 | REDEVELOPING CIRCULAR QUAY CIRCULAR QUAY IS ONE OF SYDNEY’S MOST SIGNIFICANT PUBLIC SPACES – AND ONE WITH AN INTENSE ARRAY OF STAKEHOLDERS. ANDREW NIMMO CONSIDERS RECENT REDEVELOPMENTS AND SPECULATES ON ISSUES FOR THE FUTURE.
| Review |
|
Looking along the edge of a redeveloped ferry wharf, showing the raised roof eaves and newly glazed edge. Photograph Brett Boardman.
|
The wharves prior to redevelopment.
|
Overview of Wharf Six.
Photograph Brett Boardman.
|
The passenger terminal shortly after its 1988 redevelopment, showing the orange skeletal frame and the striking outdoor escalators at its southern end.
Photograph John Gollings.
|
The new public stair, replacing the escalator.
|
The northern end of the terminal.
|
View through the terminal at ground level.
|
Overview of the redeveloped terminal seen across Sydney Cove. Photographs Adrian Boddy.
|
View over Sydney Cove to the harbour from the viewing area at the mid-point along the Cahill Expressway.
|
Looking along the expressway towards east Circular Quay.
|
View west, showing the new lift connecting Circular Quay to the Cahill Expressway. Photographs Brett Boardman.
|
|
|
THE SIGNIFICANCE OF Circular Quay cannot be underestimated. To Indigenous
Australians, “Sydney Cove marks the invasion point, and the point from which the
decimation of the Aboriginal people began”. To postwar immigrants Sydney Cove is
Australia’s equivalent of Staten Island. For Sydneysiders it is one of the city’s major
transport hubs, where many thousands of people converge as part of their daily routine.
For visitors it is, along with The Rocks and the Opera House, one the places that must be
visited. It is perhaps Sydney’s only truly great public space – that is, “great” in terms of
international significance. It may not be a place for mass rallies or demonstrations, but it
is the centre of Sydney’s great public celebrations and forms a natural amphitheatre within
which to view Sydney’s three chief icons, the Opera House, the Bridge and the harbour.
In the Minister’s Forward to the Sydney Cove Waterfront Strategy – Master Concept Design Report, the Hon Ron Dyer MLC proudly announces that the report had “gained
widespread support from the twenty-five government and twenty non-government
stakeholder organizations who have been involved in the preparation of the strategy”. This
says a lot about the difficulties in dealing with Circular Quay. There are so many groups to
appease, all of whom have the ability to stifle and obstruct, with the result that significant
changes can seem beyond the possibility of a consensus.
The last major upgrade at Circular Quay was completed in time for the Bicentennial
celebrations in 1988. A number of prominent architects were engaged under the
overarching umbrella of the NSW Government Architect to refurbish the Overseas
Passenger Terminal, the Ferry Wharves, the pedestrian journey out to the Opera House
and to complete an all-encompassing urban overlay of paving, signage, lighting and the
like. The project was a great success and received from the RAIA the Lloyd Rees Award for
Urban Design and the national Civic Design Award, along with a national Merit Award for
the Overseas Passenger Terminal.
Ten years later, in the lead up to the 2000 Olympic Games, Minister Carl Scully
decided that Circular Quay had become a little tired and shabby and was again in need of
an upgrade. So in 1997 the NSW Government commissioned the Department of Public
Works and Services to complete a concept design report. The study area was divided into
seven zones, stretching from the Overseas Passenger Terminal on west Circular Quay
around to the south-east corner of the Quay. It included the wharves and the Alfred Street
precinct but specifically excluded east Circular Quay – at the time a highly contentious site
awaiting approval for redevelopment.
The concept design report was very general in its recommendations, stating four
broad “key concepts” and a series of “principles” to form the basis of future projects. This
generality was necessary if it was to gain any form of sign-off from the many stakeholders
and for any individual projects to proceed. Three main projects which emerged from this
process have now been completed: the redevelopment of the Sydney Cove Passenger
Terminal; the redevelopment of the Circular Quay Wharves; and pedestrian access to the
Cahill Expressway, including improvements to the Circular Quay Station.
