Harbour Bridge have separated it from The Rocks, although it remains part of its setting. The original boundary elements are contiguous with elements today. The ridge line has been replaced by the Harbour Bridge, the small stream and Phillip’s Street and square have been replaced by George and Grosvenor Streets and Sydney Cove shoreline has been modified. Three boundary conditions are defined. The first is a heritage curtilage boundary. This defines The Rocks as an integral entity with a clearly defined boundary and fully contains the areas of significance that characterise The Rocks. The second boundary condition comprises two areas of influence that define the setting of The Rocks. These are elements that overlap or form buffer zones with The Rocks, such as George Street and Observatory Hill. These areas influence the significance of The Rocks. In the third, a visual catchment area is described that, although not part of The Rocks and not influencing the significance of The Rocks, is visible from The Rocks and vice versa and within which the visual effects of change need to be considered. The Rocks heritage curtilage boundary encompasses the significance of The Rocks and should be considered as the potential boundary for The Rocks as a conservation area. (This boundary differs

| 18

from both the boundary of land owned by the Authority and the SEPP (State and Regional Development) 2011 statutory planning boundary which includes the Circular Quay foreshore).

5.2. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE 5.2.1. Background A statement of cultural significance is a declaration of the value and importance given to a place or item, by the community. It acknowledges the concept of a place or item having an intrinsic value that is separate from its economic value. There are a number of recognised and pre-tested guidelines for assessing the cultural significance of a place or item established by organisations including among others, the ICOMOS (International Committee on Monuments and Sites, Australia), The National Trust of Australia, The Australian Heritage Council (Australian Government) and in New South Wales, The Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH). The Heritage Council’s criteria ‘NSW Heritage Assessment Criteria’ are based on the Australian Heritage Commission criteria and encompass the five values in the Australia ICOMOS Burra Charter; Historical Significance, Historical Association Significance, Aesthetic Significance, Scientific Significance, Social Significance and ‘two’ grading level Rarity and Representativeness. These criteria were gazetted following amendments to the Heritage Act, which came into force in April 1999 and was further amended in 2004. This report uses the NSW Heritage Assessment Criteria to assess the significance of the proposed SEPP amendment on the surrounding area.

5.3. SUMMARY STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE The Rocks Heritage Management Plan - Volume 1 identifies the following key points of heritage significance for The Rocks area. • The Rocks, with its complex layering of significant fabric, uses and associations, is a precinct of national cultural significance. • The Rocks is valued as a place of major social history, reflecting more than two centuries of significant activity; including European invasion, early contact between Aboriginal people and European settlers, and colonial settlement. • The drama of cross-cultural encounters reflects The Rocks’ focal location as a place linking continental, colonial, city and maritime histories. • The Rocks was saved through fierce battles for its conservation, and by government ownership. • Despite ongoing incremental change in The Rocks, continuity and authenticity remain major themes, manifest in increasingly rare and fragile relics of original topography and built fabric, remnants of history and a living community. The NSW Heritage Register Listing provides the following Statement of Significance of The Rocks area: • The Rocks is a major element of Sydney Harbour and Circular Quay, with a dramatic setting at the narrowest point in the Harbour. Visible layers of change appear on the sandstone topography which gives the precinct its name. Less tangible aspects, such as harbour sounds and breezes and water views, are crucial to The Rocks’ sense of place on the foreshore. • The Rocks is important as a foreshore port settlement and historic focus of social and economic activity, commencing in Australia’s colonial period. The Rocks is a place where authentic early convict evidence is accessible to the public. • The Rocks is part of the place of first sustained contact between Aboriginal people and European settlers on the continent. Physical evidence of pre-European Aboriginal culture in The Rocks has been largely destroyed. The lack of such evidence is a poignant reminder of loss. Aboriginal cultural sites which may have survived such impacts are of great significance to the Aboriginal community of Sydney who consider their continued experience and association with The Rocks as symbols of endurance. • The Rocks contains a rich accumulation of features that demonstrate layers of Australian history from 1788 until the present. The precinct displays diversity in townscape and building style, form

| 19

and texture. Distinctive low-rise scale and ﬁne grain textures in The Rocks contrast with, yet complement, the imposing built forms and modern architecture of the city centre beyond. • The Rocks landscape, urban form, built structures and subsurface archaeological features, together with extensive documentary records, provide a chronicle of outstanding research potential. • The Rocks and adjacent areas of Millers Point and Dawes Point are symbols of community survival, with the associated present-day communities representing and connected to the processes of struggle, perseverance and change that have shaped these places. • Owned and managed in the public interest for a century, The Rocks has been the stage for Government innovation in public works, town planning and social engineering. It is known for historic events such as the 1901 plague, slum clearances and Green Bans. It has become a showcase for conservation practice and is an example of public land ownership and sustainable urban management under one Government agency. • The Rocks is an important Australian tourist destination – presented as the birthplace of colonial Australia and representing signiﬁcant storylines.15

15 The Rocks Heritage Management Plan Vol 1 April 2010, p.27.

| 20

6. CONSTRAINTS AND OPPORTUNITIES 6.1. CONSTRAINTS AND OPPORTUNITIES ARISING FROM THE CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE OF ITEMS IN THE VICINITY OF THE SITE The following section provides an overview of the potential constraints and opportunities of the proposed SEPP amendment on the surrounding cultural heritage items. The following table provides an overview of the heritage items that may be affected by new development on the Sirius site, due to their physical proximity and visual linkages.

ITEM ID HERITAGE ITEM STREET ADDRESS SUBURB SIGNIFICANCE SHI NO 4500010 Australian Hotel, 100-104 The Rocks State 01528 shops and Cumberland Street dwellings 4500009 Glenmore Hotel 96-98 Cumberland The Rocks State 01549 Street 4500023 Ajax Building 23 George Street The Rocks Local 4500038 ASN Hotel 91 George Street The Rocks State 01527 (former) 4500037 Bushells 86-88 George The Rocks State 01535 Warehouse Street (former) and Bushells Place 4500024 Mercantile Hotel 25-27 George The Rocks State 01560 Street 4500028 Merchants 43-45 George The Rocks State 01561 House Street 4500027 Mining Museum 36-64 George The Rocks State 01555 (former) Street 4500008 ASN Co Building 1-5 Hickson Road / The Rocks State 01526 35-45 Circular Quay West 4500099 Cleland Bond 33 Playfair Street The Rocks State 01538 Store (part of Argyle Stores) 105888 Sydney Harbour Bradfield Hwy Dawes Point National N/A Bridge / Milsons Point Milsons Point 105738 Sydney Opera 2 Circular Quay Sydney National N/A House East

6.2. CONSTRAINTS AND OPPORTUNITIES ARISING FROM HERITAGE PLANNING REQUIREMENTS 6.2.1. National Heritage Considerations The Sirius building and site is not included on the National Heritage List or Commonwealth Heritage List. The Sirius building and site is not identified under statutory protection pursuant to the EPBC Act and as such no constraints apply.

6.2.2. State Heritage Considerations The Sirius building and site is not identified by statutory protection provided pursuant to the NSW Heritage Act 1977 and is not identified as an items of state heritage significance. As such no constraints apply.

The site is within The Rocks Conservation Area which is 1 of 5 state listed Conservation Areas.

| 21

State Heritage Register The State Heritage Register is a list of heritage items of particular importance to the people of NSW. It includes items and places (such as buildings, works, relics, movable objects or precincts) of State heritage signiﬁcance endorsed by the Heritage Council and the Minister. Until May 2002, only two heritage items in The Rocks (Cadman’s Cottage and Susannah Place) were listed on the State Heritage Register. However, this number has increased by another 94 items, following approval by the Heritage Council of the inclusion of items of State signiﬁcance from the Authority’s Section 170 Heritage and Conservation Register. (See Appendix A: State Heritage Register Items and Appendix B: Map of Heritage Listings in The Rocks). The Sirius site or building is not identified as an item on the State Heritage Register.

Interim Heritage Orders Interim Heritage Orders can be made under Part 3 of the Heritage Act, either by the Minister or, where authorised, a local government council. Interim Heritage Orders are effective for a maximum period of twelve months. There are currently no properties within The Rocks that are subject to Interim Heritage Orders.

Archaeological ‘Relics’ Heritage Council approval is required where there is reasonable knowledge or likelihood that disturbance or excavation of the land is likely to result in an archaeological relic being discovered, exposed, moved, damaged or destroyed. The Act deﬁnes a ‘relic’ as: any deposit, object or material evidence which relates to the settlement of the area that comprises New South Wales, not being an Aboriginal settlement, and which is 50 or more years old. The ‘relics’ provisions of the Heritage Act applies to all land within The Rocks.16

National Trust (NSW) The building and site is not classified by the National Trust (NSW). Listings in this register impose no legal restrictions.

AIA Register of Significant Buildings The building is not listed as significant on the AIA Register of Significant Architecture in NSW. Listings in this register impose no legal restrictions.

Australian Institute of Engineers The building is not listed as an item of engineering heritage by the AIE. Listings in this register impose no legal restrictions.

Art Deco Society of NSW Building Register The building is not listed by the Art Deco Society of NSW. Listings in this register impose no legal restrictions.

Section 170 Register The site and building are listed on the Section 170 Register of the Land Housing Corporation NSW.

Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority The Rocks is managed by Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority, which was constituted on 1 February 1999 under the Sydney Harbour Foreshore Act, 1998. The Act merged the City West Development Corporation (which managed Ultimo/Pyrmont) with Sydney Cove Redevelopment Authority (SCRA), and also provided for the amalgamation with the Darling Harbour Authority, which took place in early 2001. The Authority has the responsibility of managing certain lands between Garden Island, to the east of The Rocks, and White Bay to the west, with the exception of the Royal Botanic Gardens and the Opera House and its immediate environs.

16 The Rocks Heritage Management Plan Vol 1 April 2010, p.33.

| 22

In recognition of the importance of heritage conservation in The Rocks, the Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority (SHFA) commissioned the preparation of a Heritage Management Plan by Godden Mackay Logan Pty Ltd (adopted February 2002). The strategies and recommendations (formerly in Volume 1) are now located in The Rocks Heritage Management Plan: Strategies and Action Plan. The Rocks Heritage Management Plan has formed the basis for a succinct conservation policy document (The Rocks Heritage Policy).17 The Sirius building and site is not identified as a heritage item by the Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority.

6.2.3. Local Heritage Considerations City of Sydney Council The Sirius site is located within the City of Sydney LGA, however the Sydney Local Environmental Plan (Sydney LEP) 2013 does not apply to The Rocks area. Accordingly, the site is not identified as a local heritage item under Sydney LEP 2013.

