~I

II1I

\1

IIil1I,

'I

IIilII

'I1'1;"I' 1

1j

If'.

II11I.I ,I

PYRMONT POINT PRECINCTARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH DESIGN

Report prepared forCity West Development Corporation

October, 1993

.1II,

IIIIIIIIIIIII

'III

I

I-I

11

CONTENTS PAGE

1.0 PROJECT SUMMARY 1

1.1 Application Details 11.2 Reason for Application 11.3 Description of Proposed Work 21.4 Research Design 21.5 Specific Questions 21.6 Timing 31.7 Post-excavation Analysis 31.8 Personnel 31.9 Excavation Permit 3

2.0 BACKGROUND 5

2.1 History 52.1.1 The Development ofPyrmont 52.1.2 1788 -1840 Early Settlement and the Macarthurs 62.1.3 Subdivision, Settlement and Community (1840 -1910) 82.1.4 Reconstructing the Point: Port Wharfage (1910 -1970) 102.1.5 Derelict, Demolished, Developed (1970 -1992) 11

2.2 Archaeological Resource 122.3 PyrmontlUltimo Heritage Study 13

3.0 THEORETICAL BASIS FOR RESEARCH DESIGN 153.1 Material Culture as a Resource 153.2 Problem Orientated Research 153.3 Research Design 153.4 Nature of Archaeological Features 163.5 Need for Review 16

4.0 APPROACHES 18

4.1 Objectives 184.2 Framework for Research 184.3 Core/Periphery Model 194.4 Household/Neighbourhood Models 194.5 Thematic Analysis 20

5.0 RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND THEMES 215.1 Physical 215.2 Inter-site comparative analysis 22'5.3 Spatial Structure of Sydney 22'5.4 Environmental 235.5 Methodological 23

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

CONTENTS PAGE

6.0 MElliODOLOGY 246.1 Comprehensive Research Design 246.2 Monitoring/Excavation 246.3 Recording 246.4 Artefact Recovery 246.5 Post Excavation 25

6.5.1 Database 256.5.2 Catalogue/Type Series 256.5.3 Conservation 25

6.6 Reporting 25

7.0 NOTES 26

8.0 BIBUOGRAPHY 27

9.0 APPENDICES 31Appendix A Procedures for the Evaluation of Excavation Permit Applications Under the

Heritage Act 1977.

Appendix B Sydney REP No. 26 City West Division 6. Heritage Conservation

Appendix C Ultimo Pyrmont PrecinctDraft Urban Development Plan Section 3.5Heritage and Conservation

I~

1

The specific aims of the archaeological program proposed are:

1. To identify the extent of archaeological features within the study area.

GODDBNMACKAY

Richard Mackay, Godden Mackay Pty Ltd

City West Development CorporationMaritime Services BoardDepartment of Housing

Pyrmont Point PrecinctArea enclosed by heavy line indicated in Figure 1.1

To identify the nature and, if possible, the date of construction of archaeologicalfeatures.

2.

3. To conserve the information contained within the archaeological resources and torecover information useful for understanding the history of the place.

4. To provide specific guidance and information for the future treatment of the sitesaffected.

In view of the recommendations in regard to the archaeological resource present (CaseyLowe Pg 16 and Godden Mackay Pg 36-40) it is planned to initiate a monitoring andrecording program to coincide with this redevelopment to provide accurate assessment ofremains within the precinct likely to be affected by works and recommendations for furthermore detailed archaeological investigation as required. It is further planned to undertakesuch additional tasks, including recording or archaeological excavation, as the overall workprogram proceeds.

Past studies of the Pyrmont Point area (Anglin and Associates January 1990, Casey, Loweand Associates April 1993 and Godden Mackay March 1993) have identified a number ofheritage items and sites with the potential for archaeological deposits to be present.

1.2 Reason for ApplicationAs part of the re-development of the area of Pyrmont Point by City West DevelopmentCorporation new roads are to be constructed, open space areas created, and the demolitionand excavation of a number of structures and sites is planned.

Excavation Director

Owners

1.1 Application DetailsProperty

1.0 PROJECT SUMMARY

IIII'IIIIIIIII,II

)

11IIIII

GODDENMACKAY

1.3 Description of Proposed WorkIt is proposed to:

Action: Record prior to demolition, monitor for archaeological remains duringdemolition with provision for detailed excavation if required.

IIIIIIIII

Demolish:

Action:

Demolish:

Action:

Demolish:

Waterside Cold Store (B9)*

Record prior to demolition

Western end of Pier 21 buildings (B7)*

Record prior to demolition

2-2A Ways Terrace (BlO)*

2

What is the nature of extant archaeological features? '.'

* Reference no. in Godden Mackay March 1993.

What is the extent of surviving archaeological evidence?

101-133 Point Street (A1)*Mill Street Western Side (A3)*113-119 Bowman Street (AS)*North Verges to Railway Cutting on Scott Street (A6)*

Notably:

What physical evidence of former activities at the sites survive?

1.4 Research DesignA Research Design has been prepared by the archaeological team. The background workalready completed should ensure that information yielded by the project is relevant toresearch questions as well as to current management needs.

Creation of Open Space and Pedestrian Access

1.5 Specific QuestionsIt is hoped that the work may answer some of the following questions relating to currentplanning and management needs:

Action: Monitor for archaeological remains on those areas noted as havingarchaeological potential, to be effected by above work, with provision for detailedexcavation if required.

IIIIIIIIII

;1

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

GODDENMACKAY

Are there any requirements for conservation?

What is the date of particular identified elements?

Whether or not these questions or other more general research questions can be answeredwill depend upon the actual nature of the sub-surface archaeological resource in theprecinct.

1.6 TimingMonitoring is scheduled to run concurrently with the works proposed by City West. It isproposed to let the first contract on site November 29th. The timetable for more detailedarchaeological work will depend on assessments based on evidence uncovered during themonitoring phase.

1.7 Post-excavation AnalysisIf excavation is required, the program will provide for a phase of post excavation work,inclUding cleaning, labelling, boxing and cataloguing of artefacts, entry of data to adatabase, establishment of an artefact "type" series and materials conservation, asappropriate.

Any post-excavation phase would also include provision for limited additional analysis andpreparation of a report which considers the questions identified in the Research Design.

1.8 PersonnelThe excavation director and project manager will be Richard Mackay. Other qualifiedarchaeologists will assist with specific parts of the project as required.

1.9 Excavation PermitAn excavation permit is sought covering the entire Pyrmont Point Precinct (see Figure 1.1)and all tasks to be undertaken for the City West Development Corporation which will affectpotential archaeological resources. .

A major benefit of this approaCh will be the creation of an opportunity for a series ofotherwise disparate monitoring, recording and excavation projects of meagre scale, to beintegrated within an overall research framework.

3

Figure 1.1 The Study Area, 1993, with buildings marked and the low-level roadways shown hatched.II

~I

'I~--[

'I i)

IIII

'I'0~

DARLING 15LAII~

'I'I

If•....

II 4

I-~

IIIII'IIIIIIIIIIII

;1l

1I11

GODDENMACKAY

2.0 BACKGROUNDThe following section of this report is reproliuced directly from Godden Mackay (1993). Itis included here to provide the necessary context for unde~tanding the archaeologicalpotential of the place and so that the Research Design is a "stand alone" document.

2.1 History2.1.1 The Development ofPyrmontThe area of Ultimo and Pyrmont developed early in the history of Sydney's growth andattracted commercial and industrial activities with the expansion of colonial Sydney. By1850 there were 103 commercial enterprises; including a shipyard and quarries. It wasthese industrial activities, combined with flour milling and other light industries, and thegeneral development of mercantile wharfage, for overseas and coastal shipping at Pyrmont,Darling Harbour, Glebe Island, and elsewhere in Cockle Bay, that was mainly responsiblefor the high population density of the inner western suburbs.

In 1855 an incorporated company was permitted by Act of Parliament to build a woodenbridge across Darling Harbour from Market Street to Pyrmont. The Act of Parliamentstipulated that the bridge should have a movable panel "capable of admitting vessels to passand repass through it". The bridge, which opened in 1858, connecting Pyrmont directlywith the City, linked the rural northwest to .the city proper and with Glebe Island, IronCove, Gladesville and Figtree bridges and Victoria Road became known as "the Five BridgeRoad" The first Pyrmont Bridge was replaced in 1902 by the present structure of the samename.

The modern development at Pyrmont began in 1891, with the building of coal jetties alongthe shore of the peninsula on the seaward side of the Pyrmont Bridge. The lower harbour,eastward of the Harbour Bridge, has residential suburbs along its shores whilst the upperharbour, westward of the Bridge, is chiefly industrial and commercial along its southernshore. One reason for the different character east and west of the Harbour Bridge is railwayaccess, a distinct advantage for the bulk handling of export cargoes such as wheat and wool,which come from the inland, and of coal, sugar and timber, whether imported or exported.

As the City of Sydney, in the limited municipal definition, is on the southern side of theHarbour, all the railroads from the west and south, and even from the north via theMeadowbank Bridge, were Jbuilhto .converge on the rail terminus established at Redfernduring the 1850s. From there, and from other points on the trunk line, branch lines servePyrmont, Rozelle, Glebe Island, and White Bay, with marshalling yards and facilities fordelivering trains of good wagons alongside vessels berthed at wharves.