Circular Quay Wharves. The design strategy here was simple and difficult to
disagree with – to clear away the clutter, to remove all that was not required to be on
the wharf and to open up to the magnificent views to the Harbour. The first Development
Application lodged removed the retail and relocated it under the Circular Quay railway
line within a series of lightweight retail pods. However this strategy was opposed by the
Central Sydney Planning Committee, who did not want additional built forms blocking the
ground plane connection between the wharf zone and the Alfred Street zone.
The second scheme therefore moved the retail outlets back onto the wharves, but
with a much rationalized layout that concentrated built form to one side, and relocated
most of the operational activities within the two-storey Wharf Three. The other side of
each of the wharves and the centre zone were to remain open.
But during the development of the design a perceived need for dual ticket booths on
each wharf emerged (despite the fact that only one is used). As a result, most of the
wharves have some form of structure and retail parked on both sides. Wharf Six remains
closest to the vision intended, though the detailing of the frameless glass screens to the
sides seems over-designed in amongst the robust and straightforward expression of the
base wharf structure. Lifting up the roof eaves, so that they now appear to peel away
from the steel portals, has been an elegant and clever strategy, and the consistent and
clear signage strategy has improved the legibility and branding of the zone. In the end,
however, the works completed have not really fulfilled their visions, even though they
were modest and reasonable in their breadth and were clearly pushed heavily by the
Government Architect. This says much about the frustrations of working at the Quay.
Sydney Cove Passenger Terminal. Most architects might wonder why
there was a need for a major refurbishment to an award-winning building that had only
been completed ten years. There were a number of perceived problems with the original
building, such as the maintenance of the external escalators and the visual barrier that
the building presented to pedestrians wanting to explore north towards Campbells Cove.
However, the real outcome for this project has been the desired retail expansion and
associated financial return to the Sydney Ports Authority. This drive for retail expansion
seems to have overtaken the redevelopment to the extent that much of the delight of the
1988 design has been swept away.
The commercial project did present the opportunity to develop and apply some
considered urban design principles: opening up the visual link to Circular Quay West by
pulling back the western alignment of the building at ground level; activating and
partially pedestrianizing the Circular Quay West roadway and ensuring visual
transparency across the building at ground level. However, the success of these
principles will depend in part on whether the existing commercial outlets along Circular
Quay West choose to orientate to the east and thereby help activate the space. For the
moment at least this is still not an entirely inviting place to wander through and it is
doubtful that it will ever be able to compete with the water side of the terminal, which is
open for public access on the 300-odd days of the year that a ship is not berthed.
But it is the southern end of the redevelopment that is particularly disappointing in
its execution. The tectonic expression has little to do with the remainder of the building,
which had a romantic maritime expression, symbolic of its function. The new public stair
on the western alignment is poor compensation for the loss of the escalators, with their
angled invitation to public exploration of the building platforms, and much of the original
exposed orange-coloured skeletal steel frame has been excised and rationalized. At the
other end of the building, another set of public stairs has been removed and rebuilt
internally, as though swallowed by the expanding restaurants. This also interrupts the
existing public pedestrian route along the raised roadway.
Cahill Expressway and Circular Quay Station. The works to the
Circular Quay Station were also about clearing away clutter and opening up the views to
the Harbour. Advertising hoardings between the tracks were removed, and the solid
framed balustrade on either side of the central masonry enclosure was replaced with
bronze stanchions and toughened glass.
Direct pedestrian access to the Cahill Expressway from Circular Quay was provided
though two glass-encased lifts placed at the eastern corner of the Quay. The existing
pedestrian path was narrow, however the Government Architect managed to convince
the Roads and Traffic Authority to allow two metres to be trimmed from the roadway and
the path was widened. Midpoint along the path, a raised platform provides a sheltered
viewing area and interpretative panel display. The path has been extended across
Macquarie Street, with a piggyback section to the existing bridge, and now connects into
the edge of the Botanic Gardens. Apart from the expense of the lift, this is a modest
design that builds on existing aspects of the Quay and provides an important new link
within existing pedestrian networks.
