NSW Premier skewers democracy again in service of developers

On Monday, the NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian, below, abandoned all pretence at community consultation in government planning decisions. Hours before the second community consultation about the future of the Powerhouse Museum, Ultimo, was due to begin, she announced that a new facility would be built on the old DJ’s carpark site on Parramatta River, above, to be purchased from Parramatta Council at a cost of $140 million. “Any future redevelopment at Ultimo would potentially include residential units, while retaining an arts and cultural presence,” she said. The interests and values of the Rum Rebellion had won again.

This was no longer the pretence at community consultation, conducted by the same people, over the future of the North Parramatta Heritage Precinct four years ago, when participants were encouraged to think widely and creatively. By the second session the results had been distilled into one option of choosing where to place potential buildings.

As it was, my heart sank as we read the two key questions in the first consultation. This was the Museum of Arts and Sciences (MAAS) Project Public Meeting (Parramatta), organised by the Department of Planning and Environment with MAAS, on Wednesday evening, July 26. About 100 people grouped around tables had one and a half hours to respond –

Question 1: What would you like to see, do and experience at the new Museum in Western Sydney? What would make it an exciting place for you and your family/friends to visit?

Question 2: If some Powerhouse Museum presence stays at Ultimo, what would you like to see, do and experience?

Once again the parameters of community involvement were strictly limited. There had been media reports that former Premier Mike Baird’s developer driven thought bubble of selling the Powerhouse Museum, (SMH photo right, by Louise Kennerley) and relocating it to Parramatta had not withstood financial scrutiny and community pressure was forcing a rethink. In booking for the free event, people were invited to submit three key questions they would like answered in the consultations.

Mine were along the lines of questioning the assumptions on which the project was based:

• Why dismantle a popular and well established cultural institution in the heart of Sydney?
• Why move it to a small flood prone site on the bank of the Parramatta River?
• Why not consider a museum for Parramatta that relates to its rich indigenous past and early colonial history already holding national and World Heritage values, like the North Parramatta heritage precinct?

It wasn’t long before it was clear that many others were questioning the same assumptions and offering a range of alternative proposals.

Organisers stated ,”The new museum will be designed with community input and will be on the cutting edge of science and innovation. To deliver the best possible museum, a business case has been established to ensure all options are investigated, tested and analysed. Community consultation is an important element of the business case and local community members are invited to be part of the conversation.”

People certainly responded: Why, if you are going to spend $500 million delivering the museum to western Sydney, spend $100 million purchasing the Parramatta River site and another $100 million on flood proofing it, before you even begin building a new museum? You could do so much more with that money. Parramatta is difficult to access from many parts of western Sydney and now with new road tolls and poor public transport, it’s not going to get any easier. Why the rush? The government wants the business case for the project to be submitted to cabinet before the end of the year. For such a major institution, why not spend time engaging community and experts in conversation from the ground up?

Why not operate like the Smithsonian Institution which now has 19 museums and the National Zoo across the United States? “Congress authorised acceptance of the Smithson bequest on July 1, 1836, but it took another ten years of debate before the Smithsonian was founded. Once established, the Smithsonian became part of the process of developing an American national identity—an identity rooted in exploration, innovation, and a unique American style.”

In western Sydney, MAAS could operate like Western Sydney University with its network of campuses across the region. Indeed it could be linked to the university and work with the existing arts centres serving different parts of the region. An excellent example of such a productive collaboration was last year’s Gravity (and Wonder) exhibition, left, at Penrith Regional Gallery. What about the new technology park planned for Luddenham and links to the Blue Mountains World Heritage Centre?

On the “community” consultative process alone, there were plenty of questions: Where was the cultural diversity among the participants, which is such a feature of Parramatta, let alone the region’s population? Where were the young people for whom the future museum is so important?

The deadline for responses about the MAAS  project is August 18. You can reply to the question: “Is there anything else that should be taken into consideration when developing the business case?” https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/536XXPF

Highlighting the state government wish for haste was the Parramatta City Council meeting on Monday, July 10, conducted by administrator Amanda Chadwick and attended by 200 people. Twenty speakers were registered for the public forum including Better Planning Network, National Trust of Australia, Australian Institute of Architects, Saving Sydney’s Trees, Parramatta Female Factory Friends, ParraGirls, Darug Elder Kerrie Kenton and North Parramatta  Resident Action Group, left.

