Alienation of the World Heritage Carlton Gardens By Melbourne - - PDF document

alienation of the world heritage carlton gardens
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Alienation of the World Heritage Carlton Gardens By Melbourne - - PDF document

Alienation of the World Heritage Carlton Gardens By Melbourne International Flower & Garden Show Presentation by Carlton Residents Association and Carlton Gardens Group - 3 April 2008 World Heritage Values Described in ICOMOS documents


slide-1
SLIDE 1

1

By

Melbourne International Flower & Garden Show

Alienation of the World Heritage Carlton Gardens

Presentation by Carlton Residents Association and Carlton Gardens Group - 3 April 2008

World Heritage Values

Described in ICOMOS documents

  • The International Council on Monuments and Sites
  • ICOMOS advises UNESCO on cultural heritage values re WH listings.

Justification for World Heritage citation for Carlton Gardens and REB

  • ICOMOS statement, March 2004.

World Heritage qualities

  • REB: rare surviving example of international exhibitions including Great Hall,

shop front for industrial revolution,

  • REB and Gardens: representative of type and retaining authenticity of form

and function. Gardens description during exhibitions

  • Southern Gardens: pleasure, gardenesque, avenues of trees, shrubs, linking

paths, cast iron fences, fountains esp Hochgurtel

  • Joseph Reed architect, William Sangster, horticulturalist
  • Northern Gardens: partly used for temporary buildings, now museum,
  • Clement Hodgkinson, designer.

ICOMOS evaluation – risk analysis

  • Pressures from development, environment, natural and visitor/tourism,
  • Greatest pressure from annual flower show,
  • Government stated damage repaired immediately.
slide-2
SLIDE 2

2

Alienation of World Heritage Gardens for private development

Development is temporary but cumulative,

  • Annual cycle repeated for 10 years,
  • Alienation is substantial,
  • southern gardens totally enclosed for 14 days.
  • additional 6 weeks public access and amenity reduced during

construction and demolition and repair, and

  • further periods, sometimes months, for extended restoration,

Alienation from cultural, heritage and historical values,

  • intended as statement of 19th century Marvellous Melbourne,
  • purpose was as a public botanic leisure garden,
  • additional MIFGS event pressures degrades gardens, diminishes standard

Alienation from public good,

  • 2 million people visit gardens each year (COM master plan, 2004),
  • public loses access and amenity because of MIFGS,
  • can directly affect gardens for 6 months of the year, and
  • additional periods when repairs not successful
  • event also uses the REB & environs,
  • REB closed to visitors,
  • this year part of the museum fore-court also appropriated by event.

Detrimental to Melbourne’s reputation,

  • when gardens not open to public or overtaken by construction, demolition or

under repairs,

  • when gardens and whole world heritage site is in a degraded state,
  • government disregard for World Heritage values is obvious to all

users.

Alienation contrary to Melbourne 2030

Policy intended to encourage increased population in activity centres

  • particularly affects city and inner city suburbs,
  • Melbourne CBD, Carlton and Fitzroy collectively have increased

population

  • 2030 intended to maximize public use of facilities, services and assets,
  • including use of public gardens and parks

Carlton Gardens is public leisure gardens for city workers, Carlton and Fitzroy residents, students from universities, residents of adjacent high rise housing, visitors to Museum including school groups from around the State, and tourists,

  • this is extraordinarily heavy normal use,
  • pressure exacerbated by loss of southern gardens’ from MIFGS,
  • puts further pressure on northern gardens,
  • most of the open grassed area in north gardens cordoned off from

public for past 6 months,

  • degraded from normal overuse and drought.

Public alienation of southern gardens is unfair

  • private commercial enterprise benefits at public expense, and
  • contrary to 2030 policy.

Public alienation is cumulative across the entire CoM

  • the appropriation of the gardens should been seen in the context of the loss of

Goschs Paddock, the excisions from Royal Park, the loss of parklands for the tennis centre,

  • there is shrinking public space for a growing public
slide-3
SLIDE 3

3

Private development of the World Heritage Carlton Gardens

Is not appropriate Is unsuitable, and Is not sustainable Affects programs to improve world heritage gardens

Private development not appropriate

Historically

  • ignores cultural and heritage values,
  • stated in government policies,
  • prescribed in national and state heritage registers.
  • recognised as having World Heritage significance
  • also site of first sitting of federation and of Victorian parliament, 1901-1926.

