• The letters laid in the terrazzo of the entrance porch on the eastern side were added in 1993. Two urns (?), once set to either side of the doorway, have been removed. Refer back to Figures 45 and 46. • The tiles on the porte-cochere roof and on the northern and southern porches were added in 1993. • The existing railings on the porte-cochere roof and on the northern and southern porches appear to have been added (or repaired) in 1993. • A bricked-up window in the northern elevation of the rear wing was reinstated in 1993. • The early photograph (Figure 13) shows that there were originally shutters on the eastern elevation windows at ground and first floor level and shutters on the windows at first floor level on the northern elevation. The shutters have been removed from the eastern elevation and from all but the french doors on the northern elevation. • The rear porch was infilled in the c.1950s.
Interior The following should be read in conjunction with Figures 21 and 22, which details some of the early changes made to the floor plans, and Figures 62 and 63, the existing floor plans.
Ground Floor The principal rooms- G01, G02, G11 and G10- are substantially intact in terms of layout, fabric and finishes. The following is noted: • Some of the originally stained maple timberwork has been painted; some has been replaced or repaired. Similarly, some of the door hardware has been replaced. • The veneer sliding door between G01 and G02 is not original. • The flush panel door between G02 and G03 is not original. • The fireplaces were restored in 1993. The existing marble mantelpieces were present in 1993. • An opening was made in the northern wall of G02 in 1963 but has since been reinstated. • The existing light fittings are not original. The remaining rooms demonstrate lower integrity. The layout of Rooms G03 has been altered over time, most recently in 1993 when a new kitchen fitted. Rooms G05 and G06 were created out of a single room in 1993. Room G05 was once an open porch; the eastern wall of this space, now painted, is originally an exterior wall. Rooms G07 and G08 have later plasterboard ceilings. An opening between the two noted in the CP 1993 has since been blocked in. The joinery in these rooms varies in profile and date. Room G09 retains an original floor and some wall tiling.
First Floor The principal rooms at first floor level- 101, 102, 104 and 109- are substantially intact in terms of plan and finishes. The following is noted: • Some of the originally stained maple timberwork has been painted; some has been replaced or repaired. Similarly, some of the door hardware has been replaced.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 101
• The marble mantelpieces at first floor level were noted as missing in 1993. It is not clear if the originals were located and reinstated or, more likely, if the existing mantelpieces are not original to the dwelling. • The wall between 101 and 102 is a plasterboard wall. • The built-in cupboards appear to be later additions to the original dwelling.
The remaining rooms demonstrate varying degrees of integrity. Joinery is mixed in profile; ceilings and cornices have been replaced. The timber parquetry flooring, wall panelling and joinery in Room 106 is later in date. Partitioning and a toilet have been removed from Room 103 since 1993 and work carried out to the bathroom 107/107A.
4.2.2.2 Building CC2
This building appears to be substantially intact externally. There have been no apparent additions and the majority of doors and windows appear to be original.
Without access to original plans and internal access, it is not possible to accurately determine how intact the interior is. It is noted that services were upgraded as part of the works carried out in 1993.
4.2.2.3 Building CC3: The Garage
This building has undergone a greater degree of alteration than Cliffbrook. The following is noted: • The existing doors in the eastern elevation date from the UNSW works in the early-mid 1990s. • Doors and windows have been repaired/replaced over time. • The interior was refitted in 1993.
4.2.2.4 Building CC4
This stages in which this building was constructed are difficult to determine from the available evidence. While presenting as a coherent whole, it demonstrates low integrity.
The first part of this building- the ground floor of the east-west running wing- existed prior to 1958 when Budden, Nangle and Michael were commissioned to design the three storey north-south running wing. The new wing was constructed prior to 1965. In 1969 Edwards, Madigan, Torzillo and Partners carried out alterations and additions to this building. Further works, designed by McDonald McPhee, were carried out after 1993. The interior of the building has been upgraded over time.
4.3 Streetscape Contribution and Identifying View Corridors
4.3.1 Preamble
The following should be read with an understanding of the character of the immediately surrounding area, as set out in Section 3.6.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 102
4.3.2 View Corridors Towards to the Study Area
The most important single built element within the Study Area- the focal point- is Cliffbrook (Building CC1). Cliffbrook was built to address Gordon Bay- it is to the bay that the building present’s its primary elevation. The principal view corridors towards the Study Area from the public domain are now from Beach Street. With regard to views from Beach Street: • The stone walls and Norfolk Island Pines on the site are the first elements of the site to become visible on approach in either direction. They are prominent elements within the streetscape that mark the presence of a ‘historic building’ within the public domain. • Unless standing outside of the gates, views towards Cliffbrook (CC1) are largely screened by the stone boundary wall and by vegetation. The roof is the most visible element of the building visible from Beach Street. • The former garage (Building CC3) is not visible from Beach Street. • Buildings C3 and CC4 are visible from Beach Street, but are not dominant because of their recession into the site (CC4) or screening by vegetation (CC3).
Figures 130 to 132 illustrate views towards the Study Area on approach from the south from various viewpoints. Figure 133 is of a view on approach from the north.
Figure 130: Looking north along Beach Street. The stone wall and the Norfolk Island Pine trees mark the location of the Campus. Cliffbrook (CC1) is concealed from this distance.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 103
Figure 131: View towards the Campus on approach from the south, closer than Figure 130 above.
Figure 132: The north western corner of the Campus is visible when close to the site on approach along Beach Street from the south. Cliffbrook (CC1) is concealed by vegetation.
Views towards the Campus from Battery Street are less significant. The only significant element of the Campus that is readily visible from Battery Street is the stone boundary wall. Vegetation largely conceals the buildings from the public domain. The chimneys and roof top of Cliffbrook (Building CC1) are visible through the trees from some, limited, viewpoints. Figures 133 to 135 illustrate views towards the Campus from Battery Street.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 104
Figure 133: View towards the site from the western end of Battery Street. The wall is prominent. The buildings are completely screened by vegetation.
Figure 134: View towards the site from further along Battery Street. The roof of Cliffbrook is just visible beyond the tree.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 105
Figure 135: View towards the site on approach along Battery Street from the east. Vegetation conceals the buildings on the site. The wall is not notable when cars are parked along the street.
Building CC4 blocks all view corridors towards Cliffbrook (Building CC1) from Gordon Bay.
The most significant views towards the site from the public domain are:
• Obtained from directly outside of the site on Beach Street. • Obtained on approach along Beach Street from the north.
4.3.3 View Corridors from the Study Area
Cliffbrook (Building CC1) was built to address the views to the east, over Gordon’s Bay. These views are now blocked by the AAEC buildings. From the eastern part of the Study Area, south of Building CC4, there are views towards the ocean.
There are views out of the site to the east from Building CC4 and from the eastern end of the Study Area.
There are no significant view corridors out of the site to Beach Street or Battery Street. None of the buildings within the Study Area were specifically built to address either street.
4.3.4 View Corridors within the Study Area
Significant view corridors within the Study Area views that include Cliffbrook (Building CC1) and, to a lesser extent, Building CC3. These view corridors have been substantially curtailed by the later AAEC buildings. The following is noted:
• There is a foreshortened view corridor towards the eastern, front, elevation of Cliffbrook from the lawn immediately outside of the building. Refer back to Figure 42. This is a significant view corridor. • There are views towards the southern elevation of Cliffbrook from within the Study Area. These are significant view corridors. • The proximity of Building CC2 to the northern elevation precludes long distant views towards this elevation.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 106
• Views towards the western elevation of Cliffbrook are views towards a rear elevation and are partially screened by vegetation. These are not significant view corridors. • There is a narrow angled view corridor towards the south eastern corner of Cliffbrook from the southern part of the Study Area, below Building CC4. Refer to Figure 136 below. • There are view corridors along the inside of the Beach Street and Battery Street walls from within the site. Refer back to Figures 30 and 33. These are less significant view corridors than those towards Cliffbrook. • The best view corridors towards Building CC3 are views towards the eastern elevation from directly outside of it. This building is not a dominant site element.
Figure 136: Significant view towards Cliffbrook from the south eastern corner of the Study Area.
4.4 Comparative Analysis
4.4.1 Cliffbrook (Building CC1)
Cliffbrook is one of thirty listings on the State Heritage Register within the Municipality of Randwick. These listings include residential buildings, commercial buildings, religious buildings and infrastructure, such as substations. Cliffbrook is the only interwar period dwelling listed on the State Heritage Register within the municipality and the only interwar period dwelling of this size listed on the Randwick LEP 2013.
Given the uncertainties surround the architect of Cliffbrook, it is not useful to compare it to the works of another architect. The dwelling does not readily compare with other buildings attributed to John Kirkpatrick. All the other buildings identified on the State Heritage Inventory by Kirkpatrick are in the Late Victorian period styles or in the Federation Style. No other buildings designed by John Miller have been identified.
Cliffbrook is one of a number of large interwar period dwellings surviving in the Sydney area. It is, however, a rare example of the use of the Interwar Free Classical Style for a private dwelling. The style was far more commonly used in commercial and residential flat buildings.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 107
4.4.2 Buildings CC2 and CC4
The original architect(s) for these buildings remains unknown. Architects known to have carried out work on these buildings include Budden, Nangle and Michael and Edwards, Madigan, Torzillo and Partners. These two practices are well-regarded Sydney architectural practices whose work is well represented on heritage registers. Neither building can be considered a good example of the work of these practices, given that they are not the originating architects. In the case of Building CC4, further alterations have been carried out after the involvement of Edwards, Madigan, Torzillo and Partners. Building CC4 does not approach the architectural merit of the best examples of the works of this practice, which include the National Gallery of Australia.
Commercial buildings of the 1950s-1970s are only now beginning to be included on heritage registers. The best office buildings of the 1950s-1970s are identified by the Australian Institute of Architects Register of Twentieth Century Architecture. The buildings on this register are notable for their architectural and/or technical innovations. Neither building is identified on this register.
4.5 Established Significance
4.5.1 Existing Citations and Listings
4.5.1.1 Statutory
Commonwealth
No part of the Campus is identified on the National Heritage List under the auspices of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999.
State Heritage Register
Part of the Campus is listed on the State Heritage Register under the auspices of the NSW Heritage Act 1977.
The listing reads: ‘Cliffbrook’, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee. The curtilage of the listing is: Lot 1, DP 8162; Part of Lot 1, DP 109530. Register No.: 00609.
Figure 137 defines the curtilage of the State Heritage listing. These are the Study Area boundaries.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 108
Figure 137: Boundary of the state (and local) heritage listing. State Heritage Register.
Randwick Council
Part of the Campus is listed as a heritage item by Schedule 5 Part 1 of the Randwick LEP 2012. The listing reads: ‘Cliffbrook’, Edwardian Villa, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee. State significance. The curtilage of the listing is: Lot 1, DP 8162; Part of Lot 1, DP 109530. Listing No.: I53. This is the same as the curtilage shown by Figure 137 above.
The Campus is not located within a Conservation Area defined by Schedule 5 Part 2 of the Randwick LEP 2012.
4.5.1.2 Non-Statutory
The Campus (or parts thereof) are listed on the following non-statutory heritage registers:
• National Trust of Australia (NSW): Classified. • Register of the National Estate.
NB: The site is not listed on the AIA Register of Significant Architecture.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 109
4.5.2 Adjacent Heritage Items
What is considered to be ‘in the vicinity’ will be determined in each circumstance with reference to physical proximity, existing and potential view corridors and the nature of any proposed works.
There are no heritage items listed on the State Heritage Register, under the auspices of the NSW Heritage Act 1977, in the vicinity of the site.
Figure 138 shows the location of heritage items, listed by Schedule 5 Part 1 of the Randwick LEP 2013, and Conservation Areas, listed by Schedule 5 Part 2 of the North Randwick LEP 2013, within the vicinity of the site. Heritage items are coloured brown (built) or green (landscape) and numbered. Conservation Areas are hatched in red and numbered. The site is marked ‘I53’ (see the arrow).
Figure 138: Detail of the Randwick Heritage Plan. Randwick LEP 2012.
The site adjoins the following heritage item:
• Two Storey Arts and Crafts House, No. 2 Gordon Avenue
This item is marked ‘I88’ in Figure 138 above. Local significance. Lot boundary curtilage. Figure 139 illustrates this item.
As described above, the dwelling on this site is a two storey Interwar period dwelling constructed of dark brick. It has a high-pitched roof clad in terracotta tile with intersection gables. The gables are clad in fibro(?) cladding with dark stained timber battening. It is set in garden surrounds. As noted above, the sandstone wall across the front boundary of the site on Beach Street continues across the front of this property.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 110
The State Heritage Inventory does not provide a statement of significance for this item. It is likely to have historic and aesthetic significance.
The principal view corridors to and from this item are from Gordon Avenue and Gordon Bay. Refer to Figure 139. Only the high pitched roof the dwelling is readily visible from Beach Street because of the high sandstone wall across the Beach Street boundary. Refer back to Figure 120. The principal view corridors out of this item are to the east. The view corridor is likely to include the lower part of the Campus in an arch defined by the edge of Building CC4.
Figure 139: No. 2 Gordon Avenue from Gordon Avenue.
There are other items in the vicinity of the Study Area, the closest being the Electrical Substation No. 30, No. 21S Flood Street (I23) and an Edwardian Cottage, No. 3 Quail Street (I98).
4.6 NSW Heritage Division Criteria
The Study Area is assessed for significance under the following criterion of the New South Wales Heritage Office, now Division. The Guidelines for Inclusion / Exclusion are as provided by Assessing Heritage Significance, NSW Heritage Manual Update.
4.6.1 Criterion (a)
An item is important in the course, or pattern, of New South Wales’ cultural or natural history (or the cultural of natural history of the local area)
Guidelines for Inclusion Guidelines for Exclusion • shows evidence of a significant • has incidental or unsubstantiated human activity connections with historically important activities or processes • is associated with a significant activity • provides evidence of activities or or historical phase processes that are of dubious historical importance • maintains or shows continuity of a • has been altered so that is can no historical process or activity longer provide evidence of a particular association
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 111
Constructed c.1922, Cliffbrook (Building CC1) has historic significance as a fine, if comparatively late, example of a large sea-side dwelling constructed in the Randwick Municipality. The most significant period of large house construction in the area occurred in the mid to late nineteenth century, prior to the widespread subdivisions that followed the opening of the tram lines. At the time that Cliffbrook was erected, Coogee was developing as a place for smaller residential bungalows. Building CC3 also has significance under this criterion as an associated outbuilding on this period. Constructed c.1922 it is a relatively early example of a garage building.
The site retains evidence of the Victorian period of mansion building in the area through the presence of the stone boundary walls to Beach and Battery Streets, which are remnants of the original Cliffbrook Estate.
The site has historic significance under this criterion as the former headquarters of the Australian Atomic Energy Commission (AAEC). The buildings that have significance in this regard are Cliffbrook (Building CC1), Building CC2 and Building CC4. Between 1953 and 1981 the site played a role in the development of the atomic sciences in Australia. It is noted, however, that the site has less significance for its association with this organisation than Lucas Heights, where the experimental facilities of the AAEC were located. Whereas the AAEC’s association with the site ended in 1981, their succeeding organisations have an ongoing association with Lucas Heights.
4.6.2 Criterion (b)
An item has strong or special association with the life or works of a person, or group of persons, of importance in New South Wales’ cultural or natural history (or the cultural or natural history of the local area)
Guidelines for Inclusion Guidelines for Exclusion • shows evidence of a significant • has incidental or unsubstantiated human occupation connections with historically important people or events
• is associated with a significant event, • provides evidence of people or person, or group of persons events that are of dubious historical importance
• maintains or shows continuity of a • has been altered so that is can no historical process or activity longer provide evidence of a particular association
Cliffbrook has significance under this criterion for its association with Sir Denison Miller, first Chairman of the Commonwealth Bank. It was Miller who commissioned the design and construction of the building. The size and style of the building are a reflection of Miller’s position in public life. It is noted, however, that his occupation was short-lived, given that he died soon after the building was completed and that his family sold the property shortly after.
Cliffbrook has significance under this criterion for its association with the Australian Atomic Energy Commission, who used the site as their headquarters from 1958 until 1981. The AAEC were the first Commonwealth body responsible for atomic research in Australia. As noted above, this site has lesser significance for its association with the AAEC than their Lucas Height Research Establishment.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 112
The site may have developing significance for its association with the University of NSW, who have owned the site since 1991. The UNSW are a leading provider of tertiary education and research in Australia.
The State Heritage Listing Sheet for the site attributes significance under this criterion to architect John Kirkpatrick. An advertisement that identifies him as ‘supervisor’, as opposed to architect, makes it difficult to cite this building as an example of his work. It is equally as likely that the design of the building is attributable to Miller’s son, John King Miller, who worked with Kirkpatrick, about whom little is known. Given the uncertainties surrounding the attribution of an architect, the site does not meet the threshold for listing for an association with a particular architect under this criterion.
The site has minor associations with the well-known architectural firms of Budden, Nangle Michael and Edwards Madigan Torzillo and Partners. The site does not, however, meet the threshold for listing for its association with these architectural practices because, in both instances, the work they carried out was alterations and additions to pre-existing buildings, which have since undergone further alteration. The buildings are not representative of the often-distinctive style of these architectural practices. There are far better examples of their work elsewhere in New South Wales and beyond.
4.6.3 Criterion (c)
An item is important in demonstrating aesthetic characteristics and/or a high degree of technical achievement in New South Wales (or the local area)
Guidelines for Inclusion Guidelines for Exclusion • shows or is associated with, creative • is not a major work by an important or technical innovation or designer or artist achievement • is the inspiration for creative or • has lost its design or technical technical innovation or achievement integrity • is aesthetically distinctive or has • its positive visual or sensory landmark qualities appeal or landmark and scenic qualities have been more than temporarily degraded •
• exemplifies a particular taste, style or • has only a loose association with a technology creative or technical achievement
Cliffbrook (Building CC1) has aesthetic and technical significance under this criterion. The dwelling is a fine and substantially intact example of a large Interwar Free Classical Style dwelling that exhibits high standards of craftsmanship, providing an excellent example of domestic building techniques of its day. This style is uncommon in residential dwellings in Sydney. Building CC3 has a lower level of significance than Cliffbrook under this criterion. Built as a garage in the early 1920s, it is simple in form and clearly secondary to Cliffbrook. In materials, it more strongly relates to the boundary walls than to the dwelling. It is not visible from the public domain.
Buildings CC2 and CC4 have no significance under this criterion. They do not exemplify a significant architectural style, do not demonstrate aesthetically distinctive or landmark qualities, are not major works by important architects and do not provide information not readily available from other sources.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 113
The nineteenth century stone walls, the Norfolk Island Pine Trees and the driveway loop have aesthetic significance as well as historic significance. As discussed above, the post 1943 landscaping as a whole contributes to the setting of Cliffbrook.
4.6.4 Criterion (d)
An item has strong or special association with a particular community or cultural group in New South Wales (or the local area) for social, cultural or spiritual reasons
Guidelines for Inclusion Guidelines for Exclusion • is important for its association with an • is only important to the community identifiable group for amenity reasons • is important to a community’s sense • is retained only in preference to a of place proposed alternative
It is not known if former staff members of the AAEC retain significant associations with the site. The fact that the property is little mentioned in histories of the AAEC suggests that there are far stronger associations with other sites, most notably, the Lucas Heights Research Establishment.
4.6.5 Criterion (e)
An item has potential to yield information that will contribute to an understanding of New South Wales’ cultural or natural history (or the cultural or natural history of the local area)
Guidelines for Inclusion Guidelines for Exclusion • has the potential to yield new or • has little archaeological or research further substantial scientific and/or potential archaeological information • is an important benchmark or • only contains information that is reference site or type readily available from other resources of archaeological sites
• provides evidence of past human • the knowledge gained would be cultures that is unavailable elsewhere irrelevant to research on science, human history of culture
Cliffbrook (Building CC1) has significance under this criterion as a fine example of a large interwar period dwelling as set out above.
The buildings on the site were used by the AAEC for administrative functions. There is nothing in the layout or construction of these buildings that furthers understanding of their core activities outside of the information provided by historic records. The only fabric that specifically locates the AAEC on the site are the front gates.
The Aboriginal Cultural Heritage assessment report, prepared by MDCA (see Appendix 2 in this CMP) concludes with regard to aboriginal archaeological potential:
‘Specifically, on the basis of the review of contextual information and site inspection described above, it can be concluded that:
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 114
• It is unlikely that there are any remaining physical traces of past Aboriginal occupation on the current surface, including exposed sandstone bedrock, or within the immediate subsurface dune horizons. Due to historical disturbance, it is also unlikely that intact archaeological evidence of past Aboriginal use will be present within the uppermost 0.5m of the existing dune profile wherever it is present across the subject land. Specifically, it is unlikely that the uppermost original dune A1 horizon will have survived anywhere across the subject land.
• The western portion of the subject land has Aboriginal archaeological sensitivity as it contains dune deposits forming the eastern edge of the eastern suburbs dune landscape. It is possible that archaeological remains may be located below any historical disturbance (probably at least 0.5m below the surface) and above the B1 ‘coffee rock’ horizon, which is up to 2m below the current surface. Archaeological remains may include ground or flaked stone artefacts, hearth stones or charcoal, with a very low possibility for organic remains such as human or animal bones (due to the acidic nature of the deposit). Archaeological remains are likely to be relatively discrete and limited in size, reflecting the shifting and ephemeral nature of the dune environment. If buried former stable land surfaces are present, potentially detectable as distinct humic horizons within the A2 pale grey sand deposit, these could contain more extensive evidence of past Aboriginal use. As any archaeological remains could potentially be relatively old, and such remains are currently poorly documented across the eastern suburbs area, it is important that they are identified, documented and appropriately managed (either through preservation or salvage excavation where this is not possible).
• With respect to the easternmost third of the subject land, the limited extent of exposed sandstone in this area makes it unlikely that any axe grinding grooves or engravings are present within this area. However due to low surface exposure the possible presence of grinding grooves in particular cannot be entirely discounted. There is no building works proposed in this area, however some landscaping, including bush regeneration is likely to occur.’77
The Historical Archaeological report, prepared by MDCA (see in Appendix 2 of this CMP) concludes with regard to archaeological potential:
‘The locality of the former outbuilding complex has historical archaeological significance, potential and sensitivity - though the nature, extent and integrity of the sub-surface archaeological resource cannot be adequately determined at this stage without investigation.
77 MDCA, Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment Report, UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee. Draft Report, March 2017, pp.33-34. See Appendix 2 of this CMP.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 115
At present the location is variously covered by extant structures, bitumen and brick pavement, and gardens.’78
4.6.6 Criterion (f)
An item possesses uncommon, rare or endangered aspects of New South Wales’ cultural or natural history (of the cultural or natural history of the local area)
Guidelines for Inclusion Guidelines for Exclusion • provides evidence of a defunct • is not rare custom, way of life or process • demonstrate a process, custom or • is numerous but under threat other human activity that is in danger of being lost • shown unusually accurate evidence of a significant human activity • is the only example of its type • demonstrate designs or techniques of exceptional interest • shown rare evidence of a significant human activity important to a community
Cliffbrook (Building CC1) is a rare example of a large interwar period Free Classical Style dwelling.
While the activities of the AAEC are of great significance to Australian history, their links with this site are far less significance than their links with other sites, such as the Lucas Heights Research Establishment.
4.6.7 Criterion (g)
An item is important in demonstrating the principal characteristics of a class of New South Wales (or a class of the local areas):
• Cultural or natural places; or • Cultural or natural environments
Guidelines for Inclusion Guidelines for Exclusion • is a fine example of its type • is a poor example of its type • has the potential characteristics of an • does not include or has lost the important class or group of items range of characteristics of a type • has attributes typical of a particular • does not represent well the way of life, philosophy, custom, characteristics that make up a significant process, design, technique significant variation of type of activity
78 MDCA, UNSW Cliffbrook Campus Redevelopment, 41-54 Beach Street, Coogee, Eastern Suburbs, NSW: Historical Archaeological Assessment (European Heritage) + Research Design and Excavation Methodology. Report dated 3 March, 2017, p.53. See Appendix 2 of this CMP.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 116
• is a significant variation to a class of items • is part of a group which collectively illustrates a representative type • is outstanding because of its setting, condition or size • is outstanding because of its integrity or the esteem in which it is held
Cliffbrook has significance under this criterion as a fine example of an Interwar Free Classical Style dwelling.