Present also was Sydney Morning Herald columnist, architectural critic and former Sydney city councillor Elizabeth Farrelly. She couldn’t suppress her chortles at the absurdity of the administrator’s role. Every time the administrator Amanda Chadwick said a motion was before council, followed by “I have resolved . . .”, her smiles broke out afresh. Her report the following Saturday was scathing –

“Oh, and the item on everybody’s lips: the new development control plan enabling UrbanGrowth’s massive, 20-storey resi-velopment of the area euphemistically dubbed the Parramatta North Urban Transformation Precinct. Our finest treasures reduced to that. PNUTP. More than a thousand public objections. Twenty impassioned speakers. The screens scroll. RESOLVED CHADWICK.

“Why cram so much in? Why vet speakers? Why ram this through when national and perhaps world heritage listings are expected any week?

“Could it be because this was the last ordinary “meeting” before democracy returns in September? Is this how we do things now in Sydney? Is this “inclusion”? Approved voices only? Excuse me, Big Sister, but how exactly is this different from tyranny? From Big Brother’s deliberate erasure of history? How is “inclusive, resilient” (Parramatta promotional buzzwords) not classic doublethink?

“It’d be funny if it weren’t so dangerous, running hand-in-murderous-glove with the wholescale destruction of everything . . . ”

The only speaker in favour was the head of the UrbanGrowth team planning the North Parramatta transformation. She stated that people were stopping her in the street saying yes, yes, yes. That was undoubtedly happening at the archaeology open day, when the focus was on the history and heritage and not the proposed development to come.

Conflict over the national heritage site continues to escalate. NPRAG president, Suzette Meade, left, wrote yesterday – “Thanks to our continued relationship with University of Sydney’s Professor Peter Phibbs from Sydney School of Architecture, Design and Planning we were able to secure two events to be included in the University’s Festival of Urbanism.

“Urban Growth tried very hard to dissuade the university from holding a tour on the site claiming it was a construction site and unsafe, and then followed that up with an offer to hold the tour  themselves and provide free lunch for tour goers. The university stood their ground and secured Dr Terry Smith local historian and myself to provide a two hour tour of the Cumberland Hospital Precinct to architects, planners and industry specialists.

“We had also included a discussion on the future of the Heritage Precinct, this was passed on to the Western Sydney University to hold at the Female Orphanage/Whitlam Institute.   Unfortunately we were told there was no room for NPRAG to speak and then advised Urban Growth NSW were invited to be keynote speaker.  We continued to push the university hard for equal representation and negotiated to allow a ‘community member’ to speak at the event.  Speaking will be long time advocate for the precinct and former NPRAG committee member Jason Burcher.”

Better news from the Premier on Monday was the announcement of $100 million for the redevelopment of the Riverside Theatres. There is no doubt that this commitment is the result of years of negotiation between Parramatta Council and the state government, following the enormous success of the theatres under the direction of Robert Love.

Democracy repeatedly sabotaged in heritage, arts and cultural planning

Sabotage – to destroy, damage or disrupt, especially by secret means.

Parramatta Council has published a cultural discussion paper and is inviting community responses by April 7. Culture and Our City – a cultural discussion paper for Parramatta’s CBD is seeking feedback and ideas to contribute to a new cultural plan. I urge you to read it and respond. The plan is intended to guide arts and cultural directions, over the next five years and beyond. Somewhat unexpectedly, I found myself reacting with anger and frustration. Yes, I had been a willing participant in a focus group for the discussion paper, but my frustration was not with the research or the principles articulated in the draft.

Bear with me, this requires some explanation.

The research was commissioned by the new City of Parramatta Council, which is administered by an appointee of the NSW Government. There will be no democratically elected council until September, by which time the state government will have run the show since May 2016. No government would allow the release of a document in its name without its approval and authorisation and it shows in this one. The parameters of the research are restricted to Parramatta’s CBD and do not include the rest of Parramatta’s local government area, including the North Parramatta Heritage Precinct. For almost 70 years, the Parramatta community has been tantalised with promises of cultural opportunity and then betrayed more often than not in their implementation.