The first significant use of electricity in New South Wales was in 1863 and in 1904 theSydney Electric Lighting Station at Pyrmont was opened as a major facility.

5

-~I

IIIII'IIIIIIIIIII~'"

I··1II

...... ;"'

GODDENMACKAY

On the western side of the Pyrmont Peninsula is Johnston's Bay, where the principal waterfrontage is occupied by the large buildings of the C.S.R. sugar refinery, established there in1878. Bulk sugar is brought to Pyrmont by sea, chiefly from Queensland and from thenorthern parts of New South Wales.

During the 1939-45 war the cargo wharves at Pyrmont were used largely for theembarkation of troops going overseas on active service, and also for the shipment of largequantities of war materials. Mter the war had ended, the first modern passenger shippingterminal in Australia was developed at Berth No. 13 Pyrmont.

The residential element of Pyrmont consists largely of terraced houses and blocks of selfcontained flats or home units scattered among bulky industrial and commercial buildings.Traditionally, these have been the homes of those working in industry located in the InnerCity and Harbour areas. There are also some older houses and occasional impressiveEdwardian terraces in Pyrmont Bridge Road. Most of the houses were built before 1890.

2.1.2 1788 - 1840 Early Settlement and the MacarthursThe Pyrmont Point Precinct known as Pyrmont encompasses the northern end of a broadpeninsula on the western side of Darling Harbour and it is the first peninsula west of thepromontory on which the city of Sydney was established. The area which is the subject ofthis report is the north-eastern corner of the peninsula and includes the northern mostextremity, Pyrmont Point.

This area is wholly contained within an early land grant, made by Acting Governor Patersonon 14th March, 1795 to a soldier in the 102nd Regiment, Thomas Jones. As was typical ofsuch land grants to soldiers, Jones appears to have made no attempt to occupy the land andsold it for ten pounds to his sergeant, Obadiah Ilkin in August, 1796. Eleven months later,Ilkin sold it for a similar amount to his regimental captain, John Macarthur, already wellestablished as a landowner, merchant and administrator. Thomas Jones, having given hisname to Jones Bay, was, in 1799, arrested and convicted of the murder of a clergyman,Samuel Ash Clode and was subsequently hung.!

John Macarthur was a prominent and influential figure in the early history of the N.S.W.colony and was one of its largest land holders. The property at Cockle Bay, as DarlingHarbour was then known, was a relatively small acquisition, a mere fifty-five acres anddoes not appear to have figured in the activities of John Macarthur to any significant degree.The only recorded visit of Macarthur to this property- is· described in the Sydney Gazette on21.12.1806:

On Thursday a selectparty ofLadies and Gentlemen, twenty-one in umber, exclusiveofattemlants, made an aquatic excursion from Parramatta to Captain Macarthur'sestate in Cockle Bay, being highly favoured by the uninterrupted serenity ofasalubrious atmosphere; and after examining with inexpressible satisfaction thepicturesque beauties which that romantic scene afforded, a handsome collationushered in the evening's festivity, beneath the shelter ofa spreading fig tree, whose

6

I ­

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

,""f",O....

GODDENMACKAY

waving foliage whispered to refreshing breezes. To this enviable retirement, one ofthe fair visitors was pleased to give the appellation "Le Repos de L'Amite"; the estatereceiving at the same time the name of ''Pyrmount'' (sic), from its pure anduncontaminated spring, joined to the native beauties of the place; ofwhich thecompany took Leave at five, much gratified with the rationaL festivities ofthe day.2

The name "Pyrmont" (Pyrmount or Piermont) appears to be a reference to the mineralsprings at Pyrmont in Germany, well regarded for their restorative properties in this period.

One other reference may also refer to this property, an advertisement in the Sydney Gazetteof the 17th November, 1805, wherein a Mr McArthur "gives notice that any persons foundcutting and taking wood from his farm at "Blank Cove, opposite the Barracks" will beprosecuted.3

Whilst there remains no record of the Macarthurs effecting any improvements to thePyrmont estate, it is known that a windmill was present on the high ground of PyrmontPoint, visible in a Joseph Lycett's 1824-25 Views in Australia, particularly those Views ofSydney From the North and From the Lighthouse, and in Major Taylor's Panorama ofSydney, painted from near the present Obser,ratory in 1823. It is also shown marked on the1822 Plan of the Town and Suburbs of Sydney. Uttle is known of this mill, save itslocation, attributed to the later site of St Bartholemews Church. Norman Selfe, writing atthe turn of the century, suggested that it was probably built and operated by one of theMacarthur family4

The Sydney Gazette of Sunday, 5th November, 1809, carries an advertisement fromGarnham Blaxcell, a prominent merchant, ship owner and magistrate, which states:

FIFTY POUNDS STERLING REWARD

Whereas on the night ofWednesday the 1st Instan~ or early on Thursday.morning, Mr.Blaxcell's Windmill at Pyrmont was broke into, and robbed of Seven Canvas Bags,containing Fifteen Bushells of Wheat, or thereabouts; which, from the trace of theFootsteps, appears to have been taken away in some Boat opposite Cockle Bay. If anyPerson or Persons will give information of the above Offenders, so they can bebrought to Justice they shall receive, upon Conviction, the above Reward of FiftyPounds Sterling. .

G. Blaxcell.5

It is likely that this windmill, like most others in Sydney, had been abandoned by the 1830s,by which time there were four steam-driven flour-mills operating in the city.6 It fails to bementioned in the later subdivision, although giving a name to Mill Street, in its vicinity.

7

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

GODDBNMACKAY

Whilst the Thomas Jones grant remained intact in the hands of John Macarthur, thecontemporary grants elsewhere on the peninsula to John Malone (24 acres on the 10thDecember, 1794) and William Mitchell (18 acres, also on the 10th December, 1894) appearto have lapsed or have been purchased by Surgeon John Hams. John Harris had received 34acres in 1803, with a further 144 acres in 1806, with a small addition of 12 3/4 acres in1818. On these lands he established the Ultimo Estate, which encompassed the whole ofthis peninsula except Macarthur's Pyrmont Estate.7

2.1.3 Subdivision, Settlement and Community (1840 - 1910)In 1836, subsequent to the death of John Macarthur, Edward Macarthur, resident inEngland, organised for the subdivision and sale of the Pyrmont Estate. A plan showing 102blocks, with reservations for recreation, a church, a wharf and a fortification was drawn up.8This plan was not acted upon and a second plan was drawn up in 1839, showing fifty-nineblocks. Auctions were held in December 1839 and June, 1940 and, with leases and otherpurchases, most lots south of John Street and some to the north had been sold or leased by1843, with sales of individual allotments continuing into the 1850s and 186Os.

The area saw two forms of development. Along the waterfrontages with reasonable access,industry in the from of shipbuilding, timber yards and ironworks were established, whilstthe higher land around the ridges was generally utilised for residential housing. Waterfrontdevelopment was characterised by" foreshore reclamation and timber jetties and a number oflarge industries were established in the area, notably the Junter River Steam NavigationCompany's Shipyard, later the Australian Steam Navigation Company, established in 1846on Darling Island and expanded greatly by levelling the island in 1854. Thomas Chowneand J.W. Russell were prominent shipbuilders, both established in the 184Os. CharlesSaunders established the Pyrmont Quarries in 1853 and John Fyfe (or Fife) established aniron foundry in 1855 in Pyrmont. A ferry service operating across Darling Harbour wasestablished during the 184Os, serving a wharf at the eastern end of John Street, Pyrmont.

Whilst these developments were undelWay around Pyrmont, the area around Pyrmont Point(then known as Macarthur's Point), which was the highest and steepest area, was also theslowest to develop. Its topography was less suited to commercial development and themajor expansion in this area was for residences in the late 1860s and early 1870s, thoughthere were scattered houses from the 1850s. The most notable building in the area was theSt Bartholomew's Anglican Church, its foundation stone laid in August, 1849 andcompleted the next year. It occupied the highest point of the" peninsula and its positiongenerally matched that ·of-the wrndinill of the 1820s. The church was soon accompanied bya school hall and rectory. The land was donated by Macarthur in the subdivision and in1842, he refused a request for a land donation to the Presbyterian Church on the groundsthat he had already given land for the Anglican church.IQ

8

II11II'IIIIIIIIII1I

--III

GODDENMACKAY

By the end of the 1870s, Pyrmont POiJ;lt'S development matched that of the area south ofJohn Street, with small scale residential housing on the ridges and some industry groupedon the foreshore. Michael Matthews, quoting the Sands Directory of 1875, gives theoccupations of a number of residents of Pyrmont Point. This list is reproduced below:

Sands Directory 1875

111 Bowman Street, John O'Toole.

113 Bowman Street, James Cambridge, iron roller.

115 Bowman Street, Wilson, engineer.

14 Harris Street, Alexander Fraser, fruiter.

50 Harris Street, Henry Piper, grocer.

53 Point Street, Francisco Mazitiell, master mariner.

55 Point Street, William J Pinkerton, tobacco twister.

57 Point Street, James Morrison, engineer.

59 Point Street, William Cooper, master mariner.

61 Point Street, Thomas Hodfield, shipwright.

63 Point Street, William B. Simpson, joiner.

65 Point Street, William Kermode, carpenter.

67 Point Street, Robert McDonald, bla~ksmith.ll

Matthews also states that No. 50 Harris Street was built in 1872, used as a grocers shop,No's 46 and 48 Harris Street plus 1-5 Cross Street and 2-6 Scott Street date from 1878 andthe Pyrmont Arms Hotel and No. 52 Harris St. from 1879.12