4.7 Statement of Significance
4.7.1 Existing Statements of Significance
The State Heritage Register adopts the statement of significance for the site provided by the CP 1993. This is as follows:
‘Cliffbrook is of State heritage significance for its association with the larger original Estate 'Cliff-brook' of John Thompson, Mayor of Randwick in 1873, being the largest surviving area of land of that estate, following successive subdivisions and sales. It is significant through its association with the first owner Sir Denison Miller who was the first Governor of the Commonwealth Bank. The house may be found to be a late work of John Kirkpatrick a prominent architect in Sydney from the 1880s responsible for major commissions such as the Colonial Mutual Life Building, Grandstands at the Sydney Cricket Ground and the Commonwealth Bank Pitt Street Sydney. It may also be established that E.A. Scott was involved in the building's creation. The firm established by E.A. Scott in 1888 still practices today in the name of E.A. and T.M. Scott. The house of a high standard of architectural design. It is well proportioned, has an impressive scale and appearance befitting Sir Denison Miller's prestige and position in public life. The design in the Inter Wars Free Classical style contains anomalous applications of the Italianate style rare in the 1920s. It is the more significant for its rarity being such a late example containing elements of the Italianate style. The building displays high standards of craftsmanship in the brickwork and joinery particularly, as excellent examples of the techniques employed and use of the materials in the 1920s. (McDonald McPhee 1993).’79
The Register of the National Estate provides the following statement of significance for the site:
‘A late example of a Federation Free Classical style residence, heavily dependent on Georgian sources, which retains much of its setting, complete with older stables and perimeter stone walls. Cliffbrook demonstrates the nature of an early twentieth century estate of Sydney's eastern suburbs. There are fine interiors with marble chimney pieces, Adam Revival plaster ceilings, Art Deco leadlights and a maple staircase of Georgian design. The house has historical associations with the family of Sir Denison Miller, first Governor of
79 Cliffbrook, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee. State Heritage Inventory Database No.: 5045282.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 117
the Commonwealth Bank.’80
4.7.2 Revised Statement of Significance
The above statements of significance assume information not confirmed by research (about the architect) and do not consider significance arising out of associations with the AAEC. The following revised statement of significance is provided:
The UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee, has historic and aesthetic significance arising out of the presence of a fine example of a large Interwar Free Classical Style dwelling on a large site with some significant planting. Erected c.1922, Cliffbrook (Building CC1), is a relatively late example of this type of building within the Randwick area and a rare example of a private dwelling in this style in Sydney. The style and craftsmanship of the dwelling reflects the social standing of the man who commissioned it, Sir Dennis Miller, the first Chairman of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia. Building CC3 has significance as an associated outbuilding. Erected c.1922, it is an early example of a garage. The nineteenth century sandstone walls on the boundaries of Beach and Battery Streets have historic and aesthetic significance as remnants of the earlier Cliffbrook mansion estate and for their contribution to the streetscape.
The site has historic significance as the former headquarters of the Australian Atomic Energy Commission (AAEC). Between 1953 and 1981, when the AAEC occupied the site, it played a role in the development of atomic science in Australia. It is noted, however, given its administrative uses, that the site has less significance in this regard than the Lucas Heights Research Establishment, where the primary facilities of the AAEC were located. The buildings erected by the AAEC- Buildings CC2 and CC4- do not have aesthetic or technical significance.
The site has developing significance for its ongoing association with the University of NSW, one of Australia’s leading Universities.
4.8 Grading of Significance
4.8.1 Relative Significance
The various elements of a place may make different contributions to its heritage significance.
The significance of the main elements of the site have been assessed and ranked for the purpose of developing conservation policies and determining priorities.
The different rankings used are as follows:
A Exceptional: elements identified as being of exceptional significance include those which are rare or outstanding in their own right and/or are fundamental to demonstrating the significance of the site. These elements will usually display a high degree of integrity. B High: elements identified as being of high significance represent those elements which provide evidence of a key phase in the history of the site’s development or that of the surrounding area. These elements may not be as distinctive as those classified as being of exceptional significance, yet still strongly embody the heritage values of the place. These elements may display some loss of original fabric, provided that these alterations do not detract substantially from significance.
80 Cliffbrook House, Stables and Stone Walls, No. 45 Beach Street, Coogee. Place ID: 1770.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 118
C Moderate: elements identified as being of moderate significance consist of those elements which are not individually significant, but which when considered within the context of the site as a whole nevertheless have some significance. Such elements generally provide coherence, context and/or links between other significant elements and contribute to the understanding of the evolution of the site. Moderately significant elements may have been altered or modified; they may contribute to the interpretation of the site. D Neutral: neutral elements neither contribute nor detract from the significance of a site. X Intrusive: elements identified as intrusive are those elements which, while they may potentially contribute to a comprehensive understanding of the evolution of the site and how it has been used, have no historical value and/or are located in a manner which is unsympathetic to or detract from the significance of other significant elements.
4.8.2 Site
Element Significance Remarks
Beach Street Stone A Remnant of the original Cliffbrook Estate. Significant Wall element that ‘marks’ the location of the site within the public domain. Battery Street Stone A Remnant of the original Cliffbrook Estate. Significant Wall element from the public domain. Entrance Gates B One of the few physical pieces of fabric on the site that specifically place the AAEC on the site. It appears that there has been an entrance into the site from this point from the mid/late nineteenth century. Driveway loop on A Most likely dates from the construction of Cliffbrook, the eastern side of c.1920s. Cliffbrook Parking area on the D Recent. western side of Cliffbrook
Planting Various Refer to separate Arborist report. The most significant plantings are the two Norfolk Island Pines identified in the arborist report in Appendix 2 as Trees 25 and 26. The third Norfolk Island Pine on the site, Tree 27, is not evident in the 1943 aerial but is a significant planting on the site. As discussed above, the post 1943 landscape elements and plantings are not or significance as individual items but which have significance as a whole for providing Cliffbrook with a landscape setting.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 119
4.8.3 Building CC1: Cliffbrook
Exterior
Roof
Element Significance Remarks
Covering Form: A Form: Hipped roof. Fabric: D Fabric. The existing slate was installed in 1993. It replaced an original finish. The finish is significant; the fabric is not. Chimneys A Louvred dormers A
Gutters/down pipes D Replaced over time (?). B Cast iron downpipes noted by the CP 1993 may be original. Fascia/eaves A Includes fabric and profile.
Walls
Element Significance Remarks
Face brick A The face brick finish is an important characteristic. Stone Detailing A Note: some has been repaired. Porches A and D ‘A’ rank: Relates to form, stonework, ceilings and terrazzo/stone at ground floor level. ‘D’ rank: Modern paving and safety balustrades at first floor level. Front Door (eastern A Note: Hardware replaced. elevation) Multi-Paned DH A One known replacement at ground floor level on the Sash Windows northern side. Louvred Windows A/B In western elevation. Marks the location of the original WC. The lower pane may have originally been glazed with obscure glass. French doors A Includes terrazzo thresholds. Timber shutters A Note: missing shutters to windows on the eastern elevation and northern elevation. Rear Porch A and D A: Original elements. D: Infill materials.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 120
Interior: Ground Floor
Element Significance Remarks
Floors Timber Floors A Assumed to be original, but condition unknown (concealed by carpet). Concrete Floor C In service rooms to rear, now tiled. Original A In G09 and G12. Terrazzo Walls Plaster A Plasterboard C Plasterboard walls are later additions.
Original Tiling A-B In G09. Condition variable. Modern Tiling D Doors Single Panel A Single panel doors are original. Some have been Doors painted and some have had hardware replaced. Timber framed A or D A: Doors in G11 Doors with D: Doors between G01 and G02 leadlight Flush Panel D Not original. doors Four Panel A or D A: Door to G8. Possibly original but painted? Doors D: Other.
Former Back A Between G04 and G05. Door- Ledged and Braced Ceilings and Cornices Decorative A Original. plaster ceilings Deep cove A Original. plaster cornices Battened B Likely to be original. Ceilings Square set A Original. concrete ceilings Plasterboard D Not original. Ceilings and quad cornices Windows Multi-Paned DH A One known replacement on the northern side. Sash Windows Includes white marble sills.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 121
Element Significance Remarks
Louvred A-B In western elevation. Marks the location of the Windows original WC. Lower sash possibly had obscure glass originally. Other Joinery Skirtings A or A: Where original, even if painted. D D: Replacement sections. Window and A or A: Where original, even if painted. Door D: Replacement sections. Architraves Fireplaces Mantelpieces A Brick Interiors A Glazed Tiles ? Not clear if original or later replacement. Other Staircase A and D All elements ‘A’ except the wall mounted handrail (‘D’).
Cupboards B In G04: Original kitchen fireplace converted into a cupboard. Desirable to retain the masonry.
Interior: First Floor
Element Significance Remarks
Floors Timber floors A Assumed to be original, but condition unknown (concealed by carpet). Original A In Room 107 and 107A Terrazzo Parquetry B In Room 106. Later finish. Walls Plaster A Plasterboard D None of the plasterboard walls are this level are original partition walls or define a significant space. Original Tiling A In Room 107A. Condition variable. Modern Tiling D In Room 107. Doors Single Panel A Single panel doors are original. Some have been Doors painted and some have had hardware replaced. Flush Panel D Not original. doors Ceilings and Cornices
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 122
Element Significance Remarks
Decorative A plaster ceilings Deep cove A plaster cornices Battened B Ceilings Plasterboard D Ceilings and quad cornices Windows Multi-Paned DH A Sash Windows Other Joinery Skirtings A or A: Where original, even if painted. D D: Replacement sections. Window and A or A: Where original, even if painted. Door D: Replacement sections, including modified sills in Architraves 106. Fireplaces Mantelpieces C Not original at this level, but appropriate replacements. Brick Interiors A Glazed Tiles ? Not clear if original or later replacement.
Other Cupboards D
4.8.4 Building CC2
Individual elements on this building are not ranked separately for the purposes of this CMP.
This building is ranked ‘B’ in terms of historic significance and ‘D’ in terms of aesthetic or architectural significance.
4.8.5 Building CC3: Former Garage
Exterior
Element Significance Remarks
Stone walls A Surviving elements from the first Cliffbrook. Roof A and D Form: A. Covering: D.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 123
Element Significance Remarks
Doors and D Appear to have been replaced/repaired over time. Windows The large doors in the eastern elevation were installed in 1993.
Interior
Element Significance Remarks
Walls A Exposed, unpainted stone. All other D Upgraded over time. elements
4.5.6 Building CC4
Individual elements on this building are not ranked separately for the purposes of this CMP.
This building is ranked ‘B’ in terms of historic significance and ‘D’ in terms of aesthetic or architectural significance.
5.0 DEVELOPING CONSERVATION POLICIES
5.1 Preamble
Once heritage significance has been determined, management policies can be developed to ensure that the heritage significance of a place is retained whilst ongoing use is facilitated. In considering the drafting of conservation policies, a number of issues must first be taken into consideration.
5.2 Issues Arising from the Requirements of the Owners
This CMP was prepared in conjunction with a development application for works on the Campus. The Campus currently under-utilised. Only part of Building CC4 is occupied (by the UNSW Press); the other buildings are all unoccupied. The University wish to adaptively re-use the Campus to provide teaching and accommodation facilities for students of the Australian Graduate School of Management. As set out in the Architectural Design Statement, prepared by FJMT, for the project:
‘The new Cliffbrook Campus Redevelopment for the University of New South Wales (UNSW) will provide a "state of the art" executive residential retreat with accommodation and teaching facilities for the Australian Graduate School of Management (AGSM) Residential Programs. The facility will also be used by the university for faculty strategy days and conferences…
The Cliffbrook Campus Redevelopment Project will offer the following improvement opportunities:
• A “4-star” conference centre experience, with improved residential accommodation and amenities; • A more contemporary and customised suite of learning spaces; • A unique beachside ‘retreat’ locale;
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 124
• A location for other UNSW faculties, schools and business units to hold small conferences and strategy days; and • An opportunity to revisit the operational model to ensure this is market-competitive.’81
5.3 Issues Arising from Heritage Significance
5.3.1 Requirements for the Retention of Significance
The significance of the site as assessed within this CMP, gives rise to the following requirements: • To recognise and acknowledge the significance of the site. • To maintain an appropriate level of heritage listing. • To conserve, manage and interpret evidence according to relative significance. • To conserve evidence of construction techniques, significant fabric, finishes and fittings, significant technologies and services. • To conserve evidence of past uses and hierarchies within individual buildings and in their relationships to one another. • To provide interpretation for the site in appropriate forms. • To secure the site and meet requirements of statutory authorities without damaging significant fabric, spaces etc. • To determine and manage the curtilage of the site and any future development that might take place within this curtilage or impact upon this curtilage. • To conserve and manage the setting of the site wherever feasible.
Specific examples of how this can be achieved include: • Conserve the principal building form and architectural character of Cliffbrook (Building CC1) and a sufficient curtilage around it. • Conserve the nineteenth century boundary walls. • Preserve significant plantings on the site. • The site has significant links with Randwick’s past and with the Commonwealth’s early involvement with nuclear technology. These links should inform part of an interpretation strategy for the site.
5.3.2 Opportunities Arising Out of Significance
The Campus has a high local profile arising out of the presence of Cliffbrook, its past use by the AAEC and its current use by the UNSW.
Protecting the unique qualities of the place and promoting understanding of its significance can have considerable long-term benefits for the site.
Like many sites that have evolved over a long time, the integrity of parts of the site and of individual buildings has been compromised by later alterations and additions. While each period of works has significance for what it reveals about the evolution of a building and/or the site, areas of low integrity that no longer represent significant
81 FJMT, Cliffbrook Campus Design Development: Architectural Design Statement, April 2017.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 125
periods, and/or which do not provide information of a significant evolution, provide opportunities for sensitive new works and/or adaptation to suit new uses. Work has been carried out to some buildings and areas of the site that has had a negative impact on the understanding of significance. There may thus be opportunities to reinstate understanding of significant aesthetic and spatial qualities.
5.3.3 Constraints Arising Out of Significance
Changes to the Campus must be carefully managed so that those elements of the site that are significant to its history and architectural form are retained, while making allowance for those changes needed to give an acceptable amenity and compliance with regulation for continued use.
The ICOMOS (Australia) Burra Charter provides guidelines for the conservation and management of places of cultural significance. The Charter sets a standard of practice for those who provide advice, make decisions about or undertake works to places of cultural significance. A copy of the Charter is included in Appendix 4 of this CMP. In particular:
• The Burra Charter advocates a cautious approach to change: do as much as is necessary to care for a place and to make it useable, but otherwise change it as little as possible so that its cultural significance is retained. • The Burra Charter advocates respect for all layers of fabric. This requires the in-situ retention of all fabric identified as being of primary significance. • The Burra Charter advocates the reversibility of changes where circumstances permit. • The Burra Charter advocates the sufficiency of evidence to guide change.
To retain the significance of the site, the following should occur: • The requirements for the retention of significance listed above should be implemented. • Statutory provisions should be met without destroying significant fabric. Alternative solutions that are deemed to satisfy the conditions of legislation should be sought where strict compliance would compromise significant fabric/spaces. • The significance of the site should be interpreted. • All proposed work should be carried out in conjunction with a qualified heritage consultant and be subject to a Heritage Impact Statement. • The site should remain listed as a heritage item by the Randwick LEP 2012 and the State Heritage Register or succeeding documents.
5.3.4 Archaeological Considerations
Refer to the archaeological reports in Appendix 2 of this CMP.
5.4 Issues Arising from Statutory Requirements
There is a hierarchy for planning controls in New South Wales. At the pinnacle of the system are Commonwealth and State government acts and regulations, followed by State Environmental Planning Policies (SEPPs). At local government level are Local Environmental Plans (LEPs). All the above are legally binding, or statutory
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 126
documents. Below the LEP, Councils have a range of non-statutory documents, including Development Control Plans, guidelines and codes.
The following outlines some of the legislation that may impact on the management of the heritage values of the site.
Legislation affecting the site includes, but is not restricted to:
5.4.1 Commonwealth and State
5.4.1.1 NSW Heritage Act 1977
The site is listed on the State Heritage Register under the auspices of the NSW Heritage Act 1977. Requirements under the Heritage Act 1977 include:
• The maintenance and security of the significant items in accordance with NSW Heritage Council guidelines. • Approval by the NSW Heritage Council for non-exempt works. • Approval by the Director/Assistant Director of the Heritage Division for exempt works.
5.4.1.2 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act (EP&A Act) and The Building Code of Australia (BCA)
In NSW, the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act (EP&A Act) contains legislation applicable to the development of buildings. The Act applies the Building Code of Australia (BCA).
The Building Code of Australia (BCA) is a uniform set of technical provisions for the design and construction of buildings and other structures throughout Australia. The code, in conjunction with the Standards Association of Australia, governs issues such as the standards of material and construction techniques, access, fire safety and access to light and ventilation etc. The BCA applies to new buildings and new building work only. The EP&A Act does not apply the BCA retrospectively to existing buildings. For an existing building undergoing alterations and additions the new work must comply with the BCA. The BCA may be applied to the whole building, subject to the discretion of the consent authority. It may be possible to gain concessions for future works given the heritage significance of the site.
5.4.1.3 Other
Other legislation or regulations to be considered include: • BASIX. • Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Commonwealth). • Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000 (State). • State Environmental Planning Policies.
5.4.2 Local Government
Randwick Council has a range of building controls that are applicable to the subject site. The most important controls in terms of heritage are:
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 127
5.4.2.1 Randwick LEP 2012
The Randwick LEP 2012 provides the overall guidelines for development within the Council area. The aims of the LEP 2012, include objectives related to heritage, as well as the maintenance and enhancement of amenity, vitality and viability.
The LEP 2012 provides opportunities and constraints with regard to heritage listing.
The left-hand column in the following table sets out two particularly relevant sections from the Randwick LEP 2013: Part 2, which provides zoning controls, and Part 5.10, which provides heritage controls. The right-hand column shows how these sections relate to the site.
Randwick LEP 2012 Relevance to the Site Under Part 2 Permitted or Prohibited Development 2.1 Land Use Zones The Campus is zoned SP2- 2.2 Zoning of Land to Which Plan Applies Educational Establishment and RE2- private recreation. The Study Area is located within the SP2 zoning. 2.3 Zone Objectives and Land Use Table Most of the likely activities foreseeable under use by the Zone SP2 Infrastructure UNSW would be permissible uses 1 Objectives of zone on the site. Where a use is not a permitted, use, an application can • To provide for infrastructure and related be made under Clause 5.10 (10)- uses. see below. • To prevent development that is not
compatible with or that may detract from the provision of infrastructure. The zoning of the surrounding • To facilitate development that will not area must also be taken into adversely affect the amenity of nearby and consideration in any application adjoining development. for new works. The surrounding • To protect and provide for land used for area is generally zoned: community purposes. R2- Low Density Residential (land to the immediate north and south); 2 Permitted without consent R3- Medium Density Residential Recreation areas (land to the west); and
RE1- Public Recreation (along the 3 Permitted with consent foreshore).
Environmental protection works; Flood mitigation works; Roads; The purpose shown on the Land Zoning Map, including any development that is ordinarily incidental or ancillary to development for that purpose
4 Prohibited Any development not specified in item 2 or 3.
2.4 and 2.5 Not applicable to this site
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 128
Randwick LEP 2012 Relevance to the Site 2.6 Subdivision Subdivision of the site within the (1) Land to which this Plan applies may be curtilage of the state and local subdivided, but only with development heritage listings is unlikely to be consent. permitted. Subdivision of the (2) Development consent must not be granted remainder of the site would be for the subdivision of land on which a difficult because of the terrain and secondary dwelling is situated if the access. subdivision would result in the principal dwelling and the secondary dwelling being situated on separate lots, unless the resulting lots are not less than the minimum size shown on the Lot Size Map in relation to that land.
2.7 Demolition Requires Consent Demolition of structures on a The demolition of a building or work may be heritage site have additional carried out only with development consent. criteria that must be satisfied. These are set out in the Randwick DCP 2012. 2.8 Temporary Use of Land This section is not likely to be applicable to this site.
Under Part 5.10 Heritage Conservation (1) Objectives The principal building form of The objectives of this clause are as follows: Cliffbrook (Building CC1) and (a) to conserve the environmental heritage Building CC3 should be retained. of Randwick; New uses and new works on the (b) to conserve the heritage significance of site must respect the significance heritage items and heritage of the site and its fabric. conservation areas, including Knowledge of the site’s history associated fabric, settings and views, and significance should be (c) to conserve archaeological sites, interpreted and, at the very least, (d) to conserve Aboriginal objects and not obscured. Aboriginal places of heritage All new works and new uses must significance. also respect the site’s proximity to other heritage items.
(2) Requirement for consent The approval authority for the site is Randwick Council and the Development consent is required for any Heritage Council (unless a State of the following: Significant development is proposed). (a) demolishing or moving any of the following or altering the exterior of any of Many works to the site will the following (including, in the case of a require development approval. If building, making changes to its detail, in doubt, professional advice fabric, finish or appearance): should be sought. (i) a heritage item, (ii) an Aboriginal object, A heritage consultant should be (iii) a building, work, relic or tree within a engaged at the outset of a project. heritage conservation area, The type of supporting document (b) altering a heritage item that is a building by that should be submitted as part making structural changes to its interior or of an application will depend on by making changes to anything inside the the nature of the proposed works. item that is specified in Schedule 5 in Major works may require the relation to the item, preparation of a Conservation
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 129
Randwick LEP 2012 Relevance to the Site (c) disturbing or excavating an archaeological Management Plan. Minor works site while knowing, or having reasonable should be accompanied by a cause to suspect, that the disturbance or Heritage Impact Statement. excavation will or is likely to result in a relic being discovered, exposed, moved, Major works may require an damaged or destroyed, archaeological assessment. If (d) disturbing or excavating an Aboriginal relics are uncovered on the site at place of heritage significance, any time, work should stop and (e) erecting a building on land: advice should be sort. Refer to the (i) on which a heritage item is located or reports in Appendix 2 of this that is within a heritage conservation CMP. area, or (ii) on which an Aboriginal object is located The site adjoins a heritage item or that is within an Aboriginal place of listed by the LEP 2012 and lies in heritage significance, the vicinity of others. The impact (f) subdividing land: of proposals on these items must (i) on which a heritage item is located or that is also be assessed as part of the within a heritage conservation area, or assessment process. (ii) on which an Aboriginal object is located or that is within an Aboriginal place of heritage significance.
(3) When consent not required
However, development consent under this clause is not required if:
(a) the applicant has notified the consent authority of the proposed development and the consent authority has advised the applicant in writing before any work is carried out that it is satisfied that the proposed development: (i) is of a minor nature or is for the maintenance of the heritage item, Aboriginal object, Aboriginal place of heritage significance or archaeological site or a building, work, relic, tree or place within the heritage conservation area, and (ii) would not adversely affect the heritage significance of the heritage item, Aboriginal object, Aboriginal place, archaeological site or heritage conservation area, or (b) the development is in a cemetery or burial ground and the proposed development: (i) is the creation of a new grave or monument, or excavation or disturbance of land for the purpose of conserving or repairing monuments or grave markers, and (ii) would not cause disturbance to human remains, relics, Aboriginal objects in the form of grave goods, or to an Aboriginal place of heritage significance, or (c) the development is limited to the removal of a tree or other vegetation that the Council is satisfied is a risk to human life or property, or (d) the development is exempt development.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 130
Randwick LEP 2012 Relevance to the Site
(4) Effect of proposed development on heritage significance
The consent authority must, before granting consent under this clause in respect of a heritage item or heritage conservation area, consider the effect of the proposed development on the heritage significance of the item or area concerned. This sub clause applies regardless of whether a heritage management document is prepared under sub clause (5) or a heritage conservation management plan is submitted under sub clause (6).
(5) Heritage assessment
The consent authority may, before granting consent to any development: (a) on land on which a heritage item is located, or (b) on land that is within a heritage conservation area, or (c) on land that is within the vicinity of land referred to in paragraph (a) or (b), require a heritage management document to be prepared that assesses the extent to which the carrying out of the proposed development would affect the heritage significance of the heritage item or heritage conservation area concerned.
(6) Heritage conservation management plans
The consent authority may require, after considering the heritage significance of a heritage item and the extent of change proposed to it, the submission of a heritage conservation management plan before granting consent under this clause.
(7) Archaeological sites
The consent authority must, before granting consent under this clause to the carrying out of development on an archaeological site (other than land listed on the State Heritage Register or to which an interim heritage order under the Heritage Act 1977 applies):
(a) notify the Heritage Council of its intention to grant consent, and (b) take into consideration any response received from the Heritage Council within 28 days after the notice is sent.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 131
Randwick LEP 2012 Relevance to the Site
(8) Aboriginal places of heritage significance
The consent authority must, before granting consent under this clause to the carrying out of development in an Aboriginal place of heritage significance:
(a) consider the effect of the proposed development on the heritage significance of the place and any Aboriginal object known or reasonably likely to be located at the place by means of an adequate investigation and assessment (which may involve consideration of a heritage impact statement), and (b) notify the local Aboriginal communities, in writing or in such other manner as may be appropriate, about the application and take into consideration any response received within 28 days after the notice is sent.
(9) Demolition of nominated State heritage items…. (10) Conservation incentives This clause allows a high degree of The consent authority may grant consent to flexibility in use. Heritage advice development for any purpose of a building that is should be sought at the outset. a heritage item or of the land on which such a building is erected, or for any purpose on an Aboriginal place of heritage significance, even though development for that purpose would otherwise not be allowed by this Plan, if the consent authority is satisfied that: (a) the conservation of the heritage item or Aboriginal place of heritage significance is facilitated by the granting of consent, and (b) the proposed development is in accordance with a heritage management document that has been approved by the consent authority, and (c) the consent to the proposed development would require that all necessary conservation work identified in the heritage management document is carried out, and (d) the proposed development would not adversely affect the heritage significance of the heritage item, including its setting, or the heritage significance of the Aboriginal place of heritage significance, and (e) the proposed development would not have any significant adverse effect on the amenity of the surrounding area
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 132
5.4.2.2 Development Control Plans Development Control Plans help interpret the intent of local environmental plans by providing detailed objectives and controls. There are no site-specific development controls plans (DCP) for this site. The principal DCP for the site is the Randwick LEP 2012. Part B2 Heritage contains specific controls for heritage items. Within this part, Section 1.7 relates to State Heritage Items; Section 1.8 sets out Consent Requirements; Section 1.9 deals with demolition; Section 1.10 provides controls for infill buildings and Section 1.11 considers adaptive re-use. Section 2.0 provides general controls for all items, for example, design and character, fences, gardens etc. Section 3.0 considers landscape elements.