17 The Rocks Heritage Management Plan Vol 1 April 2010, p.6.

| 23

7. STATEMENT OF CONSERVATION POLICY

The Statement of Cultural Significance and Schedule of Significant Fabric set out in Section 5, together with any more detailed assessments of individual heritage items in the policy section should be accepted as one of the bases for future planning and work on the place. A Statement of Conservation Policy is a document that provides guidelines to assess many different proposals. Policies for the preservation of a Conservation Area or Heritage Item are based on a recognition of its significance and the relevant constraints. Conservation can be regarded as the management of change and can be applicable whether or not the building has reached the threshold for listing as a heritage item or as a contributing component of a streetscape or Conservation Area. Any future refurbishment or development of the Sirius site should be carried out in accordance with the principles of the Australia ICOMOS Charter for the Conservation of Places of Cultural Significance (the Burra Charter) as revised in 2013.

| 24

8. STATEMENT OF HERITAGE IMPACT 8.1. THE PROPOSED SEPP AMENDMENT The proposed SEPP amendment seeks to apply the following controls over the Sirius site: • A B4-Mixed Use zone across the site; • Maximum building height ranging from RL+41.41 at the northern end of the site, RL+39.81 to RL+38.21 at the southern part of the to open up views to and from the Sydney Harbour Bridge and Sydney Opera House (two – four storeys); • Maximum Gross Floor Area of 8,420m2 (approximately 85 residential apartments); and • Active street frontage along Cumberland Street for commercial or retail development (approximately 670m2); • Provisions ensuring that the existing building continues to be permissible in its current built form; and • Design excellence provisions applying to development of any new building or alternations to the existing building, including a requirement for a design competition. Any future redevelopment of the site under these controls would form the backdrop to terraces at Playfair Street (east of the site) and other heritage items along George Street, and would be visible to the south-west of heritage items fronting George Street. The proposed SEPP amendment provides for a built form that is lower in height than the existing building, which provides a maximum building height of RL+61.7 (11 storeys). The proposed controls would allow a building of lower height and scale, being more consistent with adjoining development at 88 Cumberland Street. This would provide a more uniform view line along Gloucester Walk and Cumberland Street, having a lesser overall impact on surrounding heritage items and conservation areas than the existing building.

8.2. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE OF THE ROCKS CONSERVATION AREA The Rocks has a complex layering of significant heritage fabric, uses and associations and is a precinct of national cultural significance. The Rocks is valued as a place of major social history, reflecting more than two centuries of significant activity; including European invasion, early contact between Aboriginal people and European settlers, and colonial settlement. The drama of cross cultural encounters reflects The Rocks' focal location as a place linking continental, colonial, city and maritime histories. The Rocks was saved through fierce battles for its conservation, and by government ownership. Despite ongoing incremental change in The Rocks, continuity and authenticity remain major themes, manifest in increasingly rare and fragile relics of original topography and built fabric, remnants of history and a living community.18

8.3. ASSESSMENT OF HERITAGE IMPACT AGAINST THE HERITAGE POLICIES IN THE INVENTORY SHEET FOR THE ROCKS CONSERVATION AREA The Inventory Sheet Notes: The Rocks is an area of national cultural heritage significance and as such, it is desirable that it continues with the majority of the area in public ownership, to enable coordinated and consistent conservation management. A Heritage Management Plan was prepared for The Rocks area to identify the heritage significance of The Rocks and the principles and practice that will enable a coordinated approach to this important heritage resource. The Heritage Management Plan identifies that the historic pattern of streets, lanes, pathways and subdivision should be maintained. The historical places within The Rocks should be retained and conserved, to ensure there is ability to reveal heritage information to current and future generations about Australia’s cultural background. Any new development over the site should give consideration to removing or minimising the impact of unsympathetic elements of the building, where appropriate. Any new development on the Sirius site should: • Consider the Heritage Management Plan and Interpretation Plan; • Consider the impact of views to and from The Rocks;

18 The Rocks Conservation Area. Extracted from www.environment.nsw.gov.au on 06/09/2017

| 25

• Be designed to address and be considerate of the width of terraces along Playfair Street, which vary between 3.5m, 4m and 4.5m; and • Respect the historic pattern of streets, lanes and pathways, removing or minimizing the impact of height of the Sirius building.

8.4. THE ASSESSMENT OF HERITAGE IMPACT AGAINST THE HERITAGE POLICIES IN THE ROCKS HERITAGE MANAGEMENT PLAN The Rocks Heritage Management Plan sets out the following protection measures for heritage conservation: • The visual and historic setting of The Rocks and the current urban structure, including subdivision and characteristic built form, should be maintained. • The fine grain and human scale of The Rocks should be retained. • Conservation management plans should be prepared for individual heritage items in accordance with the NSW Heritage Council policies and guidelines and the Burra Charter of Australia ICOMOS. • Intangible aspects of the heritage of The Rocks, including significant uses and historic associations and meanings, should be conserved.19 • New development should be required to comply with ‘infill’ principles to respect the form, scale, character and texture of The Rocks. 20 • Management decisions and procedures should include consideration of heritage requirements.21 • A proactive approach should continue to be taken to interpretation of the history and heritage values of The Rocks. 22 • Interpretation should be provided both on and off-site, through a diverse range of media. • The Authority should consult widely, to help develop interpretative messages and to ensure that these messages are appropriately conveyed to the maximum audience.23 When considering the proposed SEPP amendment in regard to the above conservation measures, it is recommended that any new development on the Sirius site respect and reinforce the visual and historic setting of The Rocks, including its characteristic built form, fine grain and human scale. New development on the Sirius site should respect the form, scale, character and texture of The Rocks. The rich history of the site should be interpreted both on and off-site, through a diverse range of media. Extensive consultation should also inform the development of interpretative messages.

8.5. ALTERNATE ASSESSMENT OF HERITAGE IMPACT THE HERITAGE OFFICE GUIDELINES 8.5.1. New development adjacent to a Heritage Item (including additional buildings and dual occupancies) The following section provides an assessment of the proposed SEPP amendment in accordance with the guidelines set out by the Heritage Office. • How is the impact of the new development on the heritage significance of the item or area to be minimised? Any new development under the proposed draft SEPP amendment would minimise the impact on the heritage significance in The Rocks area as the proposal building height is more compatible with the fine grain human scale of The Rocks area. Articulation of any building facades should be considered at detailed design stage to reflect surrounding heritage items. Reducing the height of the building envelope so it is more compatible with the overall height and scale of The Rocks. • Is the development sited on any known, or potentially significant archaeological deposits? If so, have alternative sites been considered? Why were they rejected? The development is not sited on any known archaeological deposits. Given the extent of modification to the site, the potential for archaeological deposits is low, however archaeological investigation should be undertaken at development application stage.

19 The Rocks Heritage Management Plan Vol 1 April 2010, p.42. 20 The Rocks Heritage Management Plan Vol 1 April 2010, p.42. 21 The Rocks Heritage Management Plan Vol 1 April 2010, p.43. 22 The Rocks Heritage Management Plan Vol 1 April 2010, p.46. 23 The Rocks Heritage Management Plan Vol 1 April 2010, p.46.

| 26

• Are any known or potential archaeological deposits affected by the landscape works? If so, what alternatives have been considered? No known archaeological deposits will be affected by future development. Given the extent of modification to the site, the potential for archaeological deposits is low. • How does the work impact on views to, and from, adjacent heritage items? There is no impact on views to and from adjacent heritage items given the reduced scale under the proposed planning controls for the Sirius site.

8.6. MITIGATION MEASURES AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT ON THE SITE It is recommended that the following steps are considered at detailed design and development application stage of any new proposal on the Sirius site: • Consider the Heritage Management Plan and Interpretation Plan; • Consider the impact of views to and from The Rocks; • Consider building design in relation to the width of terraces along Playfair Street, which vary between 3.5m, 4m and 4.5m; • Consider and respect the historic pattern of streets, lanes and pathways, removing or minimizing the impact of height of the Sirius building; • Undertake archaeological investigations to ensure no impact; • Consider building articulation of any building facades to reflect surrounding heritage items; • Have regard to the visual and historic setting of The Rocks, including its characteristic built form, fine grain and human scale; • Comply with ‘infill’ principles to respect the form, scale, character and texture of The Rocks; • Interpret the rich history of the site both on and off-site, through a diverse range of detailed design considerations; and • Undertake community consultation to inform the development of the interpretative messages associated with future development.

8.7. CONCLUSION Given the heritage significance of The Rocks Conservation Area, it is recommended that the above mentioned mitigation measures are implemented prior to detailed design phase for any new development on the Sirius site. This will ensure that the significance of The Rocks Conservation Area is adequately protected. It is considered that the proposed reduction of the building height controls on the Sirius site is more compatible with the overall height and scale of The Rocks, insuring minimal impact to the character to the area and surrounding heritage items. Is noted that, as a result of the proposed planning controls, as well as the existing controls under the NSW Government Apartment Design Guide, future development of the Sirius site is unlikely to have any significant impact on The Rocks area of surrounding heritage items. The proposed SEPP amendment is more consistent with the surrounding development and heritage conservation are of the wider Rocks area, providing a more consistent built form.

| 27

9. BIBLIOGRAPHY

Dr Edward Duyker. The Rocks. 1999 Godden Mackay Logan for Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority. The Rocks Heritage Management Plan (revised 2006) 2002 Higginbotham, Kass & Walker. The Rocks and Millers Point Archaeological Management Plan. 1991

Irving, R. and Reynolds, P. A Pictorial Guide to Identifying Australian Architecture, 1989

Jahn, Graham, Sydney Architecture, Watermark Press, Sydney 1997

Joseph Glascott, “Eyesore’ is a Welcome Sight for Residents”, Sydney Morning Herald, March 20 1980

Jyoti Somerville. Mercantile Hotel 2527 George Street, The Rocks Conservation Management Plan. 1999

Kelly, M. Anchored in a Small Cove A History and Archaeology of The Rocks, Sydney. 1997

Kelly, M. The Heritage of Australia The Illustrated Register of the National Estate. 1981

Kennedy, Brian & Barbara, Sydney and Suburbs – A History and Description, AH & AW Reid Pty Ltd, 1982

Leslie Walford, “Not Lumpy”, Sydney Morning Herald, April 6, 1980 Myles Buildings, Goodsir’s Buildings and Young’s Buildings town house Oswald Brierly’s panoramic view 1842 Norman Day Boxes Stacked like so many Playing Cards May 16 1979

Pollon, Frances, The Book of Sydney Suburbs, Angus & Robertson, 1988

R L Rawson That Block of Flats Sydney Morning Herald May 23 1979.

Rice, Jean. 23 George Street North. Concrete Warehouse: Conservation Management Plan. June 2012.