According to the 1948 County of Cumberland Scheme released by the NSW Government, Parramatta was to be the most important centre after Sydney. The only drawback at the time was the lack of adequate cultural facilities in Parramatta. I was an active part of a push that led to the opening of Riverside Theatres in Parramatta in 1988, above (Sydney Festival 17 photo), but still there was no gallery. Then the state government, under Labor Premier Bob Carr, invited artists and community members to discussion groups in the late 1990s about the future of the Cumberland Hospital site, now described as the North Parramatta or Fleet Street Heritage Precinct. Opportunities were sketched for future artists studios, music and dance rehearsal spaces, heritage and community facilities – and on the outskirts – medium density residential development – not unlike current proposals by North Parramatta Residents Action Group.

Nothing more was heard until Parramatta Council released its Arts Facilities & Cultural Places Framework (2005) – Parramatta: Identity, Contemporary Culture & Prosperity. “The Parramatta Arts Facilities & Cultural Places Framework 2005,” it said, “will assist Council in establishing a clear direction for the planning, the provision and resourcing of a broad range of arts infrastructure & cultural places for the City over the next ten years. The vitality of Parramatta comes down to establishing cultural assets with a point of difference, that are unique, reflect the community and complement rather than replicate the rest of Sydney’s cultural resources. The City must also build its cultural identity and creative industries to attract, retain, validate, and acknowledge the role of artists in our community, as well as to generate new wealth and prosperity for Parramatta.”

Then Lord Mayor of Parramatta, David Borger, was the political champion of this framework, and officiated at the opening of Parramatta Artists Studios – the foundation component of the framework, where production has continued to flourish. The framework stated there would be three sites for the placement of facilities –

Cluster 1 Venue—Civic Place (the administrative heart of the CBD)

Cluster 2 Venue—Old Kings School (on the bank of Parramatta River and across the road from Riverside Theatres)

Cluster 3 Venue—North Parramatta Mixed Use Site (i.e. North Parramatta Heritage Precinct)

Twelve years later, not one of these facilities has been achieved. The first was not so much a matter of the state government as a fierce struggle between council, landholders and developers. Civic Place, now known as Parramatta Square, left (artist’s impression), is finally under construction, but there is no mention of a major gallery or exhibition space. This is primarily the council’s responsibility.

Determined advocacy by artists, the Western Sydney Arts Lobby and proposals for adaptations of the Old King’s School buildings, continued right up to the March state election in 2011. Then a week before the election, Labor Premier Kristina Keneally announced $24.6 million for the refurbishment and transformation of the heritage buildings into galleries and spaces for arts groups – intended for regional and not just local use, see photo below. The government was defeated and after six months the new Liberal/National Party Government failed to allocate funding and claimed it was an unfunded election promise. In 2015, the government announced the precinct would become a primary school, which is now under construction.

In the meantime, the state government announced the decision to subdivide and sell much of the North Parramatta Heritage Precinct for high rise development.  It claims the sale of one of Australia’s most important historic sites is the only way it can finance preservation of its heritage. A framework masterplan was to be developed by the government agency UrbanGrowth NSW. Local residents were appalled. Many of them lived close by in a Parramatta Council heritage listed zone and by 2013 were banding together in protest. One of them explains their distress, with relevant links:

“There are over 10 conservation areas in Parramatta district and these all have residents. The contradictions between what’s supported and allowed for property developers and for those who are resident in the conservation areas affects more people than just those adjacent to the high density/high rise planned in what’s called the ‘Parramatta North Urban Transformation’. List of conservation areas link. Link to straightforward map of North Parramatta Conservation Area (there are 2 parts of this one area). This map is worth a close look.  The current North Parramatta Heritage area between  O’Connell and Villiers St is very close to 90,000 sq metres in size.

“Regulations governing what can be done by property owners are in the Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011   (Current version for 23 September 2016 to date Part 5 Clause 5.10) Parramatta LEP requires owners to organise and pay for all archaeological surveys prior to submitting DAs for approval and construction of a simple garage or shed on their land as it is in a conservation area where it is anticipated features/items of archaeological significance can be found in the land.  Surveys have not been done of the entire conservation area so it falls to each individual to do instance-by-instance. (We can’t even dig a vegetable bed.)