5.5 Issues Arising from Non-Statutory Regulations
5.5.1 The Burra Charter The principles of the Australian ICOMOS Burra Charter should be applied to the site (see above). The Burra Charter provides guidance for the conservation and management of places of cultural significance. The Charter was adopted considering the protocols established by the International Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments and Sites (Venice 1964) and the Resolutions of the Fifth General Assembly of the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) (Moscow 1978). The Burra Charter was adopted by Australia ICOMOS (the Australian National Committee of ICOMOS) on 19 August, 1979 at Burra, South Australia. The Charter has since been revised, most recently in 2013. A series of practice notes have been prepared to help interpret the Charter. A copy of the Charter can be found in Appendix 4 of this CMP.
5.5.2 The National Trust of Australia (NSW)
The site is listed by the National Trust of Australia (NSW).
The National Trust (NSW) lists those buildings, sites, items and areas which ‘are components of the natural or cultural environment of Australia, that have aesthetic, historical, architectural, archaeological, scientific or social significance, or other special value for future generations, as well as for the present community.’ While inclusion on the Register has no statutory power, it is widely recognised as an authoritative statement on the significance of a place. The Trust may take whatever action it deems necessary to protect a listed property, chiefly, targeted advocacy to raise Council and public awareness of issues.
5.6 Issues Arising from the Physical Condition of the Site
5.6.1 Opportunities Arising from Physical Condition
The site and the buildings upon it appear to be in good repair and the grounds are well maintained. Major works were last carried out in 1993.
5.6.2 Constraints Arising from Physical Condition
Elements/areas identified as Rank A or B in Section 4.8 are relatively intact and of high significance. This means that particularly careful consideration must be given to the impact of proposed new works on these elements/areas.
The insertion of new services, such as air conditioning and cabling, into significant buildings should take into consideration the relative integrity of spaces and fabric.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 133
Any changes to the internal loading should be made subject to the advice of a structural engineer with experience in heritage buildings.
5.7 Issues Arising from Curtilage
5.7.1 Curtilage Defined
When a heritage item or place is being considered for management purposes, a decision must be made about the extent of land around it that could be considered to contain its heritage significance. This boundary is often referred to as the curtilage of a site.
Curtilage is a difficult concept that is subject to many interpretations. Curtilage takes into consideration tangible and intangible historic relationships and aesthetic relationships defined by vistas and visual corridors. In other words, curtilage moderates between a site and its setting. Curtilage may be comprised of more or less than the legal or physical boundary of a site:
‘At times there is a clear distinction between the place and its setting – only rarely is a culturally significant place self-contained within definite boundaries, without some visible link to the world around it. If the cultural significance of a place relates to its visual attributes – such as form, scale, colour, texture and materials – its setting is of special importance.’82
For the purposes of this CMP, the following definition, provided by the NSW Heritage Division, has been adopted.
Curtilage is:
‘… the area of land (including land covered by water) surrounding an item or area of heritage significance which is essential for retaining and interpreting its heritage significance. This can apply to either: Land which is integral to the heritage significance of the items or the built heritage; or A Precinct which includes buildings, works, relics, trees or places and their setting.’83
5.7.2 Different Types of Curtilages
The NSW Heritage Division has identified a number of types of curtilage:
• Lot boundary curtilage: the most common type of curtilage, comprising the boundary of the property containing the heritage item. • Reduced lot boundary curtilage: less than the lot boundary of a site. • Expanded heritage curtilage: greater than the lot boundary of a site.84
82 Commentary for Article 8 of the Burra Charter in Marquis-Kyle, Peter and Walker, Meredith, The Illustrated Burra Charter, QLD, Australia ICOMOS Inc., 1992, p.38. 83 New South Wales Heritage Office and Department of Urban Affairs and Planning, Heritage Curtilages, NSW, NSW Heritage Office and Department of Urban Affairs and Planning, 1996, p.3. 84 New South Wales Heritage Office and Department of Urban Affairs and Planning, Heritage Curtilages, op.cit., 1996, pp.5-7.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 134
5.7.3 Existing Curtilage Definitions for the Site
The State Heritage Register listing and the listing under the Randwick LEP 2012 provide for a reduced lot boundary curtilage that encompasses all of one lot and part of a second lot. This is the Study Area of this CMP.
5.7.4 Recommendation The State Heritage Register and Randwick LEP 2012 curtilages are appropriate for the site. Within the site, a curtilage of at least 4-5m should be retained around Cliffbrook.
6.0 CONSERVATION POLICIES
6.1 Preamble The purpose of this section is to provide a guide for actions relating to the conservation and management of the site on a day-to-day basis and in the long term, so that heritage significance is retained and enhanced and not diminished. The following conservation policies make reference to the assessment and statement of significance contained in this CMP.
Good decision-making relies on a clear understanding of the values embodied in a place and associated meanings. Good outcomes follow from the application of best practice heritage management principles and procedures.
To be successful, heritage management should be an integrated activity. A number of the actions outlined below are thus applicable under more than one policy and may thus be repeated. The conservation policies of this CMP identify an ideal heritage outcome. In implementing these policies, it should be recognised that other constraints, for example, essential safety requirements, may take precedence and therefore constrain full policy implementation. Definitions: • Should in the context of this CMP implies mandatory requirement for compliance. • May in the context of this CMP implies a suggestion of optimal compliance.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 135
6.2 Policy Outline
The following outlines the conservation principles and polices for the site. Each is expanded upon in greater detail in Section 6.3 below.
6.2.1 Protocols with Regard to This Conservation Management Plan
Principles Policy Key Requirements
A Recognise and retain Retain identified heritage values • This CMP should be heritage values. and avoid adverse heritage formally adopted as an impacts. essential tool for the management of the site. • The guidelines of this CMP should be followed in day-to-day management and in planning for the future. B Maintain statutory listing. The site should continue to be listed • Be aware of current as a heritage item on the State statutory listings and the Heritage Register and by the implications that arise Randwick LEP 2012 and succeeding out of it. documents. C Provide responsible site Ensure there is an effective system • Obtain a common management. of management for heritage matters. commitment to this CMP Acknowledged points of from all key agencies responsibility for the care of the site responsible for the site. should be devised. • Provide effective management. • Identify responsibility and communicate between agencies.
D Make use of professional Advice should be sought from • Seek the appropriate advice. experienced professionals for all level of professional works aside from routine advice. maintenance.
E Review this CMP on a Review this CMP at five year • Maintain the relevance of timely basis. intervals or at such times as this CMP through timely deemed necessary by events, such review. as major changes in use, ownership or circumstances.
6.2.2 Ongoing Actions to Physically Protect the Site
Principles Policy Key Requirements
F Provide for an An ongoing, viable, use for the site • Support the current use appropriate and viable should be facilitated. by the UNSW as an use for the site and for appropriate use. significant buildings • Other uses can be and spaces. supported so long as the use does not require
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 136
Principles Policy Key Requirements changes to the overall fabric that would obscure heritage significance of significant buildings (Buildings CC1 and CC3) or significant landscape elements of the site ,the most important being the boundary walls, the driveway loop on the eastern side of Cliffbrook and the three Norfolk Island Pines). G Retain and enhance Retain and enhance the heritage • Understand the significant buildings values of identified significant significance of buildings and spaces. buildings. and protect/enhance that Retain and enhance the heritage significance. values of identified significant landscape elements including planting and structures such as walls and individual trees.
H Retain and enhance Ensure identified significant vistas • Carefully determine the significant vistas. are protected. location and envelope of any new building works.
I Maintain safety The site should satisfy all current • Fire safety should be part measures, fire protection fire safety, DDA and building of an ongoing and compliance with regulation requirements. programme to protect the building regulations. Alternative Solutions or occupants and the concessions providing alternative building and to meet means of achieving the desired building regulation safety requirements should be requirements. sought, particularly where those • Seek guidance when concessions can minimize impact upgrades are required. on significant fabric and elements.
J Continue to carry out All significant elements should be • Use maintenance as a maintenance and repair. actively maintained and conserved form of asset as part of site management. management. Maintenance should be carried out • Carry out cyclic in a timely manner. Where maintenance. possible, repair existing fabric • Follow best practice rather than replace. principles. Repairs should be based on • Document all works as appropriate knowledge. part of ongoing records. Conjecture, guesswork or prejudicial estimation is not acceptable. Provide security. Continue to provide security for • Monitor security levels the site. and methods. Identify any new threats to security • Utilise good site as they may arise. maintenance as a form of Security should take into account security. impact on heritage significance and
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 137
Principles Policy Key Requirements fabric of significance, and should include the exclusion of vermin and birds.
L Maintain the setting The significant aspects of the • Where change is planned setting of the site should be carefully determine the maintained. impact of such changes on the significant aspects of the setting. • Be aware of proposed change in the surrounding area. • Prepare a submission should the change be seen as having an impact on the significance of the site.
6.2.3 Procedures When Dealing with Changes to the Site
Principles Policy Key Requirements
M The level of significance The level of significance should • Be guided by relative of the buildings and guide the degree of change. significance. their individual Changes may be made, provided • The fabric assessment components, should be their impact is assessed as contained in this CMP is used to guide the level acceptable and that all changes are general. Carry out of change that can carefully recorded. detailed assessments of occur. Proposed adaptations and new significance if required Proposed changes should uses that would introduce for affected areas prior to be accompanied by irreversible modifications to new works. detailed assessments of significant elements and have an • Seek the advice of a component parts. adverse impact on significance are heritage consultant to be avoided where possible. before removing significant built fabric and landscape components. • Consider the impact of new works. • Undertake reconstruction were appropriate. N The retention and New work to significant elements • Seek professional advice conservation of should respect the heritage values of and carry out detailed significance should be at these places. assessments. the forefront of planning • Commission a HIS to for new work to site. accompany new works. Procedures associate • Obtain the appropriate with new work should approvals. facilitate the retention and conservation of significance.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 138
Principles Policy Key Requirements
O New works on the site New works should be designed to • New work should be should avoid having an complement the existing significant based on a plan that adverse impact on buildings. considers the whole site significance. New works should enhance or, at area. the very least, not diminish or mask significance.
P New landscaping should Opportunities for new landscaping • Landscaping should be respect the significance on this site are limited. carried out and and setting of existing maintained so as not to buildings and spaces. damage significant fabric.
Q Resist the introduction of Elements considered obtrusive • Assess and list intrusive, intrusive elements and should first be assessed to determine non-significant, items. remove existing intrusive heritage significance and, if found to • Determine ways to elements. have no heritage value, removed or remove them or mitigate modified so as to eliminate or their impact. reduce their detrimental impact on significance. Fabric/elements that are part of the history of the site, but which no longer perform their intended function, should not automatically be regarded as intrusive elements.
R Introduce services in a New services should be introduced • Where new services are sensitive manner. in a sensitive manner. introduced adjacent to Evidence of redundant significant significant fabric, seek services should be retained where the advice of a heritage they contribute to the narrative of consultant. the place. • Remove redundant services that do not contribute to heritage significance at the time of decommissioning.
S Consider potential Archaeological impact should be • Seek advice from an archaeological considered in future proposals. archaeologist where significance. significant works are proposed. • If remains are unexpectedly discovered during works, all work should stop immediately and archaeological advice sought. • Refer to the reports in Appendix 2 of this CMP.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 139
Principles Policy Key Requirements T It is important that New owner(s) or occupier(s) should heritage significance be be made aware of the significance of considered, should a the site at the outset. change in ownership, New uses should only be considered occupation or use be if they are compatible with the proposed. retention and/or recovery of the identified character and significance of the site, significant buildings and spaces. At the very least, they should not be detrimental to significance. U Prepare and implement All means should be taken to An interpretation interpretation strategies ensure that knowledge about the strategy should be site and its heritage significance devised and remains within the general implemented. knowledge of the people of Randwick. Interpretation should represent significant aspects of the site’s history and include both tangible and intangible elements. Interpretation should be reflected in the physical presentation of the site (and in new works) as well as through the installation of specific interpretative devices. V Encourage research. Research directed at increasing the Encourage further knowledge and understanding of research into the history the site and its environment should of the site. be encouraged and supported.
W Record and archive any Existing buildings on the site that • Any buildings to be works to the site. are considered of lower demolished should be significance have contributed to the archivially recorded to narrative of the site over time. Heritage Division New work should be recorded in a standards manner that reflects the extent of • Keep proper records. work and the significance of the element/area involved. A comprehensive copy of all relevant archival material and all records of new work should be assembled for reference use and stored on site. X Protect moveable Identify and retain moveable • Maintain use of heritage. heritage. moveable heritage where possible and where damage will not occur. Where there is potential for the moveable item to be damaged appropriate storage should be considered.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 140
6.2.4 Protocols with Regard to Sustainability
Principles Policy Key Requirements
Y Encourage sustainability Significant element should be • Store, reuse and recycle retained. wherever possible. Early building materials that • Record your actions to cannot be retained in their current maintain the integrity of location should be used elsewhere the fabric record. on site, where possible, stored for future reinstatement or, offered for salvage.
6.3 Policy Implementation
6.3.1 Preamble
The effectiveness of a CMP depends on how it is implemented. The following provides a series of simple actions to achieve each of the conservation principles outlined above and identifies who is primarily responsible for carrying out that action. Conservation activities should be pursued as part of day-to-day activities. This section thus deals with the immediate issues affecting the site. It also addresses the long-term implications of the conservation, maintenance and management of heritage significance. Under Responsibility, terms for those with involvement in maintaining the heritage significance of the site are defined as follows.
Term Definition
Owner(s) Legal owner(s) of the site. Users of the site Those living, working in or visiting the site. Architect The person responsible for designing a programme of works, e.g., an architect for alterations to the dwelling or landscape. Heritage Consultant A person qualified to deal with the technical aspects of heritage significance and conservation issues pertaining to the site and its buildings. Maintenance and Persons charged with the repair and maintenance of the tradespeople fabric of the site. Stakeholders Owners, users of the site and those in the wider community with an interest in the significance of the site.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 141
6.3.2 Protocols with Regard to this Conservation Management Plan
6.3.2.1 Principle and Policy A
PRINCIPLE A
Recognise and retain heritage values.
The assessment of significance contained in this CMP provides the basis for the future management of the site and its setting. It recognises the history of a site where significance lies partially in built elements, and their relationships with each other, but also in use, association and meaning.
POLICY A
Retain identified heritage values and avoid adverse heritage impacts.
Adopt a Holistic Approach The site should be conserved, managed and operated holistically.
Action(s) Responsibility A1 The owner(s) of the site should formally adopt Owner(s) and users. this CMP as an essential element in the future management of the site and commit to the principles and policies contained within it. A2 Conservation should respond to the significance All. of the site. A3 Conservation should be inclusive. Significant Owners and users. changes should be made in consultation with all stakeholders. A4 Conservation should recognise the relative All. contribution of all phases of the site’s history and have regard to relative significance as determined in Section 4.8 of this CMP. A5 Conservation should operate within best practice All. principles. This is further explained below.
Adopt Best Practice Principles The Australian ICOMOS Charter for Places of Cultural Significance (Burra Charter) sets out practice principles for the management of heritage sites (see Appendix 4). The NSW Heritage Division (previously the NSW Heritage Office) has interpreted the Burra Charter and provided a multi-faceted guide for the management of heritage sites. This guide, the NSW Heritage Manual, and a wide range of other publications to assist with heritage sites, is available through the NSW Heritage Branch website (www.heritage.nsw.gov.au).
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 142
Action(s) Responsibility A6 Ask questions. When in doubt as to the impact of Owner(s), users, an action, contact a heritage consultant. architect and maintenance and tradespeople. A7 For all works, excluding basic maintenance, Owner(s), users and engage a heritage consultant at the outset. This is architect. outlined further under Principle D: Make Use of Conservation Advice. A8 Use all the available documentation and physical Owner(s), users, evidence as a guide prior to planning or architect, heritage undertaking any work. consultant, maintenance and tradespeople. A9 Undertake all work on the basis of known Owner(s), users, evidence. Conjecture, guesswork and prejudicial architect, heritage estimation are not acceptable. consultant and maintenance and tradespeople. A10 Create records. Record your actions to create a Owner(s), users, clear record of what has taken place on the site. architect, heritage This is further outlined under Principle W. consultant and maintenance and tradespeople.
6.3.2.2 Principle and Policy B
PRINCIPLE B
Maintain statutory listing.
The protection afforded by statutory listing is important for the long-term conservation of the site. Statutory listing: • Ensures appropriate statutory control over maintenance, conservation and new works. • Publicly recognise the significance of the site. The current listing of the site by the State Heritage Register and the Randwick LEP 2012 recognises the site’s significance to the local area and to the state.
POLICY B
The site should continue to be listed as a heritage item on the State Heritage Register and the Randwick LEP 2012 and succeeding documents.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 143
Be Aware of Current Statutory Listings and Any Proposed Changes Statutory listing conserves significance by affecting the management of change to a site.
Action(s) Responsibility B1 Continue to support listing of the site on the Owner(s) and heritage State Heritage Register and the local LEP. consultant. Provide historical information to the Heritage Council and Randwick Council if requested. B2 Be aware if planning is underway for updates Owner(s) and heritage to the State Heritage Register and LEP. consultant. Determine if there are any proposed listing changes and seek advice from a heritage consultant if necessary. Council should inform the owners of any such developments.
Understand the Implications of Statutory Listing It is important that the implications of heritage listings are understood and that the proper consents are obtain should work be undertaken.
Action(s) Responsibility
B3 The appropriate approval for new works Owner(s), users, architect should be obtained. Check with the consent and heritage consultant. authority to determine if your proposed actions do or do not require assessment by means of a Development Application. The local consent authority is the Randwick City Council. Most works will also require approval from the NSW Heritage Council. The type of proposed works determines the type of application required. The most common applications to the NSW Heritage Council are Section 57(2) applications for minor works and Section 60 applications for major works. B4 For new works, refer to relevant Council Owner(s), architect and planning provisions and policies for heritage heritage consultant. items; to the NSW Heritage Council guidelines; and to this CMP.
6.3.2.3 Principle and Policy C
PRINCIPLE C
Provide responsible site management.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 144
Co-ordinated and effective communication, combined with the appropriate allocation of resources, is essential to effective management.
POLICY C
Ensure there is an effective system of management for heritage matters. Acknowledged points of responsibility for the care of the site should be devised.
Obtain a Common Commitment This CMP will be most effective if there is a common commitment by key personnel to its implementation.
Actions Responsibility C1 Obtain a common commitment to this CMP Owner(s). from all key agencies involved in the site. These include: • The Owner(s). • Occupiers of the site (where not owners) • Randwick Council or its successor. C2 Recommend to Randwick Council that Owner(s) Council’s Heritage Inventory Sheet be updated to acknowledge and incorporate relevant information from this CMP.
Provide Effective Management
Management must be inclusive and multi-faceted.
Actions Responsibility
C2 Ensure that the management of the site is Owner(s) and users. capable of the following:
• Achieving recognition of the aims of this CMP.
• Enhancing and developing the cultural significance of the site. • Promoting the efficient execution of policies set out in this CMP. • Providing and managing levels of authority to protect the Item. • Devising, implementing and supervising conservation activity. • Being flexible enough to provide for day- to-day contingencies while providing a high standard of conservation management. • Representing the major stakeholders.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 145
C3 Provide the site/facilities manager with a Owner(s). copy of this CMP and ensure that they understand it.
Identify Responsibility and Communicate Management should evolve a clear identification of those responsible for conservation works on the site. Communication is vital.
Action(s) Responsibility C5 Make decisions in the context of the use of Owner(s) and users. the site and its significance. Major decisions should take place in consultation with heritage advice and stakeholders (where appropriate). It is advisable to inform significant community interest groups (e.g. the National Trust and the local historical society) of proposed major changes. Even though the National Trust and local historical society have no statutory authority over the site, their opinions are often sought and considered as part of the decision-making process. C6 Communicate with the occupants of the site. Owner(s). Provide a general understanding of the significance of the site and its fabric and the general conservation procedures that apply. C7 Provide a copy of this CMP to: Owner(s). - Site management. - Randwick Council. - UNSW Archives. - NSW Heritage Council. C8 Ensure that appropriate works, procedures Owner(s). and policies are prepared having regard to the policies of this CMP.
6.3.2.4 Principle and Policy D
PRINCIPLE D
Make use of professional advice.
This CMP is a guide for the future care, maintenance and adaptation of the site. The assistance of a qualified heritage consultant should be sought in order to assist in the management, interpretation and implementation of this CMP.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 146
POLICY D
Advice should be sought from experienced professionals for all works aside from routine maintenance.
Seek the Appropriate Level of Professional Advice Major and minor works will require different levels of advice and consents.
Action(s) Responsibility D1 Major decisions involving new works or a Owner(s) and architect. change in use should be made in consultation with a qualified heritage consultant. The most effective advice is obtained if the heritage consultant is engaged at the beginning of the planning process. D2 Minor works should be undertaken with Owner(s), architect and advice from a heritage consultant to avoid maintenance and incremental damage to fabric and tradespeople. significance. Incremental damage occurs when a series of small changes have a much more pronounced cumulative effect. D3 Part of the role of the heritage consultant will Heritage consultant. be the preparation of a Heritage Impact Statement outlining the impacts on the significance of the Item of any proposed works. D5 Ascertain whether an application to the Owner(s), architect and relevant consent authority is or is not heritage consultant. required for proposed works.
6.3.2.5 Principle and Policy E
PRINCIPLE E
Review this CMP on a timely basis.
This CMP should be regarded as an evolving document. Changes in use, major proposed new works, funding and/or ownership (etc.) necessitate a re-evaluation of conservation requirements. Further research may also bring to light important information that necessitates a review of policies. Reviews at regular intervals will ensure that this CMP retains its relevancy.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 147
POLICY E
Review this CMP at five yearly intervals or at such times as deemed necessary by events, such as major changes in use, ownership or circumstances.
Maintain the Relevance of the CMP The CMP will be most effective if it remains a relevant document.
Action(s) Responsibility E1 Engage a heritage consultant to review this Owner(s). CMP every five years. E2 Record any changes or works (see under Owner(s) and heritage Principle W) during the period between consultant. reviews so that they can be easily incorporated during the review process. E3 Re-endorse the CMP after each review. Owner(s).
6.3.2.6 Ongoing Actions to Physically Protect the Site
Principle and Policy F
PRINCIPLE F
Provide for an appropriate and viable use for the site.
An appropriate use is one that is compatible with the heritage values of the place and that generates funding for its continued maintenance, repair and operation. A viable use for a place is important as it provides for the ongoing protection of the place.
POLICY F
An ongoing, viable, use for the site should be facilitated.
The use of significant spaces should be consistent with their level of relative significance and their assessed heritage values.
Support the use of the site by the UNSW as an appropriate use The continued use of the site by UNSW for education is an appropriate use. Uses ancillary to education should be facilitated as an appropriate use for the site. The central significance of the site lies in the heritage values of Cliffbrook (Building CC1) and its associated garage (Building CC3) and in the boundary walls and mature plantings.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 148
Action(s) Responsibility F1 The use of the site by UNSW is supported so Owner(s), Council, long as the use does not require changes to architect and heritage the fabric of the significant buildings or their consultant. setting that would have an unacceptable impact on the heritage significance of the buildings and spaces.
6.3.2.7 Principle and Policy G
PRINCIPLE G
Retain and enhance significant elements and spaces.
POLICY G
Retain and enhance the heritage values of significant elements and spaces.
Retaining Significance
Action(s) Responsibility
G1 The principal form, scale and fabric of the Owner(s), architect and following site elements should be retained: heritage consultant. • Cliffbrook (Building CC1). • Building CC3 • Sandstone boundary walls. Work that may have a detrimental impact on understanding the form or scale of principal elevations of significant buildings is unacceptable. Work that may have a detrimental impact on understanding the form or scale of significant rooms in those buildings is unacceptable. It may be possible to demolish the following site elements: • Building CC2 • Building CC4
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 149
G2 Conservation of significant elements/spaces Owner(s), architect and should be undertaken with regard to their level heritage consultant. of significance: - Elements and spaces of exceptional and high significance are to be retained. - Elements and spaces of moderate significance are to be substantially retained. - Elements and spaces that are neutral may be removed or altered. - Elements and spaces that are intrusive are encouraged to be altered.
Landscaping The Study Area has a number of significant landscape elements including the sandstone walls, the circular driveway and three Norfolk Island Pines. These particular components form part of an overall landscape setting that contributes to the significance of Cliffbrook. The original significant components should be retained. Where possible, plantings and landscape elements that contribute to the setting of Cliffbrook should be retained. Where it is not possible to retain these plantings and landscape elements, their removal should be compensated with additional landscaping, in particular planting that will enhance the setting of Cliffbrook.
Action(s) Responsibility
G1 Ensure that the stone walls, driveway look and Owner(s), architect and three Norfolk Island Pine trees are retained and heritage consultant. maintained. Retain other mature planting where possible. Where trees/vegetation must be removed, relocated where possible and supplement with new planting to maintain an overall landscaping setting for Cliffbrook. Ensure new landscaping does not adversely impact upon significance.
