CULTURAL HERITAGE RESPONSE TO A PROPOSED UPGRADE OF THE OPEN SPACE BETWEEN THE KIRKBRIDE COMPLEX AND BALMAIN ROAD, CALLAN PARK Proposa l Leichhardt Municipal Council proposes to upgrade the existing area of open space (traditionally known as a cricket ground) between Balmain Road and the Kirkbride group as a playing field entailing site levelling, the installation of an underground water tank, irrigation and drainage, a power pole, four new 18m high floodlight towers and the refurbishment of an existing toilet block. S i te Context The proposed Balmain Road playing field is part of the Callan Park site’s traditional open space and is immediately adjacent the southern end of the Kirkbride complex and next to Balmain Road. The southern end of the Kirkbride group is clearly visible from Balmain Road and this traditional prospect should remain. As with many of Sydney’s earlier roads, Balmain Road sits close to a ridgeline and the open space area proposed for the playing field upgrade is likewise across this higher ground. The actual ground plane for the Kirkbride complex is on noticeably lower levels.

FIGURE 1 View of the former cricket ground landscape where upgrade proposals include the introduction of 18m high floodlighting towers. The space was planned as an integral landscape element for the Kirkbride complex in the 1870s. As this view shows the overall setting is remarkably intact. (Photograph GB 2013)

FIGURE 2 One of numerous panoramic views from the Drummoyne shoreline where the distinctive and iconic skyline profile of the Kirkbride landscape is plainly evident. The proposed 18m high floodlighting towers would project above this skyline and be evident from even this prospect. While the Kirkbride site appears distant in this panoramic view, in reality it appears much closer to the viewer where considerable architectural and landscape detail can be readily identified. (Photograph GB 2013)

On the basis of the 1893 and 1903 site plans of Callan Park the space is described in the 2011 CMP as a “cricket ground” where recreational facilities included cricket, a bowling green and a tennis court (CP CMP, 2011 Vol. 3 p. 85)(and, likely, provided for other ad hoc recreational uses). The space retains its informal, low key (quasi rural) character and, as a picturesque landscape providing a more relaxed, low key counterbalance to the massive, institutional character of the Kirkbride Block (CP CMP, 2011 Vol. 3 p. 83), it remains integral with, and continues to demonstrate, the Kirkbride philosophy (CP CMP, 2011 Vol. 3 p. 78). Key views that remain relevant to the present proposal have been included in the analysis of significant views in Figure 3-62 ((CP CMP, 2011 Vol. 3 p. 119), namely those closer views from Balmain Road (including evening views where the Kirkbride’s sandstone is subtly illuminated) and the impressive views across the water from Drummoyne of the iconic Kirkbride skyline. Other views of significance that are relevant include views from the Kirkbride complex looking out to the former cricket ground space. Assessed Cultura l S ign i f icance The Kirkbride group is of exceptional cultural significance as one of the first and largest of Australia’s mental institutions specially designed on the basis of progressive late 19th century mental health care philosophy where great importance was placed on the careful integration of buildings and surrounding landscape as a curative and therapeutic environment, and currently remains largely intact. (Heritage Database under Kirkbride) The landscape was a key element in the original design for the first hospital in Australia to be designed, built and opened as a complete hospital using the moral therapy principles of patient care. (CP CMP, 2011 Vol. 4 p. 136)

The buildings and setting were deliberately and successfully designed to form a picturesque landscape composition, creating and taking advantage of views into, out of and within the site, and containing areas of horticultural richness. (CP CMP, 2011 Vol. 4 p. 138)

The gardens and grounds of Callan Park are of exceptional importance as the prime example of the direct application of moral therapy principles of psychiatric care in the landscape.

The composition of large sandstone buildings with dominant tower surrounded by mature vegetation, particularly araucarias, is a landmark in the local area. Its prominent position means that it is seen by thousands of commuters each day. (CP CMP, 2011 Vol. 4 p. 139)

The Callan Park Mental Hospital complex has value because of the survival of the built fabric and landscape setting and the availability of comprehensive records from 1880 onwards. These form a valuable resource for the study of psychiatric care and social history. (CP CMP, 2011 Vol. 4 p. 140)

The Kirkbride complex has a unique place in the history of mental hospitals in New South Wales. It is the only mental hospital which fully represented the ideal and classic ‘moral therapy' style of institution. In the twentieth century it became one of the major examples of the modern custodial institutions. Although now seen as inappropriate for a modern mental health care system, it stands as a significant reminder, undoubtedly the most significant in New South Wales, of two major developments in the history of mental health care. (Assessment in Conservation Plan for the Kirkbride Block Rozelle Hospital, State Projects, NSW Public Works, May 1993, Volume 2: 102.)