Sands Directory SCA J Lydon 1992. Archaeological Monitoring The Australian Hotel and Adjoining Shops, The Rocks, Sydney. 1992 SCA Johnson, W. Archaeological Work in The Rocks, 1978 1998

SCRA. Building Data Sheets 19781984

The Housing Commission of NSW – Annual Report 1977

The Rocks Heritage Management Plan Vol 1 April 2010.

| 28

10. APPENDICES

APPENDIX A - HISTORY OF THE SITE APPENDIX B – HISTORY OF THE BUILDING APPENDIX C – DETAILED SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA ROCKS MANAGEMENT PLAN APPENDIX D – ILLUSTRATIONS

| 29

APPENDIX A - HISTORY OF THE SITE

1788 The land on which most of the Sirius Apartment Block now stands is the traditional land of the Cadigal Aboriginal people. With European settlement the traditional people were eventually dispossessed of their land. The 1788 Ltn. Dawes map based on soundings by Gov. John Hunter & Ltn. William Bradley (Fig 3.1) indicates the rocky outcrop of Bunkers Hill. 1806 Captain Bunker, was granted the land by Governor King, known as Bunker's Hill, in return for "services to the Governor". Captain Bunker was Master of the Third Fleet and delivered his cargo of 185 convicts to Sydney in 1791. He went on to set up a flourishing whaling enterprise. In around 1800, Bunker established a wattle and daub cottage on Bunkers Hill which was later replaced by a stone villa and store buildings in 1820 with views to both sides of the hill. The villa and stores became the headquarters of his whaling enterprise. This building was demolished in 1909.24 The 1812 John Eyres’ lithograph of Bunkers Hill, Campbell’s Cover and Sydney Cove (Fig 3.2) indicates dwellings on the ridge. The 1822 John Septimus Roe’s map of Sydney indicates the same landform (Fig 3.3) 1820’s Although The Rocks resumed area was considered by many to be a slum, the area had traditionally contained a mixture of substantial houses built on the ridge and smaller terraces for workers built in the back lanes. Many of the smaller houses were substandard, however the larger houses were substantial and well built. The area had once been home to prominent men such as David Scott Mitchell, Edmund Barton and William Bede Dalley.25 In the 1820s Sydney’s most prominent merchants built villas on Bunker’s Hill, Dawes Point and Millers Point overlooking their private wharf complexes. The early residents of Bunkers Hill and Dawes Point were merchants of Scottish origin, who came to Sydney via India. Campbell commissioned the architect Francis Greenway to design a new residence or ‘cottage ornee’ on Bunker’s Hill, which became known as Cumberland Place. Cumberland Place was completed around 1827 and he sold it to Augusta Maria Scott in 1832. Her daughter Augusta Maria and son-in-law Dr James Mitchell lived in the house. Charles Rodius, Jacob Janssen and Conrad Martens show the elegant villa and its extensive gardens. The house was sold in 1871.26 William Walker built a villa. Campbell’s house, Cumberland Place, William Walkers, villa and Dawes Point built in 1790 can be seen in George Frederick Dashwood’s sketch of Sydney Cove, dated October 183227. (Fig 3.4) Gloucester Street (now Walk) was originally a path that followed the natural terrain. It ran in a north- south direction, along the rock shelf that formed the western boundary of the first hospital and gaol, and led to rows of huts built on the naturally occurring rock shelves. The first time development occurred is in 1834 when 19 allotments in 'New George-street (Gloucester Street) and Bunker's Hill' were advertised for sale. Early maps show Gloucester Street as little more than a path until the1860s. The City Detail Sheet, 1855 illustrates the nature of the terrain most graphically in plan. With the opening and bridging of the Argyle Cut in 1857 the land becomes more desirable. 1840 It was a fashionable suburb with substantial town houses built to rent to the newly emerging class of professional men; men who were not of convict origin, but had chosen to come to colony. 28 Following the introduction of building regulations in Sydney in 1837, town houses of a similar style and construction were erected on Bunker’s Hill, in George Street North, Lower Fort Street and Dalgety Terrace, Millers Point. At the northern end of Cumberland and Gloucester Streets a number of substantial blocks of townhouses were built, none of which survive. The Myles Buildings (34-38 Cumberland Street), Goodsir’s Buildings (30-32 Cumberland Street) and Young’s Buildings (20-24 Cumberland Street) and

24 Mary Suttor 2015 'The Sirius Legacy - A Conversation 25 Rice, Jean. 23 George Street North. Concrete Warehouse: Conservation Management Plan. June 2012. P.35. 26 Rice, Jean. 23 George Street North. Concrete Warehouse: Conservation Management Plan. June 2012. P.23. James Broadbent’s the Australian Colonial House. P.135 27 Rice, Jean. 23 George Street North. Concrete Warehouse: Conservation Management Plan. June 2012. P.23. James Broadbent’s the Australian Colonial House. P.135 28 Rice, Jean. 23 George Street North. Concrete Warehouse: Conservation Management Plan. June 2012. P.31.

| 30

Purchase’s single town house (18 Cumberland Street) were constructed.29 These buildings can be seen in Oswald Brierly’s panoramic view 184230 The William Barton family (father of the politician Edmund Barton) was still in residence in 1863. Professor Pell, the first professor of Mathematics and Natural Philosophy at the University of Sydney was one of the residents of Young’s buildings in 1853. Only one other house was occupied, by Thomas O’Reilly. The town houses that Young owned in Cumberland Street were also elegant Georgian style town houses; a design that had some similarities with the town house in Lower Fort Street designed by John Verge or Verge’s protégé John Bibb.31 The 1849 Plan of George Street North showing the proposed alignment of New George Street, indicates Gloucester Street and Youngs Buildings. (Fig 3.5) 1850s By the 1850s an increasing number of businessmen, such as Charles John, Royle of Randwick, owned numerous rental properties in The Rocks but never lived there. The status of the area had declined considerably since the 1840s when it was a fashionable suburb. 32 The 1854 Woolcott & Clark’s map of City of Sydney indicates development at Bunkers Hill (Fig 3.7). Blackwood’s panorama annoted in CMP 23 George Street North indicates Myles, Goodsir and Youngs Buildings (Fig 3.7). The 1865 trigonometrical survey indicates development of Myles, Goodsir and Youngs Buildings (Fig 3.8). The Mercantile Rowling club and the Myles, Goodsir’s & Young’s buildings can be seen in photos from 1875 (Fig 3.9). An image of the ASN Company’s new wharfs in the illustrated Sydney news 1877 indicates the Myles, Goodsir and Youngs Buildings in the background (Fig 3.10). The Tronier’s 1879 view of Sydney Cove indicates the Myles, Goodsir and Youngs Buildings (Fig 3.11) 1880s The sisters of St Joseph of the Sacred Heart moved to The Rocks around 1880, to the northern end of Cumberland Street. The villa became the priest’s residence and the Sisters of St Joseph of the Sacred Heart occupied the town house as their convent. In 1882 Mary McKillop is listed as the owner and occupier of No. 9 Cumberland Street and the Reverend C Jolly is listed as the owner and occupier of No. 17 Cumberland Street. They occupied these premises until the official resumption of their complex by the State Government, when the Sisters of St Joseph of the Sacred Heart relocated to North Sydney. The church also owned a vacant piece of land between Cumberland and Gloucester Street, between the Harbour View Square and the Mercantile Rowing Club Hotel but did not build on this land33. The City of Sydney map indicates the Myles, Goodsir and Youngs Buildings (Fig 3.12). 1900s In November 1900 The Rocks Resumption Plan announced that:

We may hope to see, following the example of the improvements made by the London County Council, new thoroughfares or at least wide and straighter ones driven through this congested area, and green reserved spaces occupying the place of those crowded corners.34 By 1900 demolition of Youngs Building north of site had occurred (Fig 3.13) but the Myles & Goodsir building on Gloucester Street are still intact in photos dating from 1901 (Fig 3.14). The 1902 Darling Harbour resumption plan Section 87 indicates the site of Youngs Building (Fig 3.15). A 1902 view of the completed Mercantile Hotel indicates Myles & Goodsir building behind (Fig 3.16). A 1904 views of Campbells Cove also indicates the Myles & Goodsir building (Fig 3.17) By 1905 The Rocks Resumed area had been renamed the Observatory Hill Resumed Lands and residential and business leases were being offered on a 99 year lease basis of the portions closest to the city. The Sydney Harbour Trust obtained 152 properties to administer.35

29 Rice, Jean. 23 George Street North. Concrete Warehouse: Conservation Management Plan. June 2012. P.25 30 ML 65 Digital image a928514 EG 31 Rice, Jean. 23 George Street North. Concrete Warehouse: Conservation Management Plan. June 2012. P.27 32 Rice, Jean. 23 George Street North. Concrete Warehouse: Conservation Management Plan. June 2012. P.31. 33 Rice, Jean. 23 George Street North. Concrete Warehouse: Conservation Management Plan. June 2012. P.34. 34 SMH 3 Nov 1900. Rice, Jean. 23 George Street North. Concrete Warehouse: Conservation Management Plan. June 2012. P.34. 35 Rice, Jean. 23 George Street North. Concrete Warehouse: Conservation Management Plan. June 2012. P.37.

| 31

The residents of the resumed area liked their existing houses and were not impressed with a proposal to build tenements presented by City Improvement Advisory Board at public meetings held in Federation Hall in Grosvenor Street.36 The intersection of George Street North and Gloucester Street was altered in 1908 and new steps built and an arc lamp erected. Nos.3 -5 George Street still existed in 1911 and were probably demolished shortly after. The Mercantile Rowing Club hotel is also still listed in the 1911 rate books, as are the small houses Lindsay had drawn as being Rabbit Hutches.37 As part of the realignment of Cumberland Street and Gloucester Street a number of public houses were rebuilt including the Australian Hotel, the Glenmore Hotel, the Harbour View Hotel and the Mercantile Hotel opposite the site. The road re-alignments were undertaken first, with a new bridge over the Argyle Cut and a staircase and garden built at the northern end of the street, beyond 23 George Street, which was to be renamed York Street North. The bridge and the staircase were probably both designed by the Public Works Department as similar detailing was used in both. The hotels were rebuilt on the irregular corner sites created by the road alignments. The new hotels were not designed by the Public Works Department, but by the architects retained by the breweries. Spain and Cosh designed the Mercantile Hotel in 1914.38 The new Mercantile Hotel (No. 25 George Street North) was built in 1914 on a Rock land that had been vacant for many years requiring the cliff to be cut back and a stone retaining wall with a palisade fence erected. The 1913-1914 Annual Report of the Public Works Department noted that the construction of the concrete warehouse was part of the reconstruction works undertaken to York Street North from 1912- 191539. Part of this was later partially demolished to construct the Sirius building. A number of Housing Board buildings were erected on the site in 1913-1916 after the realignment of Cumberland St. These consisted of bond stores, warehouses and government office buildings. This included the Rowan Bond Stores on the site of 36-50 Cumberland Street and the Ajax Warehouse at 23 George Street North.

The NSW Housing Board The responsibility for the design of buildings within the Observatory Hill resumed area and the proposed garden suburb of Dacey Gardens (Daceyville) was transferred to the NSW Housing Board in 1912.40 The surviving drawings of the workers’ housing show that the Housing Board intended to build considerably more workers housing within the Resumed Area than was constructed. The outbreak of World War 1 altered their focus and the board began to design commercial buildings, including the warehouse at No. 23 George Street and the shipping office above it. Tylor and Sons, who supplied sanitary goods, operated from no. 255 George Street, however that entire block including the Brooklyn Hotel and 255 George Street was rebuilt by the Public Works Department in 1912 requiring them to move. J. Tylor & Sons is listed at 1 – 11 Gloucester Street in 1921. Tylors are still listed in the rate books as being in occupation at 1-11 Gloucester Street in 1930 and again in 1939. The premises in Gloucester Walk appear to have been vacated by 1945.41 The concrete framework of the warehouse at 23 George Street was in progress by mid 1914 and the outline of the completed building appears on a drawing of the public latrines, steps and walling at the intersection of York Street North and George Street dated 13 March 1915.42 In January 1915, the Sydney Morning Herald reported: The first building in Sydney, constructed entirely of reinforced concrete, has been erected by the Public Works Department. The building is a warehouse at the corner of George and Gloucester Streets in The Rocks area.43

36 Rice, Jean. 23 George Street North. Concrete Warehouse: Conservation Management Plan. June 2012. P.39. 37 Rice, Jean. 23 George Street North. Concrete Warehouse: Conservation Management Plan. June 2012. P.42. 38 Rice, Jean. 23 George Street North. Concrete Warehouse: Conservation Management Plan. June 2012. P.42 39 Rice, Jean. 23 George Street North. Concrete Warehouse: Conservation Management Plan. June 2012. P.43 40 Rice, Jean. 23 George Street North. Concrete Warehouse: Conservation Management Plan. June 2012. P.44 41 Rice, Jean. 23 George Street North. Concrete Warehouse: Conservation Management Plan. June 2012. P.45 42 SRNSW AO Plan 3128. Jean Rice June 2012. 43 SMH 26 Jan 2015. Rice, Jean. 23 George Street North. Concrete Warehouse: Conservation Management Plan. June 2012. P.45

| 32

The space under the northern end of the newly formed York Street North (this street being on a higher level) was utilised for the purpose of constructing a warehouse for lease. This is the first building in Sydney to be erected in reinforced concrete construction.44 The surviving architectural drawings prepared by the Housing Board held at State Records show that the initial design of the warehouse was altered and an office building built on the top at the southern end of the building, before the construction work started on the Sydney Harbour Bridge45 (Fig 3.18). This upper level office was occupied by the Mercantile Shipping Office (sometimes referred to as the Government Shipping Office) and can be seen in views from 1917 (Fig 3.19). The southern portion of this building was later demolished, including the lower section that was partly below Gloucester Street, when the Sirius building was constructed (1977-80). In the early 1920s there was considerable criticism of the work of the Housing Board, as their output had included a number of commercial buildings in the Observatory Hill Resumed area yet there were still not enough units to rehouse the existing residents. The Housing Board was disbanded in 1924 and for the remainder of the decade the only public housing built in Sydney were the blocks built by the Sydney City Council.46 Rowans Bond Store on the site was built during this period and can be seen in a photo of 1926 to the left of the Sydney Harbour Bridge (Fig 3.20). To the south of the 23 George Street, the Rowans Bond Store and the Ajax building warehouse can be seen in a 1930 photo which indicates the construction of arches to the Sydney Harbour Bridge (Fig 3.21). A 1932 photo of the Sydney Harbour Bridge indicates Rowans Bond Store to the left of the Sydney Harbour Bridge (Fig 3.22).