Other sources indicate that No's 109 - 115 Bowman Street (demolished) dated from circa1866, 117-119 Bowman Street "(Demolishedyr from 1875, 8 Scott Street from 1894 andterraces 115-125 Point Street (demolished) from the 1870s.13 Matthews also indicates thatthis area had four hotels, of which three survive, though only one retains its licence andfunction, the "Royal Pacific" on the corner of Harris and John Streets. The "Pyrmont Arms"now contains professional offices, "Caledonian", on the corner of Point and Herbert Streets,is now a residence and the "Greentree" was (Jt?glolis!t~}or the railway cutting in 1916.14

In 1875, the Pyrmont Public Baths were opened in a timber enclosure on the tip of PyrmontPoint. They were accessed by stairs down the escarpment at the north end of Point Streetand were a major social and sporting centre for the region. Around this time, the ferry wharfwas relocated to a jetty adjacent to the baths, known as the Pyrmont Point wharf. Thisservice was operated from the 1870s by Matthew Byrnes as a stopping place on the route toRozelle, Glebe and Annandale, being taken over by the ~andale Co-operative Ferry

9

-I

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

GODDBNMACKAY

Company in 1897 but closing down in· 1901,15 co-incidental with the opening of the tramroute along Harris Street to Pyrmont Point terminating at John Street.

Also in 1875, construction commenced on a refinery for the Colonial Sugar RefiningCompany, sited on the former shipyard of Thomas Chownes. This industry, from modestbeginnings, expanded enormously in the early twentieth century and by the 1980s it ownedmuch of Pyrmont and Ultimo west of Harris Street, as far south as the Saunder's Quarrynear Miller St. .

By the turn of the century, Pyrmont Point was fully developed with the Maitland BrewingCompany, the Wallorah Coal Company and the William Grant, Engineers and Iron SHIPBuilders, works occupying the foreshores on the east of the point, with the Pyrmont Baths,rebuilt in 1901, on the tip of the point. The western side of the point, from hosting a varietyof small waterfront industries, had been largely consolidated by this time into an extensivewharf and depot for the Goodlet and Smith timber company.

2.1.4 Reconstructing the Point: Port Wharfage (1910 - 1970)In 1910, the Sydney Harbour Trust, under whose direction the Pyrmont Wharves 7 to 18had already been rebuilt and redevelopment of wharfage in Darling Harbour, Walsh Bay,Sydney Cove and Woolloomooloo Bay was underway, proposed a continuation of wharfreconstruction into Jones Bay. The necessary resumptions were enacted on March 29, 1911and vested in the Commissioners for the Sydney Harbour Trust in April 26, 1911. TheAnnual Report for June 30, 1911, states:

In order to provide extra berths for overseas vessels, the Commissioners decided toconstruct two extensive piers in Jones Bay, west ofDarling Island, and for thispurpose the frontage from the Naval Victualling Stores to the Pyrmont Baths hasbeen resumed The plans which provide for 5 large berths, together with double­decked sheds, railway connection and etc are nearly completed, and the work ofrockexcavation has been commenced16

The construction of these wharves was carried on from 1911 till 1919 for wharves 19-23and the roadways were completed in 1920. The cliff face on the eastern side was quarried tothe alignment of Mill Street, and the spoil used for waterfront reclamation. A short sectionnorth of Bayview Street was indented and a refrigerated cold store of six floors with.conveyor connection to both wharves was erected, the indentation enabling top floor

.J"'~_ _ cQnnections to Point Street. Rail line connections were laid along the f9reshore l:qadways towharves 19-22 and this work coincided with the Railways Department, in i916,construction westwards through Wentworth Park and Glebe to the White Bay Goods Yardat Lilyfield.

From 1920, these wharves were in operation as port wharfage. Little new work wasundertaken by the Sydney Harbour Trust from this time, although it was clear that intentionrem~~:t;led to continue the foreshore wharfage around the Point into Elizabeth Bay when..timeand funding permitted. In 1929, the Sydney Harbour Trust announced the resumption of the

10

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

GODDENMACKAY

Pyrmont Baths, and a heavy dredge was tied up to its superstructure, causing extensivedamage. Local opposition to the loss of the Baths saw the plan deferred and the Baths werereconstructed by the local residents in 1930. In 1939, the Pyrmont Amateur SwimmingClub moved its headquarters to Drummoyne and in 1945, the Maritime Services Board,successor to the Sydney Harbour Trust from 1936, demolished the structure17 Theexcavation of the cliff face for a foreshore roadway was continued around the Point, to meetup with the wharfage in Elizabeth Bay. Berth's 24 and 25 were created in this work, whichwas largely complete by 1949. In 1955, a cargo shed was erected on Berth 2418. During the1%Os and 1970s, the M.S.B. gradually acquired control of the Elizabeth Bay waterfrontageand Jones Bay Road was connected to Harris Street. By 1980, the M.S.B. had also acquiredthe terrace housing site along Point Street, north of Herbert and Bayview Streets, though thehouses had been demolished in the late 1960s and 1970s, at a time when it was proposed to .allow commercial and industrial development to take pre-eminence over residential.

From the turn of the century until the present, no new residential buildings have beenerected in Pyrmont Point with one notable exception, In 1916, the Sydney City Councilacquired the land fronting Point Street between Bayview Street and St. Bartholomew'sChurch, including the land occupied by the Schoolhouse and the Parsonage. Thesebuildings were removed and, following the completion of the reconstruction of thewaterfront by the Sydney Harbour Trust in 1920, the City Council commissioned ProfessorLeslie Wilkinson to design a complex for working class housing. The IIWays Terracell wasdesigned in 1923 and opened in 1925 and it won a Council sponsored award for publichousing design in that year.l9

2.1.5 Derelict, Demolished, Developed (1970 - 1992)Since the 1970s, a variety of proposals have been put forward for the redevelopment ofPyrmont, ranging from almost totally industrial and commercial (generally excepting theWays Terrace) to predominantly public housing under the control of the State Government.With the exception of the Ways Terrace, and the terraces at 128-140 Bowman Streetremaining nineteenth century houses are generally either vacant or occupied by squatters. Aparticular plan, the Pyrmont Point Housing Project, was originally a joint venture with theCity Council and the N.S.W. State Land Commission20, but is now no longer to proceed asa Government project and 'Yill, under current proposalS, will be proceeded with (in spirit)through a co-operative liaison between the State Government and private developers.

Whilst the Jones Bay Port Wharfage has remained stagnant and little used since the 1970s,two significant changes occurred during the 1980s. Berths 22 and 23, with their unique 'l! ,'"

triangular jetty sheds, were appropriated for the site of the Sydney Heliport and the shedswere demolished. This facility operated for only a few months before it was closed due toresidents in nearby Balmain complaining of the noise generated by the helicopteroperations.21 The cleared jetty has been used for storage since this time. Also in the early1980s, as part of the redevelopment of the western side to Sydney Cove, the N.S.W. WaterPolice base was moved form CampbeUs Cove to the eastern side of Elizabeth Bay. Virtuallyall existing buildings and structures were removed and the Water Police occupy a number of"" .' "r ; •

demountable offices and sheds located around the site.

11

.-1

IIIIIIIIII

IIIIIIIIII

GODDENMACKAY

The only other material change to Pyrmont Point has been the recently completed roadbridge over the railway cutting, linking Point Street and Pyrmont Streets. This is aprecursor to the impending redevelopment of the area and has produced a considerableamount of excavation in its vicinity. It's provision is considered necessary for the futuretraffic requirements consequent upon the redevelopment.

2.2 Archaeological ResourceAn archaeological and heritage assessment for Pyrmont Point undertaken by GoddenMackay and Howard Tanner and ,Associates identified a range of buildings, structures andpotential subsurface deposits and structures. These items are listed in detail as appendicesD, E and F in that report.

Heritage items recom.ri:lended for retention, conservation and inclusion on HeritageSchedule of Rep. 26 are:

Pyrmont Arms Hotel

4 Ways Terrace (cottage)

The Ways Terrace

12-138 Bowman Street (Terraces)

140 Bowman Street (Terraces)

Royal Pacific Hotel

Pyrmont Wharf 19-21

Pike and Rail Fence (Bowman/Cross Street)

Escarpment Pike and Rail Fence and Railway Cutting (Jones Bay Road)

Phoenix Palm Tree (Ways Terrace)

Items which contribute to the overall significance of Pyrmont are:

Pyrmont Wharf 22-23

Former Waterside Coldstore

2-2A Ways Terrace (terrace)

Harris/Scott/Cross Street group

(46-52 Harris Street, 2-8 Scott Street, 1-5 Cross Street)

Railway structures group comprising tunnel, cutting, overbridge and sidings.

12

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

GODDENMACKAY

Potential archaeological sites identified are:

101-133 Point Street

100-118 Bowman Street

Western side Mill Street

88-100 John Street

113-115 Bowman Street

Verges to Railway cutting Scott Street

Copies of data sheets for each of these archaeological sites are included in Appendix C.