Given its proximity to Kirkbride the former cricket ground is certainly part of the immediate Kirkbride setting (NB. contiguity of zones 3 and 4 of Figure 3-4 of the CP CMP [Vol. 3]) and, as such, importantly contributes to the significance of the Kirkbride complex. Historically, the

cricket ground space is noted in the Callan Park CMP as being part of the early (ie. 1870s) planning of the Callan Park Hospital for the Insane. (CP CMP Vol. 2 p. 55) Reconc i l ia t ion of proposa l aga inst Cal lan Park CMP Po l ic ies POLICY from CMP RECONCILIATION WITH PROPOSAL

Pol icy 3 The management of the site known as Callan Park should be informed by an understanding of the cultural significance of the place as described in this Conservation Management Plan.

The proposed installation of four 18m high floodlighting towers is clearly not informed by an understanding of cultural significance. The proposed installation of additional traffic signs for football patrons is also of particular concern on account of their potential to further clutter the grounds and introduce more intrusive elements within a landscape of exceptional significance.

Pol icy 11 All work done to the historic fabric of the significant buildings and their setting should be done in accordance with the principles of the Burra Charter.

A helpful starting point in applying the Burra Charter to the Callan Park site is to consider the definition given for ‘Compatible use – means a use which respects the cultural significance of a place [where] such a use involves no, or minimal, impact on cultural significance’. (BC Article 1.11) A compatible use is what the former cricket ground needs but, if four 18m high floodlight towers are an essential condition of its proposed use, then the proposal is clearly not compatible with the site as a landscape of exceptional significance and setting for the exceptionally significant Kirkbride group. Article 8 of the BC states that ‘conservation requires the retention of an appropriate visual setting and other relationships that contribute to the cultural significance of the place’. The proposed introduction of four 18m high structures does not retain significance – it reduces it by imposing four prominent, intrusive and anachronistic structures.

Pol icy 16 Prior to undertaking any conservation, maintenance or upgrading works on any part of the fabric and spaces of significant buildings and landscape a Conservation Actions Schedule shall be prepared.

Even though the proposed works are described as an “upgrade” no Conservation Actions Schedule appears to have been devised or offered.

Pol icy 33 Prepare individual conservation management plan for all site features, whether built or landscape, that have been evaluated as having exceptional or high significance.

Even though the former cricket ground is within an area that has been assessed as part of the exceptional or high significance benchmark as a landscape, no specific grounds CMP has been provided to guide the adaptive reuse of this important space.

Pol icy 38 The size and placement of new signage shall be carefully considered so that it does not intrude on the setting of buildings and landscape and does not detract from views and vistas across the Callan Park site.

Policies dealing with signs within the Callan Park site are based on the need to avoid introducing visual clutter and further intrusive elements. It is of concern that additional road/traffic signs will add to existing intrusive elements within the grounds.

Pol icy 44 The preferred uses of site areas designated capable of new development and adaptation are uses which respect the significance and setting of the heritage items.

The proposed 18m high floodlighting structures are arguably disrespectful of the significance and setting of the heritage items.

Pol icy 46 Conserve the significant fabric and elements of Callan Park and its landscape setting.

The proposed 18m high floodlighting structures would not respect the need to conserve the significant fabric and elements of Callan Park and its landscape setting.

Pol icy 55 Apart from archivally-based landscape reconstruction, where appropriate, no new development should occur in those areas designated as landscaped areas. Restoration would also be appropriate especially where the integrity of an earlier design intention could be recovered.

The proposed 18m high floodlighting structures would reduce the credibility of the proposed work as any form of respectful landscape reconstruction.

Pol icy 57 The key visual relationships of the site as viewed from Iron Cove and Balmain Road should be conserved.

The proposed 18m high floodlight structures have the potential to seriously detract from these key visual relationships.

Po l icy 59 Many parts of the site have significant spatial qualities and these should be conserved (See relevant zone plans).

They include: ���-

- The elevation and views to open landscapes from the Kirkbride Block and the Convalescent Cottages.

It is highly likely that key views from the Kirkbride group to the former cricket ground would be impaired by intrusive 18m high floodlight towers.

Po l icy 62 New landscaping work should emphasise the reinstatement of known missing elements and, where appropriate, include sympathetic adaptive new design.

Evidence of the early site design for example the alignment of the former main entrance drive, the spatial qualities of the cricket ground and evidence of former garden layouts should guide the design of any new landscape work.