6.3.2.8 Principle and Policy G
PRINCIPLE H
Retain and enhance identified significant vistas.
The way in which the site visually interacts with the surrounding area helps define it within the wider cultural landscape. Additionally, significant buildings or elements within the site may have visual relationships with each other that help explain their
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 150
significance. Significant vistas into and out of the site, and within the site, are identified in Section 4.3 of this CMP.
POLICY H
Ensure identified significant vistas are protected.
Protect and Enhance Significant Vistas
Action(s) Responsibility
H1 Ensure the vistas into the site identified in Owner(s), architect and Section 4.3 of this CMP are retained. This heritage consultant. does not exclude the possibility of change, but means that changes must be carefully assessed and managed.
H2 Carefully determine the location of new Owner(s), architect and buildings/structures, their envelope and heritage consultant. massing and scale, to protect and enhance vistas.
H3 Carefully consider the location and type of Owner(s), architect and new plantings and other landscaping heritage consultant. works, including fencing.
6.3.2.9 Principle and Policy I
PRINCIPLE I
Maintain safety measures, fire protection and compliance with building regulations.
It is important to ensure that the site can be accessed and used whilst maintaining the safety of its occupants and visitors to the site.
POLICY I
The site should satisfy all current fire safety and building regulation requirements.
New solutions or concessions providing alternative means of achieving the desired effect of the standard or regulation may have to be sought should mandated requirements negatively impact on significance.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 151
Actions to Undertake Immediately
Action(s) Responsibility I1 Ascertain if current fire installations require Owner(s) and architect. certification inspection by suitably qualified professionals and carry out if required. I2 All fire detection and security systems should Owner(s) and user. be monitored and tested on a regular basis
Actions for Future Fire Upgrades
Action(s) Responsibility
I3 Where fire services require upgrading, Owner(s), user, architect engage the services of a competent fire and heritage consultant. engineer, in conjunction with a heritage consultant with experience in fire services, to provide a fire engineered or alternative solution. This approach recognises that heritage buildings rarely strictly comply with the BCA. Alternative solutions provide a holistic set of measures that can be taken to give the building the required level of safety. The Fire Access and Services Advisory Panel (FSAP) of the NSW Heritage Council can also provide expert advice. I4 Ensure that all new works meet the Owner, user, architect performance requirements and provisions of and heritage consultant. the BCA. Special consideration should be given to those parts of the building that cannot comply and their interaction with new parts of the building.
Carry out Fire Hazard Reduction
Fire Hazard Reduction I5 Avoid the storage of any unnecessary Owner(s), user, combustible materials within or immediately tradesmen and adjacent to buildings. maintenance people.
6.3.2.10 Principle and Policy J
PRINCIPLE J
Continue to carry out maintenance and repair.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 152
Maintenance of significant fabric is important if the site is to retain its level of significance and integrity. A heritage site should be cared for using a planned maintenance and repair programme based on knowledge of the buildings and their fabric, regular inspections and prompt and preventative actions. As defined by the Burra Charter, maintenance means ‘the continuous protective care of the fabric, contents and setting of a place, and is to be distinguished from repair…’ 85 Maintenance is the most effective way to maintain the value of an asset. Regular expenditure on timely maintenance is more effective and beneficial than large injections of funds at irregular intervals. Landscapes (gardens and grounds) may require maintenance much more frequently than buildings. They also contain trees and other plants that are continually changing.
POLICY J All significant elements should be actively maintained and conserved as part of general site management. Maintenance should be carried out in a timely manner. Repair original fabric where possible, rather than replace.
Repairs should be based on appropriate knowledge. Conjecture, guesswork or prejudicial estimation is not acceptable.
Use Maintenance as a Form of Asset Management
Action(s) Responsibility J1 Section 4.8: Grading of Significance should be Owner(s), user, architect used a guide for all works. and heritage consultant. J2 Conserve significant site elements by the Owner(s) and user. regular monitoring of condition. A program of regular inspections and cyclical maintenance should be established. J3 Establish a maintenance allowance in Owner(s) and user. recurring budgets to adequately cover a scheduled works program that will maintain the building in a state of good and constant repair. J4 A program of works should not commence Owner(s) and user. until there are sufficient people, materials and funds to complete it, otherwise fabric may be left exposed and vulnerable to degradation. Works may need to be carried out in carefully planned stages.
85 The Australian ICOMOS Charter for the Conservation of Places of Cultural Significance (The Burra Charter), Article 1.5.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 153
Action(s) Responsibility J5 Significant fabric should not be damaged by All. maintenance and repair activity. Trade demarcation disputes should not be permitted to inhibit the conservation requirements of ‘making good’ the surrounding materials and finishes. J6 Encourage tradespeople to ask questions if in All. doubt, rather than carry on regardless.
Follow Appropriate Procedures
Action(s) Responsibility J7 Obtain the appropriate approval for works. Owner(s), user and Approval for all works, excluding general architect. maintenance, should be obtained from the Randwick Council and the NSW Heritage Council. A Heritage Consultant can provide advice. J8 Ensure that consultants, staff and Owner(s), user, architect tradespersons have appropriate and heritage consultant. qualifications for the tasks, including sound conservation expertise. Major repairs to significant elements should be specified and supervised by a heritage consultant. Major repairs are those that materially affect and/or change significant fabric, fixtures or fittings. J9 All work is to be undertaken on the basis of All. known evidence. Conjecture, guesswork or prejudicial estimation is not acceptable. J10 Avoid incremental change to significant All. buildings, spaces and fabric. Careful management is required to ensure that significance is not damaged by alterations carried out in an ad-hoc manner. J11 Whilst being sympathetic and respectful, All. detail of new work should generally be distinguishable from the old; on closer inspection, it should be clear what is old and what is new. Techniques for achieving subtle differences include: • Slight recession of new material. • Slight differences in material texture. • Differing surface treatment. • Outlining the treated area. • Dating new material by means of a die stamp or affixing labels to the inside face of the material.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 154
J12 All work should be carefully and fully Owner(s), user, architect documented. This is outlined further under and heritage consultant. Principle W.
Follow Basic Maintenance Guidelines
Basic maintenance guidelines with regard to Cliffbrook (Building CC1) and Building CC3 are as follows.
Action(s) Responsibility
J13 Brickwork and Stonework Owner(s), architect and Existing brickwork or stonework should be heritage consultant. maintained as unpainted brickwork. Under
no circumstances is the face brickwork or stone to be rendered and or painted.
Brickwork and stonework should be regularly inspected for broken or missing mortar joins, moisture, or any other defects.
Re-point only where existing mortar is unsound or where sufficient mortar is missing to cause deterioration by water penetration. Generally, mortar should be weaker than the materials that it is binding. Use lime mortar. Under no circumstances should cement be used as part of the mortar mix.
Timberwork Owner(s), architect and Wherever possible any timberwork heritage consultant. identified as being of significance (Rank A
and B) should be repaired, as opposed to being replaced.
The condition of timberwork should be carefully monitored and a programme of regular maintenance (including painting) prepared and implemented.
Windows Owner(s), architect and Inspect for defective sills, frames, sashes and heritage consultant. mullions. Ensure glazing is waterproof. Confirm joints between window frames and cladding are adequately flashed. Check operation of moving parts.
Slate Owner(s), architect and Check for soundness. heritage consultant.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 155
Action(s) Responsibility
Plaster Ceilings Ensure plaster ceiling have proper adhesion to ceiling joists and battens. Marble Fire Surrounds Protect during any works. Effect any repairs with a restorer who is expert in marble repairs. Paint Schemes Owner(s), architect and The exterior timberwork to Cliffbrook should heritage consultant. remain white. Interior paint colours may change. The colour chosen, however, should take into account the correct hierarchy of architectural elements. Do not paint external or internal joinery with a polished or varnished appearance, in particular any timber that has been “grained”. Do not over paint French Polish with modern non-reversible clear finishes, e.g. polyurethane.
Cyclic Maintenance A Cyclic Management Plan based on this CMP (with input from a suitably qualified heritage practitioner) should be drawn up, adopted and carried out in the recommended priority order. Regular maintenance and inspection will identify maintenance issues at an early stage before significant damage can occur to fabric. This applies particularly to water penetration. The presence of water in any form can cause significant damage or accelerate the process of decay of building fabric. The following provides a basic programme of cyclical maintenance as a guide. This programme addresses the short-term, medium-term and long- term conservation of significant elements. Should problems be identified during cyclic inspections then the advice of a heritage consultant should be sought to determine the appropriate action. A concise report on the findings of inspections should be prepared so that an understanding of the changing condition of the fabric over time can be obtained and used to update the cyclic maintenance plan.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 156
ELEMENT MAINTENANCE INTERVAL <6 Months Yearly 5 yearly Other Whole Engage specialist to Building check for pests and termites, including roof and sub floor areas annually or as often as recommended. Whole Ensure safety of Building occupants. Remove flammable items from around flashpoints. Do not store unnecessary items within the building. External Roof If the roof starts to Engage Access to the deteriorate, engage specialist to roof is to be a specialist to check access roof achieved only on an annual basis. and do a with the Otherwise, see detailed appropriate under five year inspection. access and column. safety equipment. Gutters and Inspect and remove downpipes debris. Repair as required. If replacement is required, use an appropriate profile and carefully consider the placement.
ELEMENT MAINTENANCE INTERVAL <6 Months Yearly 5 yearly Other Internal Walls Check for Prepare drummy or and paint loose plaster. as required. Ceilings Check for soundness and adhesion of plaster ceilings.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 157
ELEMENT MAINTENANCE INTERVAL Joinery Check for rot, pest activity and fixing to wall. Floors/ Check that ventilation subfloor openings are clear and areas allowing free passage of air. Engage specialist to check for moisture penetration/dry rot etc. Fittings and Check all present and Retain hardware. in working order. original Adjust as required. hardware. Space between floors All spaces Check as part of annual pest inspection. Check also for signs of water penetration. Ensure that roof and subfloor spaces are sealed from wildlife and vermin whilst necessary ventilation is maintained. Stormwater Check and clear debris. Electrical Check for operation; service and repair as required. Hydraulic Mechanic- al
ELEMENT MAINTENANCE INTERVAL <6 Months Yearly 5 yearly Other Hard landscape elements Statues Check and repair as required. Document changes to statues and other Paths significant elements. Other
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 158
2.3.2.11 Principle and Policy K
PRINCIPLE K
Provide security.
Unauthorised access by those who are intent on damaging or compromising the site, as well as by occupants and visitors, should be prevented. This is not limited to humans; but to wildlife and vermin, such as possums, birds and rats, all capable of damaging significant fabric. Vacancy and/or the appearance of vacancy are significant threats that should be counteracted if such a situation should arise in the future. The impact of security measures on the significance of fabric, access ways and views, etc., should be considered.
POLICY K
Continue to provide security for the site. Security should take into account impact on heritage significance and fabric of significance, and should include the exclusion of vermin and birds.
Good Site Maintenance as a Form of Security In addition to securing the site and building as required by the University, the following should be undertaken.
Action(s) Responsibility
K1 Ensure a high level of site maintenance. Owner(s). Good maintenance projects an image of occupation and care. K2 Accumulated unwanted items, in particular Owner(s). flammable items, should be disposed of regularly. K3 Do not attach security devices to significant Owner(s), architect and fabric or, if unavoidable, attach them in such tradespeople. a way that they are not visually prominent and can be removed without damaging original fabric. K4 The site should be equipped with Owner(s). appropriate levels of lighting to cover the issue of lighting for use and safety. K5 Monitor the activity of pests (such as Owner(s), tradespeople. termites, birds, and rats) and address issues as necessary in order to protect fabric.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 159
2.3.2.12 Principle and Policy L
PRINCIPLE L
Maintain the setting.
Two aspects of setting need to be considered when managing a heritage site: • The setting in which the site is located. • The setting within the site.
POLICY L
An appropriate setting for the site should be maintained.
Be Aware of Proposed Change in the Surrounding Area New work in the surrounding area should not diminish the significance of the site and its component parts.
Action(s) Responsibility L1 Be aware of applications for new works to Owner(s). nearby properties so that their impact on the site can be assessed and comments made to the Randwick Council and, if appropriate, to the NSW Heritage Council. Council should notify the owners of any works in the immediate area as part of the DA process. L2 Ensure Council has the correct contact Owner(s). information for Owner(s) so that all notices are received promptly and responses can be made in a timely manner.
2.3.2.13 Procedures When Dealing with Changes to the Site
Principle and Policy M
PRINCIPLE M
The level of significance of Cliffbrook (Building CC1) and Building CC3, and their individual components, should be used to guide the level of change that can occur. Proposed changes should be accompanied by detailed assessments of component parts.
Building CC2 and CC4 can be removed, provided that their historic significance is recorded in an appropriate interpretation strategy and through archival recording.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 160
Significant landscape elements and planting should be retained and maintained. A landscape setting should be maintained for Cliffbrook.
The concept of change on a site identified as having heritage significance is complex. In some instances, change has played a role in the development of heritage significance. When making changes to the site the ‘Requirements for the Retention of Significance’ as provided under Section 4.8 should be taken into account. The following actions aim to support and control the ongoing use of the site by providing for changes that are viable and compatible with the retention of significance. It is important to remember that a series of minor changes that may individually appear to have a low level of impact on heritage significance can have a much more pronounced cumulative impact. Consideration should also be given to the possibility that future stakeholders may have different opinions as to the impact of proposed changes. Consultation and communication are an important part of the planning process.
POLICY M
Cliffbrook (Building CC1) and Building CC3 should be retained. Buildings CC2 and CC4 can be removed provided that their historic significance is recognised by the commissioning of an archival recording and preparation of an Interpretation Strategy.
The level of significance should guide the degree of change.
Changes may be made, provided their impact is assessed as acceptable, that it fully resolves the issue created requiring the change and that all changes are carefully recorded. Proposed adaptations and new uses that would introduce irreversible modifications to significant elements and have an adverse impact on significance require closest consideration as the intervention must only be allowable where there is no other alternative and little chance of the item reverting to the existing configuration.
The following relates to Cliffbrook (Building CC1), Building CC3 and significant landscape elements Be Guided by Relative Significance General grades of significance for the site are provided in Section 4.8 of this CMP. The following provides a general guide for these different levels of significance. Should a departure from these general provisions be proposed, full justification, including alternative solutions considered, should be provided as part of the Heritage Impact Statement.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 161
Action(s) Responsibility M1 Exceptional (A) Owner(s), architect and • Conserve in accordance with these heritage consultant. guidelines. • Encourage reconstruction of significant elements wherever possible or appropriate. • Allow adaptation/alteration (including removal of fabric) only if carried out in accordance with the actions below. • Encourage interpretation.
M2 High (B) Owner(s), architect and • Conserve fabric and spaces in accordance heritage consultant. with these conservation guidelines wherever possible. • Encourage reconstruction of significant elements where possible and or appropriate. • Allow adaptation (including removal of fabric) where primary significance is conserved or the best conservation outcome achieved. • Allow sympathetic alteration in accordance with conservation guidelines. M3 Moderate (C) Owner(s), architect and • Conserve fabric and spaces in accordance heritage consultant. with these conservation guidelines wherever possible. • Encourage reconstruction of significant elements where possible and appropriate. • Allow sympathetic alteration in accordance with the general intent of these policies. M4 Neutral (D) Owner(s), architect and • May be removed or replaced. heritage consultant. • Reconstruction may be undertaken where appropriate evidence of a prior form exists. Distinguish between old and new work. • May be otherwise altered in line with the general intent of these policies.
M5 Intrusive (X) Owner(s), architect and • Encourage removal or modification to a heritage consultant. less intrusive form. • Reconstruction may be undertaken where appropriate evidence of a prior form exists. Distinguish between old and new work. • May be otherwise altered in line with the general intent of these policies.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 162
Carry out Detailed Assessments of Significance Prior to New Works Levels of significance are assigned to the fabric of Cliffbrook (Building CC1) and Building CC3 in Section 4.8. These gradings are general only. A detailed assessment of individual rooms or spaces may need to be undertaken when specific new works are proposed. This assessment should be part of a heritage impact statement for new work. The policies and guidelines of this CMP then apply to any new work.
Action(s) Responsibility M6 When work is proposed to a building or Owner(s) and heritage space a detailed assessment of the consultant significance of the space and fabric should be undertaken prior to planning for change. The history and assessment in this CMP will serve as a guide. M7 New work to an individual building, external Owner(s), architect, space, landscaping or landscape element landscape architect, and should be undertaken in accordance with the heritage consultant policies and guidelines of this CMP.
Consider the Impact
Action(s) Responsibility
M8 Involve a heritage consultant at the outset. Owner(s) and architect. This is a preferable approach to seeking comments on a completed proposal. By these means, the heritage significance of the site can be used to inform the development or proposed change. M9 When considering changes to elements Owner(s), architect and identified as being of Exceptional or High heritage consultant. Significance (i.e. Ranked A or B):
• Consider all available options in order to determine the best course of action. • Avoid work that would have an adverse heritage impact. • Consider the reinstatement of historic use, spaces, etc., where appropriate. • Facilitate the interpretation of the history of the site, its context, its use, etc. • Carefully consider the cumulative impact of a series of minor changes. • Ensure that an appropriate setting is retained, including significant views. • Commission a Heritage Impact Statement prepared by a qualified heritage consultant. M10 Changes to other elements that will have an Owner(s), architect and impact on elements Ranked A and B should heritage consultant.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 163
Action(s) Responsibility be subject to a similar process. M11 Uses that would introduce irreversible Owner(s), architect and modifications to significant elements and heritage consultant. have an adverse impact on significance are generally not acceptable. In situations where this is unavoidable, see under ‘removal of significant built fabric below.’ M12 Record the changes made. This is outlined Owner(s), architect, further under Principle W. heritage consultant and maintenance and tradespeople. M13 Whilst being sympathetic and respectful, Owner(s), architect, detail of new work should generally be heritage consultant and distinguishable from the old; on closer maintenance and inspection, it should be clear what is old and tradespeople. what is new. Techniques for achieving subtle differences include: • Slight recession of new material. • Slight differences in material texture. • Surface treatment. • Outlining. • Dating new material.
Removal of Significant Built Fabric All parts of a heritage site may be intrinsic to its significance. The removal of fabric from a heritage site has the potential to impact on its significance. Significant fabric should not be removed from the site without a comprehensive study of the impact on heritage significance and exploration of all other options. Removal of significant fabric may, in specific circumstances, be appropriate as part of the overall conservation of the site. Work may sometimes be required that has an adverse heritage impact. This may be work required for safety reasons, to meet statutory requirements or for the ongoing conservation of the building as a whole.
Action(s) Responsibility M14 If significant fabric is to be removed it should Owner(s), architect, only: heritage consultant and maintenance and • Occur after heritage advice is sought. tradespeople. There may be alternative solutions. The removal of buildings, spaces, landscaping and fabric nominated by this CMP as significant should only be considered where there is no appropriate alternative. • Be done to allow the conservation of fabric of greater significance or if essential to the conservation of the place as a whole.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 164
Action(s) Responsibility • Occur only where the integrity of the fabric has been compromised. For example, elements that are not original or which are causing harm to significant fabric. • Occur where the safety of the occupants cannot be achieved through other reasonable and well explored means. • Occur where investigation is required to better understand the building. Removal should ideally be kept to a minimum and be reversible. • Be carried out in a reversible manner where possible. • Occur only after the preparation of documentation that demonstrates that all alternatives have been considered. This is likely to take the form of an HIS. • Occur only after appropriate approvals are obtained from the relevant statutory authorities. M15 When approval is obtained for the removal of Owner(s), architect, fabric: heritage consultant and maintenance and • Record the original form and detail. See tradespeople. Principle W. • Label and securely store any removed significant elements for future reinstatement or for repair of like material where reinstatement will not be possible. • If removed fabric cannot be reinstated, used for repair or stored on site for possible reinstatement, it should be offered for resale to a reputable salvage yard.
Undertake Reconstruction Where Appropriate Reconstruction is generally not necessary for the conservation of heritage significance.
Action(s) Responsibility
M16 Reconstructing elements to a known earlier state is acceptable in the following circumstances:
• If required for conservation.
• If it enhances the significance of the site and does not distort existing evidence.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 165
• If undertaken using documentary and or physical evidence of the original.
2.3.2.14 Principle and Policy N
PRINCIPLE N
The retention and conservation of significance should be at the forefront of planning for new work to the site. Procedures associated with new work should facilitate the retention and conservation of significance.
The aim of heritage conservation is to ensure that the cultural significance of a heritage place is maintained over time. While changes may be necessary to adapt heritage buildings to new uses, it is important to ensure that these changes do not compromise heritage significance. For the following, also refer back to the actions under Principle L.
POLICY N
New work to significant buildings, fabric and external spaces should respect the heritage values of these places.
Seek Professional Advice and Carry Out Detailed Assessments
Action(s) Responsibility N1 Seek heritage advice at the outset. Owner(s) and architect. N2 Should structural problems emerge that have Owner(s), architect and the potential to impact on the significance of heritage consultant. the site, an engineering solution will have to be developed that also provides an appropriate conservation response. Engineering advice should be sought from engineers with experience in dealing with historic structures.
Follow Appropriate Procedures
Action(s) Responsibility N3 Obtain the appropriate approval for works. Owner(s) and architect. Approval for all works, excluding general maintenance, should be obtained from Randwick Council and the NSW Heritage Council. A heritage consultant can provide advice on the appropriate approvals path.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 166
Follow Basic Principles
Action(s) Responsibility N4 New work can occur where: Owner(s), architect. • the proposed design has respect for the original design intent and fabric. • interpretation is provided for (major works). • archival recording has taken place (major works). • it is otherwise in accordance with the guidelines provided by this CMP. N5 New work should: • Consider all available options in order to determine the best course of action. • Carefully consider the cumulative impact of a series of minor changes.
• Contribute to the conservation of the building or space. For example: If appropriate, use the opportunity presented by new works to allocate resources for conservation works; consider the reinstatement of historic uses, spaces where appropriate; or facilitate the interpretation of the history of the site, buildings etc. • Should respect the massing, scale, fabric, fenestration patterns, detailing, of the existing building or space. • Minimise intervention with significant fabric.
• Be identifiable as such. New work should generally be of a character that represents a new layer of the site’s history. New work should complement, but not compete with, existing characteristics. • Have regard to the surrounding context and important view corridors to and from the site. Ensure that an appropriate setting is retained. N6 New work should not: Owner(s), architect and • be considered if the resultant design heritage consultant. would detrimentally affect the significance of the place. • be considered if any structural alterations are required which would have an adverse impact on significance. N7 Commission a Heritage Impact Statement. Owner(s). (see below for further information.).
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 167
Action(s) Responsibility N8 Obtain proper consents. Owner(s), architect and heritage consultant. N9 Record your actions. See Principle W. Owner(s), architect and heritage consultant.
Commission a Heritage Impact Statement Any work that involves or will impact upon a significant element should be subject to a Heritage Impact Statement (HIS) prepared by a qualified heritage consultant. This includes work that will impact upon significant internal spaces and external view corridors and vistas. An HIS will be required by the relevant consent authority for any work carried out on a heritage site. An HIS should convey what the impact(s) of a proposal for new works would be. An informed decision can then be made whether to allow the development to proceed.
Action(s) Responsibility N10 A Heritage Impact Statement should: Owner(s) and heritage consultant. • Be prepared by a qualified heritage consultant. • Verify the assessment of significance for relevant fabric/area contained in this CMP through detailed investigation and evaluation. • Have regard to this CMP. • Document why a particular course of action has been chosen. • Provide evidence that all possible alternatives have been considered to determine the best course of action.
• Make reference to the policies in this CMP.
N11 The Heritage Branch publication Statements of Heritage Impact (www.heritage.nsw.gov.au) provides further information on what a Heritage Impact Statement should include.
2.3.2.15 Principle and Policy O
PRINCIPLE O
New works should not have an adverse impact on significance.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 168
POLICY O
New works should be designed to complement existing significant buildings, external spaces and landscapes. New works should enhance or, at the very least, not diminish or mask significance.
New buildings should not adversely impact on the heritage values of existing significant buildings and external spaces. Their scale, massing, form and materials should complement the existing buildings and help maintain an appropriate setting for these buildings. New buildings should not copy the style of historical buildings, but should have a contemporary expression. New buildings should have a high design quality in order to complement the heritage buildings. This will help ensure that the site retains its significant aesthetic values and that an appropriate setting is maintained for heritage significant buildings on the site. Basic Principles for New buildings
Action(s) Responsibility O1 New work should be based on a Owner(s). Comprehensive Plan covering the whole site. O2 New buildings should exhibit a high degree Owner(s) and architect. of design excellence. O3 New buildings should not copy historical Owner(s) and architect. architectural styles. O4 The scale, form and materials of new Owner(s), architect and buildings should be compatible with the heritage consultant. existing significant buildings. O5 New buildings should not adversely impact Owner(s), architect and on the setting of significant buildings and heritage consultant. spaces.
A curtilage of at least 4-5m around Cliffbrook should be retained.
2.3.2.16 Principle and Policy P The site includes significant nineteenth century stone walls and planting from varying periods.