Legislation and regulations

  • Commonwealth and State Acts and City of Melbourne regulations all intended

to protect, preserve and conserve heritage as a public asset,

  • HeritageAct (1994), Commonwealth Environment Protection and

Biodiversity Act (1999), Crown Lands Reserve Act 1978,

  • Melbourne Parks and Gardens (joint Trustee Reserve) Regs1994.

UNESCO obligations

  • UNESCO Convention and World Heritage citation agreements,
  • in accepting WH citation government committed to protecting heritage values
  • this means retaining integrity of Gardens’ use as defined in citation.
slide-4
SLIDE 4

4

Private Development not suitable

World Heritage Gardens appropriated for exclusive use and benefit of commercial business enterprise,

  • Victoria’s only World Heritage site should be open to public every day.

Large commercial event should be in purpose built event venue

  • gardens not suited for MIFGS,
  • needs facilities, infrastructure, vehicular access that supports event,
  • event increasingly variety and retail with huge, heavy installations
  • inadequate vehicular capacity both within gardens, REB and adjacent roads,
  • heavy congestion within Gardens and surrounding roads.
  • public health and safety issues in gardens,
  • high risk mix of pedestrians, heavy vehicular traffic and construction

works, and

  • gardens with construction materials not secure except for 14 days
  • space too small and site inefficient,
  • impacts on health of significant tree and gardens,
  • damages lawns and trees – repair costs greater than $50,000 each year.

Alternative MIFGS venues COM has repeatedly encouraged MIFGS/IMG to change exhibitions’ siting,

  • to remove landscape and hard buildings from the Gardens to open areas

around the REB,

  • MIFGS refused,
  • COM has recommended to MIFGS that other venues be investigated,
  • renovated show grounds, Flemington and Caulfield race courses,

Melbourne Convention Centre and Yarra banks, Birrarung Marr and Federation Square,

  • COM undertook to continue to sponsor MIFGS at another site.

MIFGS lack of accountability MIFGS withdrew from COM consultation and accountability mechanisms,

  • did not attend Events Advisory Committee or COM committee meetings.

COM decision to not renew licence was a last resort,

  • the increasing pressures of maintaining the gardens and trees were onerous,
  • COM had to put the long term preservation of the Gardens and the public good

ahead of the short term commercial interests

Private Development not sustainable

Increased risk to gardens from natural pressures,

  • accumulative affect of prolonged drought and water restrictions on aged and

diseased trees and degraded lawns,

  • difficulties in maintaining Gardens and trees as drought takes toll,
  • increases in costs of maintaining minimal conditions, and
  • increases in budgets for capital improvements,
  • increased risks to gardens and trees led COM to unanimously decide not to

renew the MIFGS licence. Use of public gardens for events not sustainable

  • even normal use is sometimes restricted to protect degraded areas,
  • events in public gardens have increased in numbers and size,
  • difficult to deduce expectation of event managers,

MIFGS event is highest impact of any of Melbourne’s events Carlton Gardens are classified by COM as only suitable for low impact events,

  • MIFGS use the southern gardens as a construction site,
  • exhibits cover most of the gardens,
  • 100,000 plus people walk over the lawns and tree root canopies over 5 day

period Problems of post event gardens’ recovery in drought conditions increase in recovery time and repair costs, and

  • ngoing maintenance because repairs not effective in drought conditions.

Council policy of restricting public access and even normal use on areas that are degraded, worn and prone to damage,

  • events involving heavy constructions and large numbers of people in confined

spaces no longer sustainable,

  • grossly hypocritical of COM if it were to approve high impact event while

reducing or excluding public from normal use,

  • bad public policy alienates government and council from electorate.
slide-5
SLIDE 5

5

Private Development affects programs to improve heritage gardens

Cycle of events slows COM’s master planning program

  • it distracts and diverts resources, and
  • halts work program.

MIFGS in its present form hinders restoration of Gardens and REB,

  • once the gardens are restored MIFGS wouldn't fit,
  • significant heritage elements of REB/Museum site to be restored,
  • inc western forecourt used as car park for exhibitors.
  • our primary duty of care is to gardens and future generations not to the private

profits of a short-term user,

  • we need to plan for the next 100 years not the next 1, 5, or 10 years.