Sydney Harbour Trust In August 1927 the Sydney Harbour Trust took over the management of a number of properties within the Observatory Hill / Rocks Resumed Area that had previously been dealt with by the Housing Board. The commissioners noted that

At the request of the late government, the Commissioners took over on the 29th of August 1927, the administration of 322 additional dwellings, 72 shops, 12 hotels and 52 other properties in what is known as the Observatory Hill Resumed Area, in addition to the 113 properties which have been demolished for the purposes of a roadway approach to the Sydney Harbour Bridge. World War 1 had effectively halted the construction of model workers housing within the resumed area. With the creation of the Maritime Services Board in 1936 many of the properties within the Observatory Hill Resumed Area were transferred to the Board’s control. The Board undertook some limited maintenance work on the properties however the housing stock began to deteriorate. An Observatory Hill Resumed Area Redevelopment Committee had been formed and the committee made recommendations to the City Council about alterations to the zoning of the resumed area.42 Plans to remodel the Observatory Hill Resumed area were put before the Cabinet in 1936.43 The redevelopment committee submitted their first report in January 1937. Stage 1 plans of the remodelling were prepared in 1940 however, due to the war, schemes for the area were shelved. By 1948 the occupier of the warehouse at 1 – 11 Gloucester Street was F. H. Stephens Pty Ltd, Shipping Agents. The occupiers at the York Street level are not listed however No. 2-12 was still listed as being an office and No. 14 was listed as containing a shelter and store. The Sydney City Council lists a number of development applications for No. 1-11 Gloucester Street. In February 1957 Standard Electronic Apparatus Laboratories Pty Ltd and Affiliated Television Services put in an application to use the ground floor of the building for the assembly, servicing and storage of electronic equipment.44 In 1969 F S Glennon put in a DA to use both 1-11 Gloucester Street and 2-12 York Street North to store ceramic tiles. The 1949 Sydney City Council site plan shows the location of the warehouse at 23 George street North and Rowans Bond Store (Fig 3.23). In 1964, the Housing Commission of NSW (HCNSW) conducted a survey of the residents of a section of The Rocks, encompassing primarily residential buildings owned and operated by the Maritime Services

44 The Report of the NSW Housing Board 1917-1918 stated Jean Rice. P.46 45 Architectural Plans & Drawings of The Rocks and Millers Point. Plans held by the MSB, now held at State Records, set contains AO Plans 2953- 3155. 46 Rice, Jean. 23 George Street North. Concrete Warehouse: Conservation Management Plan. June 2012. P.47

| 33

Board. 47 The report identified the construction of flats within a 3-mile radius of the center of the city as the best outcome to accommodate the needs of the residents displaced in the future48. The idea that residential flats would be required to accommodate low-income tenants within the general area of this part of the inner city predated the Green Ban on The Rocks49 In 1970 the government-owned properties within The Rocks were transferred to the Sydney Cove Redevelopment Authority (SCRA)50. The Maritime Services Board continued to manage the residential properties in Millers Point and Dawes Point.

The Green Bans The withdrawal of building labour from jobs through the building union in an activity, came to be known as the ‘Green Ban’ and continued from 1971 to 1978 in response to concerns by a variety of interest groups, amongst them resident action groups. In 1971 these latter groups-who found their foci in the preservation of historic buildings, opposition to inner city developments and threatened housing demolition (predominantly public development proposals in low income residential areas) enlisted the union might of the Builders Labourers' Federation”51. It was Nita McRae from The Rocks who generalised the call to unions to ‘stop knocking down other workers' housing. The proposal by SCRA to demolish the majority of the buildings in The Rocks area and build high-rise buildings resulted in a Green Ban first being imposed by the Builders’ Labourers Federation (BLF) in December 1971. Additional Green Bans followed when it became apparent that local residents were not going to be able to afford to live in the proposed new apartment blocks. SCRA produced an article at the time outlining the ‘rehousing program for the East Rocks tenants’. Assistance was to be provided by the Housing Commission, but only to pensioners and existing residents who qualified for assistance. Only the pensioners were guaranteed a home in the area. The Green Bans within The Rocks started from November to December 1971 and was the third Green Ban in NSW. The Whitlam Labour Government came to power in Canberra in 1972 on a platform, which included an interventionist role in urban affairs. This at least equalized the forces: the New South Wales State Liberal Government which was pro-developer; the City Council which facilitated development by way of strategic plans; versus residents and unions who were generally anti-commercial development; the politicians who held the purse strings but did not have the planning power. “With a change in philosophical stance, public housing was introduced into the area in the following year with demolition making way for the now infamous Housing Commission building, Sirius- the first structure other than the Mining Museum chimney to rise above the skyline of the Harbour Bridge approach.”52 Former MLC Meredith Burgmann noted about the Green Bans: “From November 1971 until 1975, the NSWBLF Green Ban saved the oldest buildings in Australia and attractive foreshore parks from demolition to make way for glass and concrete office blocks. The union was concerned not merely about the threat to the historic buildings of the area but also the invidious treatment meted out to the low-income residents: the cleaners, sailors, wharfies, pensioners, shop assistants and others who lived in this traditionally working class neighbourhood. It halted the redevelopment project ‘because the scheme destroys the character of this historic area and ignores the position of the people affected'. The Rocks Resident Action Group mobilized enthusiastically in support of the ban and drew up a 'people's plan' for acceptable renovation of the area. It announced that, in the face of the usual apathy, inaction and favoritism of the government, it had been left to unionists ‘to show leadership in protecting our citizens and their historic buildings'. With the green ban prompting the Sydney Cove Redevelopment Authority

47 NSW Heritage Act 1977, section 33(2)(a)---(d) 48Housing Commission of NSW (1964) “Rocks” Area Redevelopment Scheme: Report on Survey of occupants of dwelling sin area proposed for redevelopment together with a schedule setting out details relating to the family groups residing in the area as at 30 June 1964. 3 Ibid pp 7---8. 49 Futurepast – Heritage Consulting, page 2 50 Sydney Cove Redevelopment Authority (1978) Annual Report, pp 9-11. 51 Peter Webber, The Design of Sydney, P. 57 52 Kate Blackmore, A Good Idea at the Time: The Redevelopment of The Rocks

| 34

to propose a series of improved plans, the union position was stated clearly by Mundey in August 1973. 'My federation will lift its ban when the residents are satisfied with what is being put forward by the authority'. In March 1974, when the latest plan was again sent back to the architect, a reporter observed: 'the most powerful town planning agency operating within NSW at the moment is the BLF.' When the next set of plans eliminated high-rise buildings in conformity with the 'people's plan', the ban was lifted53.“ Burgmann does not specifically mention the Sirius Building as an outcome of this process but notes that the desired outcome of the Ban was the ‘satisfaction’ of the local residents. The People’s Plan, prepared by The Rocks Resident Action Group (RAG) in December 1972 noted the following recommendations: • “The Rocks, therefore should be maintained as an integrated residential and historic area, separated from the functions of the CBD. • Any new development should be either infill or replacement of derelict buildings and should conform to the style and mass of the area. • All housing uses should be so structured that particular styles of housing should not be allocated to one income group. This would necessarily involve some form of rental subsidy scheme. • The operations of the Sydney Cove Redevelopment Authority and its charter should be restructured and its objectives redrawn, so as to revitalize the city through the return of residents, an injection of cultural and entertainment centers, and an extensive programme of historic preservation. • Most importantly, the operations of SCRA must be opened up, and structures set up for full and ongoing open consultation between the Authority and residents, tenants, and interested citizens. • The future planning of The Rocks should be a cooperative endeavor of the planners and the public, rather than the secretive conflict and bad feeling that has characterized relations up till now. • It should be accepted as an overriding principle, that decisions made about the future of The Rocks must involve as fully as possible, even to the point of veto, those who live and work there now, and those who will come into the area to live over the next years 54.” As the 1975 Housing Commission Report noted: “In The Rocks, the Housing Commission did not select the location for the projects which were, in fact, very largely dictated by the requirements laid down by The Rocks Residents’ Group. During lengthy discussions the following was demanded: 1. A design which would ensure that people allergic to heights could be housed on lower levels whilst others, who had no reluctance in respect of heights could be given the advantage of extensive views and “not shut in by other buildings’’. 2. The inclusion of small “open areas” where families who had been used to small backyards could “continue their interest in growing a few flowers” 3. A design which would provide a building that was neither of orthodox square or rectangular style but which would blend in with the then existing skyline of that section of The Rocks.” 55 The 1975 Commission Report noted that: “…it was surprising to find that there was not a general reluctance to this possibility (Relocation to other areas). Many of the residents readily realized that it would not be possible to provide housing in the area, on a basis that would enable them to pay the rents necessary to make the scheme economical. There are, of course, those who are adamant that they must be housed in The Rocks area but these, fortunately, are comparatively few in number.”56 When completed, former ‘Rocks’ residents received preference in the allocation of units.