The proposed 18m high floodlighting structures would alter the traditional character of this important space.

Po l icy 64 Any new landscape development on the site should reflect, and be subservient to, the significance of the place. It should support and not obscure the significant elements and design principles of the early layout.

The proposed 18m high floodlighting structures would not reflect or be subservient to the assessed significance of the place. They would likely be intrusive, anachronistic and prominent.

Po l icy 65 Significant views to the site and views within the site should be conserved or re-instated.

The proposed 18m high floodlighting structures would become a visual encumbrance to key views to, from and within the site.

Po l icy 72 A landscape management structure for the whole site should be established which ensures the conservation and maintenance of the existing landscape and provides guidelines for the creation of new landscaped areas and gardens.

Callan Park contains cultural and natural landscape elements of such importance that it should have a Landscape Management Plan prepared, incorporating landscape restoration/reconstruction plans for specific areas, as an integral part of any future management program.

The present proposal with the floodlights will have serious implications for any future decisions made as part of a holistic site Landscape Management Plan as recommended in Policy 72 by pre-empting and precluding an appropriate response by any future Trust.

Po l icy 93 (Part) Replace unsympathetic lighting and seating on the Kirkbride platform.

Policy 93 requires the removal of inappropriate lighting on the Kirkbride platform yet even more inappropriate lighting is proposed for the area immediately adjacent the Kirkbride group.

Po l icy 94 Interpret the former cricket oval area through appropriate fencing, structures and planting based on archival evidence including the removal of intrusive buildings.

Policy 94 advocates the interpretation of the cricket field using appropriate fencing (traditionally a low white picket type of an oval arrangement) which would be precluded by developing this area as proposed.

S i te Conservat ion Guide l ines (p . 202 of CMP pol ic ies) Some portions of the site are identified as available for redevelopment, but only on the basis that their scale and character does not compromise the special qualities of the whole site.

Provision of open space in accordance with the historical context will be important for the setting of the significant buildings on the site.

2 Maintenance of an adequate setting for the former Callan Park Mental Hospital and Broughton Hall Psychiatric Clinic, and the various individual significant buildings within the site, at close quarters and from a distance as major landmarks in the landscape setting.

3 Maintenance of the major views of the site and its significant buildings from both within and outside the site.

This CMP section further confirms that there are serious inconsistencies between the proposed works and the need to conserve the scale and character of the Callan Park grounds where these constitute a key part of the special and desirable qualities of the place.

Sect ion 6 .5 .2 Zone 4 : K i rkbr ide , etc . Principles include: – opportunities to remove intrusive elements.

In spite of this important CMP policy Council is proposing to introduce more intrusive elements of an even more prominent nature! as well as additional signs within the Callan Park grounds with the potential to further clutter the landscape setting.

It should be noted that the number of relevant CMP policy clauses or Burra Charter articles quoted above is not exhaustive, many more could have been quoted in relation to the proposed open space works where the nature of the proposals in relation to the site would be found to be deficient. Even in view of this basic reconciliation it is hard to see how the proposal could be viewed as respectful of its site context. It is clearly at variance with the intent, expressed directions and spirit of the CMP that Council has adopted and hitherto supported. Planning Response The proposal is a form of integrated development as defined at Section 91 of the EPA Act, 1979. As it concerns the NSW Heritage Act, 1977 it requires a response from the NSW Heritage Council based on a s60 application and while there has been a delegated response on behalf of the Heritage Council – even to the granting of consent (letter 15.11.12) – it reveals inconsistencies in the handling of the issues. A heritage impact assessment has also been undertaken (by Tanner architects) though, again, there are obvious inherent philosophical and procedural flaws in the way the issues are handled. Firstly, the Heritage Branch approval is based on the need to observe various conditions, one of which (Condition 2 quoting mitigatory measures directly from the SHI report) is the need to ensure that a new power pole “is screened from view from Balmain Road by existing trees and does not intrude on views into Callan Park from that road”. Similarly, Condition 3 expresses concerns that “the semi-sunken water tank should be completely screened by dense shrub planting…”. However, the four 18m high floodlight towers are not even mentioned – in fact the Heritage Council approval responds to a different application based on 15m high towers which is inconsistent with those actually proposed - though there is the implication that additional tree plantings to the former cricket ground periphery (Conditions 5 and 6) are intended to provide a screen for the floodlight structures. Additional trees will arguably do nothing in the short term and probably very little in the long term to ameliorate glare from across the road or successfully screen the four overscaled structures from either Balmain Road, internal campus areas or the Kirkbride group. There is no doubt the proposed lighting towers will visually impinge on the setting of the Kirkbride group and alter its traditional landscape character. While the Heritage Branch conditions of approval seek to address potential impositions for the power pole and water tank, they fail to adequately address the more prominent lighting structures. The approval conditions will not ensure cultural significance is retained or protected and therefore represent a flawed response. The 2012 Statement of Heritage Impact report by Tanner architects at least acknowledges that “the floodlight poles will have an impact on the upper section of Callan Park” (p. 31) although it then attempts to play down this impact as acceptable (to whom?) and even attempts to justify it on the spurious basis of using the space for recreation. Firstly, this argument of justification is demonstrable nonsense. That the open space was historically used for active recreation in no way justifies the escalation of its future use by way of anachronistic structures that have the (acknowledged) potential to detract from the assessed significance of the place. The whole point of conserving a place – which may well advocate the continuation of traditional uses – is in order to retain its special qualities that give it its cultural value. If a modern version of the traditional use requires additional trappings to the point of