Conclusions. To date, little of real design consequence has been implemented
from the Waterfront Strategy. This may seem harsh, but it could be strongly argued that
little needed to be done anyway – the Quay already worked extremely well. However,
other factors – commercial pressures, the difficulty of obtaining agreement from the
myriad stakeholders and so on – have also had a negative impact on the outcome. This
is of concern. The sheer importance of the Quay should override the commercial
pressures that have devalued the architecture of the Overseas Passenger Terminal and
should facilitate more complete adoption of the vision for the wharves. There will always
be occasions when the greater urban design considerations will clash with the objectives
of one or more of the Quay stakeholders. Without the ability to control and direct the
stakeholders at the Quay, there is a risk that the kinds of positive changes that are able to
be wrought will amount to little more than occasional “tinkering” and stylistic redirections.
Perhaps the root of Circular Quay’s problems lie in the way in which the
responsibilities for decision making are divided amongst various groups that each have
vested interests. Concentrated and layered within the Quay is perhaps the most complex
array of problematic stakeholders that could be contemplated. While there appears to be
considerable goodwill amongst these stakeholders to improve the Quay, there is actually
no single authority who has the responsibility for the entire Quay. Sydney Harbour
Foreshore Authority (SHFA) are officially the place managers, but their role is limited to
ranger services, cleaning and waste removal, planning functions, tenant and asset
management, event facilitation and precinct marketing. Planning NSW are the approval
authority, but they can only respond to proposals, not initiate them.
Major design initiatives at the Quay are generated at the political level when there is
a perceived need for an upgrade, such as in the lead up to 1988 and 2000. In both cases
the Government Architect managed the upgrade works, and battled as best it could
through the long-winded process of stakeholder approvals. While improvements can be
managed this way, it is a piecemeal approach that does not always result in the best
possible outcomes
The future of Circular Quay will probably continue to be a future of regular upgrade
works spaced approximately 10 to 15 years apart. They will be in the realm of clean-ups
– as the carefully considered design concepts laid in place every 10 to 15 years
gradually become diluted by the drip, drip, drip of parsimonious retailers, obstinate
authorities and indolent regulators. Each clean-up will be tempered with the flavour of its
time, as part of the general circular nature of design conformities. So along with the
predictable build-up of accretions that must be chipped away, like barnacles from a
boat, there will also be a ritual removal of items from the previous “clean-up” that are
no longer viewed in a positive design light. For anything visionary and lasting to ever
happen at Circular Quay, (and that is not to say that anything visionary is actually
required), there would need to be a change in how decisions are made regarding the
Quay. Otherwise “tinkering” will continue to be the fate of the Quay.
ANDREW NIMMO IS A DIRECTOR OF LAHZ NIMMO ARCHITECTS AND A REGULAR CONTRIBUTOR TO ARCHITECTURAL PUBLICATIONS.
|
| Project Credits |
SYDNEY COVE WATERFRONT STRATEGY
Design team—Peter Mould, Leonard Morgan, Melissa
Ward, Jason Border, Linda Gosling.
SYDNEY COVE PASSENGER TERMINAL
Design Government Architects Office—Government Architect
Chris Johnson; design oversight Peter Mould; design
architects Lindsay and Kerry Clare; project architect Lynn
McCaig. Design development/documentation and
technical inspection (construction), design of southern
end Bligh Voller Neild—partner in charge Laurence Neild;
design architect Neil Hanson; documentation architects
Martin Langham, Phillip Walker. Retail guidelines/signage
guidelines Government Architects Office—Peter Mould,
Kerry Clare, Lynn McCaig, Nadia Brogan. Client Sydney Ports.
CIRCULAR QUAY WHARVES
Design Government Architects Office—project architect
Peter Mould; design architects Lindsay and Kerry Clare.
Design development/documentation and technical
inspection (construction) Noel Bell Ridley Smith—design
team Graham Thornburn, Rod Drayton, Andrew Duffin.
Client Waterways Authority/Sydney Ferries.
CAHILL EXPRESSWAY
Design Government Architects Office—project architect
Peter Poulet; design team Peter Mould, Annie Tennant,
Michael Harvey. Documentation Noel Bell Ridley
Smith—Graham Thornburn, Rod Drayton.
|
|