53See Burgmann, M (1998) Green Bans, Red Union. See also Burgmann, M & Burgmann, V (2011) Green Bans Movement Dictionary of Sydney http://dictionaryofsydney.org/entry/green_bans_movement 54 Ibid pp 9-10. 55 1975 Housing Commission Report 56 1975 Housing Commission Report

| 35

The Green Ban on The Rocks was lifted in June 1975 and allowed for the construction of public housing, the focus of the Green Ban in that locale was on a) improved consultation between the community and government and b) retaining the 240 residents of The Rocks and Millers Point at that time in the area57 The compromise which was eventually negotiated saw the demolition of Rowan’s Bond Store and the southern half of the George Street Ajax Building and the construction of the Sirius Building. Another reported outcome of this consultation and the Advisory Committee process was the establishment of The Rocks Visitor’s Centre 58. By 1978 there had been approximately 50 Green Bans throughout Sydney59, or approximately 1 Green Ban every 2 months for a period of nearly 8 years, historic preservation60. MLC Meredith Burgmann quotes Mundey as stating that it was

“gratifying to see the authority [SCRA] coming up with low-rise residential developments, something definitely not in the original plan”. In this context, Mundey was also referring to community displeasure with earlier proposals by SCRA to increase the local population from circa 200 to up to 2500 residents 61. This suggests there was not general support for high-rise residential solutions, such as Sirius. The high-rise character and the extension of the building above the level of the Bridge was publicly criticized62 . The building was considered incongruously large scale compared to other structures in the area. Upon its completion, The National Trust referred to the building as ‘the lump in The Rocks’63. This assessment was further elaborated upon with the Trust stating it was ‘concerned’ about the visual impact of the development from the outset, and that the Sirius Building lacked the ‘special character’ that embodied The Rocks as the ‘cradle of European settlement in Australia’. At that time, the Trust had been generally concerned about the effect of the building on the conservation value of the townscape.64

Contemporary Comment Contemporary comment at the time of opening was very negative, including articles by Joseph Glascott and Norman Day and comments by the National Trust and Paul Landa. Some critics such as Leslie Walford saw the benefit of the project. The NSW Housing Commission was taken by surprise considering the extent of consultation. 65 Sirius was the ﬁrst structure to be constructed above the Sydney Harbour Bridge approaches, other than the 61 metre high chimney of the Mining Museum, but replaced a similar scaled warehouse that also was constructed above the Sydney Harbour Bridge. At the time of its completion, Jack Bourke argued that the development was consistent in scale with the Rowan Bond Stores that it replaced. According to Joseph Glascott, in an article entitled “Lump in The Rocks”, the (National) trust said new development within the area should be sympathetic with the existing buildings. 66 Joseph Glascott, continued to comment in an article entitled Eyesore is a Welcome Sight for residents “…The National Trust has called it the “lump in The Rocks.67” The former Minister for Planning and Environment, Mr Landa has described it as “damned awful”. Some architects have criticised the

57 The Rocks Resident Action Group (December 1972) The Rocks: This or That: A People’s Plan. Copy obtained from the Nita McCrae papers held in the State Library of NSW. Note the number of residents at that time has been variously reported as 200, 240 and 250. See for example SCRA Annual Report for 1978, P. 10. 58 SCRA (1978) Annual Report. Pg 10. 59 Roddewigg, R (1978) Green Bans: The Birth of Environmental Politics in Australia. Sydney: Hale & Iremonger. Pp 29---30. 60 Ibid pp 30---31. Roddewigg notes reasons for Green Bans included historic preservation, refusal to build in the inner city, refusal to build flats, retention of open space, resistance to expressways, inadequate compensation for acquisition and other social issues. In that respect, a Green Ban was a tool to influence and bargain on a range of issues. 61 Burgmann, M (1998) Green Bans, Red Union. Pp 200 -201. The number of proposed new residents is variously reported as 1200 and 1500 in other documents 62Rodrigo 2015 cites many of these articles, but see specifically: Day, N (1979) ’Boxes stacked…like so many playing cards’. The Sydney Morning Herald. 16 May 1979, p 7; Glascott, J (1979) ‘Lump in The Rocks’ Trust critical of new block of flats. The Sydney Morning Herald. 18 April 1979, pg 6; Purcell, C (1986) Sydney’s eyesores. The Sydney Morning Herald. April 27, 1986, pg 27; Glascott, J (1980) ‘Eyesore’ is a welcome sight for residents. The Sydney Morning Herald. 20 May 1980, pg3. 63 Sydney Morning Herald March 20, 1980:3 64 National Trust Bulletin April 1979:6 65 Oral history John Gregory 66 Joseph Glascott, “Lump in The Rocks”, Sydney Morning Herald, April 18 1979 67 Joseph Glascott, “Eyesore’ is a Welcome Sight for Residents”, Sydney Morning Herald, March 20 1980

| 36

design, motorists have complained that it cuts off Harbour views and some members of the public have suggested that the central tower be demolished.” 68 Norman Day described it as “The half-built chicken crate Housing Commission estate, built on Bunkers Hill which sits over The Rocks, is a disgrace ... The building is a series of tiny concrete boxes stacked on top of each other like so many grey playing cards which step up from three to 12 storeys ... as if designed by a group of droogs from Clockwork Orange. It does not even try to harmonise with The Rocks buildings, which are either original and more than 100 years old or delicately recreated to the character of that Victorian period.” 69 R.L. Rawson responded to Day’s article with “And now this encroachment of a collection of ‘human ﬁling cabinets’ with all their ugliness and sterility” in a letter to the Herald.70 Leslie Walford was more positive in his assessment: “Sirius is a building to admire, sturdy outside, unusual even, but inside it is positively luxurious, spacious, well planned, with excellent safety devices such as emergency call buttons for the aged tenants. I was really astonished at the thoughtful planning and quality of this large building, with its public areas, gardens, little private courtyards and a garage per unit.... Perhaps there is some merit in his criticism that the block spoils the line of the Sydney Harbour Bridge but, I cannot help detecting hints of a more general resentment which is perhaps levelled at those people who might win a place in this unique setting – people who ordinarily would never be able to afford harbourside accommodation ...” 71 Large planter boxes on the top floor, visible from the Sydney Harbour Bridge, were referred to in a 1979 letter to the Sydney Morning Herald as 'those hideous purple bulbous things on the roof'. They are still there but much faded.72 In 2002, ”A History of Public Housing Design” is published by the Department of Housing, written by John Gregory and Jennifer Campbell. It provides the following details on Sirius: “Sirius is a prominent high rise complex undertaken in the 1970s at The Rocks, adjacent to the Harbour Bridge approach. It was constructed for residents displaced by the redevelopment activity in the area. The original concept for a precast concrete building system was modified to a conventional concrete frame construction, retaining the appearance of the original system. Some units are split-level in configuration.” The architect is not mentioned in the list of architects who were influential on the development of housing.

68 Joseph Glascott, “Eyesore’ is a Welcome Sight for Residents”, Sydney Morning Herald, March 20 1980 69 Norman Day Boxes Stacked like so many Playing Cards May 16 1979 70 R L Rawson That Block of Flats Sydney Morning Herald May 23 1979, 4 71 Leslie Walford, “Not Lumpy”, Sydney Morning Herald, April 6, 1980 72 National Trust Inventory Sheet

| 37

APPENDIX B – HISTORY OF THE BUILDING

In 1975 the Housing Commission reported that: A “scheme to provide public housing in The Rocks Redevelopment Area was agreed upon by the Commission and the Sydney Cove Redevelopment Authority. This project which will provide 69 dwelling units on Bunker’s Hill close to the Expressway approaches to the Harbour Bridge will be proceeded with when funds permit.”73 The Sydney Cove Redevelopment Authority named its redevelopment projects after the ships of the First Fleet. This building was called Sirius. The Sirius Apartments were designed in 1975. The initial scheme prepared in 7 days based on a 1974 design of the Ritchie Street San Souci Apartments.74 Plans and a model of the Sirius project were placed on public exhibition in February 1975 at SCRA and NSW Housing. The tenants of No 1 – 11 Gloucester Street were asked to vacate by July 1975. In 1977 the Housing Commission reported that: “Today the Housing Commission’s Architects are providing some of the most advanced housing developments in Australia. This artist’s impression of the new housing scheme in Sydney’s Rocks district is typical of the Commission’s ‘new look’. When completed it will provide 79 units with some of the best harbor views in the city. Some of the larger units will have either private courtyards, roof terraces, or large balconies. It will be a mixed development with accommodation for aged pensioners, as well as families with children.”75 The report included the perspective (Fig 3.24). Final designs were submitted to the Sydney Cove Redevelopment Authority in 1977 and the building application to erect a new block residential flats buildings at 2 – 36 Cumberland Street was submitted in December 1977. In 1977 the Housing Commission entered into a contract worth over $4M to construct 62 apartments for families and 17 units for aged persons in The Rocks. The Housing Commission employed a Public Relations consultant Ian Vernel to provide a new image of the Housing Commission in response to the criticism of the Waterloo Towers and the Green Bans. The Sirius Apartments were presented as a “new look” when, in fact, it was the re-used Sans Souci aesthetics. The southern end of the Ajax warehouse at 23 George Street and other warehouses on the site were demolished (Fig 3.25). Repairs were undertaken to Gloucester Walk in 1979 and the first tenants of the new housing block moved in to Sirius during early 198076. In 1978 the Housing Commission reported that: The site is described as being ideally suited… “being in the heart of The Rocks and offering residents magnificent views of Circular Quay, the Opera House and Sydney Harbour…… The building has been designed as an irregular, stepped pyramidal form, which will harmonise with the existing Rocks skyline. The split-level construction, ranging in height from three to twelve storeys, has allowed the Commission’s designers to include a range of unit types within the building, from the special units for elderly people, to apartments for small and large families. Other features of the complex will includes private courtyards adjacent to larger apartments, several community rooms, providing meeting, library, entertainment and children’s play facilities, and underground parking. When complete, former and present Rocks residents, assessed as eligible under the terms of an Agreement made between the SCRA and the Commission, will receive preference in the allocation of units, with any units not allocated in this fashion being offered to people on the Commission’s ordinary waiting lists seeking accommodation in the inner city area...” 77 At the end of the year work on the project was well in hand with completion planned for the second half on 1979.78

73 The Housing Commission of NSW – Annual Report 1975 74 Tao Gofers Video 75 The Housing Commission of NSW – Annual Report 1977 76 Rice, J (2012) Conservation Management Plan 23 George Street North & 1--11 Gloucester Street. June 2012 77 The Housing Commission of NSW – Annual Report 1978 78 The Housing Commission of NSW – Annual Report 1978

| 38

In 1979 the Housing Commission reported that: • The 79 unit project was on target to be completed by the end of the year. • The allocation process, which ensures bona fide current and former residents of The Rocks receive allocation preference, is underway. • Criticism had been received about the height of the building in relation the Harbour Bridge and the Commission responded to some of these. • It had consulted extensively with local residents before submitting plans for approval, and that the “approval of The Rocks Resident Action Committee, the Sydney Cove Redevelopment Authority, the Builders Labourers Federation and the height of Buildings Committee, was obtained before the calling of tenders. The proposal was publicly exhibited and a model of the project was displayed in The Rocks Information Centre. Repairs were undertaken to Gloucester Walk in 1979. Modification of design occurred during construction to reduce costs. Deletion of white cement in the concrete mix achieved a saving of $200,000, which the design architect later regretted. Redesign of the public art in foyers from recessed concrete reliefs to stacked timber panels also occurred to achieve cost savings.79 In 1980 the Housing Commission reported that: “The Commission’s major apartment building at The Rocks, “Sirius”, was completed and occupied in March 1980.” In the same Annual Report an image of the modular apartments at Ritchie Street, Sans Souci, accompanied an article about design. Of the 79 apartments, 24 were occupied by families from The Rocks. It would appear the Sirius Building did not house the totality of all residents of The Rocks who were displaced by redevelopment works in 1970s. The specific response of the Sirius Building was driven by the Housing Commission’s intent to meet the need of the mix of family types evident in The Rocks and Millers Point in the mid-1970s (and identified in part in the earlier 1964 survey), who were otherwise going to be displaced.

