Heritage dispute over Fitzroy Gardens

A Council project to demolish and redesign Fitzroy Gardens in Kings Cross, site of the El Alamein Fountain, had been delayed long enough and should go ahead, argued Lord Mayor Clover Moore at Council on Monday evening.

But Council’s own Heritage Report on the Gardens, which had not been published with Council documents, says the Gardens are listed with State and Local Significance.

The report was released last week only after heritage campaigner Andrew Woodhouse threatened FOI-style legal action.

Council denies this, saying “The request to access the Heritage Report was not refused and the City has provided a copy to Mr Woodhouse.”

“Not all documents associated with every project are always attached in full to Council reports, this is just a sensible approach.”

But Mr Woodhouse countered with a list of 22 Development Applications now on exhibition, all containing a heritage report.

The debate at Council proved complex. Cr Harris (Greens) opened by tabling a petition with 466 signatures opposing the project outright, which had been collected by Kings Cross residents over the weekend.

Then Cr Phillip Black, a member of Clover Moore’s team and a heritage enthusiast, said he could not be comfortable with a “complete redesign” of the Gardens.

He criticised the Council-commissioned heritage report, which he said overlooked the significance of the 1970 design by Australia’s first landscape artist, Ilmar Berzins, who also designed the garden reserve in front of Elizabeth Bay House, and Sandringham Gardens in Hyde Park on the corner of College and Park Streets.

The report itself seems contradictory. On the one hand it lists the gardens as having Moderate State Significance and High Local Significance, saying “It is apparent from the above that the Fitzroy Gardens and the El Alamein fountain are of cultural significance and should be conserved.”

Then on the other hand it says: “The built form of the gardens is of limited significance and can be modified.”

Cr John McInerney (Clover Moore’s team) argued the project “had been on our books since 2004 and should move ahead”. He said while heritage was important, sustainability must be the driver.

But Cr Meredith Burgmann (Labor) disagreed.

“You can’t trade off heritage for sustainability,” she said. “Next thing we’ll be pulling down Victorian houses as long as we put a bike rack out the front.” This elicited groans from other Councillors.

“Residents I have spoken to were shocked at the proposals,” said Cr Burgmann. “They tell me they think the tiles just need cheering up.”

Cr Harris moved that Council convene a new public meeting where residents could put their case for conservation of the Gardens alongside Council’s case for demolition and re-design, and the matter put to a vote.

Ms Moore blocked Cr Harris and called for a vote on her own motion requesting staff to “urgently assess the significance of the… 1970s park landscape and social heritage of Fitzroy Gardens in consultation with interested Councillors” and report to the next Council meeting.

This was carried, along with endorsement for the key design directions for the upgrade of nearby Lawrence Hargraves Reserve, which is far less contentious among residents.

However Cr Harris is sceptical about Ms Moore’s motion.

“I am very concerned that Ms Moore refused to support my amendment requiring the staff to conduct a public meeting in Kings Cross,” he said. “I suspect that the current design will be merely tweaked and the project will go ahead with little change.”

Yet there is a wide gap between Ms Moore’s arguments and the apparent intent of her motion; and at least one of her team, Cr Black, wants to conserve the Gardens. Stay tuned to this station…

by Michael Gormly