Dissertation - Jose Siccion by IA_UNSW

THE UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES Built Environment

Individual Plagiarism Declaration z5120254

SICCION

Student Number

Family Name

1/4

Other Names

INTA2411-Dissertation

2411 Course ID

JOSE RAYMUNDO PADILLA

Course Name

DISSERATION

Session & Year

Title of the Assessment Task to which this Declaration applies

SING D'ARCY Lecturer

NB. if, by prior agreement, this work is being submitted for assessment in more than one course, you must list all those other course IDs in the above boxes …

I declare that: • this assessment item is my own work, except where acknowledged, and has not been submitted for academic credit elsewhere; • all reasonable care has been taken to ensure that no other person has been able to copy this work either in paper or electronic form. I acknowledge that the assessor of this item may, for the purpose of assessing this item: • reproduce this assessment item and provide a copy to another member of the University; and/or, • communicate a copy of this assessment item to a plagiarism checking service (which may then retain a copy of the assessment item on its database for the purpose of future plagiarism checking). I certify that I have read and understood the University rules in respect of Student Academic Misconduct. JOSE SICCION

10/05/19

Signature

Date

Plagiarism is the use another's work pretending that it is your own. More specifically, in an educational context, plagiarism is endeavouring to obtain academic credit in a course of study for work that is either not individually prepared by you or prepared by you, but for some other purpose, whether paid or unpaid. The following web sites expand more fully on the nature and consequences of plagiarism and must be read prior to submitting this declaration. https://student.unsw.edu.au/plagiarism https://intranet.be.unsw.edu.au/student-intranet/assignments-and-plagiarism

Case study: of the prevalence of adaptive reuse within Sydneyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Heritage Buildings

Jose Siccion

Bachelor of Interior Architecture (Honours) Final Year Dissertation

UNSW Built Environment UNSW Sydney 2019

Abstract

This dissertation is aimed at defining adaptive reuse and its application within Sydney. Adaptive reuse and heritage conservation are inextricably linked to each other, as such their popularity within the western world have risen and fallen many times. This is mainly due to events or movements that have influenced the popularity of the two concepts. However, it is only during contemporary age that appeal of the two concepts have continuously risen. This paper seeks to define the history of adaptive reuse and its connection to heritage conservation to supplement the on why adaptive reuse has become so beneficial and popular within Sydney’s urban landscape. The paper will explore the rise of adaptive reuse within the western world until focusing on Sydney’s history to give context on why adaptive reuse has become prevalent within Sydney’s heritage buildings. It will explore the nuances of adaptive reuse and the many benefits that accompany the approach it will also analyse, the guidelines and rules for adaptive reuse to reach its best outcome within its heritage site. Three case studies will be examined within this dissertation to then further support the benefits and integration of adaptive reuse within Sydney’s heritage buildings. These three case studies would be three different typologies to ensure that many different buildings that have been implemented with adaptive reuse are examined.

Acknowledgments

To my dissertation supervisor Dr Sing Dâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Arcy, thank you for all your feedback, knowledge, support and patience.

Thank you to my Bachelor of Interior Architecture colleagues: Akio Tumbaga, Vanessa Houlohan and Breanna Wallace for the continuous support and guidance.

Thank you to my close friends Fredric Fernando and Nikki Aways, who were always there when spell checking, and proofreading was required.

Table of Contents Abstract pg 1

Acknowledgements pg 2

Introduction pg 5

Chapter one: What is adaptive reuse and its rise within the western world pg 7 1.1 Introduction

1.2 What is adaptive reuse and its benefits

1.3 The rise of heritage conservation within the western world

1.4 The rise of awareness for heritage conservation and creation of the “Vienna” legislation

1.5 Conclusion

Chapter two: The history of Sydney’s urban landscape to the rise of contemporary adaptive reuse and its benefits pg 12 2.1 Introduction

2.2 Sydney’s Heritage History 18th to 19th Century

2.3 Sydney’s Heritage History 20thcentury and the rise of awareness of historical building

2.4 Contemporary application of adaptive reuse on Sydneyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Heritage Sites and its benefits

2.5 Conclusion

Chapter 3: The analysis of three case studies of adaptive reuse pg 19 3.1 Introduction

3.2 Adaptive re use within the Queen Victoria Building in Sydney

3.2 Adaptive re use within Carriage Works

3.3 Adaptive re use with the Primus Hotel in Sydney

3.4 Conclusion

Conclusion pg 31

References pg 33

Case study: of the prevalence of adaptive reuse within Sydney’s Heritage Buildings