PRINCIPLE P
New landscaping should respect the significance and settings of the existing buildings.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 169
POLICY P
New landscaping should be designed to complement existing significant buildings and landscape elements, including the sandstone boundary walls.
Landscaping must also take into account the use of the site as an educational facility and the need to provide facilities, such as bins and signage, and equal access.
Guidelines for New Landscaping
Action(s) Responsibility P1 Stone walls: Owner(s), architect, and • The stone walls should be maintained as heritage consultant. set out above. • The stone walls should remain visible. • Planting should not occur in areas where it will have an adverse impact on the walls. P2 The line of the original driveway (i.e. the Owner(s), architect, and location of the entrance and the loop on the heritage consultant. eastern side of Cliffbrook) should remain or at the very least be interpreted. P3 The three Norfolk Island Pine trees to the Owner(s), architect, and west of Cliffbrook should be retained. heritage consultant. P4 Mature planting should be retained wherever Owner(s), architect, and possible. Trees and vegetation may be heritage consultant. removed from the site where permitted by Council. A landscape setting, however, should be retained around Cliffbrook. P5 Any new landscaping should take into Owner(s), architect, and consideration issues such as: heritage consultant. • Appropriate massing, scale and character with respect to the building. • View corridors to and from the site. • The requirements of the users of the site. • The proper separation of garden beds from building fabric so as not to introduce rising damp. • Correct ground levels relative to walls. • Opportunities for interpretation. • Opportunities for relocating trees that need to be moved to enable works. • When choosing tree species, take into account factors such as:
i. The historical appearance of the site. ii. Important relationships and view corridors. iii. The potential damage that can be
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 170
Action(s) Responsibility caused by root systems. iv. The potential damage that can be caused in the advent of a severe storm. P6 Do not attach fittings to significant fabric or, Owner(s), architect and if unavoidable, attach them in such a way heritage consultant. that they can be removed without damaging fabric. P7 The location of amenities such as bins, Owner(s), architect and signage etc. must take into consideration heritage consultant. view corridors. P8 A consistent signage regime should be Owner(s) and architect. developed and applied throughout the campus. As stated above, placement of signage needs to consider view corridors. Signage should not be attached to significant fabric where at all possible or, where unavoidable, should be attached in such a way that minimal damage is done. Where required fixing of new elements to masonry walls is to be undertaken with non- ferrous fixings and where possible is to reuse existing fixing points. A higher grade stainless steel fixing is appropriate - essentially, a 'non-rusting' fixing is needed. Reuse existing fixing points where possible and ‘make good’ old redundant fixing holes in an appropriate manner.
2.3.2.17 Principle and Policy Q
PRINCIPLE Q
Resist the introduction of intrusive elements and remove existing intrusive elements.
Intrusive elements may fall under several categories: • Alterations and additions which may be aesthetically unpleasing but which contribute to the heritage significance of the site by, for example, providing evidence of adaptation for a significant new use. Such changes may aid in the interpretation of a place and may be regarded as significant. • Alterations and additions (including services) which do not contribute to an understanding of the heritage significance of a site or which detract from this heritage significance.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 171
• Alterations and additions which are or are not of significance and which make the interpretation of a place more difficult by masking original intentions or by presenting confusing layers of fabric.
POLICY Q
Fabric/elements that are part of the history of the site, but which no longer perform their intended function, should not automatically be regarded as intrusive elements. Elements considered obtrusive should first be assessed to determine heritage significance and, if found to have no heritage value, removed or modified so as to eliminate or reduce their detrimental impact on significance.
Follow Basic Guidelines
Action(s) Responsibility Q1 Create a list of intrusive elements that Owner(s), architect and should, where possible, be removed. heritage consultant. Q2 Fully assess your actions to ensure that the Owner(s), architect and fabric to be removed is not of significance. heritage consultant. Engage a heritage consultant and liaise with the relevant statutory authority. Prepare an HIS, if required. Q3 The making good of fabric following the Owner(s), architect, removal of intrusive elements should be heritage consultant and completed without further damage to the maintenance and fabric and in a manner consistent with the tradespeople. Burra Charter principles of restoration and reconstruction. Q4 New plant equipment should not be placed Owner(s) and architect. on the principal elevations or in any location noticeable from significant vantage points. Q5 Record your actions. This is outlined further Owner(s), heritage under Principle W. consultant and maintenance and tradespeople.
2.3.2.18 Principle and Policy R
PRINCIPLE R
Introduce services in a sensitive manner.
The objective is to design the least disruptive routes for the provision and reticulation of electrical, mechanical, hydraulic, communication services etc., and to provide for the retention of original services where these contribute to the significance of the place.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 172
POLICY R
New services should be introduced in a sensitive manner. Evidence of significant services should be retained.
Guidelines for Installing and Removing Services It is essential that there is a coordinated approach to the future installation of services.
Action(s) Responsibility R1 Seek professional advice. Engage Owner(s), architect, and appropriate consultants and tradespeople to heritage consultant. devise new protocols for the introduction of services as the need arises. R2 New services should, where possible, make Owner(s), consultants appropriate use of existing service routes and and tradespeople. ducts, if these are unobtrusive. The introduction of new services should avoid damage to significant fabric and should avoid being fixed to such fabric. Where interference with significant fabric is unavoidable, fixing and installation of services should be reversible. R3 Routes for new reticulated services should be Owner(s), tradespeople located and designed in a way that will have and consultants. minimal adverse impact on fabric and on significance. R4 Service locations should have regard to the Owner(s), tradespeople relative significance of individual elements. and consultants. Services should not disrupt major architectural or decorative elements. R5 Where possible services should not be surface Owner(s), consultants mounted on the exterior of the building. and tradespeople. R6 Remove redundant services that do not Owner(s), tradespeople contribute to heritage significance at the time and consultants. of decommissioning. R7 The making good of fabric associated with Owner(s), tradespeople the removal of intrusive elements should be and consultants. completed without further damage to the fabric and in a manner consistent with the Burra Charter principles of repair, restoration and reconstruction (see Appendix 4). R8 Protocols for new services should examine Owner(s), tradespeople ways in which intrusive services can be and consultants. removed in a systematic manner and appropriate finishes reinstated. Intrusive elements identified include, but are not limited to: • Wiring conduit.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 173
Action(s) Responsibility • Air conditioning pipework. • Additional downpipes. • Plumbing services. R9 Record your actions. See Principle W. Owner(s), tradespeople and consultants. R10 Locate fixed furniture, etc., in places where Owner(s). they do not adversely affect significant fabric or spaces. R11 Do not attach the above to significant fabric. Owner(s) and Where unavoidable, attach in a reversible tradespeople. manner or in a way that results in the least possible damage to fabric. Demonstrate that all options have been explored in the event of the latter.
2.3.2.19 Principle and Policy S A baseline archaeological assessment has been prepared by others. Refer to the reports in Appendix 2 of this CMP.
PRINCIPLE S
Consider potential archaeological significance.
POLICY S
Archaeological impact should be considered in future proposals.
The current philosophy regarding the conservation of archaeological relics is that they are best conserved by remaining undisturbed.
Archaeological Requirements
Action(s) Responsibility S1 If major works are being undertaken, an Owner(s), architect, and archaeological assessment will be required. heritage consultant. S2 If remains are unexpectedly discovered, cease Owner(s), architect, work and seek professional advice. heritage consultant and trades people. For further information, refer to the reports in Appendix 2 of this CMP.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 174
2.3.2.20 Principle and Policy T
PRINCIPLE T
It is important that heritage significance be considered should changes ownership, occupation or use be proposed.
Change in the use and/or ownership of a heritage site can have a fundamental impact on its heritage significance.
POLICY T
New owner(s) and/or occupier(s) should be made aware of the significance of the site at the outset. New uses should only be considered if they are compatible with the retention and/or recovery of the identified character and significance of the site, significant buildings and spaces. At the very least, they should not be detrimental to significance.
Guidelines for When a Change in Use is Proposed
Action(s) Responsibility T1 If a future change in use is proposed, ensure Owner(s). Also selling that sufficient and timely consultation occurs. agent. This will enable consideration of the broadest range of options to produce the best possible outcome. T2 Ensure that future owner(s)/occupants Owner(s). Also selling understand and provide a commitment to the agent. heritage significance of the site. T3 Review and update this CMP when a change New Owner(s). in use of the site, or change in ownership occurs. T4 All proposals for new uses should be subject New Owner(s) and to an HIS. heritage consultant.
2.3.2.21 Undertakings to Further Understanding About the Place
Principle and Policy U
PRINCIPLE U
Prepare and implement interpretation strategies.
Communicating an understanding of what a heritage item is and why it is important is a key tenet of the heritage conservation process.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 175
Communication can be undertaken in numerous ways. The site conveys a message simply by being identified within a heritage context. Determining what that message is, and how best to convey and reinforce it, is the purpose of interpretation. This CMP is an important step in promoting a greater understanding of the cultural significance of the site to all stakeholders and the wider community.
POLICY U
All means should be taken to ensure that knowledge about the site and its heritage significance remains within the general knowledge of the people of Randwick and NSW. Interpretation should represent all aspects of the site’s history and include both tangible and intangible elements. Interpretation should be reflected in the physical presentation of the site (and in new works) as well as through the installation of specific interpretative devices.
Guidelines for Interpretation
Action(s) Responsibility
U1 Consider how new works may also aid Owner(s), architect and interpretation and understanding of the heritage consultant. significance of the site. U2 Provide inclusive interpretation. Owner(s). Interpretation should be inclusive of recognised community groups to encourage as wide as possible knowledge and understanding of the significance of the site. U3 Maintain the fabric of place in accordance Owners and architects. with the policies in this CMP. Allow the buildings and site elements to ‘speak for themselves.’ U4 Specifically, (though not exclusively): Owner(s) and occupiers. • Celebrate landmark anniversaries in the history of the site. • Conserve and interpret links with the AAEC. • Conserve and interpret links with early owners and occupiers. • Maintain the characteristics of Building CC1 that make it an example of an Interwar Classical Style dwelling. • Conserve evidence of significant interior floor plans and fabric. U5 Encourage the return of related fabric and Owners. items (if any).
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 176
2.3.2.22 Principle and Policy V
PRINCIPLE V
Encourage research.
Understanding a heritage site is a constantly evolving process. Further information about the site may come to light at a future date.
POLICY V
Research directed at increasing the knowledge and understanding of the site and its environment should be encouraged and supported.
Suggestions for Future Research
Action(s) Responsibility V1 Encourage further research and where Owner(s). possible give access to researchers. Areas of further research include: • Collection of oral history and photographs. • Detailed research in to the archives of the AAEC and the Australian Army held by the National Archives of Australia. V2 Publication in journals of material that Owner(s). provides a greater understanding of the site should be encouraged. V3 Engage a heritage consultant to review and Owner(s). revise this CMP should research bring to light additional information that impacts upon the significance of the site.
2.3.2.23 Principle and Policy W
PRINCIPLE W
Record and archive any works to the site.
It is important to keep a secure copy of all known and relevant information about the site. Collections and records form an important part of the site’s history and significance. Similarly, it is important that a full record of management decisions, in particular maintenance and new works, be maintained. Such records ensure that the historical record of the site remains clear. They also form part of the history of a still-evolving site and provide a level of accountability.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 177
POLICY W
New work should be recorded in a manner that reflects the extent of work and the significance of the element/area involved.
New work should be recorded in a manner that reflects the extent of work and the significance of the element/area involved. A comprehensive copy of all relevant archival material and all records of new work should be assembled for reference use and stored in the library/archives of the Council and on site.
Appreciate the Value of Recording The level of recording necessary will vary with the significance of the elements involved and the level of change proposed.
Action(s) Responsibility W1 The level of recording should be appropriate Owner(s) and heritage to the particular situation. It may be as consultant. simple as a page of handwritten notes or as extensive as several volumes of text, drawings and photographs. W2 Major changes and/or alterations, if Owner(s) and heritage approved by Council, should involve consultant. archival recording to Heritage Division standards. An explanation as to what is involved in the preparation of an archival recording (How to Prepare Archival Records of Heritage Items) can be viewed on the Heritage Division website www.heritage.nsw.gov.au. The Heritage Division can also provide the contact details of people who can carry out archival recordings. W3 For major works, fill out Schedule 1 in Owner(s) and heritage Appendix 5 of this CMP. This schedule consultant. records the creation and location of any related report for the site so that the information can be incorporated into the CMP when reviewed in 5 years time. W4 Minor changes/actions that do not require Owner(s) and heritage full archival recording to Heritage Branch consultant. Standards should be recorded in Schedule 2 in Appendix 5 of this CMP. This information can then be incorporated into the CMP when reviewed in 5 years. W5 Any evidence of earlier configurations of the Owner(s), heritage building or of decoration or paint schemes consultant, maintenance uncovered during the course of new works or and tradespeople. maintenance works should be recorded.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 178
Storage in Archival Repositories
Action(s) Responsibility W6 An appropriate repository for archival Owner(s). materials is the UNSW Archives and Randwick Council. This should include: • A copy of this and subsequent CMPs. • Copies of all available photographs. • Copies of all drawings and plans. • A copy of relevant records relating to building maintenance, contractors and works undertaken. W7 Keep copies of all relevant records on the site. Owner(s). These should include records relating to ongoing heritage management decisions and actions, as well as other relevant archival materials.
2.3.2.24 Principle and Policy X
PRINCIPLE X
Protect moveable heritage.
Movable heritage often derives significance from its relationship to a site. Removing items from their context can diminish the significance of the item and the place.
POLICY X
Identify and retain significant moveable heritage.
Protect Moveable Heritage
Action(s) Responsibility X1 Assess the significance of moveable heritage Heritage Consultant. items prior to removal for storage, interpretation or disposal. X2 Use remaining moveable heritage items for Owner(s). interpretation purposes where possible. X3 Store all other moveable heritage items Owner(s). securely.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 179
2.3.2.25 Protocols with Regard to Sustainability
Principle and Policy Y
PRINCIPLE Y
Encourage sustainability.
The conservation of heritage values contributes to the environmental sustainability of the site through the retention of significant buildings. Many traditional buildings and materials are durable and perform well in terms of latent energy and energy efficiency. The energy and resources needed to replace existing buildings and materials may be considerable.
POLICY Y
Significant buildings should be retained. Traditional building materials, where they cannot be retained in their present location, should be used on site, where possible, stored for future reinstatement or, offered for salvage.
Action(s) Responsibility
Y1 Removed components of significant Owner(s), architect and buildings or structures should be, where heritage consultant. practical, carefully removed and stored on site for future reinstatement. Where this is unlikely, the material can be used for repair of like material on the site. Where the latter is not possible, it should be offered to a reputable salvage yard for sale.
7.0 CONCLUSION
This Conservation Management Plan has provided a history and assessment of significance of the UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45 Beach Street, Coogee, New South Wales. Part of the site area, designated the Study Area by this CMP, is listed on the State Heritage Register, under the auspices of the NSW Heritage Act 1977, and by Schedule 5 Part 1 of the Randwick LEP 2012 as having state significance.
As determined by this CMP, the site has historic and aesthetic significance arising out of the presence of a fine example of a large Interwar Free Classical Style dwelling, erected in c.1922, on a large site with some significant planting and a contemporary stone garage. The nineteenth century sandstone walls on the boundaries of Beach and Battery Streets have historic and aesthetic significance as remnants of the earlier Cliffbrook mansion estate and for their contribution to the streetscape. The site has significance for its associations with Sir Denison Miller, first chairman of the Commonwealth Bank, and with the AAEC, whose headquarters were located at Cliffbrook between 1953 and 1981. The current owner of the site, the UNSW, wish to upgrade it to provide teaching facilities and accommodation for students of the Australian Graduate School of
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 180
Management. The use of the site as a University Campus is supported by this document as an appropriate use. The significance of the site provides both opportunities and constraints on the way in which it is used in the present day and in the future. Many factors influence the way in which the site should be managed in order for its significance to be retained, including statutory controls. The integrity and relative significance of different part of the site and the buildings upon it create different opportunities and constraints as to how that building(s) or space(s) can be developed. Management policies have been provided to ensure that the heritage significance of the place is retained whilst ongoing use is facilitated. Policies are organised under a set of general principles that define a conservation policy for the site.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 181
8.0 APPENDIX 1
References
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 182 Principal Reference
• McDonald McPhee Pty Ltd, Conservation Plan for Cliffbrook, 45 Beach Street, Coogee. Unpublished plan prepared for the University of NSW, dated 1993.
General References
• Attenbrow, V., Sydney Aboriginal Past: investigating the archaeological and historical records, NSW, University of New South Wales Press Ltd, 2002. • Cornish, S., Official Historian, Reserve Bank of Australia, ‘Responsibilities of the Bank and its Leader’ in From Bank to Battlefield: Challenges of War. Online reference: museum.rba.gov.au. • Curby, Pauline, Randwick, NSW, Randwick City Council, 2009. • Gilchrist, C., ‘Coogee,’ Dictionary of Sydney, 2015. Online reference: http://dictionaryofsydney.org/entry/coogee. • Gollan, R., 'Miller, Sir Denison Samuel King (1860–1923)', Australian Dictionary of Biography, National Centre of Biography, Australian National University. Online reference: http://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/miller-sir-denison-samuel-king- 726/text13235, published first in hardcopy 1986. • Hughes, J. (ed.), Demolished Houses of Sydney, NSW, Historic Houses Trust of NSW, 1999. • Lawrence, J., Pictorial History of Randwick, Sydney, Kingsclear Books, 2001. • Turbet, P., The Aborigines of the Sydney District Before 1788, NSW, Kangaroo Press, 2001. • Wells, W.H., A Geographical Dictionary of Gazetteer of the Australian Colonies, 1848. This edition reprinted in Sydney by The Council of the Library of New South Wales, 1970.
Conservation Literature
• The Australian ICOMOS Charter for the Conservation of Places of Cultural Significance (The Burra Charter), 2013. • Davison, G., ‘The meanings of ‘heritage’, in Graeme Davison and Chris McConville (eds.), A Heritage Handbook, NSW, Allen and Unwin, 1991. • Kerr, James Semple, The Conservation Plan: A Guide to the Preparation of Conservation Plans for Places of European Cultural Significance, NSW, The National Trust of Australia (NSW Branch), 1996. • Marquis-Kyle, P.and Walker, M., The Illustrated Burra Charter, QLD, Australia ICOMOS Inc., 1992. • NSW Heritage Office and DUAP, ‘Altering Heritage Assets’, The NSW Heritage Manual, Sydney, NSW Heritage Office and DUAP, 1996. • NSW Heritage Office and DUAP, Conservation Areas: Guidelines for Managing Change in Heritage Conservation Areas, NSW, NSW Heritage Office and DUAP. • New South Wales Heritage Office and DUCAP, Heritage Curtilages, NSW, NSW Heritage Office and DUAP, 1996. • Pearson. M. and Sullivan, S., Looking After Heritage Places, Melbourne, Melbourne University Press, 1995. • Rapoport, A., ‘The Emergence of the Present Environment’ (editorial note), in A. Rapoport (ed.), Australia as a Human Setting, Sydney, Angus and Robertson, 1972.
Periodicals, Newspapers and Annual Reports
• ‘Another Line of Defence’, The Age (Melbourne), 15 September, 1942. • ‘Auction Sales,’ The Sydney Morning Herald, 19 October, 1887. • Australian Atomic Energy Commission, First Annual Report, 17 April-20 June 1953, NSW, Government Printer, 1954. • Australian Atomic Energy Commission, Second Annual Report, 1953-1954, NSW, Government Printer, 1955. • Australian Atomic Energy Commission, 29th Annual Report for the Year Ending 30 June, 1981. • Australian Atomic Energy Commission, 30th Annual Report 1981-1982, June 1982. • ‘Births’, The Sydney Morning Herald, 28 May, 1859. • ‘Civvy Street’, Newcastle Morning Herald and Miners’ Advocate, 11 July, 1946. • ‘Cliffbrook Estate, Coogee Heights’, The Sydney Morning Herald, 17 September, 1881. • ‘Coogee Bay: A Highly Attractive and Picturesque Property…’, The Sydney Morning Herald, 10 November, 1886. • ‘8 Acres Land…’, The Sydney Morning Herald, 3 April, 1849. • ‘Historic Cliffbrook Transferred to the UNSW’, Uniken, 19 February, 1993. • ‘In the Estate of the Late Sir Denison S.K. Miller…’, The Sun, 12 March, 1924. • ‘Law Report. High Court of Australia. War Service Homes Commissioner v Kirkpatrick and Others’, The Sydney Morning Herald, 27 August, 1925. • ‘Model Homes: New Suburb at Lane Cove’, Truth, 7 August, 1927. • ‘New Companies- Victoria’, Daily Commercial News and Shipping List, 20 November, 1926. • ‘Pathologists Sought’, The Sydney Morning Herald, 14 May, 1941. • ‘Preliminary Announcement….’, The Sydney Morning Herald, 22 May, 1897. • ‘Property Sales’, The Sydney Morning Herald, 16 April, 1881. • ‘Public Auction Sale’, The Sydney Morning Herald, 13 January, 1901. • ‘Push to Sell Off Historic Coogee Estate,’ The Sydney Morning Herald, 7 February, 1991. • ‘School of army Hygiene: Clovelly Establishment’, The Sydney Morning Herald, 14 May, 1941. • ‘Sugar Planer’s Rise to Fame in Sydney Real Estate World’, The Sunday Times, 13 Match, 1927. • ‘You are Insured Against Loss of Livelihood,’ The Australian Women’s Weekly, 16 September, 1950.
NSW Land and Property Information (in date order)
• Grant: Serial 77 Folio 115 (Portion 386). • Grant: Serial 78 Folio 28 (Portion 385). • Grant; Serial 118 Folio 2831 (Portion 3A). • Primary Application No. 11271. NSW LPI. • Certificate of Title Volume 1326 Folio 25. NSW LPI. • Certificate of Title Volume 2652 Folios 205 and 206. NSW LPI • Certificate of Title Volume 3697 Folio 130. • Volume 5727 Folios 127 and 128. NSW LPI. • Certificate of Title Volume 6681 Folio 186. NSW LPI. Historic Maps, Plans and Photographs
• Atomic Energy Commission Site, 1981. Randwick Library. File A00/A00177. • Australian Army Medical Officers Attending a Special Course at the Land Headquarters of Hygiene, 5 July, 1945. Australian War Memorial. ID 110512. • Cliffbrook House (2), undated. Randwick Library, File A00/A00304. • Cliffbrook, 45 Beach Street, 1981. Randwick Library. File A00/A00178d. • Cliffbook, 45 Beach Street, 1981. Randwick Library. File No.: A00/A00178b. • Cliffbrook, 45 Beach Street, 1981. Randwick Library. File A00/A00178c. • Detail Survey Branch, Department of Lands, (Field Book Survey of the Cliffbrook Stables), February 1893. Sydney Water Archives, CFB2307. • Fisher, Robert, Plan of Lewis Gordon’s 2 a 3r 30p; 4 a 1 r 10p; and John Stewart’s 2 acre; Grants and Lots 7, 8, 99 and 10 Section 3 of the Cliffbrook Subdivision, 1899. NSW LPI, D.P. 61271. • General View of the Land Headquarters of the School of Hygiene, 5 July, 1945. Australian War Memorial. ID Number: 110508. • General View of Terraces at the Land Headquarters of the School of Hygiene, 5 July, 1945. Australian War Memorial. ID 110509. • ‘George Wilkie King’, Truth, 14 August, 1927. • Gordon’s Bay Area Showing Cliffbrook, c.1880s. Randwick Library. File A00/A00044. • Randwick Sheet No. 19, 1893. Sydney Water Archives, PWDS1544-S1149. • Looking south along Beach Street, Showing Cliffbrook, c.1883. Randwick and District Historical Society. • Major H. Shannon, Chief Instructor, Lecturing at the Land Headquarters School of Hygiene, 9 July, 1945. Australian War Memorial. ID 111491. • NSW Lands Department, (Aerial Photograph over Coogee), 1943. SIXMaps. • Re-Development Application – 45 Beach Street, Coogee (E), 68/45/D-202/93. Randwick Council.
Heritage Listing Sheets
• Cliffbrook, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee. State Heritage Inventory Database No.: 5045282. • Cliffbrook House, Stables and Stone Walls, No. 45 Beach Street, Coogee. Register of the National Place Place ID: 1770.
Reports by Other Consultants
• ENTS Tree Consultancy, UNSW Coogee Campus, Arboricultural Impact Assessment. Draft Report dated 20 May, 2016. • MDCA, Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment Report, UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee. Draft Report, March 2017. • MDCA, UNSW Cliffbrook Campus Redevelopment, 41-54 Beach Street, Coogee, Eastern Suburbs, NSW: Historical Archaeological Assessment (European Heritage) + Research Design and Excavation Methodology. Report dated 3 March, 2017.
Other
• Clovelly (Access of Cliffbrook, Beach Road, for the School of Hygiene and Sanitation, Australian Army)(Property File)(Box 1200). National Archives of Australia. Citation: NAA: SP857/10, PR/1430 PART 1. Record accessed online only. • Agency Details: Australian Atomic Energy Commission, Head Office. National Archives of Australia, CA 278. • Agency Details: The Asia Australia Institute. Agency No. 316. UNSW University Archives. • Land of Opportunity: Australia’s post-ware reconstruction: Chapter 6: Re-establishment and rehabilitation. National Library of Australia. Research Guide.