It was recommended by Godden Mackay that any sub-surface disturbance associated withthese sites be monitored by qualified archaeologist in accordance with Division 9 of theNSW Heritage Act.

Also provision should be made for more extensive recording and/or archaeologicalinvestigation (Le. excavation) is, circumstances where significant features or contexts areencounted.

Any item identified in the study proposed for removal/demolition as part of theredevelopment process should also be recorded. This should comprise the completion ofmeasured drawings and a comprehensive black and white photographic study.

2.3 Pyrmont/Ultimo Heritage StudyThe Pyrmont Ultimo Heritage Study provided the following detailed summary of thesignificance of the Pyrmont/Ultimo peninsula.

This summary relates directly to the items identified in the Pyrmont Point study and listedabove.

The Pyrmont and Ultimo peninsula is ofheritage significance for its outstandingcollective representation ofthe character ofnearly two centuries ofSydney's innersuburban lifestyle and industrial development.

The Pyrmont and Ultimo peninsula demonstrates environmental significance for itsdisplay ofhuman intervention and modification ofthe visually prominent, dramaticharbourside topography which has been utilised and exploited ofindustrial andsuburban uses. Remnant historic planting's or indigenous species are ofhistoricalsignificance.

13

.-­11I11I1III111IIIII

'.,I

GODDENMACKAY

It demonstrates historical and cultural significance as Pyrmont and Ultimo containvirtually intactprecincts ofmid-Vzctorian residential streets and commercial areaswhich are physical records both oflocal social relationships and the closely forgedlinks between housing and industry ofthese inner Sydney working class suburbs inthe late 19th and early 20th centuries. The collective character ofthese areas, andtheir archaeologicalpotential are ofinterpretive significance.

Pyrmont and Ultimo demonstrate environmental and architectural significance in thediversity and variety ofbuilt forms, materials and scale spanning from 1850 to 1930.

Ofparticular note are the terraces, the late-Vzctorian civic and institutionalbuildings and the expansive wool stores ofthe early 20th century.

Aesthetic significance is demonstrated in the residential and industrial areas. Thecohesive and collective character found in the repetition ofform, scale and detail ofthe mid-Victoria terrace row housing and turn of the century wool warehouses is ofnote, many ofwhich remain virtually intact.

Physical evidence ofscientific. archaeologicnl a.nd technological Sifmificance remainintact in the structure and mechanisms ofthe wool stores and other industrial sites.Early 20th century MSB wharfage and sheds contain exemplary scientific andtechnological innovations of their time. .

The mix ofuses, residentia~ commercial, industrial and transport is ofhistorical andcultural significance.

14

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

GODDENMACKAY

3.0 THEORETICAL BASIS FOR RESEARCH DESIGN

3.1 Material Culture as a ResourceArchaeological deposits and features provide important evidence of the history andsettlement of NSW. Archaeological sites include structures and stratified deposits ofmaterial which, when analysed, may yield information about the history of the colonywhich is unavailable from any other source. New information can challenge existing ideasof past behaviour. Archaeological investigation can yield much about technologies,economic and social conditions, taste and style, as well as site-specific information, such asdata on the buildings themselves or information about their occupants. Features andartefacts extracted and recorded provide primary evidence about the way of life of previousgenerations. Archaeological sites therefore have high scientific value. This value can befurther enhanced where there is substantial body of supporting documentary evidence that~nables further inference to be drawn from archaeological records.

3.2 Problem Orientated ResearchIn undertaking archaeological excavation, it is a fundamental principle that the investigationshould reveal information which is available from no other resource. Given the substantialcosts that are involved in the conduct of archaeological excavation it is clearly incumbentupon the archaeologist to ensure that the funds expended result in the revelation ofworthwhile data. Indiscriminate excavation in the absence of any overall theoreticalframework is likely to lead to dubious results in which analysis only centres aroundexplanation of already known features; an inductive approach unlikely to result in anyadvances to current knowledge.

As a means of avoiding this inductive approach, archaeologists have developed amethodology centred around hypotheses testing, in which questions are framed in relationto current research problems and models, and the archaeological resource is used to testthem. This "hypothetico-deductive" method is often referred to as the "New Archaeology".The major benefit is that the archaeological research becomes result oriented (Grabert 1983,Goodyear et a11978, Smith 1983).

3.3 Research DesignA research design is a set of research questions developed specifically for a site within awider research framework; an analytic tool that ensures that when archaeological resources.are destroyed by excavation the information content contributes to current and relevantknOWledge. In the United states, urban archaeological excavations are undertaken withinthe context of a regional research designs formulated by large archaeological enterprises,often funded by the state. While Temple (1989) has advocated the development of such aregional approach within Sydney, there is no general research framework currently availablewithin which the subject project can be undertaken. This paper endeavours to establish aframework relevant for this site.

15

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

GODDBNMACKAY

In the Australian urban context, Bairstow (1991:57) has argued that archaeology IIhasreached the stage where it can formulate and answer research questions which are vital tonineteenth century process of urbanisation and social changell

• However, the ability toachieve this goal dependS on the development of research questions that are able to beanswered by archaeological evidence. A fundamental requirement, of archaeologicalresearch design is that the questions posed must be responsive to the nature of thearchaeological evidence that is likely to be encountered.

3.4 Nature of Archaeological FeaturesThe information ultimately revealed by monitoring programs or archaeological excavationdepends upon deposits and features themselves, factors affecting their preselVation, factorsaffecting their recovery and the manner in which they are analysed. This process isrepresented schematically in Figure 3.1, which reproduces a diagram first published byDaniels (1972:203).

Archaeological features fall into a number of categories. Deposits may be unstratified fill, ascatter of artefacts relating to a single event or process, or an accumulation of artefacts, assuch occurs in a well or privy. Archaeological evidence itself may not necessarily be adeposit. In addition there are structural features, individual finds and "ecofacts ll

- "changesapparent in the environment as the result of human activity, such as land clearance,introduction of vermin or soil pollution" (Birmingham 1985:39). Questions about what isto be collected during excavation, and indeed how the excavation is to occur will determinewhich of these elements are recorded. It is therefore essential that the analysis stage of theproject is "planned before rather than after fieldwork by explicit presentation of conceptualframework which can guide strategies in the field and in finds interpretation." (Birmingham1988:152).

3.5 Need for Review .Notwithstanding the development of a detailed research design, the nature of archaeologicalsites is such that their structure and content cannot be determined with any certainty untilexcavation commences and it is therefore essential that the research design is adaptable andis revised as the nature and extent of the resources within the site become better understood,and a greater database enables decisions about what to monitor, what to record, what to digand where.

16

III

IIIIII

IIIIIII

FA( TORSCONTROLLABLE

Locationof

excavotlon

Recoveryprocedures

AnalytIcalond sorllngprocedures

Wrlllng andpuolashrngprocedures

/ '\.

I Recorded Idala

-L '- /-"\

IPubllshed Idala

" /

FA( TORSUNCONTROLLABLE

Factorsaffecllng

preservation

Transpor tollonfactors

(posl-deposlllon)

III

Figure 3.1 Archaeological Data Causation (Daniels, 1972:203)

17

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

GODDENMACKAY

4.0 APPROACHES

4.1 ObjectivesThe proposed monitoring, recording and excavation program in Pyrmont Point has as itsprimary objective the identification of the archaeological resources believed to be presentbeneath the surface. The excavation approach and methodology will consequently beoriented towards determination of the presence and extent of features and their recording.However, the area is also expected to contain evidence relevant to a range of other "questionsabout Sydneyts and Australia's historical and social development.

The work will consequently be undertaken in a manner which has regard for contemporarymodels and theories, and which facilitateS recording of data useful for inter-site comparisonand further research. However, it is not the intention to attempt to answer all relevantresearch questions at this stage, but rather to concentrate on the primary purpose of theexercise.

The following outline of contemporary approaches is intended to provide a contextualbackground to the methodology to be adopted.

4.2 Framework for ResearchThere are a number of frameworks which may be used in urban archaeology. Traditionalstudies adopt an empirical approach, typical of inductive archaeology in which excavationis undertaken and analysis attempts to make some sense of the results. Later behaviouralmodels attempt to analyse the structure and processes which are implicit in humanbehaviour and which are reflected in material culture. A number of extensivearchaeological projects undertaken in the Unites States adopt such an approach; theAlexandria project in Virginia being a case in point (Cressey et al 1982). More recentcontemporary frameworks adopt an historical approach in which models are derived usingsocial and economic data, such as a combination of official records and analysis ofcontemporary sources. This has been attempted by Graeme Aplin in his sodo-economicconsideration of the structure of Sydney (1982). Birmingham (1990) has recently pointedout the dangers inherent in this approach in the context of Australian Urban HistoricalArchaeology where comparison of historical and archaeological information can sometimesproduce a simple "narrative" record rather than a dialogue which highlights both agreementand contradictions in the evidence. Given the extensive historical information which is .~_

available about the PyrmontMtimo area, and the relative scarcity of comprehensivehistorical information usually available at the household or site specific level in urbanAustralia (see Bairstow 1991:54), the investigations envisaged at Pyrmont Point wouldappear to lend themselves to an historical approach, emphasising considerations of Sydney'surban spatial development.

