Over the Christmas holiday period Gold Coast Council invited public feedback on a City Plan Major amendment – Heritage overlay provisions. On the eve of the closing date for submissions, the Bulletin published an opinion piece with the headline “Community consultation, hurry or you’ll miss it”. The story declared that “Our city has lost much of its heritage. Planning reforms could preserve what’s left.” It highlighted division in the community about what should be kept, and some nostalgic memories of experiences of former places that could only be shared by people over 60. It asserted that threatened sites need immediate protection. But it stopped short of examining the effectiveness of the existing Heritage overlay provisions and the proposed amendment. Nor did it interrogate gaps and inconsistencies in the Local Heritage Register, or identify threatened heritage places.
This cursory newspaper article accurately reflected conversations that I have had about Gold Coast heritage. It made me realise that unless you have professional experience in heritage planning, it’s difficult to understand what the Council is proposing, and impossible to make a judgement call. For this reason, I felt compelled to review the amendment and share my opinion here. Like The Bulletin, I won’t identify significant places that need protection. In this city, that’s the surest way to precipitate demolition by an owner or developer wishing to avoid the risk of heritage listing - which of course could inhibit redevelopment potential. I do agree with both the Council and The Bulletin that it’s time for urgent action to preserve some scant remnants of ‘The Old Coast’; and I have a few ideas for this.
WILL THE CITY PLAN AMENDMENT MAKE A DIFFERENCE?
For anyone questioning the implications of the amendment, the short answer is: next to nothing. The Gold Coast is a city where redevelopment potential will always trump heritage conservation. The current City Plan provisions pay little more than lip service to urban heritage and character as important elements in the image and integrity of the city. They address the bare minimum requirements stipulated under the Planning Act and State Planning Policies. If the council were serious about heritage (and local area character) conservation, the entire strategic framework and the overlay provisions would be very different, and there would be many more than the 84 places listed in the Local Heritage Register. It’s an overstatement to call the proposed amendment ‘major’. It amounts to a tinkering around the edges of ineffective policy - to tidy-up maps, refine processes for development applications, and add nine places to the Local Heritage Register. It entails nothing for the general public to take issue with.
Click here for information about the CITY PLAN AMENDMENT
And here to view the LOCAL HERITAGE REGISTER
One of the additions to the register is a lovely 1950s fibro house on Tugun hill that was voluntarily nominated by the owner. Another is the Burleigh Theatre Arcade which has been the subject of a recent court decision allowing a highrise development that retains the façade of the heritage building at its lower levels. Most places listed in the council’s register are on public land, under little or no threat of damage or demolition.
Meanwhile, in areas where urban renewal is occurring at great pace, important older style buildings have been ignored as additions to the register, and these are being quietly and quickly demolished, like some mass extinction event.
Gold Coaster views about heritage are diverse. Some people shrug their shoulders at the loss and say “that’s the price of progress”. Others lament the changing character of the city and wonder why the council isn’t doing more to protect our heritage. Consensus on this topic will never be achieved, but it’s certain that most people would support the council taking action to ensure that at least a few important heritage places survive.
I have never been an advocate for regulation as a conservation mechanism at the Gold Coast (except the Queensland Heritage Register for places of State significance). Planning controls such as heritage precincts and grading of significant buildings are implemented effectively in some cities, but I will bet my bottom dollar that it would be impossible to gain political support for these in our city. Besides, heritage regulations and registers do not guarantee protection of buildings that owners want to demolish. Heritage contests can be long, negative and costly, and the threat of listing typically hastens the demise of heritage places.
The reality at the Gold Coast is that we are losing the vast majority our heritage places to development, the council is saving only a token few in precincts of no interest to developers, and the current minor amendment is contrived to look like something bigger than it is.
WHAT CAN BE DONE TO SAVE SOME GOLD COAST HERITAGE BEFORE IT’S ALL GONE?
Blind Freddy can see that urgent action is needed to save a few remnant gems before it’s too late. Below I outline three ideas that could be initiated quickly. These have little to do with town planning and will not impinge on redevelopment ambitions of any private property owner, but they would need commitment and resourcing by the council.
1. CONSERVATION INCENTIVES FOR OWNERS OF IDENTIFIED HERITAGE PLACES
The council could establish a heritage incentives program to promote voluntary conservation: free expert advice; restoration grants; transferrable development rights; rates and/or land tax exemption.
2. PRODUCTION OF LOCAL HISTORIES
The council could proactively encourage residents to survey, document and collect historical information and stories about houses or local areas. There are various ways to self-publish and share histories. The Local Studies Library, which serves as the Gold Coast’s civic archive, is usually pleased to receive original materials and historical research documentation. Local history and knowledge fosters appreciation and stewardship of local heritage and character.
3. THE LAST RESORT – HERITAGE ACCOMMODATION ENTERPRISE
The council, in partnership with Destination Gold Coast, could establish heritage accommodation experiences as cultural tourism enterprise. I’ve been dreaming about this since I stayed at the ACE Hotel in Palm Springs, CA in 2015. I’d call it “The Last Resort”. This would entail purchase of a handful of the very best surviving examples of each classic building typology as public assets - 1950s beach house, 1960s canal home, small 1960s motel, block of 1950s, 60s and 70s flats, apartment in Kinkabool etc. These would be restored and revamped, and systems set up to manage them for niche holiday experiences. Holiday booking charges would pay for their maintenance and judging by the success of places like the Mysa Motel at Palm Beach, La Costa Motel at Bilinga, and the The Pink Hotel at Coolangatta, they could be expected to turn a profit. ‘The Last Resort’ collection of heritage accommodation establishments could be a living museum that preserves at least some remnants that demonstrate the evolution of the Gold Coast’s holiday accommodation. There are only a few remaining possibilities which I won’t mention publicly for fear of precipitating their demolition.
There’s no denying that the sun is setting on “The Old Coast”. Demise of our urban heritage is progressing rapidly, but immediate action could save a original buildings for posterity. The biggest risk is to do nothing. If I were Mayor for a day, I would press the emergency button to set THE LAST RESORT in motion.