“The inequity and hypocrisy around the different circumstances of those in conservation areas compared to property developers who plan to profit from high rise development in recent rezoning/planning is stark.”

In June 2014, then NSW Premier Mike Baird announced a cultural ambassador for western Sydney, Liz Ann Macgregor, left, the Director of the Museum of Contemporary Art Australia (MCA). For many years, under her leadership, the MCA has worked closely with a “terrific network of galleries, organisations and artists in Western Sydney doing innovative and highly engaging work.” She was keen to bring their work to closer government attention. She was also keen to bring the services of Sydney museums and galleries to the west. In February 2015, Mike Baird announced the sale of the Powerhouse Museum at Darling Harbour and its relocation to Parramatta. To many it was seen merely as a land grab for developers and resistance by Save the Powerhouse supporters was fierce.

Nonetheless, the Powerhouse move was seen by others as symbolic of the state government’s commitment to western Sydney and enthusiastically embraced by David Borger, now the Western Sydney director of the Sydney Business Chamber, and other civic leaders and, more cautiously, by the Western Sydney Arts Lobby. Anything, after all, was better than nothing. Later that year a Deloitte report, commissioned by Sydney Business Chamber – Western Sydney, and three western Sydney councils – Parramatta, Penrith and Liverpool, Building Western Sydney’s Cultural Economy – A Key to Sydney’s Success, recommended relocation of the Powerhouse Museum to western Sydney.

Since then, there has been much debate about what funds the sale of the Darling Harbour site, left, would actually generate, the cost of relocation and whether Parramatta Council should simply donate the announced new site, it already owns, on the banks of the Parramatta River. The current fiasco over the state government’s authorisation of demolition of the city’s main swimming pool to make way for the expansion of a sports stadium is a guide to what may come. Parramatta Council acquiesced without protest, before the administrator was appointed last year. No financial compensation has been made for the loss of the popular pool and no state funds committed to the building of a new one. A new aquatic centre is said to be two to five years away. Sabotage of community interests now seems standard practice.

A year ago, exchange visits between Save the Powerhouse Museum and NPRAG members led to mutual support for each other’s positions and SPM supporting a proposal for a museum unique to Parramatta and the region. The visitors were gobsmacked by the volume and evidence of Australia’s colonial history in the Fleet Street Heritage Precinct and the site’s treasury of thousands of years of Aboriginal custodianship.

Last October, Liz-Ann McGregor was the guest speaker at a Western Sydney University event – the launch of a Bachelor of Creative Industries. The new degree combines majoring in a chosen field within the creative industries, with minors in business management and law. Liz Ann spoke in the presence of WSU Vice-Chancellor Professor Barney Glover, who was also the newly appointed president of the Museum of Applied Arts and Sciences (MAAS) Trust. The trust will play a pivotal role in the Powerhouse’s relocation to Parramatta (see artist’s impression). She spoke of the current dispiriting atmosphere that surrounds financial support for the arts at state and federal levels and internationally and the likelihood of little change in the foreseeable future. She spoke of her own frustration when arguing with ministers for better support for western Sydney and meeting with a wall of resistance.

In this climate, a long term project like MCA’s C3West offers a model of alternative approaches that have been bringing artists, businesses and community together for more than a decade. A course like the new Bachelor of Creative Industries can equip artists with the financial and marketing skills to enter into these relationships. It takes a long time for artists and business to learn to talk each other’s language, she said. It’s a slow process, but artists can often articulate issues and offer possible solutions.

Under Suzette Meade’s leadership North Parramatta Residents Action Group has been listening to community and working with other organisations to develop an economically viable alternative proposal for the Fleet Street Precinct. They want genuine community consultation. Their supporters and collaborators number in the thousands, but neither state government nor Parramatta Council are really listening.

Is it any wonder she wrote to Sydney’s Lord Mayor Clover Moore last week appealing for her help? In a neat summary Elizabeth Farrelly wrote in the Sydney Morning Herald

“This week, when North Parramatta Residents’ Action Group begged Sydney Lord Mayor Clover Moore to “adopt the community of Parramatta, as we are left without a democratically elected council” there certainly was envy. It was the envy of people deliberately disenfranchised at a moment of great change, people gazing wistfully at a place where local government is strong, free and fair. It was an “I’ll have what she’s having” moment.This envy is entirely justified.