18

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

GODDENMACKAY

4.3 Core/Periphery ModelOne of the main frameworks for behavioural investigations at urban archaeological sites 'isthe core/periphery model. This model proposes that an economic and social central corewithin urban centres contain sites and localities that are typically wealthier and moredeveloped than those further from the centre. The archetypal application of this modeloccurred in Alexandria, Virginia (Cressey et a11982, Cressey and Sheppard 1987). Themodel may have some relevance to the Pyrmont Point project, in that during most of its19th century history the Point was a peripheral area, although it became more intensivelydeveloped towards the end of the century and into the early 20th century. In this context,investigation of Pyrmont Point might contribute to the overall investigation of the socialspatial and economic development of Sydney, by providing us with information derivedfrom a geographically "discrete" urban area to contrast with evidence available from othersites.

4.4 Household/Neighbourhood ModelsRecent years have seen some debate amongst Australian archaeologists between thosefavouring "household" approaches and those preferring to consider "neighbourhoods". Thedifferences in approach derive from a major change in emphasis and increasingconsideration of archaeological sites in terms of socio-economic patterning anddevelopment. Biriningham (1988) emphasises the opportunities that are afforded to urbanarchaeologists by the new wave of Australian and economic historians. A fundamentalissue to such consideration is the basis on upon which the site or its elements areconsidered.

Citing the difficulties of disturbed sites in urban context, and the lack of household-specificstatistics, American archaeologists such as Honerkamp (1987) and Rothschilds (1987) arestrong advocates of a neighbourhood approaCh in which attempts are not made to attributefeatures and contexts to specific sites households or people. Instead the archaeologicalrecord is considered on a macro-scale and used to analyse broad range historical questions.The argument is that the site functions and activities can be determined and dated even if asite is disturbed (King and Miller 1985). This approach is clearly useful in the context ofgreatly disturbed urban sites where the "density and mobility of urban populations makes itdifficult to assign ownership of artefact assemblages to particular individuals orhouseholds" (Cressey et aI1982:143). This is a position that has been strongly advocatedby Bairstow with respect to some urban sites and Research Designs in Sydney (Bairstow1989:2; 1991:54-57).

This is not to say that the consideration of individual households cannot and should not beundertaken. Historical analysis already completed for Pyrmont!Ultimo has revealed awealth of detailed information relating to inhabitants of dwellings within the area i.e. CaseyLowe (1993:9-13). In the Sydney context, Birmingham (1988:155-156) suggests that acombination of thorough historiographies and site specific research, in combination withcompetent analysis of the site and the context within it, can often allow a multi-stagehierarchical approach, in which questions at the household level are considered in cases

19

-IIIIIIIIIII

IIIIIIIIII

GODDBNMACKAY

where disturbed sites or insufficient background records are available, and overall socio­economic spatial structures are considered in a wider context such a core periphery model(Birmingham 1988:159). Given the information available in Pyrmont Point and the natureof this project which extends across a number of sites, it may well prove a useful place totest Birmingham's proposal.

4.5 Thematic AnalysisA further major development in heritage conservation during recent years is a thematicapproach to history and contextual consideration of the cultural significance of sites. TheCentral Sydney Heritage Study already recommended that archaeological resources withinthe City of Sydney should be addressed using a thematic approach. This methodology isstrongly supported by Bairstow who emphasises the important role played early 19th­century Sydney the shop or workroom attached to the house, which was the basic unit ofproduction in the urban environment (Bairstow 1991:56).

Study of the Pyrmont Point Precinct fits well into thematic considerations of theurbanisation and spatial development of Sydney. This area also evidences the 19th and20th century interplay between residential accommodation, industry and communicationaccess via both the foreshore and rail and road. As a precinct, the sites in Pyrmont Pointmay provide a useful set of data for comparative studies with the Market City Development(Paddys Market) site excavated in 1990. This site also includes a late nineteenth centuryworking class community living in close proximity to an industrial workplace. (Finalreports from the Paddy Markets excavation will be issued in November 1993).

20

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

GODDENMACKAY

5.0 RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND THEMESThis section of the document outlines a number of research questions which will form theoverall framework for the proposed work at Pyrmont Point. The questions will bereconsidered and refined following commencement of work, once more information isknown about the nature of the archaeological resource. The primary aims of this work is todetermine the nature and extent of physical features, and to make recommendations abouttheir future treatment. While it is likely that information relevant to each of the research

. questions below (and others) will be gained as a result of the information, and while someanalysis of these issues will be inCluded in the final project report, the project does notprovide for exhaustive comprehensive analysis of artefactual material or structures. Theproject is primarily.oriented towards management of the area's cultural resources thoughmonitoring and recording of sites affected by new works.

The research questions below are those to which it is hoped the site will provide answersand those to which the site should contribute information. In reality, the area mayor maynot contain evidence relevant to these questions, or enabling definitive answers to bedetermined.

5.1 Physical .At this stage, the primary purpose of the work is to obtain information on the nature andextent of archaeological features that remain in situ sub-surface. The following questionsshould be answered:

What physical evidence of former activities in the area survives?

What is the extent of surviving archaeological evidence?

What is the nature of extant archaeological features?

What are requirements for conservation, (both in situ and once removed from context)?

What is the date of particular identified elements?

Initially, it is expected to monitor works associated with the redevelopment, demolition,excavation etc.

Monitoring will enable an accurate assessment to be made of the need for further, moredetailed, .archaeological investigation.

Should this further work be indicated a variety of physical and analytical methods will beused to address these questions:

a test trenching strategy, in locations based upon existing physical and documentaryevidence in light of assessment made during monitoring of work;

refinement of the trenching and sampling strategy as excavation at each site proceedsand information becomes available;

21

i-W­

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

GODDENMACKAY

open area excavation as required;

input from materials conservators, applied geologists and other specialists as required;

analysis of fabric revealed, particularly bricks and mortar.

5.2 Inter-site comparative analysisInvestigation of Pyrmont Point would provide excellent comparative data for materialrecently excavated in the centre of Sydney. Notably, material from the Markets CityDevelopment excavation and The Rocks. Comparison of the three assemblages of data islikely to provide useful insights into the nature of urban land use and development in thenineteenth century.

5.3 Spatial Structure of SydneyThe nature of Pyrmont Point as a geographically discrete unit peripheral to central Sydneymay provide useful comparisons at both the single site and neighbourhood levels with boththe Haymarket and The Rocks material which represents more centralised urban contextssettled at different stages in Sydney's development.

As the city expanded, the Point appears to have undergone intensified use and development.The provision of accommodation for inner city workers of the late nineteenth century had tobe juggled with the needs of industry on the point and access to the foreshores for sea-bornetrade. The tension between these disparate activities is also likely to provide useful insightsinto the management of growth of a large city in the late nineteenth and early twentiethcenturies.

These considerations, which relate particularly to more broad ranging theoretical-frameworks such as the core/periphery model may be contributed to at this site by asking anumber of questions such as:

What was the intensity of development of the area over time?

Is there any evidence of increased development pressures as Sydney expands?

Is expansion clearly linked to particular historical phases of Sydney's development?

Do the building configurations reflect changing land values; (Le. is there increaseddevelopment, less yard use, more extensive structures on smaller sites)?

What was the impact of provision of municipal services?

How were transport services both for people and goods integrated into the expandingurban system?

22

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

";~I'"-'-

I··1 .,....::1.

II

GODDENMACKAY

These questions also require concurrent consideration of physical evidence and backgroundcontextual information including:

analysis of sequential plans showing actual structural elements in the area;

evaluation of building and site usage, including yards, as suggested by physicalevidence, relative to historical documentation;

correlation of particular phases on the sites with historical events or other processes(e.g. 1837 Building Act, 1850s goldrush);

changes following arrival of town services.

As already suggested in section 4.4 above, the program proposed may also provide anopportunity to test the possibility of individual household studies using the multi-stageapproach advocated by Birmingham (1988).

5.4 EnvironmentalEcological data, including soil samples and poiien records, will be documented for futureanalysis. The data should provide an important complement to similar data recorded at theMarkets City site and Little Pier Street site and is likely to contribute to otherenvironmental studies undertaken in Sydney. The data may afford an opportunity toexamine the effects of urbanisation on the local environment, and changes made to theoriginal topography to accommodation increased development.

5.5 MethodologicalAs will all major excavations, this project provides an opportunity to gather informationabout site formation and disturbance processes. It is already known that sections of the areahave been extensively disturbed, both by the sequence of building activities and demolition,and by the subsequent introduction of service conduits and associated facilities. It isexpected that analysis of the taphonomy (site formation processes) and stratigraphicanalysis will present a major challenge to the archaeological team. The report on this aspectof the project is likely to be a Useful reference document to those undertaking subsequentexcavations in this part of the city.

The excavations are also likely to provide iIiformati'oR'aboul surVival rates of archaeologicalmaterial and to contribute methodological knowledge on attribution of particular features tophases or site occupants.

23

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

GODDENMACKAY

6.0 METHODOLOGY

6.1 Comprehensive Research DesignAlthough the work program of the City West Development Corporation affects a series ofseparate sites and areas within the Pyrmont Point Precinct, it is proposed that the intendedarchaeological monitoring, recording and (if needed) excavation, post-excavation andreporting should be subject to a single excavation permit issued by the Heritage Council ofNSW pursuant to Section 145 of the NSW Heritage Act.