detracting from significance then that use is obviously no longer compatible. This much has already been made perfectly clear by Article 1.11 of the Burra Charter. The untenable suggestion that “the proposed works can be supported on heritage grounds” is a distortion of the truth as only part of the proposed works can be supported using this concept. A reconciliation of the proposal clearly demonstrates that the intended use of the four 18m high floodlight towers reveals contradictions with numerous Callan Park CMP policies as well as Burra Charter articles both of which form the benchmark for the site’s conservation. Secondly, the SHI report readily acknowledges there is likely to be the potential for heritage impact. However to suggest that this is no longer an issue simply because there are four structures (instead of more) is also spurious as, if the policies of the CMP are taken seriously, even one 18m high tower in this location is clearly a problem as it would obviously impinge on an appreciation of the space as a setting for the Kirkbride group and detract from significance. Painting the structures black or charcoal, khaki or sky blue is also irrelevant as the structures would still be visible and obviously so illuminated at night. The SHI report goes on to maintain that “the floodlight poles would not be visible in views to the site from the northeast, north and northwest or from localities in the southern sections of Callan Park”. While some of this is debatable (for example it is already contradicted at p. 22) the statement conspicuously omits that the structures would be visible from the important Bay run/walk views in the west, from Balmain Road (east and southeast) as well as directly from the Kirkbride group and adjacent grounds. At p. 22 of the SHI report the standard test question asks “how does the work impact on views to, and from, adjacent heritage items?” and in responding to the question a generally inadequate defence regarding the floodlighting poles is revealed. At 18m high the structures would remain an issue notwithstanding attempts to screen them, paint them out of consideration and design them to be as minimal as possible. They would remain visible and would be perceived to be an anachronistic imposition against the immediate backdrop of an 1880s sandstone building complex of exceptional significance. They would also remain visible in views from the Kirkbride complex, which important observation appears not to have been clearly stated in the heritage impact assessment. The reconciliation of the proposal with policies from the CMP appears to be extraordinarily selective (only two policies cited!) while that above in this review notes many without being particularly exhaustive. This section of the SHI is clearly inadequate. The SHI reconciliation with the SEPP 56 is largely irrelevant as most of the quoted clauses have no relevance with the former cricket field site and those few that do are erroneously stated as complying – eg. (f) protection of cultural heritage values (p. 27) – how do four 18m high floodlight poles protect cultural heritage values? Responding to clause (i) the SHI admits that the light poles “will impact on views …” yet the mitigatory measures mentioned will not ensure there would be no substantial or deleterious impact. The argument for justifying the proposed works by activating recreational use is again employed but a different active recreational use (eg. cricket) could also be proposed that doesn’t require four 18m high lighting structures. Which of the two recreational uses is the more satisfactory from a heritage conservation outcome and would satisfy the stringent requirements of the CMP policies? Obviously the one that doesn’t require the offending intrusive structures. This justification argument of the SHI is farcical, a distortion of the truth and a blatant misuse of the argument of continuing a traditional use. The SHI response to (j) also admits the obvious but then uses the surprising and preposterous justification that “the poles will have limited impact on the heritage significance of Callan Park as

a whole”! This may be true as much as they will have only limited heritage impact in Penrith too but there will be a sufficiently serious impact in the specific area where they are proposed that strongly demands they should not be used at all. The response for clause (k) is untrue as the upper metres of the structures would certainly be visible projecting above the important and iconic Kirkbride skyline from the Drummoyne shoreline to the west. Other planning documents also include provisions that are relevant to the proposed new uses of this former cricket ground space. These are now briefly considered. Only the most relevant objectives of the Leichhardt LEP 2000 and Callan Park (Special Provisions) Act 2002 are considered for brevity although other sections and clauses are also relevant. LEICHHARDT LEP 2000 SECTION 15 RECONCILIATION WITH PROPOSAL