“Parramatta is reeling from a governelopment boom: 3000 apartments on its irreplaceable heritage precinct (Cumberland Hospital, 1818 Female Factory); the $2 billion ultra-ugly Parramatta Square project behind the old town hall; the proposed new Powerhouse, or whatever fragment of it finally drifts up-river; the demolition of the Pirtek Stadium and pool for a bigger, more lucrative stadium (no pool); plus masses of private development like Meriton’s 54-storey Altitude, the city’s tallest tower, on the old David Jones site. Barely a squeak of affordable housing anywhere, and the people held voiceless, all the while, by a government-appointed city administrator.”

It makes better sense to create a cultural hub celebrating indigenous and migration history (NPRAG’s Artist’s impression in their Alternative Vision, above)

I’m off for three weeks to New Zealand. Family members there tell me local governments are guided by democratically elected advisory committees and it is one of the world’s most democratic countries. Now there’s an idea!

Compelled by poor planning, Powerhouse Museum and North Parramatta campaigners join forces

Shared anger about the determination of the Baird Government to sell off “surplus” real estate has brought together advocates for the Powerhouse Museum to remain in Ultimo and those campaigning for a better vision for the North Parramatta heritage precinct. On Tuesday, March 29, a busload of museum supporters came from the inner city for a tour of the North Parramatta site, escorted by historian and former mental health nurse, Dr Terry Smith, with fellow historian and tour operator Judith Dunn. The event was arranged by North Parramatta Residents Action Group, supported by Parramatta Female Factory Friends.The visitors were stunned by the extraordinary history encompassed by the site, including evidence of 20,000 years of indigenous occupation, Governor Phillip’s 1788 campsite, links to Reverend Samuel Marsden’s farm operated from 1803 to 1840, and the first of the many incarnations, which began with the 1821 opening of the convict Parramatta Female Factory – now part of Cumberland Hospital. Some of the tour group, above, stand under the historic clock on Male Ward 1 (now the Institute of Psychiatry), built in the 1880s from the sandstone of the original Female Factory. Gay Hendriksen of PFF Friends, far left, Suzette Meade of NPRAG, third from left, Jamie Parker MP, fifth from right, and Patricia Johnson of SPM, to his left.

It was clear from discussion over lunch that the state government’s proposed move of the Powerhouse Museum to Parramatta did not originate in western Sydney. In fact for years the region has sought its own independent centre relevant to local, regional and national history, arts and culture. Apart from any other consideration, the cost of relocating the Powerhouse Museum from its present Sydney site to Parramatta would be far greater than the $200 million the government anticipates from the sale of the site. The primary reason for local acceptance of the proposed move to Parramatta is pragmatism. The western Sydney region receives such a small proportion of arts funding that locals are willing to accept something, rather than nothing at all. So much for Premier Mike Baird as Minister for Western Sydney!

The visit ended with a declaration that both parties, from the east and the west of Sydney, would combine their enthusiasm and commitment to further the goals of both organisations. They would continue to meet in their common interests and acknowledged that there was no division and no elitism between the City of Sydney and the City of Parramatta, “despite government efforts to drive a wedge between them”. While thankful to find their own cause supported, Save the Powerhouse Museum campaigners were equally supportive of a more equitable share of arts funding for western Sydney. Above right, historian Judith Dunn explains the characteristics of a remnant wall of the Parramatta Female Factory. Convict and colonial architect, Frances Greenway had given instructions for a “rusticated” wall, with bevelled edges to the sandstone blocks, cut to shape and individually marked by convict labourers, she said. Trouble was, the bevels allowed enterprising women to climb over the wall and men to climb in. As a result, the top bevels had to be smoothed, as Judith is demonstrating here.

The future of the heritage precinct in Fleet St, North Parramatta has been the focus of many recent meetings. In mid-February, the Parramatta branch of the National Trust, under the leadership of Brian Powyer, revisited Brian’s address to last October’s symposium about creating an alternate vision for the site. The Challenge – Foundations, Enterprise, Destination outlined with careful detail, the steps required for sustainable tourism to the site that would generate substantial financial return, while integrating the needs of tourism, protection of the environment and heritage. Authenticity is a key demand of tourism, he said.