Issue of a single permit will facilitate that completion of the project by the same team in anefficient and expeditious manner. More importantly it will provide an opportunity for theconduct of the project as a cohesive whole, rather than as a series of separate small scaleactivities. In this manner it is hoped that each component of the project can make amaximum contribution to the overall research framework.

6.2 Monitoring/ExcavationArchaeological monitoring or "Watching Brief" will be undertaken at those sites affected byredevelopment works for which monitoring has been recommended.

These sites will include:

2-2A Ways Terrace101-133 Point StreetMill Street Western side113-119 Bowman StreetNorth Verges to Railway cutting on Scott Street.

Where monitoring indicates undisturbed archaeological material (deposits or structures) itmay be deemed appropriate to undertake a more detailed archaeological investigation whichmay involve trench sampling or in significant instances open area excavation. Both of theseinvolve the stratigraphic excavation of depoSits, usually by hand. Where monitoringindicates it is appropriate, some clearance may be carried out by machine.

6.3 RecordingWhere archaeological excavation is not required, recording will comprise photographs and a

., ',,'. -written report of findings where archaeological excavation does occur every identified-unitwill be individually planned, described, photographed and levelled. A series of standardpro-forma sheets will be used to record basic information about each unit or context.

6.4 Artefact RecoveryWhere archaeological excavation occurs significant units will be carefully excavated by

. hand and:an artefacts will be retained. Where appropriate, deposits will be .sieved.." ..:8.:system of labelled trays will ensure the provenance of all recorded artefacts remains secure.

24

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

GODDENMACKAY

6.5 Post ExcavationWhere possible processing of artefacts and other preliminary analysis and conservationtreatment will occur on site, during any. required excavation phase.

6.5.1 DatabaseExcavation data will be recorded on hard copy standard forms and will be entered into a D­Base archaeological data system. This system, which has been used by Godden Mackay onother urban excavations is ideally suited to recording artefactual and other informationlikely to be revealed by the project. Entry of information to the database will continue untilcompletion of the post excavation phase.

6.5.2 Cataloguerrype SeriesThe D-Base IV database will be used to prepare a comprehensive catalogue of all artefactual

,material removed from the site.

6.5.3 ConservationAn impoqant element of the post excavation work will be physical conservation ofartefacts. The services of a professional materials conservator will be employed to ensurethat any special conservation needs of delicate artefacts are met. Artefacts will be labelled,bagged and boxed, ready for lodgement with an appropriate authority.

6.6 ReportingA series of reports will be prepared as a result of this project. Brief progress reports will beprepared in relation to each of the sites dealt with during the program. In addition, at theconclusion of the total project, an overall report outlining the work undertaken, resultsachieved and responds to the research design will be prepared.

25

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

GODDBNMACKAY

7.0 NOTES1. Matthews, M. R., Pyrmont and Ultimo - A History Pyrmont Ultimo History Project,

1982, p7.

2. The Sydney Gazette and New South Wales Advertise, Sunday, December 21, 1806,Facsimile Edition, Angus and Robertson Ltd, Sydney, 1968.

3. ibid, Sunday November 17,1805.

4. Fox, Len, Old Sydney Windmills, L. Fox, Sydney, 1978, pp33-35.

5. The Sydney Gazette and New South Wales Advertiser, Sunday, November 5, 1809,Facsimile Edition, Angus and Robertson Ltd, Sydney, 1968.

6. Fox, Len, op.cit p.35.

7. Matthews, M. R., op cit. p9-13.

8. Kelly, M & Crocker, R. Sydney Takes Shaped, Doak Press, Sydney 1978.

9. Ashton, P. PyrmontlUltimo Heritage Study - Thematic History, Anglin Associatesfor the Sydney City Council/Dept of Planning, 1989.

10. Matthews, M. R. op cit p35-39.

11. ibid p28.

12. ibid p27.

13. Nation~l Trust of Australia (NSW) - Listing Cards.

14. Matthews, op cit. p32.

15. Prescott, A M. Sydney Ferry Fleets, Ronald H. Parsons, Magill, S.A 1984.

16. Annual Report of the Commissioners for the Sydney Harbour Trust, June, 30, 1911,NSW. Government, cited in Bartes B. Fraser, S, Wharves 19, 20 & 21 Pyrmont,Undergraduates Thesis, School of Architecture, University of NSW, 1989.

17. Matthews op cit p. 87-89.

18. Ashton op cit p38.

19. National Trust of Australia (NSW) - Listing Card "Ways Terrace", 1983.

20. Planning Workshop - Ultimo - Pyrmont Peninsula and Environs Study, Dept. ofPlanning, NSW, 1985 p103.

21. National Trust of Australia (NSW) Heritage Study of 19th and Early 20th CenturyTrading Wharves in Sydney Harbour, The National Trust of Australia (NSW), 1989,p34, 40.

26

IIIIIIIIIII•IIIIII"~"""

".T ~ '#:;;,

IIII

GODDENMACKAY

8.0 BIBUOGRAPHYAnglin Associates 1990.Pyrmont/UltimoHeritage Study For Sydney City Council

Aplin G. 1982"Models of Urban Change"Australian Geographic Studies 20pp 144-158

Aplin G. 1985"Socio-spatial Structure of Australia Cities"in BUrnley & Forest (eds) Living in Cities: Urbanism and Society in MetropolitanAustralia.

Bairstow D. 1989"Approaches to Urban Archaeology"Australian Society for Historical Archaeology. Research Bulletin.

Bairstow, D. 1990"271-272 Pitt Street, Sydney. Historical Archaeological Excavation tl Volume 1, Reportprepared for Crone and Associates and Kumagai (NSW) Pty Ltd.

Bairstow D. 1991"Urban Archaeology: American Theory, Australia Practice" Australian Archaeology, Vol33 Dec 1991 pp 52-58.

Beaudry, M. C. 1984"Archaeology and the Historic Household:in Man in the Northeast 28:27-38.

Birmingham,J.1985"Research Design in Urban Salvage Excavations" in First Government House Site. Sydney;Its Significance and its Future. Proceedings of Seminar No. 2. Department of Environmentand Planning, Sydney.

Birmingham, J. and Murray, T. 1987Historical Archaeology in Australia A HandbookAustralian Society for Historic Archaeology, Sydney.

Birmingham,J.1988tiThe Refuse of Empire: International Perspectives on urban Colonial Rubbish" inBirmingham, Bairstow & Wilson (eds), Archaeology and Colonisation: Australia hI. theWorld context, Australian Society for Historical Archaeology, Sydney.

27

I,IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

GODDENMACKAY

Birmingham, J.199O - "A DeCade of Digging: Deconstructing Urban Archaeology"In The Australian Journal of Historical Archaeology8,13-22.

Casey and Lowe Associates. 1993Baseline Archaeological Assessment, Pyrmont Pointfor the Department of Housing.

Cressey, P. J. and Sheppard, S. 1987"Geographical versus Social Scale in Alexandria: A Growing Archaeological Perspecitve".Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society for Historical Archaeology Savannah,Georgia.

Cressey, P. J. Stephens, J. F. Shephard, S. J. and Magid, RH. 1982."The Core-Periphery Relationship and the? Archaeological Record in Alexandria, Virginia"in Roy S. Dickens 9th ed). Archaeology of Urban America: The Search for Pattern andProcess pp. 142-173.

Davies, M. & Buckley, K. 1987Port Arthur Conservation Project Archaeological Procedures ManualDepartment of Lands and Parks, Hobart.

Friedlander, A 1987"Household Time and Historical Time: The Problem of Temporal Scale in Urban HistoricSites".Paper presented to the Annual General Meeting of the Society for Historical Archaeology.Savannah Georgia.

Godden Mackay 1993 and Howard Tanner and Associates Pyrmont Point PrecinctArchaeological and Heritage Assessment for Property Services Group.

Goodyear, A C., Raab, M. L., Klinger, T. C. 1987"The Status of Archaeological Research Design in Cultural Resource Management".American Antiquity 43, 159-171. .

Henry, S. 1987"A Chicken in Every Pot"in E Staski (ed)"I!;iving in Cities" Current Research in Urban Archaeology. The Society. for .. ,. ,~....Historic Archaeology Special Publication Series 5 pp 19-28.

Honerkamp, N. 1987"Households or Neighbourhoods" Finding Appropriate Levels of Research in urbanArchaeology", Paper presented at a Symposium entitled The Problems of Scale in UrbanArchaeology, Meetings of the Conference of Historical and Underwater Archaeology,Savannah, Georgia.

28

i,

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

GODDBNMACKAY

Kelly, M. 1984"Urban History in Australasia" in David Reeder (ed) Urban History Yearbook pp. 68-80.

King J. A. Miller, H. M. 1985"The View from the Midden: An Analysis of Midden Distribution and Composition at theVan Sverigen Site, St Mary's City, Maryland"Historical Archaeology 21, pp 37-59.

Kee, L. W. 1984"Delineating Ethnicity from the Garbage of Early Virginians: The Faunal Remains fromthe Kingsmill Plantation Slave Quarter". Unpublished Manuscript. Depart of Sociologyand Criminal Justice, Old Dominion University Norfolk, VA. USA.

Otto, J. 1975Status Differences and the Archaeological Record - A Comparison of Planter, Overseer, andSlave Sites from Cannon's Point Plantation (1794 - 1861)".University Microfilms Ann Arbor Michigan.