9.0 APPENDIX 2
Specialist Reports
ENTS Tree Consultancy, UNSW Coogee Campus, Arboricultural Impact Assessment. Draft Report dated 20 May, 2016. MDCA, Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment Report, UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee. Draft Report, March 2017. MDCA, UNSW Cliffbrook Campus Redevelopment, 41-54 Beach Street, Coogee, Eastern Suburbs, NSW: Historical Archaeological Assessment (European Heritage) + Research Design and Excavation Methodology. Report dated 3 March, 2017.
UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, No. 45-51 Beach Street, Coogee CMP 2017 183
Client University of New South Wales Location UNSW Coogee Campus Document Type Arboriculture Impact Assessment. Date/Time 20th May 2016.
THE ENTS TREE CONSULTANCY
The Ents Tree Consultancy. Hayden Coulter AQF Level 5 Diploma in Arboriculture AQF Level 4 Advanced Certificate in Urban Horticulture
P.O Box 6019 Marrickville 2204 Mobile: 0422 265 128 ABN: 95 598 933136 [email protected]
Client University of New South Wales Location UNSW Coogee Campus Document Type Arboriculture Impact Assessment. Date/Time 20th May 2016.
1. Contents
Page 3 2. Introduction 3 3. Methodology
4 4. Discussion
5 5. Recommendations Appendices 1. U.L.E Rating Schedule 6 2. Assessment of trees 7 3. Tree Images 11 4. Site Plan (existing) 14 (proposed) 19 5. IACA STARS Rating System 20 6. References 22 7. Glossary of Terms 23 8. Tree Protection Guidelines 24 9. Curriculum Vitae 25
2
2 Introduction
2.1 On the UNSW has engaged The Ents Tree Consultancy to complete an Arboricultural Impact Assessment for the proposed development site at the UNSW Cliffbrook Campus Coogee. This report will assess the trees that are on or adjoining the proposed site which may be impacted upon by the works or the associated activities. The client stated that the trees have been nominated to be inspected in relation to a development application which involves the demolition of an existing building and the construction of new building structure with some landscape works. Consultation was sought with the client about the number and position of trees to be inspected prior to a survey being completed.
2.2 The site inspection of the nominated trees occurred on the 20th May 2016. The client was not present for the site inspection but had previously issued a verbal brief providing background information in regards to the trees on the site. This tree report will detail the condition of the nominated trees, observe the proposed works and recommend removal or retention of the trees on site. Recommendations for removal or retention will be based on the proposed works and compatibility of the trees with the works as well as the trees hazard potential or ULE Rating. The report will also assess any potential impacts for tree nominated to be retained and attempt to remove or minimise them where possible. Recommended tree protection measures as set out in the Australian Standard AS4970 Protection of Trees on development sites will be nominated as required.
2.3 The purpose of this report is to assess the proposed works as well as the health and suitability of the tree nominated at the time of the inspection. The report will also provide tree management options for trees on the site in regards to the proposed works. In this report the client has requested several trees be removed. The Tree Protection Guidelines will be discussed for all trees nominated to be retained. The information in this report will be based on the information presented by the client at the time of the inspection as well as the site inspection. The Australian Standard AS4970 Protection of Trees on development sites will be used as a guide to managing the site. Additional Tree Protection measures are included in appendix 8.
2.4 To achieve the objectives of the report, the trees will be assessed noting the species, size, general condition. The trees will be assessed using the internationally recognised VTA assessment method for above ground parts only. The trees characteristics and eventual size will be taken into consideration as will the trees position in relation to structures and hard scapes. Recommendations will be outlined in section 5 of the report. A detailed list of the trees surveyed will be provided in Appendix 2 of the report and an existing numerical system has be used to identify them for this report and future reference on this job site.
3 Methodology
3.1 The trees were assessed using the standard Visual Tree Assessment technique (VTA). The trees were assessed from the ground for the purpose of this report.
3.2 A Lufkin 6.5m diameter tape was used to obtain the Diameter at breast height (DBH) as recommended at 1.4 metres unless otherwise stated due to variations in the trees form.
3.3 The height of the trees was estimated and the spread of the trees canopy was paced out.
3.4 A Canon 5D Digital camera with a 24-105mm lens was used to take all photographs in this report.
3.5 The ULE rating system has been used as a guide to assist in determining the Useful Life Expectancy of the trees surveyed. Refer to Appendices 1.
3
4 Discussion
4.1 The trees nominated to be inspected are located site at the UNSW Cliffbrook Campus. Some of the trees are significant in the immediate landscape and some are likely to be considered important in the local areas landscape in terms of amenity and function. The trees are located on partially sheltered site with some protection from surrounding structures, trees and topography. The soil on site appears to be a sandy loam that has been disturbed previously when the existing building and hardscapes were built.
4.2 Based on the information provided by the client, the works involve the demolition of the existing buildingCC4 and CC2 building and the construction of new buildings in that approximate footprint with a new landscape plan. To achieve this, some of the trees close to the existing or proposed building footprint are proposed to be removed to allow the works to proceed. Some other trees on site and some of the trees adjoining the site are proposed to be retained and protected for the duration of the works by separating them from the works site. All trees that are nominated to be retained on the adjoining site will be kept in good condition for the duration of the works using the Australian Standard AS4970 2009 Protection of trees on development sites for the basis of all tree management practices.
4.3 Trees 1 to 6 are trees located on the proposed works site that are away from the works. Although not all of these trees are in great condition they can be retained for the purpose of the works.
4.4 Trees 7-24, tree 35 and trees 38 - 52 are trees located in or close to the position of the proposed works. These trees are proposed to be removed to allow the works to proceed. An effort to replace these trees should be made within the new landscape plan.
4.5 Trees 25 to 34, trees 36 & 37 are trees located on site that are away from the proposed works. These trees are proposed to be retained and protected for the duration of the works.
4.7 Trees 53 to 66, trees 76 &77 are trees located on site. These trees are close the position of the proposed works and are proposed to be retained and protected for the duration of the works. These trees may require pruning to achieve site access, (trees 53, 54, 76 & 77. All trees will require 1.8m tree protection fencing to be installed along the edge of their projected Tree Protection Zones. If works are proposed to occur within the trees projected structural root zones or projected Tree Protection Zone, the AQF level 5 site Arborist will need to be present to document the works and record all activities. All roots 50mm+ are to be severed by the AQF level 5 site Arborist.
4.8 Trees 66 to 75 are trees located on the adjoining property. These trees are proposed to retained and protected for the duration of the works. Based on the plans there are no impacts anticipated for these trees in relation to the works. If the existing fences are proposed to be removed, temporary 1.8m chain mesh fencing will need to be installed to separate the trees from the construction site. If there are machinery works proposed to occur within the projected Tree Protection zones to the west of trees 66 – 71 ground protection or tree protection fencing will need to be installed. Trees 72 to 75 may need ground protection installed to the south if there are any machinery works proposed to occur within the projected tree protection zones.
4
5 Recommendations
5.1 After reviewing the site and the information provided by the client it is my recommendation that the works proceed with the following recommendations
5.2 To allow the works to proceed trees 7 to 24, tree 35 and trees 38 to 52 are proposed to be removed. An effort to replace these tree should be made within the new landscape plan. Trees 1 to 6, trees 25 to 76 are proposed to be retained and protected for the duration of the works.
5.3 Any excavation within or at the edge of nominated Structural Root Zone of any tree will need to be completed under the supervision of the AQF level 5 site Arborist. If any roots 50mm+ are located the AQF level 5 Arborist should be consulted. If the root cannot be retained, the root is to be severed cleanly if deemed appropriate by the AQF level 5 Arborist. All works are to be documented by the AQF level 5 site Arborist. It will be the clients responsibility to contact the site arborist and to co-ordinate the works.
5.4 It is recommended that all tree protection measures are in place as described in section 4 of the report prior to the commencement of any further works. The AQF level 5 site Arborist will need to sign off on the tree protection measures prior to works recommencing. Monthly reports are recommended to monitor the works and ensure the tree protection remains in place and viable and that no breaches of the tree protection guidelines or the Australian Standard AS4970 have occurred.
5.5 At the end of the works period the tree will be inspected by an AQF 5 Arborist to determine if the trees have been maintained adequately. If this is done the compliance certificate will be issued. If trees have been damaged or breaches of the Australian Standards have occurred council will be contacted for further advice.
5.6 It is recommended that construction proceeds using the Australian Standard AS4970 2009 Protection of trees on development sites as a basis for tree protection on the site as well as the site specific instructions listed in section 5 of this report. Additional Tree Protection measures are listed in Appendix 7 of the report to assist in the care of the trees on site.
Please do not hesitate to call 0422 265 128 if you have any questions regarding the contents of this report.
Regards
Hayden Coulter Diploma in Arboriculture Advanced Certificate in Urban Horticulture
The Ents Tree Consultancy. ABN: 95 598 933136 [email protected]
THE ENTS TREE CONSULTANCY
Disclaimer
All trees have been assessed based on the information and facts of the site and as presented by the client or relevant parties at the time of inspection. No responsibility can be taken for incorrect or misleading information provided by the client or other parties. The nominated tree/s are assessed for biological requirements and hazard potential with reasonable care. The trees are assessed from the ground and by visual means only unless otherwise stated. All tree protection and tree preservation measures are designed to minimise the damage to the tree/s or to reduce the hazard potential of the tree/s. No responsibility can be taken by the author of this report for future damage to structures by the existing trees or planted trees. Trees are inherently dangerous, therefore will always have a hazard potential. Trees fail in ways that are not predictable or fully
5
understood. There is no guarantee expressed or implied that failure or deficiencies may not arise of the subject trees in the future. No responsibility is accepted for damage to property or injury/death caused by the nominated tree/s.
Appendix 1 ULE Rating
Useful Life Expectancy (ULE): Useful life expectancy refers to an expected period of time the tree can be retained within the landscape before its amenity value declines to a point where it may detract from the appearance of the landscape and/or becomes potentially hazardous to people and/or property. ULE values consider tree species, current age, health, structure and location. ULE values are based on the tree at the time of assessment and do not consider future changes to the tree’s location and environment which may influence the ULE value.
Category Category definition in years: rating: 0 Immediate removal 1 0-5 Years 2 5-10 Years 3 10-20 Years 4 20-30 Years 5 30-50 Years 6 >50 Years
6
Appendix 2 Assessment of Trees
Tree Species Height DBH* Canopy TPZ Health Structure ULE Stars Observations and comments No (m) & DAC** Spread *** Rating Rating (m) *** **** 1 Phoenix canariensis 4 .40 4 4.5 A A 5 L Self-sown palm tree. Phoenix Palm DAC .45 SRZ 2.25 2 Lagunaria patersonii 10 .24 6 3 A A 5 M Norfolk Island DAC .30 SRZ 2 Hibiscus 3 Magnolia grandiflora 7 .25 6 3 A A 5 L Bull Magnolia DC .30 SRZ 2 4 Hymenosporum 5 .08 3 2 P Ba 2 L This tree is stresses and has suffered significant dieback. flavum DAC .10 SRZ 1.5 Native Frangipani 5 Hymenosporum 5 .08 3 2 P Ba 2 L This tree is stresses and has suffered significant dieback. flavum DAC .10 SRZ 1.5 Native Frangipani 6 Hymenosporum 7 .20 5 2.4 A A 5 L flavum DAC .25 SRZ 1.85 Native Frangipani 7 Ulmus parvifolia 10 .31 8 3.6 A A 6 L The tree has a low crown. Chinese Elm DAC .40 SRZ 2.25 8 Ulmus parvifolia 10 .44 9 5.5 Ba A 4 L This tree has a low crown that is sparse, this tree has fungi at the base and Chinese Elm DAC .55 SRZ 2.5 requires testing if long term retention is desired. 9 Hymenosporum 7 .08 3 2 P Ba 2 L This tree is stresses and has suffered significant dieback. flavum DAC .10 SRZ 1.5 Native Frangipani 10 Ulmus parvifolia 9 .31 8 3.6 A A 6 M This tree has significant growth potential and is located .5m off the boundary Chinese Elm DAC .40 SRZ 2.25 wall. 11 Fraxinus raywoodii 8 .20 x 2 9 5 Ba Ba 4 L This tree has some sections of dieback in its crown. Claret Ash DAC .40 SRZ 2.25
7
Tree Species Height DBH* Canopy TPZ Health Structure ULE Stars Observations and comments No (m) & DAC** Spread *** Rating Rating (m) *** ****
12 Ficus rubigonosa 10 .54 10 6.6 Ba Ba 6 L This tree has a sparse crown and is damaging the wall Port Jackson Fig DAC .65 SRZ 2.76
13 Lagunaria patersonii 11 .36 6 4.2 A A 5 M This tree is .5m off the wall and is causing damage. Norfolk Island DAC .40 DAC 2.25 Hibiscus
14 Olea europaea 5 2 x .20 5 5 A A 6 L A self-sown weed tree. African Olive DAC .40 SRZ 2.25
15 Grevillea hookeriana 4 .10 4 2 A Ba 4 L This tree is a shrub, not a tree that was included in the survey. Hookers grevillea DAC .15 SRZ 1.5
16 Banksia integrifolia 16 .36 7 4.25 A A 6 M Coastal Banksia DAC .45 SRZ 2.35
17 Banksia integrifolia 16 .39, .34 9 8 A A 6 M Coastal Banksia DAC .60 SRZ 2.7
18 Banksia integrifolia 16 .43 7 5.5 A A 6 M Coastal Banksia DAC .55 SRZ 2.6
19 Banksia integrifolia 15 .36 7 4.25 A A 6 M Coastal Banksia DAC .45 SRZ 2.35
20 Corymbia citriodora 15 .40 7 5 A A 5 L Lemon Scented Gum DAC .49 SRZ 2.5
21 Banksia integrifolia 16 .51 7 6 A A 6 M Coastal Banksia DAC .60 SRZ 2.7
22 Corymbia ficifolia 10 .20 x 2 5 4.5 A Ba 5 L This tree has been lopped and allowed to regrow. Red Flowering Gum DAC .35 SRZ 2.15
23 Banksia integrifolia 15 .40 7 4.8 A A 6 M Coastal Banksia DAC .50 SRZ 2.5
24 Banksia integrifolia 15 .36 7 4.25 A A 6 M Coastal Banksia DAC .45 SRZ 2.35
25 Araucaria heterophylla 17 .56 8 6.6 A A 6 H Norfolk Island Pine DAC .65 SRZ 2.75
8
Tree Species Height DBH* Canopy TPZ Health Structure ULE Stars Observations and comments No (m) & DAC** Spread *** Rating Rating (m) *** ****
26 Araucaria heterophylla 17 .53 9 6.6 A A 6 H Norfolk Island Pine DAC .64 SRZ 2.75
27 Araucaria heterophylla 18 .60 9 7.2 A A 6 H Norfolk Island Pine DAC .70 SRZ 2.85
28 Howea forsteriana 10 .20 5 2.4 A A 6 M Kentia Palm DAC .25 SRZ 1.85
29 Howea forsteriana 7 .20 4 2.4 Ba Ba 4 L This palm tree has dieback / wilt in its crown. Kentia Palm DAC .25 SRZ 1.85
30 Howea forsteriana 10 .20 5 2.4 A A 6 M Kentia Palm DAC .25 SRZ 1.85
31 Howea forsteriana 10 .20 5 2.4 A A 6 M Kentia Palm DAC .25 SRZ 1.85
32 Howea forsteriana 8 .20 5 2.4 A A 6 M Kentia Palm DAC .25 SRZ 1.85
33 Howea forsteriana 7 .20 5 2.4 A A 6 M Kentia Palm DAC .25 SRZ 1.85
34 Howea forsteriana 5 .15 4 2 A A 6 M Kentia Palm DAC .20 SRZ 1.7
35 Pittosporum 12 2 x .15 7 4.2 A A 5 L A self-sown tree. undulatum DAC .35 SRZ 2.15 Sweet Pittosporum
36 Dypsis decaryi 4 .35 3 4.2 A A 5 L Triangle Palm DAC .30 SRZ 2
37 Dypsis decaryi 4 .35 3 4.2 A A 5 L Triangle Palm DAC .30 SRZ 2
38 Ulmus parvifolia 15 .44 13 5.5 A A 6 M This tree is located 1m off the building and has significant growth potential. Chinese Elm DAC .55 SRZ 2.6
9
Tree Species Height DBH* Canopy TPZ Health Structure ULE Stars Observations and comments No (m) & DAC** Spread *** Rating Rating (m) *** ****
39 Murraya paniculata 4 .10 x 4 4 3 A Ba 5 L This is a mature shrub that was included in the survey. Murraya DAC .25 SRZ 1.85
40 Elaeocarpus reticulatus 17 .20 5 2.4 A A 5 M Blueberry Ash DAC .25 SRZ 1.85
41 Elaeocarpus reticulatus 17 .20 5 2.4 A A 5 M Blueberry Ash DAC .25 SRZ 1.85
42 Phoenix canariensis 7 .95 7 5 A A 6 L Canary Island Date DAC .95 SRZ 2.5 Palm
43 Phoenix canariensis 7 .95 7 5 A A 6 L Canary Island Date DAC .95 SRZ 2.5 Palm
44 Phoenix canariensis 8 .95 7 5 A A 6 L Canary Island Date DAC .95 SRZ 2.5 Palm
45 Phoenix canariensis 8 .95 7 5 A A 6 L Canary Island Date DAC .95 SRZ 2.5 Palm
46 Phoenix canariensis 8 .95 7 5 A A 6 L Canary Island Date DAC .95 SRZ 2.5 Palm
47 Zelkova serrata 9 .25 4 3 A A 5 L Japanese Elm DAC .30 SRZ 2
48 Zelkova serrata 9 .15 x 2, .20 5 4.25 A A 5 L Japanese Elm DAC .35 SRZ 2.15
49 Zelkova serrata 10 2 x .20, .10 5 4.25 A A 5 L Japanese Elm DAC .35 SRZ 2.15
10
Tree Species Height DBH* Canopy TPZ Health Structure ULE Stars Observations and comments No (m) & DAC** Spread *** Rating Rating (m) *** ****
50 Zelkova serrata 10 .15, .10 5 3 A A 5 L Japanese Elm DAC .30 SRZ 2
51 Zelkova serrata 10 3 x .10 4 3.6 A A 5 L Japanese Elm DAC .20 SRZ 1.7
52 Zelkova serrata 10 .25 4 3 A A 5 L Japanese Elm DAC .30 SRZ 2
53 Ficus lyrata 13 .32, .45, .30 15 9.5 A A 6 M This tree has an 11m crown to the East with low branches over the road. #m Fiddle Leaf Fig DAC .80 SRZ 3 high at edge of parking and 5m at edge of road.
54 Eucalyptus saligna 16 .75 12 9 A Ba 5 M Blue Gum DAC .85 SRZ 3.1
55 Phoenix dactylifera 8 .80 6 5 A A 5 L DAC .85 SRZ 2.5
56 Magnolia grandiflora 8 4 x .20 7 9 A A 5 L Bull Magnolia DAC .70 SRZ 2.85
57 Cupaniopsis 5 .10 4 2 Ba A 5 L This tree is partially defoliated. anacardioides DAC .15 SRZ 1.5 Tuckeroo
58 Pittosporum 7 .15 5 2 A A 5 L A self-sown tree. undulatum DAC .20 SRZ 1.7 Sweet Pittosporum
59 Banksia integrifolia 8 .15 5 2 A A 5 L Coastal Banksia DAC .20 SRZ 1.7
60 Pittosporum 6 .10 4 2 A A 5 L A self-sown tree. undulatum DAC .15 SRZ 1.5 Sweet Pittosporum
61 Cupaniopsis 5 .08 3 2 A A 5 L A self-sown tree. anacardioides DAC .10 SRZ 1.5 Tuckeroo
11
Tree Species Height DBH* Canopy TPZ Health Structure ULE Stars Observations and comments No (m) & DAC** Spread *** Rating Rating (m) *** ****
62 Unknown species 7 3 x .10 6 3.6 A A 5 L DAC .30 SRZ 2
63 Unknown species 7 3 x .10 6 3.6 A A 5 L DAC .30 SRZ 2
64 Cupaniopsis 13 .55 12 6.6 A A 6 M This tree has a low crown. anacardioides DAC .65 SRZ 2.75 Tuckeroo
65 Zelkova serrata 6 .20 5 2.4 A Ba 5 L Japanese Elm DAC .25 SRZ 1.85
66 Ficus rubigonosa 3 .08 2 2 A A 6 L Port Jackson Fig DAC .10 SRZ 1.5
67 Livistona australis 14 .30 4 3.6 A A 5 L Cabbage palm DAC .35 SRZ 2
68 Livistona australis 15 .30 4 3.6 A A 5 L Cabbage palm DAC .35 SRZ 2
69 Livistona australis 15 .30 4 3.6 A A 5 L Cabbage palm DAC .35 SRZ 2
70 Melaleuca 5 .22 6 2.5 A Ba 5 L quinquenervia DAC .30 SRZ 2 Paperbark
71 Araucaria heterophylla 16 .40 7 5 A A 6 M Norfolk Island Pine DAC .45 SRZ 2.35
72 Lagunaria patersonii 11 .40 6 5 A A 5 L Norfolk Island DAC .45 SRZ 2.35 Hibiscus
73 Phoenix canariensis 13 .95 7 5 A A 6 L Canary Island Date DAC .95 SRZ 2.5 Palm
12
Tree Species Height DBH* Canopy TPZ Health Structure ULE Stars Observations and comments No (m) & DAC** Spread *** Rating Rating (m) *** ****
74 Lagunaria patersonii 14 .60 10 7.2 A A 6 M Norfolk Island DAC .65 SRZ 2.75 Hibiscus
75 Lagunaria patersonii 9 .30 5 3.6 A Ba 5 L Norfolk Island DAC .35 SRZ 2.15 Hibiscus
76 Cinamomum 16 .30 x 4 12 10 A A 5 L 8 camphora DAC .85 SRZ 3.1 Camphor Laurel
77 Eucalyptus botryoides 15 .20, .35 12 7.2 A A 5 L Southern Mahogany DAC .60 SRZ 2.7
Explanatory Notes for Table *Dbh = Diameter of trunk at breast height. ** DAC = Diameter above the root collar used to measure the Structural Root Zone (SRZ). ***TPZ is the recommended TPZ 12x the DBH at 1.4m, SRZ is the trees structural root zone. Refer to AS4970 for details. **** ULE Explanation can be found in Appendix 1. IACA S.T.A.R.S Rating system. Refer to Appendix 5
13
Appendix 3 Images of Tree
Image 1 above left shows trees 1 & 2 on site. Image 2 above centre shows trees 3 & 4 on site. Image 3 above right shows trees 5 & 6 on site. Image 4 below left shows tree 7 on site. Image 5 below centre shows the base of tree 7 and the fungi. Image below right shows trees 11 and 12 on site.
14
Image 7 shows tree 14 on site. Image 8 above centre shows tree 15 on site. Image 9 above right shows trees 16-18 on site. Image 10 below left shows trees 17 and 18 on site. Image 11 below left centre shows trees 19-21. Image 12 below centre shows trees 24-20. Image 13 below right centre shows tree 25 on site. Image 14 below right shows trees 26 & 27 on site.
15
Image 15 above left shows trees 28-34. Image 16 above left shows the base of tree 35 on the wall. Image 17 above right centre shows tree 35 on site. Image 18 above right shows trees 36 & 37 on site. Image 19 below left shows trees 38, 39 & 42. Image 20 below right shows trees 43-46.
16
Image 21 above left shows trees 49-52. Image 22 above centre shows tree53 on site. Image 23 above right shows tree 53 and its low crown over the entry road. Image 24 below left shows tree 54 and its low limb over the road. Image 25 below right shows trees 54-58.
17
Image 26 above left shows trees 58 – 63. Image 27 above centre shows trees 63 & 64. Image 28 above right shows tree 65. Image 29 below left shows tree 66 on site. Image 30 shows trees 67-70. Image 31 below right centre shows trees 71-76. Image below right shows trees 65-54.
18
Appendix 4 Existing Site Plans 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
8 7
38 42 39 40 41
6 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 5
27 36
66 37 4 67 26 43 68 45 69 44 3 70 46 47 71 48 49 25 50 51 2 52 1 72 73 74 75
76
77
54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 19
Appendix 4 Proposed Site Plan
10 11 12 13 35 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
9 8 38 42 39 40 41
7 66 67 6 37 43 68 5 45 69 27 36 47 70 26 48 44 4 49 50 3 51 71 72 73 74 75 25 52 46 1 2
76 53 77 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66
20
Appendix 5 Legend for S.T.A.R.S matrix assessment IACA Significance of a Tree, Assessment Rating System (STARS) © (IACA 2010)©
In the development of this document IACA acknowledges the contribution and original concept of the Footprint Green Tree Significance & Retention Value Matrix, developed by Footprint Green Pty Ltd in June 2001.
The landscape significance of a tree is an essential criterion to establish the importance that a particular tree may have on a site. However, rating the significance of a tree becomes subjective and difficult to ascertain in a consistent and repetitive fashion due to assessor bias. It is therefore necessary to have a rating system utilising structured qualitative criteria to assist in determining the retention value for a tree. To assist this process all definitions for terms used in the Tree Significance - Assessment Criteria and Tree Retention Value - Priority Matrix, are taken from the IACA Dictionary for Managing Trees in Urban Environments 2009.