The objectives of the Plan in relation to heritage conservation are as follows:

(a) to protect, conserve and enhance the cultural heritage and the evidence of cultural heritage, including places, buildings, works, relics, townscapes, landscapes, trees, potential archaeological sites and conservation areas, and provide measures for their conservation,

The proposed installation of four 18m high floodlighting towers immediately adjacent one of NSW’s most important cultural sites is clearly not consistent with the LEP’s objective to protect, conserve and enhance the cultural heritage and the evidence of cultural heritage, including places, buildings, landscapes and conservation areas.

(b) to protect , conserve and enhance the character and ident i ty of the suburbs, places and landscapes of Le ichhardt , including the natural, scenic and cultural attributes of the Sydney Harbour foreshore and its creeks and waterways, surface rock, remnant bushland, r idge l ines and sky l ines ,

The proposed installation of four 18m high floodlighting towers is also clearly inconsistent with the objective to protect, conserve and enhance the character of this subtle 1870s landscape area and skyline that, together with its integral built elements, forms one of the most memorable and impressive places within the Leichhardt LGA.

(c) to prevent undesirable incremental change, including demolition, which reduces the heritage significance of places, conservation areas or heritage items,

The proposed installation of four 18m high floodlighting towers represents an insidious example of the very undesirable incremental change that the LEP was written to prevent.

(d) to allow compatible and viable adaptation and re-use of the fabric of heritage significance,

The proposed installation of four 18m high floodlighting towers within and immediately adjacent an area of exceptional cultural significance cannot be regarded as a compatible adaptive reuse and it fails to meet the expectations of defined compatible use as given in the Burra Charter (eg. Article 1.11)

CALLAN PARK (SPECIAL PROVISIONS) ACT 2002 RECONCILIATION WITH PROPOSAL

4 Objects of Act

The objects of this Act are:

(d) to preserve the heritage significance of

The proposed installation of four 18m high floodlighting towers would not contribute to the preservation of the assessed cultural significance of this 1870s former cricket ground space as part of the essential setting for the Kirkbride complex nor

Callan Park, including its historic buildings, gardens and other landscape features, and

(e) to impose appropriate controls on the future development of Callan Park.

preserve the low key, unstructured character of this important landscape precinct of the Callan Park site. This is clearly an instance where the powers of the Act should be employed to impose an appropriate control to prevent the imposition of intrusive elements within a landscape of exceptional significance.

7 Development at Callan Park restricted

(7) Development at Callan Park must not adversely affect the Broughton Hall Garden, Charles Moore Garden or Kirkbride Garden.

The proposed installation of four 18m high floodlighting towers would certainly adversely affect this key 1870s open space component of the Kirkbride landscape setting.

Reminder “The setting of Callan Park contributes to the cultural significance of the place. The conservation of individually significant gardens and the landscape setting as a whole is an essential requirement for the public appreciation of the site.” (Introduction to CMP Section 6.4.2 p. 185) Summary The Kirkbride complex and its integral landscape (of which the subject area is an important and immediate part) is not only of State heritage significance it is of National significance. The chief problem with the proposal is its insistence on the four 18m high towers, the very close proximity of the former cricket ground to the Kirkbride complex and the superior elevation of the open space. The basic analyses and rational reconciliation undertaken in this review clearly demonstrate that the proposed 18m high floodlight structures will certainly be visible projecting above the historic skyline of Kirkbride with its intact 1880s profile. The lighting structures will also likely remain visible from Balmain Road despite attempts to screen this by planting additional trees. To put it simply, this means that the assessed cultural significance of the place will likely be reduced or negatively impacted should the four 18m high structures be introduced. There is the potential for heritage impact in a number of ways both during the day and during the night where the cultural value of the Kirkbride complex would be negatively affected. The proposed mitigatory measures are certainly not adequate and would never prevent the considerable cultural significance of this area from being reduced – the very outcome the CMP was at pains to avoid. Floodlighting structures would represent a prominent, intrusive and anachronistic introduction within the context of a remarkably intact and consistent 19th century cultural landscape. It is considered most inappropriate to locate these structures within this very special setting. If the proposed use of this important space must be associated with these four lighting structures then the type of use being advocated is clearly not compatible with the conservation objectives (as expressed in the adopted CMP) for Callan Park. Geoffrey Britton BLArch (Canb) M.ICOMOS Environmental Design & Heritage Consultant January 2013