Rothschild, No. 1987"On the Existence of Neighbourhoods in 18th Century New York: Maps, Markets, andChurches" in E. Staski (ed) Living in Cities: Current Research in Urban ArchaeologySpecial Publication Series 5.

Smith, H. L. 1983"Research Designs in Cultural Resource Management. Future Trends and PotentialPitfalls".Contract Abstracts and eR.M. Archaeology 3, 116-118.

Staski, W. 1982"Advances in Urban Archaeology"Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory 5, pp 97-138.

Staski, E. (ed) 1987Living in Cities: Current Research in urban Archaeology. The Society for HistoricalArchaeology Special Publications Series 5.

Temple, H. 1989"Issues Procedures and Problems in Urban Archaeology in NSW" Urban Digs HistoricalArchaeology Guidelines. Department of Planning, Sydney.

University of Sydney Historical Archaeology. 1988"Urban Archaeology in Context" Unpublished Manuscript.

University of Sydney - Historical Archaeology. 1990"Student Manual" Unpublished Manuscript.

29

1IIIIIII'IIIIIIIIIIII

1 1

GODDENMACKAY

Wilson, A. 1989 ."Historical Archaeological Investigation of the Sydney school of Arts". Project Proposalprepared for Crone and Associates Pty Ltd.

Zierden, M. & Calhoun, J. 1987"Household and Beyond: Levels of Research in Charleston, South Carolina If. Paperpresented to the Annual General meeting of the Society for Historical ArchaeologySavannah, Georgia.

30

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

GODDENMACKAY

9.0 APPENDICESAppendix A Procedures for the Evaluation of Excavation Permit Applications Under

The Heritage Act 1977.

Appendix B. Sydney REP No. 26 City West Division 6. Heritage ConServation

Appendix C. Ultimo Pyrmont PrecinctDraft Urban Development Plan Section 3.5Heritage and Conservation

31

II1IIIIII"

III1III1IIII

Appendix A. Procedures for the Evaluation of Excavation Permit ApplicationsUnder The Heritage Act 1977

IIIII

------------------------------------~

I PROCEDURES FOR THE EVALUATION OFEXCAVATION PERMIT APPLICATIONS UNDER THE HERITAGE ACT 1977

IIIIIIIIIII

:"OTE: For the purpo~e of the~e procedure~:

lil 'relic' i~ dt:fined in the Heritagc Act 1<,)77. a~

amcndcd in IlJX7. a~ any dcposit. object ormatcrial cvidencc relating to the ~e[(lernent ofthe area that compri~c~ :"ew South W:.lle~. notbcing Aboriginal 'cttlcmcnt: and which i, 50or morc ycar~ old.

{il 1 'cxcavation' mcan~ the di~turbance of land torcvcal. cxtract. cxpo~e. discover or movc a relie.It abo includc~ land clearance if this involve~

disturbance of ~urface deposits.(iii) .salvage' means the inve~tigat ion of .e\"ldence

to he Ilht or made inaccessible through ...unavoid:lhle action ... '

Thc Hcritagc Act. as amended. Slatcs that <I per~on

~hall not move a relic proteclcd by a conservationinstrument without approval from the HeritageCouncil. Further. no-onc may di~llIrb or e:-.cavateany land in ~ew South Wales (except Commonwealthowned land) to discover. expose or move a relicwithout an Excavation Permit issued by the HeritageCouncil of New South Wales (~ee clauses 13X-145)and 57 (I Hc). 5X-(5). This is without prcjudice topermits rC4uired by any other hody.