Sirius Apartments emphasises repetitive forms and geometries, the units are created by the repetition of a single module repeated within the three-dimensional structural grid. The distinctive modular form and massing of the Sirius Apartments uses precast concrete techniques for some elements being the window surrounds and the balustrades. This uses typical manufacturing techniques, which had been developed since the 1950’s. The building was originally to have been developed by Boots Concrete80 as prefabricated units but this did not eventuate. This is commonly interpreted as one module indicating one unit, but in fact forms the module for a variable range of housing type unlike Safdie’s Habitat 1967, to which it is often compared. 81 The buildings provided small, private, “open areas” where families who had been used to small backyards could “continue their interest in growing a few flowers”. The rooftop gardens, which are paved areas with pot plants, are not distinctive, they are not an early example of a rooftop garden used in either private or public housing projects. Rooftop residential gardens were designed in Sydney since the 1930’s and contemporary examples such as Readers Digest were significant rooftop gardens unlike the Sirius Building.82 Tao Gofers, in response to this criticism about the building, argued that the development was in harmony with its context. The description of the building discussed in terms of context as a post justification to the criticism: “The building, of reinforced concrete with precast window panels, is finished in a sandstock brick colour to reflect the historic origins and materials of the area. The project is of variable height and

79 The Rocks Heritage Management Plan Volume 1 April 2010 Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority 80 Oral History, John Gregory 81 Stylistic inﬂuences derived from Habitat ’67 have been noted by a number of authors, including Joe Rollo, Concrete Poetry: Concrete Architecture in Australia (St Leonards: Cement Concrete and Aggregates Australia, 2004) 82 Reader Digest Inventory Sheet

| 39

reﬂects the irregular roof shapes of the buildings and the resultant sculptural quality is in harmony with the dominant forms of the Bridge and the Opera House.”83 The building was originally conceived to be white like the Opera House. Critics of the building’s height “had apparently forgotten the bond store demolished to make way for the current project.” It also rose above the Bridge approach. “The building’s irregular stepped form had been conceived to reflect the irregular forms around it: not only the most outstanding such as the Opera House, Harbour Bridge and city skyline, but also the mixture of different building types in The Rocks itself, from small terraces to large bond stores.”84 The only concession to the different building types was the height changes as the repetitive room module, which suggested a unit, not a room, actually made the building appear more massive than the reality.

83 Russell Rodrigo, Aesthetics as a Practical Ethic, P. 50 84 The Housing Commission of NSW – Annual Report 1978

| 40

APPENDIX C – DETAILED SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA ROCKS MANAGEMENT PLAN Criterion A – Historical Evolution Assessing historic value involves considering whether a place is significant because it demonstrates past customs, philosophies or systems which are important in understanding historical evolution at a Local, State, National or even International level. The item or place may be associated with a significant historic event and/or it may have the ability to demonstrate overlays of patterns of human use and occupation. The Rocks is part of the place of first major contact between Aboriginal people and European colonists. As an element in the story of Aboriginal impact, the current developed form of The Rocks is regarded as a symbol of the destructive processes that ensued from European invasion. The Rocks provides a physical chronicle of Australian history from the time before European settlement, throughout the late eighteenth, nineteenth and twentieth centuries into the present. The historic layers cover major phases and events, ranging from Governor Phillip’s town, through convict and emancipist occupation, slums, plague clearances and early public housing, to major twentieth- century public works and conservation action. The Rocks has been important as a foreshore port settlement and historic focus of social and economic activity since Australia’s colonial period. The Rocks provides a rare physical glimpse of pre-Macquarie Sydney and, along with Norfolk Island, Maria Island, the Tasman Peninsula and the City of Fremantle, is one of few places in Australia where authentic early convict evidence is accessible to the public. The Rocks was the venue for the colony’s first wharf, first hospital and first sailor’s home. The precinct saw early public housing and Sydney’s first baby health clinic. Owned and managed in the public interest for a century, The Rocks has repeatedly been the stage for Government innovation in public works, town planning and social engineering. Projects such as the Argyle Cut, plague clearances, Sydney Harbour Bridge, Cahill Expressway, Overseas Passenger Terminal and the work of Sydney Cove Redevelopment Authority, were all implemented at a large scale. Historically, The Rocks has performed a pivotal role in the economic development of Sydney and New South Wales as a focus of arrival, departure and exchange. Operationally, The Rocks was a point of connection between the colony and the world, as well as an integral part of the growing importance of the commercial role of the port of Sydney. The built form of The Rocks reflects the many layers of residential, industrial, maritime and commercial activities that have occurred in the area since 1788. The historic streetscapes of human scale, visual and physical links to the harbour, exposed sandstone rockface and archaeological features, narrow laneways, rock-hewn staircases and diversity of late nineteenth and early twentieth-century architecture contribute to its fine grain and rich texture.85

Criterion B – Historical Associations The Rocks has been the hub for historic and contemporary events such as slum clearances, community celebrations and the Green Bans. The Green Bans have national and international importance as the genesis of the use of unions as a strike force for community action. In more recent times, The Rocks has become a showcase for conservation practice and an example of public land ownership and sustainable urban management under a single Government agency. It represents the most intense and sustained urban conservation program anywhere in Australia. The Rocks has deep associational values and links. It is a significant contact place for Aboriginal people; a recognised convict period site; and an important commercial and trading centre, linked with colonial entrepreneurs such as Robert Campbell, Mary Reiby and Samuel Terry. The Rocks is identified with the achievements of noteworthy historic figures including William Dawes, Edmund Barton, Arthur Payne (first plague victim), WJC Bradfield and contemporary campaigners such as Jack Mundey and Nita McCrae. The Rocks has strong associations with a wide range of groups, communities and organisations, including the Catholic Church, Chinese immigrants, sailors, The ‘Rocks Push’, squatters and artists,

85 The Rocks Heritage Management Plan Vol 1 April 2010, p.23.

| 41

but particularly, with waterfront workers. It demonstrates a contrast in lifestyle between the very rich and the very poor.86

Criterion C – Aesthetic Values Assessing aesthetic values involves considering whether items have distinctive aesthetic attributes that are held in esteem by the community, or demonstrative creative or technical excellence, innovation or achievement. The Rocks is a visual element of Sydney Harbour, Circular Quay and edges the City of Sydney itself. The distinctive low-rise scale and fine grain of The Rocks contrasts with and complements the imposing built forms and overt modern architecture of the Central Business District to the south. Located at the narrowest point in the Harbour, The Rocks provides a focal point of historical interest in the Harbour landscape. The prominence of The Rocks within this dramatic setting creates views and vistas to and from the precinct. Other less tangible aspects such as harbour sounds and breezes are also crucial to The Rocks’ sense of place on the foreshore. The Rocks presents layers of history, founded on the sandstone topography which gives the area its name. Its urban form and subdivision demonstrate the ad hoc pattern embodied in land first appropriated and later formally owned and developed. The result is an accumulation of features that illustrate Australian history from 1788 until the present. While it is the precinct as a whole that embodies the distinctive aesthetic qualities of ‘The Rocks’, there are also fine individual buildings and structures that display innovative design or technology. These reflect the process of construction and contemporary ‘best practice’ in major public works and buildings; a number of which have received architectural or engineering excellence awards. The beauty of The Rocks extends to individual buildings and features. High-quality design, picturesque ruins and the gritty fine detail or texture are evident in both large- and small-scale elements. The diversity evident in townscape and building style, form and technology is remarkable in such a small area and creates the visual richness and sense of surprise that defines the distinctive character of the place.87

Criterion D – Social Value Recognising social significance is based on an acknowledgment that places may have importance to people with direct experience and knowledge of a place, and that this significance transcends utilitarian values. Social significance is seen as a value held by an identifiable present-day community. Assessing social significance involves identifying and consulting with communities or groups of people to understand their social, spiritual or cultural association with a place; to appreciate its significance to them; and to understand whether significance resides in the fabric of the place, or in other aspects such as its use or accessibility. The Rocks and adjacent areas of Millers and Dawes Points are symbols of the survival of a local resident community. These associated local resident communities represent and remain connected to the processes of struggle, perseverance and change that have shaped The Rocks. For these groups The Rocks embodies a deeply felt sense of connection to the past and to past communities. Since before 1788, The Rocks has been a place in which communities have formed; the precinct is therefore special to them. Specific groups include Aboriginal people, convict descendants, the Chinese, Maoris, artists, sailors, those involved in the Green Bans and people who contributed to subsequent conservation work. For some people, The Rocks stands as testimony to the achievement of direct action and the people’s defence of ‘our history’. It is symbolic of the cultural and governmental change that prevented redevelopment and paved the way for conservation. The Rocks is now an important tourist destination, presented as the birthplace of modern Australia. The precinct represents a national storyline and has taken on a ‘must see’ dimension for many visitors. It is a place where history can be experienced and enjoyed.

86 The Rocks Heritage Management Plan Vol 1 April 2010, p.23. 87 The Rocks Heritage Management Plan Vol 1 April 2010, p.22.

| 42

The social significance of The Rocks to Aboriginal people derives from the potential for physical presence of Aboriginal resources and the association of the place with the first phase of European invasion and settlement and continued associations. If physical evidence or sites of Aboriginal occupation of The Rocks were to be discovered, they would be of significance to the Aboriginal community of Sydney as powerful symbols of the survival of Aboriginal culture. Such elements have importance to Aboriginal people because they provide a tangible link with the land and have capacity to contribute to the education of future generations about Aboriginal links with the land and past practices of the Aboriginal owners of the land. The continued presence of Aboriginal people in The Rocks either as residents, workers or visitors also attest to this link and later histories and Aboriginal experiences as may be researched will elaborate our understanding of their continued association. The Aboriginal heritage of The Rocks (as part of Sydney’s Central Business District) – associational and physical – is important to the Metropolitan Local Aboriginal Land Council, the Cadigal Native Title Claimant Corporation, the Daruk Tribal Aboriginal Corporation and the Daruk Custodial Aboriginal Corporation. The Rocks is recognised as important to the Australian community, symbolising a powerful statement about who we are as Australians because of its importance in the story of early European colonisation of Australia, and the survival of urban form and architecture that express history. Archaeological features provide a physical chronicle of more than two hundred years of intensive human activities in The Rocks. Archaeology allows new insight and, sometimes, a different perspective on the past. Archaeology’s window into history is framed by evidence as diverse as buildings, deposits and single relics. Archaeological resources also provide a tangible connection to people, history and stories that may otherwise be forgotten. The Rocks is part of the place of first sustained contact between Aboriginal people and European invaders. Most of the places and sites demonstrating Aboriginal occupation were destroyed by the ensuing swift and concentrated development of Sydney. Potential physical remains and associated evidence for the continued Aboriginal experience of and association with The Rocks are a powerful symbol of endurance for the Aboriginal community. The Rocks, along with Millers and Dawes Points, is a special place. Here people have lived and worked, and communities have formed. It has been a place of struggle and perseverance, and is valued as the birthplace of Australia by many. At The Rocks, people’s love for the place and its community resulted in the Green Bans and, ultimately, its conservation.88

Criterion E – Technical/Research Value Scientific significance (often referred to as ‘research potential’) is embodied in the fabric of a place and in associated records, and it is often the combination of documents and physical evidence which provides the key to unravelling a complex story. Scientific significance is not limited to below- ground archaeological potential. Archaeological features include ruins, standing structures, engineering relics, plans and landform. Records, artefacts and collections also have the ability to yield information. The Rocks landscape, urban form, built structures and subsurface archaeological features, in conjunction with extensive documentary records, provides a physical chronicle of outstanding research potential. The Rocks landscape itself is an important artefact which provides evidence of change over time. The landform has been modified and is layered with a rich complex of standing and subsurface architecture. This resource, which is much less disturbed or destroyed than comparable areas of Sydney’s Central Business District, covers virtually the entire period of European settlement and includes extensive archaeological sites and complexes. While remains on Norfolk Island relate to a similar period, there is no other urban area in Australia which includes archaeological remains that cover a similar timespan and physical extent.