This rating system will assist in the planning processes for proposed works, above and below ground where trees are to be retained on or adjacent a development site. The system uses a scale of High, Medium and Low significance in the landscape. Once the landscape significance of an individual tree has been defined, the retention value can be determined. MEMBER OF Tree Significance - Assessment Criteria
1. High Significance in landscape ®
- The tree is in good condition and good vigour; - The tree has a form typical for the species; - The tree is a remnant or is a planted locally indigenous specimen and/or is rare or uncommon in the local area or of botanical interest or of substantial age; - The tree is listed as a Heritage Item, Threatened Species or part of an Endangered ecological community or listed on Councils significant Tree Register; - The tree is visually prominent and visible from a considerable distance when viewed from most directions within the landscape due to its size and scale and makes a positive contribution to the local amenity; - The tree supports social and cultural sentiments or spiritual associations, reflected by the broader population or community group or has commemorative values; - The tree’s growth is unrestricted by above and below ground influences, supporting its ability to reach dimensions typical for the taxa in situ - tree is appropriate to the site conditions.
2. Medium Significance in landscape
- The tree is in fair-good condition and good or low vigour; - The tree has form typical or atypical of the species; - The tree is a planted locally indigenous or a common species with its taxa commonly planted in the local area - The tree is visible from surrounding properties, although not visually prominent as partially obstructed by other vegetation or buildings when viewed from the street, - The tree provides a fair contribution to the visual character and amenity of the local area, - The tree’s growth is moderately restricted by above or below ground influences, reducing its ability to reach dimensions typical for the taxa in situ.
3. Low Significance in landscape
- The tree is in fair-poor condition and good or low vigour; - The tree has form atypical of the species; - The tree is not visible or is partly visible from surrounding properties as obstructed by other vegetation or buildings, - The tree provides a minor contribution or has a negative impact on the visual character and amenity of the local area, - The tree is a young specimen which may or may not have reached dimension to be protected by local Tree Preservation orders or similar protection mechanisms and can easily be replaced with a suitable specimen, - The tree’s growth is severely restricted by above or below ground influences, unlikely to reach dimensions typical for the taxa in situ - tree is inappropriate to the site conditions, - The tree is listed as exempt under the provisions of the local Council Tree Preservation Order or similar protection mechanisms, - The tree has a wound or defect that has potential to become structurally unsound. Environmental Pest / Noxious Weed Species - The tree is an Environmental Pest Species due to its invasiveness or poisonous/ allergenic properties, - The tree is a declared noxious weed by legislation. Hazardous/Irreversible Decline - The tree is structurally unsound and/or unstable and is considered potentially dangerous, - The tree is dead, or is in irreversible decline, or has the potential to fail or collapse in full or part in the immediate to short term.
The tree is to have a minimum of three (3) criteria in a category to be classified in that group.
Note: The assessment criteria are for individual trees only, however, can be applied to a monocultural stand in its entirety e.g. hedge.
21
Table 1.0 Tree Retention Value - Priority Matrix.
Significance
1. High 2. Medium 3. Low Significance in Significance in Significance in Environmental Hazardous / Landscape Landscape Landscape Pest / Noxious Irreversible Weed Species Decline 1. Long >40 years
2. Medium 15-40 Years
3. Short <1-15 Years
Estimated Life Expectancy Life Estimated Dead
MEMBER OF
Legend for Matrix Assessment ®
Priority for Retention (High) - These trees are considered important for retention and should be retained and protected. Design modification or re-location of building/s should be considered to accommodate the setbacks as prescribed by the Australian Standard AS4970 Protection of trees on development sites. Tree sensitive construction measures must be implemented e.g. pier and beam etc if works are to proceed within the Tree Protection Zone. Consider for Retention (Medium) - These trees may be retained and protected. These are considered less critical; however their retention should remain priority with removal considered only if adversely affecting the proposed building/works and all other alternatives have been considered and exhausted.
Consider for Removal (Low) - These trees are not considered important for retention, nor require special works or design modification to be implemented for their retention.
Priority for Removal - These trees are considered hazardous, or in irreversible decline, or weeds and should be removed irrespective of development.
REFERENCES
Australia ICOMOS Inc. 1999, The Burra Charter – The Australian ICOMOS Charter for Places of Cultural Significance, International Council of Monuments and Sites, www.icomos.org/australia
Draper BD and Richards PA 2009, Dictionary for Managing Trees in Urban Environments, Institute of Australian Consulting Arboriculturists (IACA), CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood, Victoria, Australia.
Footprint Green Pty Ltd 2001, Footprint Green Tree Significance & Retention Value Matrix, Avalon, NSW Australia, www.footprintgreen.com.au
22
Appendix 6 References
Australia ICOMOS Inc. 1999, The Burra Charter – The Australian ICOMOS Charter for Places of Cultural Significance, International Council of Monuments and Sites, www.icomos.org/australia
Draper BD and Richards PA 2009, Dictionary for Managing Trees in Urban Environments, Institute of Australian Consulting Arboriculturists (IACA), CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood, Victoria, Australia.
Footprint Green Pty Ltd 2001, Footprint Green Tree Significance & Retention Value Matrix, Avalon, NSW Australia, www.footprintgreen.com.au
Harris, R. W; Clark, J.R; & Matheny, N.P (2004). Arboriculture: Integrated Management of Landscape Trees, Shrubs & Vines 4th Edition, Prentice Hall, New Jersey
Shigo, A.L. (1986). A New Tree Biology. Shigo & Trees, Associates, Durham, New Hampshire
Hadlington, P. & Johnston, J. (1988). Australian Trees: Their Care & Repair. University of NSW Press, Kensington
Lonsdale, D. (1999). Principles of Tree Hazard Assessment & Management. Forestry Commission, The Stationery Office, London
Mattheck, C. & Breloer, H. (1994). The Body Language of Trees. Research for Amenity Trees No.4. The Stationery Office, London
23
Appendix 7 Glossary of Terms Abiotic Nonliving Anthracnose a fungal disease causing dead areas on the leaves, buds, stems. Arboriculture The science and art of caring for trees, shrubs and other woody plants in landscape settings. Barrier Zone Protective boundary formed in new wood in response to wounding or other injury. Biotic Alive, pertaining to living organisms. Branch attachment The structural union of a lateral branch. Callus Undifferentiated tissue produced in response to wounding. Canker A dead spot or necrotic lesion that is caused by a bark inhabiting organism/pathogen. Cavity an open wound characterized by the presence of decay resulting in a hollow. Collar the ring of tissue that surrounds the lateral branch at its point of attachment. Compartmentalization A physiological process that creates the chemical and physical boundaries that act to limit the spread of disease and decay organisms. Compression wood A type of reaction wood that forms on the underside of branches which tends to maintain a branch angle of growth. Crown The above ground parts of the tree, including the trunk. DBH The diameter of a trees trunk measured at 1.4m. Decay Process of degradation of woody tissues by fungi and bacteria through the decomposition of cellulose and lignin. Decline Progressive decrease in health of organs or the entire plant usually caused by a series of interacting factors. Drip line The width of the crown, as measured by the lateral extent of the foliage. Epicormic shoot a shoot that arises from latent or adventitious buds that occur on stems, branches or the bases of trees. Included bark Pattern of development at branch junctions where bark is turned inward, rather than pushed out; contrast with the branch nark ridge. Mortality Spiral The sequence of events describing a change in the trees health from vigorous to declining to death. Photosynthesis The transformation in the presence of chlorophyll and light, of carbon dioxide from (the air) and water (primarily from soil) into a simple carbohydrate and oxygen.
Pruning systematic removal of branches of a plant usually a woody perennial. Reaction wood Specialized secondary xylem that develops in response to a lean or similar mechanical stress to restore the stem to vertical. Taper The change in diameter over the length of trunks and branches. Important to mechanical support. Tension wood A type of reaction wood that trees form on the upper side of branches and stems and roots. VTA Visual Tree Assessment is a method of evaluating structural defects and stability in trees. Wound Any injury that induces a compartmentalization response.
24
Appendix 8, The Ents Tree Consultancy Tree Protection Guidelines
Definitions
A. Tree Protection Zone (TPZ), The TPZ is divided into 2 areas. 1 The Structural Root Zone delineated by an area nominated in table section 4 of the report and is assumed to contain most structural roots. The Tree Protection Zone that is twelve times the diameter of the tree trunk which is used to gauge the amount of feeder roots. No machinery works are permitted in these areas unless specified in this report or without written approval from the Council or the Arborist employed for this job site.
B. Qualified Arborist, for supervision of works and reports level 5. For carrying out tree works level 3 Levels are as recognised by the Australian training framework.
Standards, AS4970 2009, Protection of Trees on development sites. AS 4373: 1996, The pruning of amenity trees.
Tree Protection Generally 1. Prior to works commencing erect a 1800mm chain mesh fence to protect the trees trunk at 12x Dbh or as specified in this report. The Tree Protection Zones as nominated should be marked with line marking paint and observed as an area free from machinery for the duration of the works unless stated otherwise in the accompanying report. Do not remove, alter or relocate without the approval of the Council or the Arborist employed for this site.
2. Trees to be protected in the works contract are items entrusted to the Contractor /owner by the Council for the purpose of carrying out the work under the Contract. The Contractor/owner has obligations to protect these trees as part of the care of the work in the contract conditions.
3. Prior to commencing work on Site confirm with the Council all trees to be protected for the duration of the Works. Confirm also all access and haulage routes, storage areas, tree protection measures and work procedures. Ensure that the protection measures are in place prior to commencing work.
4. Use suitably qualified Arborist (level 5) to supervise earthworks or activities within the Structural Root Zone of tree, Do not severe roots 50mm or greater, which may cause damage to or affect the health of trees. Pruning of trees by the contractor is not permitted. If pruning works are required a suitably qualified (Minimum level 3) arborist will complete all works in the crown. All root pruning must be completed and documented by the level 5 site arborist.
5. Ensure construction trailers, vehicles and equipment do not come in contact with any tree at any time. Do not locate storage areas within the nominated Tree Protection Zone. Do not deposit or store materials, spoil, contaminants, and waste or washout water within Tree Protection Zone.
6. Take all reasonable precautions to protect trees to be retained on site from damage and decline, maintaining their health during the Contract. Implement recognised best practice industry standards to satisfy horticultural requirements for tree care.
7. Assess and monitor water stress in relation to trees on site. This is of particular importance if earthworks have occurred. Apply sufficient water to the trees on site as required to keep the trees healthy. Immediately report to the Council and site arborist, any trees on site that are injured, damaged or are in decline.
NOTE: Failure to comply with any part of these tree protection guidelines or the Australian standard AS4970 or AS4373 will result in the party breaching the Tree Protection Guidelines taking responsibility for all associated consequences.
25
Appendix 9 Curriculum Vitae
Education and Qualifications
2005 Diploma of Arboriculture (AQF Cert 5), Ryde TAFE. Distinction. 2000 Tree Climbing Course (AQF Cert 2), Ryde TAFE. 1999 Advanced Certificate in Urban Horticulture, (AQF Cert 4), Ryde TAFE. Distinction. 1995 Greenkeepers Trade Certificate (AQF 3) Ryde TAFE. Credit. 1991 Higher School Certificate. Conference Attendance/presentation of Scientific Papers Barrell Tree Care Workshop- Trees on Construction Sites (Brisbane 2005) Tree Logic seminar- Urban Tree Risk Management (Sydney 2005) Tree Pathology and Wood Decay Seminar Sydney (2004) Excelsior Training Claus Mattheck (Sydney 2001) Managing Mature Trees NAAA(Sydney 2000), Presented a Paper “Habitat Value of Mature Trees”
Industry Experience
2004 to Date, Sole Trader The Ents Tree Consultancy. Consultant for the Royal Botanic Gardens, Consultant Parramatta Park Trust, Consultant/ Expert Witness Woollahra Council. Master plan works for Sydney University, Taronga Zoo and University of NSW. Writing of tree reports for development applications for Energy Australia, Numerous Architectural Firms and builders. Provision of master plans, hazard evaluations, tree management plans and expert witness reports. Hazard assessments, tree surveys and consultations. 2003 to 2008, Arborist University of New South Wales. Survey all trees on site, developed a Tree Management Database. Minimise hazard potential of all trees on site through evaluation and works. Generate and prioritise works and tree assessment based areas usage, tree conditions and staff required. Development of UNSW Tree Protection Guidelines for master planning works. Acting Supervisor December 2006 to May 2007. 2003 Tree management Officer Randwick Council. Liaise with public to explain and enforce the councils Tree Preservation order. Management of internal staff and contractors. Project management and co-ordination of street tree planting and maintenance. 1999 to 2003 Animal Food Production Manager and Arborist. Management of Koala food Plantation, Management of animal food supply registry for herbivores/omnivores. Coordination of staff contractors and volunteers. Maintain and manage tree management database, complete tree works within zoo grounds and at zoo owned plantations. Acting supervisor 6 month period 2002 for grounds dept and asset management trade team (60 Staff). 1998 to 1999 Sole Trader Techniques Lawn & Garden Consultancy. Lawn, garden and Tree care. Garden design and maintenance. Tree works and tree removal. Installation of irrigation equipment. 1997 to 1998 Greenkeeper / Horticulturist Muirfield Golf Course. General grounds duties, machinery maintenance, horticultural works, tree works 1992 to 1997 Greenkeeper / Horticulturist Ashlar Golf Course. General grounds duties, machinery maintenance, horticultural works, tree works
26
ABORIGINAL CULTURAL HERITAGE ASSESSMENT REPORT
UNSW CLIFFBROOK CAMPUS 45-51 BEACH STREET COOGEE NSW
RANDWICK LGA
DRAFT
Mary Dallas Consulting Archaeologists
March 2017
Report to fjmt studio on behalf of UNSW
MARY DALLAS CONSULTING ARCHAEOLOGISTS PO BOX A281 ARNCLIFFE NSW 2205 TEL (02) 4465 2546 FAX (02) 8520 2006 [email protected] Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment Report UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, Coogee NSW
Table of contents
1.0 Project Overview 3
1.1 Introduction 3
1.2 Report Authorship 4
1.3 Site Identification 4
1.4 Reason for the Current Study 8
1.5 Methods Used 11
1.6 Study Limitations 11
2.0 Aboriginal Cultural Assessment 12
2.1 Aboriginal Community Consultation 12
2.2 Aboriginal Cultural Significance within the Subject Lands 15
3.0 Archaeological Assessment 16
3.1 Introduction 16
3.2 Environmental Context 16
3.3 European Land Use 19
3.4 Aboriginal Historical Associations 21
3.5 Archaeological Context 21
4.0 Summary of Assessment Results 33
4.1 Aboriginal Objects within the Subject Lands 33
4.2 Significance Assessment 34
5.0 Mitigation and Management 36
5.1 Potential Impacts to Aboriginal Objects 36
5.2 Potential Mitigative Measures 36
5.3 Proposed Management 36
6.0 Recommendations 41
7.0 References 42
Appendix A. Aboriginal Community Consultation Records
Appendix B. AHIMS Records
1
MARY DALLAS CONSULTING ARCHAEOLOGISTS PO BOX A281 ARNCLIFFE NSW 2205 TEL (02) 4465 2546 FAX (02) 8520 2006 [email protected] Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment Report UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, Coogee NSW
List of Tables
Table 1. Direct Agency Notices sent 16/1/2017. 13
Table 2. Direct Community Notices. 13
Table 3. Registered Aboriginal Parties. 14
Table 4. Typical eastern Sydney dune stratigraphy. 17
Table 5. Summary of site types in the AHIMS search area. 22
List of Figures
Figure 1. The subject land in its local context. 5
Figure 2. Aerial photograph of the subject land. 5
Figure 3. Current survey plan of the subject land showing existing structures. 6
Figure 4. Indicative concept – site plan 7
Figure 5. View north from Coogee Beach around 1885. 17
Figure 6. Typical Eastern Sydney dune profile missing A1 Horizon. 18
Figure 7. 1943 aerial showing now demolished buildings and vegetation clearance in the southern portion. 20
Figure 8. Aboriginal sites registered on AHIMS within the vicinity of the subject land (Blue shading). 23
Figure 9. View north-west to Cliffbrook House showing terraced dune area in the foreground. 31
Figure 10. View south-east over built up retaining wall containing piped drainage. 31
Figure 11. View east beyond the Cliffbrook Campus showing raised areas containing residential allotments and sloping ground below. 31
Figure 12. Sandstone exposures are typically limited in extent and overgrown in the eastern third of the subject land. 32
Figure 13. Property edging and footings are likely to have been carved from outcropping sandstone in the eastern third of the property. 32
Figure 14. View north-west upslope from the Gordons Bay walkway to the subject land. 32
Figure 15. Recommended Aboriginal archaeological investigations within the subject land. 34
2
MARY DALLAS CONSULTING ARCHAEOLOGISTS PO BOX A281 ARNCLIFFE NSW 2205 TEL (02) 4465 2546 FAX (02) 8520 2006 [email protected] Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment Report UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, Coogee NSW
1.0 1.0Project Overview
1.1 Introduction
This Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment (‘ACHA’) report has been prepared by MDCA [Mary Dallas Consulting Archaeologists] at the request of fjmt studio and on behalf of UNSW. It has been prepared to inform a State Significant Development application for the redevelopment of the University of New South Wales Cliffbrook Campus on the corner of Beach and Battery Streets at Coogee (the subject land). Known as Lot 1 DP8162 and Lot 1 DP109530, the subject land is situated between Gordon’s Bay and Clovelly Bay in the eastern suburbs of Sydney (Figures 1 & 2).
Projects assessed as State Significant Developments do not require approval under s90 of the National Parks & Wildlife Act 1974 to impact Aboriginal heritage, but are instead guided by the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement that addresses the Secretary’s Environmental Assessment Requirements (SEARs) for each particular project. The SEARS refer however to the same guiding documents as required for projects approved outside of State Significant Development provisions, and hence reporting and assessment takes an overall similar form. In relation to the current proposal, the SEARS require the application to:
Address Aboriginal Cultural Heritage (ACH) in accordance with the Guide to investigating, assessing and reporting on Aboriginal Cultural Heritage in NSW (DECCW 2011) and Aboriginal cultural heritage consultation requirements for proponents 2010 Part 6 National Parks & Wildlife Act 1974 (DECCW 2010a).
demonstrate attempts to avoid any impact upon cultural heritage values and identify any conservation outcomes. Where impacts are unavoidable, outline measures proposed to mitigate impacts.
The report documents the Aboriginal archaeological assessment undertaken in accordance with the Office of Environment & Heritage (OEH) Code of Practice for Archaeological Investigation of Aboriginal Objects in New South Wales (DECCW 2010b; hereafter ‘the Code’) to address the SEARs in relation to the current proposal. It is in the form of an Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment report, as referred to in the Code and the National Parks and Wildlife Regulation 2009 (NPW Regulation), and details management recommendations in relation to the development proposal. MDCA has also undertaken a European archaeological assessment of the proposal, including the State Heritage Register listed Cliffbrook House within the subject land. This is fully documented in a separate report (MDCA 2017), but is discussed where relevant in the current report.
3
MARY DALLAS CONSULTING ARCHAEOLOGISTS PO BOX A281 ARNCLIFFE NSW 2205 TEL (02) 4465 2546 FAX (02) 8520 2006 [email protected] Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment Report UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, Coogee NSW
The current report contains the following:
A description of the subject land and project (Section 1)
Details of the Aboriginal cultural assessment undertaken (Section 2)*
Details of the Aboriginal archaeological assessment undertaken (Section 3)
A discussion of the results and conclusions from the assessment (Section 4)
A discussion of potential impacts and management strategies (Section 5)
A set of management recommendations (Section 6)
References used in the current report (Section 7)
Aboriginal community consultation records (Appendix A)*
AHIMS Records (Appendix B)
* Note that due to lodgement timeframes, the Aboriginal community consultation process is not yet finalised (see Section 2 for more details). An addendum to the current report will be submitted on completion of the consultation, and will address any additional issues raised during this process, and their implications.
1.2 Report Authorship
This report has been prepared by MDCA Principal archaeologist Paul Irish as well as qualified archaeologist, Tamika Goward.
1.3 Site Identification
The subject land is approximately 1.15ha in size and is situated on Gordon’s Bay, approximately 6km southeast of the Sydney CBD and 10km north of Botany Bay (Figure 1). It is located within the Randwick Local Government Area, Parish of Alexandria and lies within the Office of Environment and Heritage Metropolitan South West Region. It is bounded to the south by Gordon’s Bay, to the west by Beach Street, to the north by Battery Street and to the east by Tower Street (Figure 2). The subject land currently contains the UNSW Cliffbrook Campus which comprises four main buildings (CC1 - CC4) with thoroughfares and car parking areas, landscaped gardens and lawns, as well as steeply sloping vegetated land above the bay. The centrepiece is the landmark, state heritage-listed 1920s mansion - Cliffbrook House (CC1). Most of the buildings are currently tenanted as offices, with the majority (including the offices of UNSW Press) located in Building CC4. In addition, Lot 8 DP8162 (10 Battery St) is an adjoining residential allotment which is also under consideration as part of the current assessment (Figure 3).
4
MARY DALLAS CONSULTING ARCHAEOLOGISTS PO BOX A281 ARNCLIFFE NSW 2205 TEL (02) 4465 2546 FAX (02) 8520 2006 [email protected] Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment Report UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, Coogee NSW
500m
Figure 1. The subject land in its local context.
Battery Street
Street
Beach
Street Tower
100m Gordons Bay
Figure 2. Aerial photograph of the subject land.
5
MARY DALLAS CONSULTING ARCHAEOLOGISTS PO BOX A281 ARNCLIFFE NSW 2205 TEL (02) 4465 2546 FAX (02) 8520 2006 [email protected] Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment Report UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, Coogee NSW
Figure 3. Current survey plan of the subject land showing existing structures. (Source: UNSW).
6
MARY DALLAS CONSULTING ARCHAEOLOGISTS PO BOX A281 ARNCLIFFE NSW 2205 TEL (02) 4465 2546 FAX (02) 8520 2006 [email protected] Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment Report UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, Coogee NSW
FINAL plan to be added
Figure 4. Indicative concept – site plan (Source: FJMT Architects).
7
MARY DALLAS CONSULTING ARCHAEOLOGISTS PO BOX A281 ARNCLIFFE NSW 2205 TEL (02) 4465 2546 FAX (02) 8520 2006 [email protected] Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment Report UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, Coogee NSW
1.4 Reason for the Current Study
1.4.1 Proposed Development
The current proposal is to construct a purpose-built facility primarily to house the UNSW Australian Graduate School of Management (AGSM) residential program, which will provide accommodation and learning facilities. The proposal involves (and see Figure 4):
Demolition of the L-shaped, multipurpose/multilevel building (CC4) that dominates the northern portion of the subject land.
Conservation of heritage buildings and structures including Cliffbrook mansion (CC1), the sandstone garage/office (CC3) and the sandstone perimeter wall and retention and conservation of significant plantings and landscapes. The mansion and garage are likely to be adaptively reused for seminar rooms and a gymnasium respectively.
Construction of a new residential and educational retreat, largely within the footprint of the building that is to be demolished. The three-level building includes basement car parking, entrance, reception spaces, student support facilities, kitchen & dining facilities, flexible teaching rooms, up to 52 bedrooms, bathrooms, storage facilities, cleaning rooms, services plant rooms and infrastructure.
In addition to the above, there will also be services upgrades (including installation of an electrical substation) as well as general landscaping improvements aimed at improving amenity and synthesising heritage, environment and architectural form within the unique coastal setting of the place.
It could be expected that these works will impact the surface and immediate subsurface of the existing site, and considerably deeper in areas where demolition of existing buildings and/or construction of the new three-level building is proposed. These works have the potential to impact Aboriginal cultural material, if present.
1.4.2 Legislative & Policy Requirements
The Office of Environment & Heritage (OEH) administers the National Parks & Wildlife Act (1974) which provides statutory protection for all Aboriginal ‘objects’ and ‘places’, is responsible for the issuing of permits under the NPW Act, and provides policy documents that define Aboriginal heritage management under the Act. The NPW Act defines and object as:
“any deposit, object or material evidence (not being a handicraft made for sale) relating to the Aboriginal habitation of the area that comprises New South Wales, being habitation
8
MARY DALLAS CONSULTING ARCHAEOLOGISTS PO BOX A281 ARNCLIFFE NSW 2205 TEL (02) 4465 2546 FAX (02) 8520 2006 [email protected] Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment Report UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, Coogee NSW
before or concurrent with (or both) the occupation of that area by persons of non-Aboriginal extraction, and includes Aboriginal remains” [Section 5(1)]
An Aboriginal place must be declared under Section 84 of the Act and be a place that:
in the opinion of the Minister, is or was of special significance with respect to Aboriginal culture, to be an Aboriginal place for the purposes of this Act.” [Section 84].