Focus on events by Victorian government obscures value of heritage gardens

  • State Tourism plan makes only cursory mention of value of heritage gardens,
  • Tourism Minister responsible for legislation in parliament to transfer

responsibility of MIFGS event to State,

  • while ignoring the tourism value of world heritage site.

Government and council provide substantial grants to major events

  • conflicts of interest as both custodians of heritage gardens and sponsor of

events,

  • if significant heritage elements of REB site were restored eg Western

forecourt, it would not be available for use by MIFGS event as a car park,

  • government is captured by vested interests of private enterprise,
  • powerful events’ lobby actively solicits government and COM patronage,
  • diverts public funds from improvements to World Heritage site.

Government has not contributed any funds to the capital improvements

  • of the World Heritage site, either for the REB or the Carlton Gardens,
  • extraordinary omission from government’s heritage strategy budget.

Photographic record MIFGS event

International Management Group of America is contracted by Nursery and Gardens Industry to manage event.

  • Project management approach has been largely same each year for 10 years,
  • use of Gardens, layout of exhibitions, repeated each year,
  • some adjustment to construction methods,
  • no trenching since 2005.

Photos are snap shot of principal stages in the event

  • set up of tents around Gardens’ perimeter,
  • enclosure of southern Gardens,
  • hard building and landscape constructions along the tree avenues,
  • entertainment, catering and seating in open lawn areas in central spaces.

Significant elements

  • set up, construction, enclosed event, demolition and repair,
  • heavy traffic and vehicular use around and within the gardens paths,
  • single point of vehicular entry at Gertrude St/Nicholson Street and exit

Rathdowne Street,

  • heavy use of REB’s Nicholson Street entrance,
  • traffic congestion throughout adjacent roads.

World Heritage Values

Carlton Gardens and the REB during the exhibition period and early federation,

  • records the heritage values and qualities described in citation,
  • shows the qualities to which we should aspire for our World Heritage site.

Current degraded state of gardens

  • high impact use not sustainable,
  • it is irresponsible to tolerate such high risk to Gardens and heritage

trees,

  • many of Gardens’ heritage trees have died, been removed or are diseased,
  • some avenues have lost all their heritage trees,
  • Victoria Parade avenue has lost most of its heritage oaks.
  • Even normal leisure use is currently prohibited in the northern Carlton

Gardens,

  • also part of the heritage site.
slide-6
SLIDE 6

6

During Exhibition Period: World Heritage Values

slide-7
SLIDE 7

7

slide-8
SLIDE 8

8

World Heritage Values: REB/Carlton Gardens Site

2003 Principal Entrance through Plane Tree Avenue

slide-9
SLIDE 9

9

2008 MIFGS Entrance

slide-10
SLIDE 10

10

slide-11
SLIDE 11

11

8 tonnes each

slide-12
SLIDE 12

12

slide-13
SLIDE 13

13

slide-14
SLIDE 14

14

Ford Cars Rock Garden

slide-15
SLIDE 15

15

Varying construction methods; trenching, timber frame, concrete block, pegging REB western area; exhibitor car park

slide-16
SLIDE 16

16

solid construction abutting trees each year, large heavy construction

slide-17
SLIDE 17

17

building into parterre beds house construction in the gardens

slide-18
SLIDE 18

18

slide-19
SLIDE 19

19

immediately after exhibit demolition large lawn areas destroyed

slide-20
SLIDE 20

20

2008 Setting Up - Construction before the gardens are closed

slide-21
SLIDE 21

21

2008 Construction at tree base Typical tent construction concrete blocks and marquee pegs in tree protection zone and into tree root area.

slide-22
SLIDE 22

22

Earthmovers Earthmovers

slide-23
SLIDE 23

23

Tree as a building site Construction on tree roots

slide-24
SLIDE 24

24

Construction between trees

slide-25
SLIDE 25

25

slide-26
SLIDE 26

26

2008 Heritage Elms removed

slide-27
SLIDE 27

27

elm split at trunk base, from adjacent Murchison Square. Damaged 4 cars

slide-28
SLIDE 28

28

Carlton Gardens north; similar storm impact to southern gardens. 2008 MIFGS: Event Layout