Three days later, members of the UrbanGrowth NSW’s Parramatta North Project team addressed a large gathering at an NPRAG meeting, attended by representatives of many community organisations, including the National Trust. In response to expressions of frustration from their audience, team members agreed there should have been continuing community consultation throughout 2015. UrbanGrowth will resume community information (not consultation) sessions, beginning Saturday, April 2, at Parramatta Town Hall, 10am to 1pm. They will be followed by two more sessions on April 5 and 6, from 6pm to 9pm. The team emphasised that decisions are ultimately made by their political masters and that they are the people to be lobbied. Team leader Tasha Burrell stated firmly that the Minister for the Arts has no interest in the site.

Accompanied by slides, they discussed design thinking, heritage protection, and possible future management. Left, is a photo from the recent tour of a neglected site overlooking the Parramatta River. At the back is the sandstone wall of the Governor Gipps Courtyard, where a former gateway (now sealed off) allowed convict women access to the river. Adjoining the wall from the right is a brick wall, which enclosed the Parramatta Girls Home and which was increased in height with every escape and disturbance. While sympathetic with many community concerns, team members insisted that the project will lose money. Sale of much of the land for high rise development was an important option for financing the work needed and was reconcilable with the heritage and environmental needs of the site, they said. UrbanGrowth will shortly become interim owner of the site.

Later this year, the first development application goes to Parramatta Council. It will cover open space, infrastructure, subdivisions and include the conservation management plan. The Female Factory Precinct will not be included in the first DA, because there is still too much to be resolved. In addition, part is still under investigation as a crime scene. The second development application covering the core heritage precinct, landscape and public domain will be lodged in 2017. Brian Powyer urged the establishment of a formally recognised community consultative committee, clearly distinct from a community reference panel, which UrbanGrowth proposes later this year. It also proposes a heritage conference late in 2016.

A month later, Associate Professor Carol Liston spoke to Parramatta Female Factory Friends about her research into the backgrounds of the 25,000 convict women transported to NSW and Van Diemen’s Land until the mid-1850s. So far, there has been little more than anecdotal evidence, but many more records are now available online. Her fellow researcher is a statistician, who advises that until about 30% of the records have been investigated, it is not possible to generalise about the women. So far, their extensive investigations reveal that, by and large, the women were inventive and professional thieves, rather than prostitutes. They still have a great deal more evidence to sift.

UrbanGrowth is currently reviewing a draft Heritage Snapshot booklet, right, which they circulated for public comment at NPRAG’s February meeting. Feedback means more time is required to check facts and perspectives on the history published. They hope that a final version will be available online by the end of April. It is an immensely interesting summary of 48 pages, providing on overview of Aboriginal history, early colonial and industrial enterprises, and the progressive development of the institutions, including the Female Factory, the Roman Catholic Orphan School, Parramatta Gaol, Parramatta Mental Hospital and the Norma Parker Correctional Centre for women. It includes maps, prints, photos, timelines, diagrams and discussion of cultural landscapes.

Although not intended, it’s difficult to avoid reading Heritage Snapshot as a powerful argument for a delay in any decision making about sale and development of the site, while so much more of its history is researched and wider discussion about its future is undertaken. In March, Bonney Djuric of Parragirls wrote “This month the Memory Project features on the International Coalition of Sites of Conscience, New York. We have come a long way since 2006 when we first started and will continue to pursue our vision for the dedication and designation of the former Parramatta Girls Home and the adjacent Cumberland Hospital Female Factory site as a publicly owned cultural heritage destination.”

It’s a big step forward and part of a much bigger vision for the site than just a small heritage oasis surrounded by high rise apartments. No wonder Jamie Parker MP summed up the meeting of members of Save the Powerhouse Museum, NPRAG and Parramatta Female Factory Friends by saying the “compelling nature of the issue of shoddy, hopelessly inadequate consultation”, by the state government has brought both groups together in “a unique alliance between the inner city and western Sydney”. They will continue to meet in a campaign for a review of both proposals. In little more than a year, NPRAG’s membership has grown to about 600. Above, is Jeremy Piper’s photo of the Powerhouse Museum, Ultimo.

If you would like to organise a group tour of the North Parramatta Heritage site, contact historian and tour guide, Judith Dunn – judith@pasttimestours.com.