88 The Rocks Heritage Management Plan Vol 1 April 2010, p.27.

| 43

Physical evidence of pre-European Aboriginal culture at The Rocks has been largely lost. The lack of evidence now remaining is, itself, a poignant reminder to future generations. Any Aboriginal sites which were to be unearthed within The Rocks are unlikely to be intact or to represent a significant proportion of the original resource. Nevertheless, any Aboriginal sites which do survive would be of significance for their ability to demonstrate Aboriginal use of their land. Historical artefacts and other archaeological data (such as pollen) available from excavated (and presumably unexcavated) sites in The Rocks provide a major opportunity for comparative study and meaningful contribution to wider historical theory and knowledge. Buildings and structures contain evidence of technology and use. Recent major excavations at sites like Lilyvale and the ‘Big Dig’ show that there can be a high survival rate of subsurface archaeological features. The potential of the physical record is heightened by a diverse set of oral and documentary historical sources which provide opportunities for synergy in research programs. On the other hand, there are some notable gaps in historical information, especially during the convict and early colonial period. The value of the combination of oral tradition, documentary records and physical evidence, is its ability to respond to people visiting or enquiring about The Rocks. The nature and extent of archaeological resources in The Rocks provides an outstanding opportunity for investigation and interpretation of Australian history. Few areas in Australia are so rich in pointers to the nature and impact of European settlement, from the small terraces and merchants’ houses of the 1840s and 1850s to the high-rise apartment blocks and offices of the 1990s. In The Rocks successive layers of urban development confront Sydney’s past. Some stories of this past - the life of convict households, publicans’ expansion plans, the habits of sailors and wharf labourers, the changing alignment of the waterfront - can still be read from archaeological evidence, written and oral testimony, and the very fabric and setting of many of the buildings.89

Criterion F - Rarity An item possesses uncommon, rare or endangered aspects of NSW’s cultural or natural history (or the cultural or natural history of the local area). The Rocks is rare in its ability to provide evidence of the early development of the Colony and how the early settlers responded to the new and strange environment.90

Criterion G - Representativeness An item is important in demonstrating the principal characteristics of a class of • NSW’s cultural or natural places; or • cultural or natural environments (or a class of the local areas’ cultural or natural places; or cultural or natural environments).

Development in The Rocks is representative of the historical phases from 1788 to the present day, and has associations with significant figures in the history of Sydney throughout this time.91

89 The Rocks Heritage Management Plan Vol 1 April 2010, p.24. 90 The Rocks Conservation Area. Extracted from www.environment.nsw.gov.au on 06/09/2017 91 The Rocks Conservation Area. Extracted from www.environment.nsw.gov.au on 06/09/2017

| 44

APPENDIX D – ILLUSTRATIONS

| 45

1749 | 36-50 CUMBERLAND STREET THE ROCKS

APPENDIX D - LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS FIGURE DATE DESCRIPTION SOURCE 1.1 2017 Location Map Google Maps 1.2 Heritage Listing The Rocks CMP 1.3 Areas of archaeological sensitivity The Rocks CMP 1.4 Areas of existing archaeological investigations The Rocks CMP reports 3.1 1788 Ltn. Dawes map based on soundings by Gov. John The Sirius Legacy Hunter & Ltn. William Bradley 3.2 1812 John Eyres’ lithograph of Bunkers Hill, Campbell’s The Sirius Legacy Cover and Sydney Cove 3.3 1822 John Septimus Roe’s map of Sydney The Sirius Legacy 3.4 1832 Detail from George Frederick Dashwood’s sketch ML digital file a1689008 of Sydney Cove PXD 1679 3.5 1849 Plan of George Street North showing the proposed SHFA Plan HP106c alignment of New George Street 3.6 1854 Woolcott & Clark’s map of City of Sydney The Sirius Legacy 3.7 1858 Blackwood’s panorama annoted in CMP 23 ML Blackwood’s Panorama George Street North, Jean Rice PXA 426 3.8 1865 Extract from the Trigonometrical Survey SCC Historical Atlas of Sydney, Trigonometrical Survey Sheet B2 3.9 1875 Mercantile Rowing Club with Myles, Goodsir’s & ML SPF 376 Young’s buildings behind 3.10 1877 The ASN Company’s new wharfs with Myles, Illlustrated Sydney News, 10 Goodsir’s & Young’s buildings behind November 1877, pg. 4 3.11 1879 Extract from Tronier’s 1879 view of Sydney Cove ML PXA 411 with Myles, Goodsir’s & Young’s buildings behind 3.12 1890 The City of Sydney, reproduced from Sydney Takes Newspaper supplement, Shape, Kelly, Max & Crocker & Ruth Macleay Museum 3.13 1900 Demolition of Youngs Building SRNSW Series 4481/870 4481_a026_000065 3.14 1901 Myles & Goodsir Building Gloucester Street SRNSW Series 4481/1133 4481_a026_000207 3.15 1902 Extract from Darling harbour Resumption plan of NSW State Records Series Section 87 19348 Darling Harbour Resumption Plan N 3.16 1902 View of completed Mercantile Hotel, Myles & ML GPO 2 Still 32245 Goodsir Building behind

FIGURE DATE DESCRIPTION SOURCE 3.17 1904 Campbell’s Cove, Myles & Goodsir Building behind Photograph by Melvin Vaniman DL pg. 23 Mitchell Library 3.18 1915 Ajax Building, 23 George Street, east elevation by AO Plan 3060 (SRNSW) William Henry Foggitt 3.19 1917 Mercantile Hotel, 23 George Street, view of the ML GPO 1 still 20607 completed warehouse & shipping offices 3.20 1926 Rowans Bond Store to the left of the Sydney Powerhouse Museum Harbour Bridge Collection 3.21 1930 Construction of arches to the Sydney Harbour SRNSW Series 12685 (8724 Bridge & Rowans Bond Stores to south view 48) 3.22 1932 Rowans Bond Store to the left of the Sydney Powerhouse Museum Harbour Bridge Collection 3.23 1949 Site plan showing the location of the warehouse, SCC Historic Atlas of Sydney, 23 George Street North & Rowans Bond Store Circular Quay 3.24 1977 Sirius apartments, watercolour & ink on board Powerhouse Museum Collection 3.25 1970s View looking across the offices built on top of the SHFA image CCM 9 warehouse 3.26 2000 Detail from The Rocks plan Foreshore Authority 4.1.1 2017 View along Cumberland Street looking north to Architectural Projects Mining Museum 4.1.2 2017 View along Cumberland Street looking north to Architectural Projects Sirius Building 4.1.3 2017 View along Cumberland Street looking north to Architectural Projects Sirius Building 4.1.4 2017 View along Cumberland Street looking south to Architectural Projects Sirius Building 4.1.5 2017 View along Cumberland Street looking north to Architectural Projects Harbour Bridge 4.1.6 2017 View along Cumberland Street looking south to Architectural Projects Sirius Building 4.1.7 2017 View along Gloucester Walk looking south Architectural Projects 4.1.8 2017 View along Gloucester Walk looking south near Architectural Projects Sirius Building 4.1.9 2017 View along Gloucester Walk looking north to Architectural Projects Harbour Bridge

FIGURE DATE DESCRIPTION SOURCE 4.1.10 2017 View along Gloucester Walk looking east to Sirius Architectural Projects Building 4.1.11 2017 View along Gloucester Walk looking east to Sirius Architectural Projects Building 4.1.12 2017 View along Gloucester Walk looking north to Architectural Projects Harbour Bridge 4.1.13 2017 View along Gloucester Walk looking west to Architectural Projects Foundation Park 4.1.14 2017 View along Gloucester Walk looking south. Sirius Architectural Projects Building to east 4.1.15 2017 View along Gloucester Walk looking south Architectural Projects 4.1.16 2017 Foundation Park looking east to Sirius Building Architectural Projects 4.1.17 2017 Playfair Street looking east to Sirius Building Architectural Projects 4.1.18 2017 Playfair Street looking east to Sirius Building Architectural Projects 4.1.19 2017 Atherton Street looking east to Sirius Building Architectural Projects 4.1.20 2017 Atherton Street looking east to Sirius Building Architectural Projects 4.1.21 2017 George Street looking north Architectural Projects 4.1.22 2017 Mill Lane looking east to Sirius Building Architectural Projects 4.1.23 2017 Mill Lane looking east to Sirius Building Architectural Projects 4.1.24 2017 View from from water edge of Argyle Street Architectural Projects looking east 4.1.25 2017 View from Hickson Road looking south east Architectural Projects 4.1.26 2017 View from Hickson Road looking east Architectural Projects 4.1.27 2017 View from Hickson Road looking east to Sirius Architectural Projects Building 4.1.28 2017 George Street looking north to Sirius Building Architectural Projects 4.1.29 2017 George Street looking north Architectural Projects 4.1.30 2017 George Street looking north Architectural Projects 4.1.31 2017 George Street looking north Architectural Projects 4.1.32 2017 George Street looking north Architectural Projects 4.2.1 2017 View up Cumberland Street with Glenmore Hotel Architectural Projects (Heritage Item) on the corner 4.2.2 2017 View further up Cumberland Street with Glenmore Architectural Projects Hotel (Heritage Item) on the corner 4.2.3 2017 View from Cumberland Street looking towards the Architectural Projects chimney of the Mining Museum (Heritage Item) 4.2.4 2017 View from George Street looking to Ajax Building, Architectural Projects 23 George Street & the Mercantile Hotel (Heritage Items)

FIGURE DATE DESCRIPTION SOURCE 4.2.5 2017 View of Sirius Building behind terraces in Architectural Projects Playfair Street (Heritage Items) 4.2.6 2017 View of Playfair Street with 88 Cumberland Street, Architectural Projects Sirius Building & Gloucester Walk behind 4.2.7 2017 View of terraces at Playfair Street below Sirius Architectural Projects Building 4.2.8 2017 View towards Sirius Building from 80 George Street Architectural Projects 4.2.9 2017 View from Hickson Road below 80 George Street Architectural Projects and square with Sirius Building in background 4.2.10 2017 Gloucester Walk defined on the west by Sirius Architectural Projects Building & on the east by Foundation Park 4.2.11 2017 Foundation Park as viewed from Gloucester Walk Architectural Projects 4.2.12 2017 Foundation Park looking east to Sirius Building Architectural Projects 4.2.13 2017 View from Opera House foreshore Turners 4.2.14 2017 View from Cahill Express Way Turners 4.3.1 2017 23 George Street, Ajax Building Inventory Sheets 4.3.2 2017 25-27 George Street, Mercantile Hotel Inventory Sheets 4.3.3 2017 33 Playfair Street, Cleland Bond Store Inventory Sheets 4.3.4 2017 36-64 George Street, Mining Museum Inventory Sheets 4.3.5 2017 43-45 George Street, Merchants House Inventory Sheets 4.3.6 2017 86-88 George Street, Old Bushells Factory Inventory Sheets Warehouse 4.3.7 2017 96-98 Cumberland Street, Glenmore Hotel Inventory Sheets 4.3.8 2017 100-104 Cumberland Street, Australia Hotel Inventory Sheets 4.3.9 2017 29-31 George Street,Terraces Inventory Sheets 4.3.10 2017 33-41 George Street, Sergeant Majors Row Inventory Sheets 4.3.11 2017 47 George Street, Union Bond Store Inventory Sheets 4.3.12 2017 68-84 George Street, Metcalfe Bond Stores Inventory Sheets 4.3.13 2017 69 George Street, Observer Hotel Inventory Sheets 4.3.14 2017 73 George Street, Ken Duncan Gallery Inventory Sheets 4.3.15 2017 75 George Street, Sam Bon’s Cottage Inventory Sheets 4.3.16 2017 2-4 Atherton Street, Avery Terrace Inventory Sheets 4.3.17 2017 13-15 Playfair Street, Argyle Terrace Inventory Sheets 4.3.18 2017 17-31 Playfair Street, Playfair Street Terrace Inventory Sheets 4.3.19 2017 22-26 Playfair Street, Playfair Street Garage Inventory Sheets 4.3.20 2017 Foundation Park Inventory Sheets