Amendments to the NPW Act in 2010 have retained an offence to knowingly harm an Aboriginal object [s86(1)] but greatly increased penalties for such offences. The amendments have also introduced a strict liability offence for any harm (i.e. knowingly or unknowingly) to Aboriginal objects [s86(2)] or Aboriginal places [s86(4)] without a valid and applicable Aboriginal Heritage Impact Permit under Section 90 of the Act. Harm is defined as:
“any act or omission that: (a) destroys, defaces or damages the object or place, or (b) in relation to an object—moves the object from the land on which it had been situated, or (c) is specified by the regulations, or (d) causes or permits the object or place to be harmed in a manner referred to in paragraph (a), (b) or (c)” [Section 5(1)]
It is a defence to the strict liability offence of harm to an Aboriginal object under s86(2) if a process of Due Diligence was followed which reasonably determined that the proposed activity would not harm an Aboriginal object [S87(2)]. Due Diligence assessment can take several forms, including a generic process developed by the OEH (as described in DECCW 2010a) or one of an equivalent standard. An exemption is also provided for ‘low impact activities’ which result in unknowing damage to an Aboriginal object, including a range of common farm and track maintenance activities.
Impacts to Aboriginal objects generally require an Aboriginal Heritage Impact Permit (AHIP), applications for which must be accompanied by an Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment report. An exception is impacts proposed through projects assessed as State Significant Development, where an AHIP is not required (see below). In general however, the same level of assessment and documentation are required for most of these projects, and methodologies for investigations such as archaeological excavation follow the same guidelines and regulations. In particular:
The Code of Practice for Archaeological Investigation of Aboriginal Objects in NSW (DECCW 2010b) sets out the requirements for Aboriginal heritage investigations and reporting, including the required format and contents of Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment reports which must accompany all AHIP applications.
9
MARY DALLAS CONSULTING ARCHAEOLOGISTS PO BOX A281 ARNCLIFFE NSW 2205 TEL (02) 4465 2546 FAX (02) 8520 2006 [email protected] Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment Report UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, Coogee NSW
S80C of the National Parks and Wildlife Regulation 2009 [‘the Regulation’], as detailed further in the Aboriginal cultural heritage consultation requirements for proponents 2010. Part 6 National Parks & Wildlife Act 1974 (OEH 2010c), sets out the legislated requirements for Aboriginal community consultation in relation to AHIP applications, which must be fully documented in the Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment reports accompanying any such applications. The consultation process includes placing a public advertisement to seek expressions of interest in the project (or more precisely the AHIP to be sought) as well as directly notifying Local Aboriginal Land Councils and government agencies dealing with Aboriginal communities in the area. People or organisations can register as “Registered Aboriginal Parties” which provides them with a right to review and comment on aspects of AHIP applications, and to provide advice on Aboriginal cultural and historical significance.
The way in which Aboriginal heritage is managed with respect to proposed development impacts is set out in the provisions of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 (the EP&A Act). The EP&A Act has three main parts of direct relevance to Aboriginal cultural heritage. Namely, Part III which governs the preparation of planning instruments, Part IV which relates to development assessment process and Part V which relates to activity approvals by governing (determining) authorities.
Part IV is of most relevance to the current project, and deals with the process of obtaining development consent, including the requirement for documentation of an assessment of potential development impacts in certain cases. Under Part 4 (Division 4.1) of the EP&A Act, projects can be deemed to be of State Significance. In these cases, the Department of Planning & Infrastructure takes over the role of the determining authority from Council. Importantly, projects assessed as State Significant Developments (SSD) do not require Aboriginal heritage impact approvals under the NPW Act but do require a process of investigation broadly parallel to that under the Act, as generally set out in the Secretary’s Environmental Assessment Requirements (SEARs) for each SSD project.
In summary, the implications of the provisions of the NPW Act and EP&A Act for the current project are as follows:
As a State Significant Development, an investigation of Aboriginal cultural heritage values must be undertaken to inform the Environmental Impact Assessment of the proposal. While impacts to Aboriginal objects in the context of State Significant Developments do not require approval under s90 of the NPW Act, similar processes of archaeological assessment and Aboriginal community consultation are required to be undertaken and documented, and impacts to Aboriginal objects should be avoided where possible.
10
MARY DALLAS CONSULTING ARCHAEOLOGISTS PO BOX A281 ARNCLIFFE NSW 2205 TEL (02) 4465 2546 FAX (02) 8520 2006 [email protected] Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment Report UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, Coogee NSW
1.5 Methods Used
The current study documents the archaeological assessment of the subject land and proposed impacts, and includes full documentation of a prescribed process of Aboriginal community consultation in accordance with current OEH guidelines (DECCW 2010c) and in fulfilment of the SEARS for the current proposal.
1.6 Study Limitations
Due to time constraints between the issuing of SEARS and the lodgement of the project application, the Aboriginal community consultation process required under the SEARS has been partly completed, as outlined in Section 2. An addendum to the current report will be submitted on completion of the consultation, outlining any additional issues identified and making additional or revised recommendations as required.
11
MARY DALLAS CONSULTING ARCHAEOLOGISTS PO BOX A281 ARNCLIFFE NSW 2205 TEL (02) 4465 2546 FAX (02) 8520 2006 [email protected] Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment Report UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, Coogee NSW
2.0 2.0Aboriginal Cultural Assessment
Consultation with the local Aboriginal community was undertaken in order to document the Aboriginal cultural significance of the subject land in relation the proposed archaeological investigations. This section documents that consultation, which was undertaken in accordance with the requirements of the National Parks and Wildlife Amendment (Aboriginal Objects and Aboriginal Places) Regulation 2010 (s80C) [‘the Regulation’]. Initially this involved formulating a list of Registered Aboriginal Parties to be consulted about the project.
As noted above in Section 1.6, due to time constraints between the issuing of SEARS and the lodgement of the project application, at the time of lodgement of the current report, the Aboriginal community consultation process has been completed to the stage of identifying Registered Aboriginal Parties and providing them with project information and methodology for their review and comment. An addendum to the current report will be submitted on completion of the consultation, outlining any additional issues identified and making additional or revised recommendations as required. It will also contain copies of relevant correspondence.
2.1 Aboriginal Community Consultation
2.1.1 Public and Direct Notices
For the purposes of initial due diligence Aboriginal heritage advice provided to the proponent in 2016 (incorporated into the current report), the La Perouse Local Aboriginal Land Council (LPLALC) were consulted to provide an Aboriginal community perspective, particularly in relation to any cultural/historical associations with the subject land. The LPLALC has a statutory responsibility “to promote the protection of Aboriginal culture and the heritage of Aboriginal persons”1 within its boundaries, which includes the current subject land. The LPLALC participated in a field inspection and also monitored some initial geotechnical investigations undertaken across western portion of the subject land. As such the La Perouse Local Aboriginal Land Council was automatically listed as a Registered Aboriginal Party for this project but provided with an opt out had they wished to have no further involvement.
A public notice seeking registrations of interest in the project was lodged in the St George and Sutherland Shire Leader on 17/1/2017 giving a date of 1/2/2017 for responses (Appendix A1). At the same time (16/1/20117) direct notices were sent to the agencies listed below (Table 1) to seek details of potential further Aboriginal parties to contact in relation to registrations of interest (see sample in Appendix A1). The responses received (Appendix A1) led to follow up letters being
1 Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983, s52(1)(m). 12
MARY DALLAS CONSULTING ARCHAEOLOGISTS PO BOX A281 ARNCLIFFE NSW 2205 TEL (02) 4465 2546 FAX (02) 8520 2006 [email protected] Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment Report UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, Coogee NSW
sent to the organisations listed in Table 2, enquiring whether they were interested in registering an interest in the project (see sample in Appendix A1).
Table 1. Direct Agency Notices sent 16/1/2017.
Agency Response Response Additional Contacts to those already Registered Deadline Received? Greater Sydney Local Land 1/2/2017 Yes The LLS states that it only considers heritage in the Services context of natural resource management projects and cannot provide contact lists for Aboriginal groups or persons to inform planning issues. National Native Title 1/2/2017 No No results. Tribunal NTS Corp 1/2/2017 No OEH 1/2/2017 Yes Walgalu, Thauaira, Dharug, Bilinga Cultural Heritage Technical Services, Gunyuu Cultural Heritage Technical Services, Munyunga Cultural Heritage Technical Services, Murrumbul Cultural Heritage Technical Services, Wingikara Cultural Heritage Technical Services, Gulaga, Biamanga, Callendulla, Murramarang, Butucarbin Aboriginal Corporation, Didge Ngunawal Clan, Ginninderra Aboriginal Corporation NSW Department of 1/2/2017 Yes No additional contacts suggested. Aboriginal Affairs/ Registrar of Aboriginal Owners 1/2/2017 No La Perouse LALC 1/2/2017 Yes No additional contacts suggested. Randwick City Council
Table 2. Direct Community Notices.
Community group Date of Response Response Seeking Registration? Letter Deadline Received? Walgalu 3/2/2017 22/2/2017 Thauaira 3/2/2017 22/2/2017 Dharug 3/2/2017 22/2/2017 Bilinga Cultural Heritage Technical 3/2/2017 22/2/2017 Services Gunyuu Cultural Heritage Technical 3/2/2017 22/2/2017 Services Munyunga Cultural Heritage 3/2/2017 22/2/2017 Technical Services Murrumbul Cultural Heritage 3/2/2017 22/2/2017 Technical Services Wingikara Cultural Heritage 3/2/2017 22/2/2017 Technical Services Gulaga 3/2/2017 22/2/2017 14/2/2017 Yes Biamanga 3/2/2017 22/2/2017 19/2/2017 Yes Callendulla 3/2/2017 22/2/2017 19/2/2017 Yes Murramarang 3/2/2017 22/2/2017 19/2/2017 Yes
13
MARY DALLAS CONSULTING ARCHAEOLOGISTS PO BOX A281 ARNCLIFFE NSW 2205 TEL (02) 4465 2546 FAX (02) 8520 2006 [email protected] Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment Report UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, Coogee NSW
Butucarbin Aboriginal Corporation 3/2/2017 22/2/2017 6/2/2017 Yes Didge Ngunawal Clan 3/2/2017 22/2/2017 4/2/2017 Yes Ginninderra Aboriginal Corporation 3/2/2017 22/2/2017 9/2/2017 Yes
2.1.1 Registered Aboriginal Parties
On the basis of the notification process above, the following Aboriginal organisations were listed as Registered Aboriginal Parties and details of these organisations were sent to the OEH and the La Perouse LALC as required by the Regulation (80C[5b]) on Monday 27th February, 2017.
Table 3. Registered Aboriginal Parties.
Name Abbreviation Used in this Report La Perouse LALC LPLALC Darug Land Observations DLO Goobah Goobah Gulaga Gulaga Butucarbin Aboriginal Corporation Butucarbin Didge Ngunawal Clan DNC Ginninderra Aboriginal Corporation Ginninderra Callendulla Callendulla Biamanga Biamanga Murramarang Murramarang
2.1.2 Project Information and Comment on Methodology
All Registered Aboriginal Parties were sent project information and a proposed assessment methodology on 7 March 2017 with a deadline of 7 April 2017 for responses (see Appendix A2). Specifically, all Registered Aboriginal Parties were requested to provide comment on:
The proposed assessment methodology.
Any objects or places of cultural value to Aboriginal people which may be located within the current subject land, and any other Aboriginal cultural or historical information relevant to the current assessment and proposal.
Aboriginal cultural knowledge relating to the subject land.
In addition, Registered Aboriginal Parties were requested to inform MDCA of any information of a culturally sensitive nature so that appropriate protocols of access and use could be developed.
As noted above, the current report and project application have been lodged prior to the completion of the Aboriginal community consultation process. Responses to the information and
14
MARY DALLAS CONSULTING ARCHAEOLOGISTS PO BOX A281 ARNCLIFFE NSW 2205 TEL (02) 4465 2546 FAX (02) 8520 2006 [email protected] Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment Report UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, Coogee NSW
methodology, and to a similar review of the current report will be included in an Addendum to the current report, to be submitted on receipt of all comments.
2.2 Aboriginal Cultural Significance within the Subject Lands
The Aboriginal community consultation undertaken so far in relation to the current project has not identified any specific Aboriginal cultural connections or significance relating to the current subject land. However through past projects and current research, the Coogee area is known to be of cultural significance to the La Perouse Aboriginal community, and (as detailed below), continued to be used throughout the nineteenth century by coastal Sydney people.
15
MARY DALLAS CONSULTING ARCHAEOLOGISTS PO BOX A281 ARNCLIFFE NSW 2205 TEL (02) 4465 2546 FAX (02) 8520 2006 [email protected] Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment Report UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, Coogee NSW
3.0 3.0Archaeological Assessment
3.1 Introduction
The Aboriginal Archaeological Assessment component of the current study is based on the requirements of the OEH Code of Practice for Archaeological Investigation of Aboriginal Objects in New South Wales (DECCW 2010b). The current section describes the environmental and archaeological context of the subject land.
3.2 Environmental Context
3.2.1 Geology, Soils and Hydrology
The subject land lies on a south-facing slope above Gordon’s Bay on the Pacific Ocean coast. The landscape in this area is dominated by rocky seacoast and headlands which alternate between protected bays. The subject land overlooks a steep slope with outcropping sandstone to the south which extends down to the small inlet and beach of Gordons Bay. The area is ultimately underlain by Hawkesbury Sandstone which outcrops along the eastern and southern extents of the subject land. Geological and soil landscape mapping suggests that the western portion of the subject land is located on the eastern edge of a Quaternary dune system that characterises most of eastern Sydney (Chapman et. al 1989). Recent geotechnical investigations within the subject land have shown that these dune deposits are several metres in depth and overly sandstone bedrock across the subject land, except its eastern and southern portions which contain outcropping sandstone.
The dune comprises Quaternary wind-blown sands, which elsewhere have been dated to around 35,000 BP. This extensive system of dune ridges and swales extends west from the coast to the Lachlan and Botany Swamps. The topography of the surrounding area is defined by the dunes, and broadly aligned southeast to northwest and up to 20-30m in height. Due to their substantial nature, the dunes have survived broadly in their original (i.e. 1788) form, though often with significant impacts to their uppermost units from historical land use. The broad topography of these dunes in the vicinity of the subject land can be seen in Figure 5.
A range of archaeological and geotechnical investigations across eastern Sydney have shown that the dunes consist of a common stratigraphic sequence. The thickness and specific composition of the horizons (particularly the ‘coffee rock’) within these dunes varies, which are described either as the Newport or Tuggerah Soil Landscape according to soil classification mapping for the region (Chapman et. al 1989). A typical stratigraphic sequence is outlined in Table 4 and illustrated in Figure 6. Typically the dune profile comprises white or grey sands (A Horizon) above the precipitation zone of hard orange brown to dark brown to black sand (B1 Horizon) and
16
MARY DALLAS CONSULTING ARCHAEOLOGISTS PO BOX A281 ARNCLIFFE NSW 2205 TEL (02) 4465 2546 FAX (02) 8520 2006 [email protected] Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment Report UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, Coogee NSW
unweathered yellow sands (B2 Horizon) below it and overlying the sandstone bedrock. The dune profile does not contain a weathered bedrock layer (C Horizon) suggesting that the sandstone was exposed at the time of dune formation.
Figure 5. View north from Coogee Beach around 1885. [The northern headland of Coogee is in the centre and the next bay and ridge beyond this is Gordons Bay and the subject land respectively. Source: Illustrated Sydney News 20/1/1883:5].
Table 4. Typical eastern Sydney dune stratigraphy.
Horizon Typical Thickness Description
A1 0 - 0.3/0.4m Thin upper humic topsoil
A2 1.0 – 1.5m Leached white Aeolian sands
B1 0.5 – 1m [Precipitation Zone]. Heavily indurated mottled sands described as Waterloo or coffee rock
B2 Various Unweathered yellow sand
Bedrock Sandstone bedrock
17
MARY DALLAS CONSULTING ARCHAEOLOGISTS PO BOX A281 ARNCLIFFE NSW 2205 TEL (02) 4465 2546 FAX (02) 8520 2006 [email protected] Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment Report UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, Coogee NSW
Figure 6. Typical Eastern Sydney dune profile missing A1 Horizon. [Documented in 2005 excavations by MDCA at Long Bay Correctional Complex].
Within the subject land, geotechnical testing at several localities suggests that this dune deposit is 1-2m in thickness on top of sandstone bedrock in the northern portion of the subject land closest to Battery Street, and 5-8m in thickness towards the southern boundary in the western half of the subject land.2 This testing further suggested that the ‘coffee rock’ horizon in these thicker dune deposits was around 2m below the current surface, and that there was little evidence of the pre- European humic topsoil (A1) horizon, no doubt as a result of historical impacts to the area. The Aboriginal heritage implications of this landform are discussed further below.
Intact Aboriginal occupation deposits dated at 8,000 years ago have been identified within the A2 horizon [leached fine loose white dune sand] of the dune about two kilometres south-west of the current subject land within the area of the former Randwick Destitute Children’s Asylum Cemetery (Austral/Godden Mackay 1997 Volume 2 Part 3). Ages for the upper dune units in the region have been obtained from sediments within a cross-section of the Banksmeadow area. Here, a date of >35,000 years was obtained on peat beneath coffee rock (from the B2 horizon) and a Holocene
2 PSM prelim Borelog data – full and final reference to be added 18
MARY DALLAS CONSULTING ARCHAEOLOGISTS PO BOX A281 ARNCLIFFE NSW 2205 TEL (02) 4465 2546 FAX (02) 8520 2006 [email protected] Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment Report UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, Coogee NSW
date was obtained for freshwater peat above the coffee rock. The Holocene date is likely to be the result of reworking of the older dune surface during times of devegetation and erosion.
The background radiocarbon ages of >35,000 years for the dune system indicate its initial formation in the Last Glacial Maximum, prior to the formation of Botany Bay and with the ocean edge a number of kilometres further east than at present. Over the last 10,000 years the dune sands above the coffee rock have also been reworked (scoured and added to) by wind. Shifting dunes and associated swales have also lead to the development of ephemeral swamps in this period, evidenced as peaty layers within the dune above the coffee rock layer.
3.2.2 Vegetation and Resources
The vegetation present on the dune in early historic times was a mixture of ‘heath, scrub and low forest vegetation with a rich variety of shrubs’ including banksia and grass trees known collectively as Eastern Suburbs Banksia Scrub (Benson & Howell 1995). The rich resources of the ocean shore were very close to the subject land, with fresh water most likely available from springs and creeks draining into Gordons Bay. The availability of these resources would have made the subject land an attractive place for Aboriginal people to have used. The dunes would also have provided an array of plant foods including fruits, nectar, tubers and roots (Benson & Howell 1995:12ff) and probably also freshwater fish, eels and freshwater mussels. Freshwater was also available from rock holes in the general area. The extent to which these resources (or others) were available (and exploited) in the more distant past is not known, though lipid analysis of one of the hearth stones excavated in the Randwick area from the dune underneath the Randwick Destitute Children’s Asylum Cemetery, indicated that freshwater fish were cooked on the fire here (Austral/Godden Mackay 1997 Volume 2 Part 3:30).
3.3 European Land Use
The subject land is likely to have been subject to clearing of the indigenous brush and scrub in the years between its granting in the 1840s and construction of the original Cliffbrook estate (Gordon Place) in the 1860s. The construction of Cliffbrook saw significant local landscape changes with the stone for the mansion, outbuildings, walls and terracing quarried from the site (NOTE that the original Cliffbrook mansion was not located within the subject land and the current Cliffbrook House is unrelated to the previous mansion except in name). The establishment of gardens, exotic plantings, a tennis court and lawn areas is also likely to have changed the appearance of the place. The subject land was further adapted in the 1920s, when the outbuildings were demolished and the second (and current) Cliffbrook House was built by Sir Denison Miller. Further landscaping and the modification of gardens and access ways likely occurred at this time to accommodate a refocusing of the estate away from the original Cliffbrook and onto the new. During the mid-twentieth century,
19
MARY DALLAS CONSULTING ARCHAEOLOGISTS PO BOX A281 ARNCLIFFE NSW 2205 TEL (02) 4465 2546 FAX (02) 8520 2006 [email protected] Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment Report UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, Coogee NSW
additional AAEC buildings and amenities were added to the site and numerous in-ground services added. More recently, several parking areas have been formalised (and paved or played with bitumen).
An aerial image from 1943 reveals the extent of historical disturbance to the property by that time (see Figure 7). Specifically, it shows that by the 1940s, all original timber had been cleared on the property, a number of buildings and other structures were present across the western portion of the subject land, extensive terracing of the dune deposits had taken place in the southern central portion of the property and areas immediately south, and a deep drainage channel had been excavated to drain the area south into Gordons Bay. The image also shows that there are three distinct parallel bands of outcropping sandstone in the eastern end of the property; level with the end of Tower Street, immediately above Gordons Bay and about halfway between the two. The outcrops within the property are not extensive. Historical activities could be expected to have removed the uppermost pre-European soil horizons of the dune, with implications for the nature of any surviving archaeological remains, as discussed below.
Figure 7. 1943 aerial showing now demolished buildings and vegetation clearance in the southern portion.
20
MARY DALLAS CONSULTING ARCHAEOLOGISTS PO BOX A281 ARNCLIFFE NSW 2205 TEL (02) 4465 2546 FAX (02) 8520 2006 [email protected] Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment Report UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, Coogee NSW
3.4 Aboriginal Historical Associations
Aboriginal people continued to use the general area after the arrival of Europeans and throughout the nineteenth century. No direct references to the use of the specific subject land by Aboriginal people after this time have been located to date. It is likely that, at least until the mid-nineteenth century, Aboriginal people continued to use the resources of the dunes, though after this time movement became more restricted by advancing European rural and suburban subdivision.
Research has been undertaken by the current report authors, into post-European contact Aboriginal use of the Sydney region (Irish & Goward 2012; Irish in press). The research shows that a series of Aboriginal settlements was present around Botany Bay and Sydney Harbour, as well as the dune areas in between, and along the ocean coast at places like Bondi, Long Bay and Little Bay. For example, there are records of a major camp near Long Bay for Aboriginal people occupied before and for some time after the arrival of Europeans (Dallas & Tuck 2005:59). A shelter with midden in Long Bay may also have been used by Aboriginal people in the historic period for smallpox victims (Dallas & Tuck 2005:46). It can be assumed an unknown number of Aboriginal prehistoric and historic sites have been destroyed by the intense development across the eastern and south-eastern Sydney area.
Some Aboriginal people had long-term relationships with some influential European landholders in the area. Among these Europeans was the Hill family, comprising brothers George, Richard and Edward Smith Hill, all of whom were born in the early 1800s and maintained close relationships with Sydney’s Aboriginal people throughout their lives. Richard Hill’s son George owned the original Cliffbrook estate in the 1880s and 1890s, and hosted Aboriginal people from La Perouse there once a month or so for cricket matches, foot races and other festivities, as well as providing meals on his lawn (Waugh 1989:8-9). After his death in 1897, his son George Jr continued to have dealings with the Aboriginal people at La Perouse, but Cliffbrook House was no longer the venue, as it had been sold to others by this time.
3.5 Archaeological Context
3.5.1 Previous Archaeological Work & Site Recordings
Background research into archaeological investigations previously completed within and surrounding the subject land was undertaken for the current study. Sources accessed included the OEH Aboriginal Heritage Information Management System Aboriginal Sites Register (‘the AHIMS Register’) and Catalogue of Archaeological Reports and other secondary sources. This review
21
MARY DALLAS CONSULTING ARCHAEOLOGISTS PO BOX A281 ARNCLIFFE NSW 2205 TEL (02) 4465 2546 FAX (02) 8520 2006 [email protected] Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Assessment Report UNSW Cliffbrook Campus, Coogee NSW
allowed the plotting of known Aboriginal sites and a means of predicting the potential location of further unrecorded areas of Aboriginal heritage significance.
OEH AHIMS Register A search of the AHIMS Register of a 5km by 5km area centred on the subject land revealed that 12 Aboriginal sites had been previously recorded in the area (see Appendix B, see also Figure 8). These sites are summarised in Table 5 below.
In general, the majority of the known Aboriginal sites in the region (those listed on the AHIMS Register) are clustered around the coastal headlands. The majority of these sites are rock engravings along the foreshore and sandstone cliffs. This is a reflection of site types that are highly visible and that have survived urban sprawl across the Sydney region rather than an actual indication of the type and number of sites which existed in the area, or of how Aboriginal people used the landscape in the past.
According to the AHIMS Register, a cluster of grinding grooves known as Gordons Bay (AHIMS #45-6-2306) recorded in 1992 is located within the subject land. However the coordinate for this site is incorrect as the original recording (see site card in Appendix B) indicates that the site is located 25m south of the subject land in the rock face above Gordons Bay. This is discussed further below in relation to the site inspection for the current assessment and a correction has been issued to the AHIMS Register.
Table 5. Summary of site types in the AHIMS search area. Site Type No. of Sites Percentage Rock engraving 5 46% Shelter with midden 2 18% Shelter with art 1 9% Shelter with Potential Archaeological Deposit 1 9% Artefact scatter 1 9% Grinding Groove 1 9% Total 11 100%
In addition to the AHIMS Register search, updated online searches of several other repositories were undertaken on 19/6/16 to determine whether any Aboriginal sites or areas of potential have been identified within or adjacent to the subject lands. The results of these searches can be summarised as follows:
A search of the Australian Heritage Database (incorporating the Register of the National Estate) was undertaken for Aboriginal heritage items within the suburb of Coogee. No items are listed for their Aboriginal heritage values within or adjacent to the subject land.
22
MARY DALLAS CONSULTING ARCHAEOLOGISTS PO BOX A281 ARNCLIFFE NSW 2205 TEL (02) 4465 2546 FAX (02) 8520 2006 [email protected]