IIII

I \

I

During the excavation, exposed features are recorded using scale diagrams, photographs and wriccen descriptions.

~~~..~~, ....

-~:.:..- --:.-- -

• -"A" ~ :-"

-' .

.-----

•

I

I

IApplying for a Permit

lifo obtain an E.\cavation Permit. applicants must completewo (2\ copie~ of the appropriate application form. An

-,Ipplicatlon umkr section 1.+0 is required to excavate.disturb. move or discover relics on any land in i':ew South

I vales not ~ubject to a conservation order under theHerirage. Act 1977. An application under Section 60 isrequired to undertake similar work involving a relic or land

l overedoyan interim or permanent conservation order.Applications must include details of the proposed

Excavation Director's professional experience and payment

Ill' the requisite fee. As the Heritage Council meets on the'irst Thursday of each month. applications being madelllder Section 60 of the Act must be received at leastl'ourteen working days in advance of the next Heritage

I council meeting. In some emergencies it may be possibleto arrange the issue of a permit at short notice.Applications being made under Section 140 can be

(' pproved hy the Director, Department of Planning. underlelegated authority from the Heritage Council. if necessary.

Assessment of ApplicationsIAPPlications are assessed by the specialist staff of the

Heritage Branch of the Department of Planning who thenprepare a report for consideration by the Heritage Council.

I Assessment is made according to the attached guidelines.The area proposed for archaeological investigation is

checked against Current permits. Only one permit for a site

l is normally issued at anyone time. If there is anothercurrent archaeological permit applying to the same site. theapplic;ll1t is advised of the position and told the name of theIII her permit holder. The applicant may he asked to liaise

IWith any other permit holder hefore the Council considers(he application.

When the Heritage Council considers the report It mayrecommend that no permit be i~sued. that a pemlit bei~sued subject to ~pecial conditions or that the permit heapproved and i:.sueu.

The conditions of the permit arc printeu on the reverseof the application form but can be altered by the Council atany time before the permit has been issued.

The Heritage Council may also refer the application tothe Archaeological Advisory Panel for advice.

Renewal of a PermitSatisfactory interim reports on work undertaken at asite are essential for a permit renewal. except underspecial circumstances.

There is no additional fee to renew an application foran existing permit.

Issue of a PermitA successful applicant is forwarded one of the twoapplication forms which will have been signed and datedhy the Secretary of the Heritage Council. This formbecomes the Excavation Permit. It is then the responsibilityof the permit holder to ensure all excavation work,including the treatment of artefacts. fultils the conditionsof the permit.

Guidelines on the Issue of Excavation PermitsThe fragile'nature and variety of the importantarchaeological resources of NSW are recognised (asamended) through the protection provided by (heHeritage Act 1977.

It is through the system of issuing excavation permitsthat the conservation of these resources can he managedand controlled, However the co-operation of all

I

II rchaeologists is necessary if this important aspect of the

tate \. herita~e is to be adequately protected.Factors ~onsidered in assessing each application for an

IxcaVation pem1it include:\) "th: reason for excavation:

(I) salvage:(ii) research:

I (iii) preliminary site exploration:(iv) training:

(b) the research design:

I C) the si~nificance and nature of the site:.,.... dt,~1e qualifications and/or expenence 01 the

Excavation Director:

le) the standard of project work and reports:Il the ownership and ~torage of excavated material.

(i) salvage

I Vhere possible this should be preceded by historicalesearch and the preparation of an archaeological research

proposal outlining the background research and reasons for

Ihe excavation of the particular ~ile.

While there i~ a need lo investigate ~it.e~ to he ~~fkcted

hy conservation or development worb. It IS recognised that~alva\re excavation~ are \renerall v not representati vc of a

IVhOI~ ~ite and are often ~onstrai;ledhy limited lime and hyhe nature of the lhreat to the ~ile.

l lii) research.~ research project ~ksigned without ~uch constraints willalmost inevitably be of more value in acquiring

larchaeolo\rical infom1ation.

Wher~ a pem1it i~ ~ou~ht for re~earch p~lrpo~es th.ismust be preceded by a detaded re~earch design Includmgextensive historical research and an outline of infom1ation

I~Ought through excavation. justification of t~e ne~d for~uch action. proposed methodology. evaluation 01 thelikely threat to the ~tability of any structures disturbed or

I revealed in the course of this work and proposed steps toconsolidate or conserve essential data.

Permits are not normally issued for sites reserved hy

I~tatute for their archaeological value where other similar

sites are available.

(iii) preliminary site exploration

I Permits may he issued for preliminary site explorationto assess the research potential of a site or confirm asite's existence.

I (iv) training excavation~. .Excavations undertaken lor teachll1g purposes only Will notgenerally he supported by the Heritage Council. It i... felt

I there is usually surticient opportunity to traininexperienced lieldworkers in the course of rescue orresearch excavations.

I Retrospective permitsRetrospective permits will not be issued.

III

Quaiitications and/or ExperienceThe qualifications and/or e.'(perience of the proposedExcavation Director arc assessed for each application. Anexcavation pem1it will only be issued to an ExcavationDirector wh6ste qualil'i{;~Hiljns and/or experience areconsidered satisfactory in terms of the scope and.requirements of the specified investigation. In assessing anExcavation Director's experience. his/her previous sitework and excavation reports will be taken into account.

Where the standard of work or experience of anindividual is not known or is questioned. comments of atleast onc referee .~jJlPe"s!?u~h.t hefore the application is

determined.[ll some circumstances a joint permit may he is~ued to

an Excavation Director. for the ultimate responsibility forthe standard of fieldwork and the final excavation report.and to an approved Site Director. to supervise andundertake the actual work on site. In instances \vhere anExcavation Director will be absent from the site for a~ubstantial time. details of the experience andqu~llil'ication~of the Site Director ill charge fur the~e

periods must be provided.

Ownership and Storage ofExcavated MaterialPermits will not be issued unle~~ the HerItage Council i~

~ati~fied with the details of (mnership and propo~ed

~torage arrangements for the exc;lvated relic~. TheHeritage Act recognises the \lu~eul11 of Applied .~rts andScience~ or another museum ~pecified by the \Iinister. a~

~uitable repositone~ for excavated relic~. The det;lib ofhow the relics arc to be de;llled. packaged ~ll1lllabdled call

be found on the e:\c;lvation penntt.

Analysis of the excavated material is an importantphase of an archaeological project.

"·r•

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

1 I1I

NOTESI. The Australian Chapter or lhe Internation:t1

Council or Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) haseSlllhlished principles to he ohserved during theconservation of historic huildings and sites. Theseare embodied in the Burra Charter. as reviseLi andadopted hy ICOMOS (Australia) on 23 FebruaryIlJX I. Certain articles havc particular relevanceI'or archaeological activity:ARTICLE 23. Work on a place must he precededby professionally prepared slUdies or the physical.documentary and other evidence. and the existing.I'abric recorded before any disturbance or the place.ARTICLE 24. Study of a place hy anydisturbance or the rabric or hy archaeologicalexcavation should be undertaken where necessaryto provide data essential ror decisions on theconservation of the place and/or to secureevidence about to be lost or made inaccessihlcthrough necessary conservation or otherunavoidahle action. [nvestig:ltion 01" a place rllrany other reason which re4ulres ph~sical

disturbance and which :ldds suh'l:llltially to ascientific body of knowleLige ma~ he pern1llteLiprovided that it is consistent \\ ith theconservation policy for the plac...:.

'Place' is defined in the Burra Charter as site.area. huilding or other wnrk. group 01" huildingsor other works together with pertinent contentsand surrounLiings.

The Heritage Council or :-iew South Wales is anindepcmknt advisory body to the Minister for Planning.The Council makes recommendations to the :Ylinister onthe conservation of items in the State considered to haveheritage significance. The Department of PI:lllningprovides technic:t1 and administrative assistance to theCouncil and produces its publications and exhibitions.

DISCLAIMER

Any representation, statement, opinion or advice expressed orimplied in this publication is made in ggod faith but on thebasis that the state of New South Wales, its agents andemployees are not liable (whether by reason of negligence,lackof care or otherwise) to any person for any damage or losswhatsoever which has occurred or may occur in relation to thatperson taking or not taking (as the case may be) action inrespect of any statement. representation or advice referred toabove.

© Crown Copyright 1989ISSN 1032-4488H8819

. .,

-IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

Appendix B. Sydney REP No. 26 City West Division 6. Heritage Conservation

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIilII

9

Landmark locations

25. Map 3 shows specific building height limits for places referred to onthe map as "landmark locations". The place to which such a limit relatesmay, with the agreement of the Minister, be varied, but only if the consentauthority is satisfied that the 'height of the buildi,ng to be erected at thatplace will be consistent with· the relevant urban design planningprinciples.

Graduated building heights

26. The heights of buildings on land shown h;ltched on Map 3 mustreduce in accordance witl1 their proximity to the adjacent area having abuilding height limit of 9 metres so as to provide a transition between theheights of buildings outside that area and the heights of buildings withinthat area. . .

Floor space limits

27. In the Ultimo-Pynnont Precinct, the ratio of the business floor spaceof a building to the site area must not be greater than:

• 2.5:1 to the north of Pynnont Bridge Road; or• 3:1 between PynnOilt Bridge Road and Mary Ann Street; or• 5:1 to the south of Mary Ann Street

No floor space limits apply to residential development

Division 6--Heritage conservation

Heritage items and conservation areas

28. Heritage items are identified on Map 4 and described in Schedule 4.

Conservation areas are identified on Map 4.

General considerations

29. Development of or including a heritage item, in the vicinity of aheritage item, or within a conservation area, must be compatible with theconservation of the heritage significance of the item or the character of.the conservation area.

Duty of consent authority

30. Before granting consent to any such development, the consentauthority must consider the heritage significance of the item orconservation area and:

• the relevant architectural features of the item; or• the character of the conservation area.

Conservation plans,

31. The consent authority may require a conservation plan to accompanyan' application for de~elopment consent relating t,o a heritage item.

Demolition of heritage items

32. Before granting consent to development which includes demolition ofa heritage item, the consent authority must seek the views of the. Heritage

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

10

Council of New South Wales and consider, any such views received

within 28 days of the day on which notice of J-he proposed development.

was given to the Heritage Council.

The views of the Heritage Council need not be sought if:

• the development 'concerned consists only of a partial demolition of

a heritage item; and

• in the opinion of the consent authority, the partial demolition will

be of a minor nature and will not adversely affect the heritage

significance of' the, item.

Potential archaeological sites:.

33. Before detennining an application for consent to development on

land identified in an urban development plan as a potential archaeological

site, the consent authority may request a report on the likely impact of. the

development on any archaeological material.

Division 7-Urban development plans

Use of plans

34. Before granting consent to development to which an urban

development plan applies, the consent authority must take the plan into

consideration.

Content of plans

35. An urban development plan is a written instrument (which may be

supported by 'diagr'aIl1s or maps) that makes more detailed provisions

relating to development within a Precinct than this plan. Any such plan

must not be inconsistent with this plan.

Preparation of draft plans

36. ·A draft urban development plan or a draft amendment of such a plan

may be prepared by the Director or by the Council of the area concerned.

Consultation

37. Before the Director, or the Council of the area concerned recommends

that the Minister adopt an urban development plan or adopt an

amendment of any such plan:

• a draft of the plan or amendment must be advertised, and exhibited

for not less than 21' days for public comment; and .

• the views of the Council or the Director (as the case may require)

arid of such other pubJ,ic authorities as the person who prepared the

draft considers relevant must have been sought on the draft; and

• the person who prepared the draft must take into account any

written, submission made about the content of the plan or

amendment to that person during the exhibition period.

Adoption of plans and amendments

,38. The, Minister may adopt an urban development plan, qr an

amendment of any such plan, recommended for adoption by the Director

or the Council, or may adopt such a plan or amendment with such

variations as the Minister considers appropriate.

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

GODDENMACKAY

Appendix C. Ultimo Pyrmont PrecinctDraft Urban Development Plan Section 3.5Heritage and Conservation

1IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

A comprehensive range of facilities for thedisabled are to be provided in allapplications involving major work orresulting in substantial intensification ofuse.

Safe and convenient access for thedisabled is required to all buildings. inrelation to the use of colonnades. plazas,bridges and landscaping. and in areaswhere there is construction activity.

The disabled should be able toconveniently use the same main entry toa building as other people.

3.5 Principle - Heritage andConservation

Modification and extensions to heritage items areto reflect their significance.

Controls

Extensions and additions to heritage items areto be designed to complement their style, form,proportions. materials and colors and the overalfheritage context of their setting.

Preferably. where heritage items are built tothe street alignment, vertical extensions should beon that same alignment where this would notcompromise the amenity of adjoining residentialareas or public spaces.

'Mlere verticaJ extensions are set back fromthe facades, the form and treetment of theextension should have regard to ..tit IeS whenviewed from significant locations In the~street and public domain system.

Ground level uses and treatment of a heritagebuilding should be compatable with Itsconservation, inducing decfsjons. regardng theprovision of awnings or cofonnades. and provisionfor car parl<ing and servicing and associatedaccess..

~

It is recommended that early investigations of thelikelihood that archaeologicaJ material win be foundon a deVelopment site be undertaken, and thenecessary excavation permit required under theHeritage Act be obtained before siteworkscommence.

Map 6 indicates locations which are most likely 'tocontain such archaeological materiaJ.

14

3.6 Environmental Issues

·3.6.1 Principle· Overshadowing. Solar Access

While parks with development to the north willinevitably be overshadowed at some times. theextent of overshadowing should be limited to allowsunlight penetration throughout the year for theperiods when public open spaces are likely to beused.

Similarly, internal residential spaces and extemalpriva1e and semi-private spaces should haveadequate access to sunlight.

Control

~v~applications should include shadowdiagrams whid'l demonstrate that any developmentwill not unduly overshadow major pari<s. squaresand pocket parks. The times. intensity andpattems of usage and landscaping should be takeninto account in determining the amount of solaraccess required. No more than 50% of majoropen space areas should be overshadowedbetween lOam and 2pm between 21st April and21 st August.

Deveiopment applications should also demonstratehow the princip4es of solar access to internal andextemaJ residential spaces are met. (see alsoprindp4e 3.8.1 - Residential Amenity

3.6.2 Principle· Wind Impact

Development is to be designed and sited to avoklunsafe and uneomfor1able winds at pedestrianIevelln pubic areas and In the private and semi­pubUc open spaces of devefopment sites.

Control

'Mlere the consent au1hority or an app4icantconsiders that wind speed problems may resultfrom the design of a proposed building, a windeffects assessment report must be preparedidentifying and analysing the effects of windconcitlons on users in various key locations Withinthe devetopment site and the ~ining street andopen space system. Wind tunnel tests shouldsUbsequentty be undertaken if the reportdemonstrates these to be necessary. Theapplicant must demonstrate how potentialpr~ms have been overcome.

The following wind speed criteria for safety andcomfort should be used in any assessment.