FIGURE DATE DESCRIPTION SOURCE 4.3.21 2017 12-20 Argyle, Argyle Stores Inventory Sheets 4.3.22 2017 Argyle Bridge Inventory Sheets 4.3.23 2017 1-5 Hickson Road, ACN Co Building Inventory Sheets 4.3.24 2017 91 George Street, ACN Former Hotel Inventory Sheets

Fig. 1.1 2017 Location Map Google Maps

Fig. 1.2 Heritage Listing The Rocks CMP

Fig. 1.3 Areas of archaeological sensitivity The Rocks CMP

Fig. 1.4 Areas of existing archaeological investigations reports The Rocks CMP

Figure 3.1 1788 Ltn. Dawes map based on soundings by Gov. The Sirius Legacy John Hunter & Ltn. William Bradley

Figure 3.2 1812 John Eyres’ lithograph of Bunkers Hill, Campbell’s The Sirius Legacy Cover and Sydney Cove

Figure 3.3 1822 John Septimus Roe’s map of Sydney The Sirius Legacy

Figure 3.4 1832 Detail from George Frederick Dashwood’s sketch ML digital file a1689008 PXD of Sydney Cove 1679

Figure 3.5 1849 Plan of George Street North showing the SHFA Plan HP106c proposed alignment of New George Street

Figure 3.6 1854 Woolcott & Clark’s map of City of Sydney The Sirius Legacy

Figure 3.7 1858 Blackwood’s panorama annoted in CMP 23 George ML Blackwood’s Street North, Jean Rice Panorama PXA 426

Figure 3.8 1865 Extract from the Trigonometrical survey SCC Historical Atlas of Sydney, Trigonometrical Survey Sheet B2

Figure 3.9 1875 Mercantile Rowing Club with Myles, Goodsir’s & ML SPF 376 Young’s buildings behind

Figure 3.10 1877 The ASN Company’s new wharfs with Myles, Illustrated Sydney News, 10 Goodsir’s & Young’s buildings behind November 1877, pg. 4

Figure 3.11 1879 Extract from Tronier’s 1879 view of Sydney Cove ML PXA 411 with Myles, Goodsir’s & Young’s buildings behind

Figure 3.12 1890 The City of Sydney, reproduced from Sydney Takes Newspaper supplement, Macleay Shape, Kelly, Max & Crocker & Ruth Museum

Figure 3.13 1900 Demolition of Youngs Building SRNSW Series 4481/870 4481_ a026_000065

Figure 3.14 1901 Myles & Goodsir Building Gloucester Street SRNSW Series 4481/1133 4481_ a026_000207

Figure 3.15 1902 Extract from Darling Harbour Resumption plan of NSW State Records Series 19348, Section 87 Darling Harbour Resumption Plan N

Figure 3.16 1902 View of completed Mercantile Hotel, Myles & Goodsir ML GPO 2 Still 32245 Building behind

Figure 3.17 1904 Campbell’s Cove, Myles & Goodsir Building Photograph by Melvin Vaniman DL pg behind 23 Mitchell Library

Figure 3.18 1915 Ajax Building, 23 George Street, east elevation by AO Plan 3060 (SRNSW) William Henry Foggitt

Figure 3.19 1917 Mercantile Hotel, 23 George Street, view of the ML GPO 1 still 30607 completed warehouse & shipping offices

Figure 3.20 1926 Rowans Bond Store to the left of the Sydney Harbour Powerhouse Museum Bridge Collection

Figure 3.21 1930 Construction of arches to the Sydney Harbour Bridge SRNSW Series 12685 (8724 & Rowans Bond Stores to south view 48)

Figure 3.22 1932 Rowans Bond Store to the left of the Sydney Harbour Powerhouse Museum Bridge Collection

Figure 3.23 1949 Site plan showing the location of the warehouse, 23 SCC Historic Atlas of Sydney, George Street North & Rowans Bond Store Circular Quay

Figure 3.24 1977 Sirius apartments, watercolour & ink on board Powerhouse Museum Collection

Figure 3.25 1970s View looking across the offices built on top of the SHFA image CCM 9 warehouse 23 George Street & The Opera House

Figure 3.26 2000 Detail from The Rocks block plan Foreshore Authority

2017 Comprehensive views within The Rocks Architectural Projects

Figure 4.1.1 View along Cumberland Street Figure 4.1.2 View along Cumberland Street looking north to Mining Museum looking north to Sirius Building

Figure 4.1.3 View along Cumberland Street Figure 4.1.4 View along Cumberland Street looking north to Sirius Building looking south to Sirius Building

Figure 4.1.5 View along Cumberland Street Figure 4.1.6 View along Cumberland Street looking north to Harbour Bridge looking south to Sirius Building

Figure 4.1.7 View along Gloucester Walk Figure 4.1.8 View along Gloucester Walk looking south looking south near Sirius Building © Architectural Projects Pty Limited – 1749 HISI_ai_V1_R10_20171019 1749 | 36-50 CUMBERLAND STREET THE ROCKS

2017 Comprehensive views within The Rocks Architectural Projects

Figure 4.1.9 View along Gloucester Walk Figure 4.1.10 View along Gloucester Walk looking looking north to Harbour Bridge east to Sirius Building

Figure 4.1.11 View along Gloucester Walk Figure 4.1.12 View along Gloucester Walk looking looking east to Sirius Building north to Harbour Bridge

Figure 4.1.13 View along Gloucester Walk looking Figure 4.1.14 View along Gloucester Walk looking west to Foundation Park south. Sirius Building to east

Figure 4.1.15 View along Gloucester Walk looking Figure Foundation Park looking east to south 4.1.16 Sirius Building

2017 Comprehensive views within The Rocks Architectural Projects

Figure 4.1.17 Playfair Street looking east to Figure 4.1.18 Playfair Street looking east to Sirius Sirius Building Building

Figure 4.1.19 Atherton Street looking east to Figure 4.1.20 Atherton Street looking east to Sirius Building Sirius Building

Figure 4.1.21 George Street looking north Figure 4.1.22 Mill Lane looking east to Sirius Building

Figure 4.1.23 Mill Lane looking east to Sirius Building Figure 4.1.24 View from from water edge of Argyle Street looking east © Architectural Projects Pty Limited – 1749 HISI_ai_V1_R10_20171019 1749 | 36-50 CUMBERLAND STREET THE ROCKS

2017 Comprehensive views within The Rocks Architectural Projects

Figure 4.1.25 View from Hickson Road looking Figure 4.1.26 View from Hickson Road south east looking east

Figure 4.1.27 View from Hickson Road looking Figure 4.1.28 George Street looking north to east to Sirius Building Sirius Building

Figure 4.1.29 George Street looking north Figure 4.1.30 George street looking north

Figure 4.1.31 George Street looking north Figure 4.1.32 George Street looking north

Figure 4.2.1 2017 View up Cumberland Street with Glenmore Hotel Architectural Projects (Heritage Item) on the corner

Figure 4.2.2 2017 View further up Cumberland Street with Glenmore Architectural Projects Hotel (Heritage Item) on the corner

Figure 4.2.3 2017 View from Cumberland Street looking towards the Architectural Projects chimney of the Mining Museum (Heritage Item)

Figure 4.2.4 2017 View from George Street looking to Ajax Building, 23 Architectural Projects George Street & the Mercantile Hotel (Heritage Items)

Figure 4.2.5 2017 View of Sirius Building behind terraces in Architectural Projects Playfair Street (Heritage Items)

Figure 4.2.6 2017 View of Playfair Street with 88 Cumberland Street, Architectural Projects Sirius Building & Gloucester Walk behind

Figure 4.2.7 2017 View of terraces at Playfair Street below Sirius Architectural Projects Building

Figure 4.2.8 2017 View towards Sirius Building from 80 George Street Architectural Projects

Figure 4.2.9 2017 View from Hickson Road below 80 George Street and square Architectural Projects with Sirius Building in background

Figure 4.2.10 2017 Gloucester Walk defined on the west by Sirius Architectural Projects Building & on the east by Foundation Park

Figure 4.2.11 2017 Foundation Park as viewed from Gloucester Walk Architectural Projects

Fig. 4.2.12 2017 Foundation Park looking east to Sirius Building Architectural Projects

Fig. 4.2.13 2017 View from Opera House foreshore Turners

Fig. 4.2.14 2017 View from Cahill Express Way Turners

Heritage Items in the Vicinity Inventory Sheets

Figure 4.3.1 23 George Street, Figure 4.3.2 25-27 George Street, Ajax Building Mercantile Hotel

Figure 4.3.3 33 Playfair Street, Figure 4.3.4 36-64 George Street, Cleland Bond Store Mining Museum

Figure 4.3.5 43-45 George Street, Figure 4.3.6 86-88 George Street, Merchants House Bushells Factory Warehouse

Figure 4.3.7 96-98 Cumberland Street, Figure 100-104 Cumberland Street, Glenmore Hotel 4.3.8 Australia Hotel

Heritage Items in the Vicinity Inventory Sheets

Figure 4.3.9 29-31 George Street, Figure 4.3.10 33-41 George Street, Terraces Sergeant Majors Row

Figure 4.3.11 47 George Street, Figure 4.3.12 68-84 George Street, Union Bond Store Metcalfe Bond Stores

Figure 4.3.13 69 George Street, Figure 4.3.14 73 George Street, Observor Hotel Ken Duncan Gallery

Figure 4.3.15 75 George Street, Figure 4.3.16 2-4 Atherton Street, Sam Bon’s Cottage Avery Terrace

Heritage Items in the Vicinity Inventory Sheets

Figure 4.3.17 13-15 Playfair Street, Figure 4.3.18 17-31 Playfair Street, Argyle Terrace Playfair Street Terraces

Figure 4.3.19 22-26 Playfair Street, Figure 4.3.20 Foundation Park Playfair Street, Garage

Figure 4.3.21 12-20 Argyle, Figure 4.3.22 Argyle Bridge Argyle Stores

Figure 4.3.23 1-5 Hickson Road, ACN Co Figure 4.3.24 91 George Street, Building ACN Former Hotel

Figure. 1832 Campbell’s landholdings, Surveyor Lewis, 1832 Survey-General Sketch Book 2, f.9

Figure. 1856-60 Campbell’s Wharf PXA 9, Mitchell Library

Figure . 1865 Trigonometrical Survey MWS & DB, 1865, Trig Survey, AONSW

Figure . 1902 Detail of a plan prepared by Public Works SRNSW AO Map 6172 Department showing public houses

Figure . Undated Plan showing the original extent of the building NSW State Records AO Plan 3060

Figure . Undated The original extent of the retaining walls and SHFA leasing file excavation for the concrete warehouse and the now RE0395.01.01 demolished shipping offices above