Introduction The primary aim of this dissertation is to research and analyse adaptive reuse within the Sydney’s heritage buildings. Adaptive reuse is an approach within the built environment that is primarily focused on heritage buildings. It is a process that utilizes heritage buildings into a new context and purpose, these historical buildings have concluded their duration of purpose and have most likely become destitute and abandoned (Luther 1998, p. 45). Architect Joseph P Luther stated within his article Site and Situation the Context of Adapt Reuse, the method of adaptive reuse is intent of restoring or renovating a heritage structure. This is done to the extent of matching its original architectural details as closely as possible. Furthermore, it is supposed to upgrade the buildings morphology and typology to it contemporary standard, however it is best that it does not lose its original face and character. This concept of adaptive reuse however is not a new idea, it has been applied to many periods of time within the western world context. The methodology that will be performed for this dissertation is through research and analysis of articles, journals and websites from architects, authors, professors and historians. Their texts will be used to support claims and give context to adaptive reuse. The first chapter will outline the context and definition of adaptive reuse, with its aims and goals on why adaptive reuse is applied to heritage buildings. Furthermore, it will outline the benefits of adaptive reuse within the local communities of the heritage buildings. Following this a brief history will be analysed in the American and European context with the application of adaptive reuse between the 18th century and the contemporary age. It will also establish the connection between urban heritage conservation and adaptive reuse, furthermore it will analyse and outline the history of urban heritage conservation. Outlining the rise of adaptive reuse as a popular western approach for heritage buildings, allowing for the historical structures to reach its potential within the contemporary age while still maintaining its heritage history and architecture. This chapter will provide the context of adaptive reuse and its rise within the western world. The second chapter will shift the focus on Sydney’s history and its authority and populous views on heritage buildings. It will highlight key chapters within Sydney’s history regarding the varying views on heritage preservation. It will explore Sydney’s roots and inspiration for its initial constructions of 5

buildings within its urban landscape and how it aspired to maintain its strong connection to British Imperialistic roots. Furthermore, this section will explore the shift in perspective with Sydney’s view on the concept of improvement and newness. During this section it will outline the systematic deconstruction of many historical buildings by Sydney’s authorities as they attempt to create a new and modern Sydney. This section will then outline the new formed legislations and perspectives about heritage conservation during the contemporary age. This will lead to the modern age application of adaptive reuse within Sydney, outlining aspects and approaches that have been taken when this is applied within Sydney’s heritage buildings. Furthermore, this section will explain the benefits of adaptive reuse within Sydney’s heritage buildings as it preserves and re purposes the city’s historical structures and creates opportunities for environmental sustainability. The main purpose of this chapter is explaining the advantages and the opportunities of using the approach of adaptive reuse within Sydney’s Heritage Buildings. This is reinforced through the brief history of Sydney outlining the various chapters of its history, from its demolition of historical sites to its shift in perspective to restoration. Finally, the third chapter will support and outline specific examples of adaptive reuse within Sydney’s historic urban landscape. It will specify within three different typologies a hotel, a performance space and a retail space. It is through these three typologies that the nuances of adaptive reuse can be showcased. As each typology will be affected differently by the approach while still retaining the primary goal of restoration and re purposing. The retail space will be the Queen Victoria Building designed by Scottish Architect George McRae (1858-1923). It will be examined by understanding its original purpose in comparison to its modern use. Furthermore, its previous typology before adaptive reuse was applied will be compared and examined with its new typology. Morphology will also be analysed with an understanding of how it architectural form was respected and repurposed to become an icon within Sydney’s urban landscape. The Performance space analysed will be the Carriage Works designed by Tonkin Zulaikha Greer Architects (2006). This section will analyse its change of typology and morphology through adaptive reuse. Specifically, its change from an industrial train work shed to a contemporary performance arts space. The Hotel space will be the Primus Hotel designed by Architects H E Budden and Nicholas Mackey (2015). It will analyse its typology and morphology from before and after adaptive reuse was applied on its interior. This chapter’s purpose is to give three case studies outlining the specific effects of adaptive reuse within Sydney’s Heritage building ultimately proving the advantage of using the approach within Sydney’s Historical buildings.

Chapter One: What is adaptive Reuse and its rise within the Western World

1.1 Introduction Chapter one begins with a clear definition of the concept of adaptive reuse within the western world, and its connection with the movement of heritage conservation. To analyse this concept authorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s and architectâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s texts will predominately used with their accompanied research and statements to support arguments and analysis about adaptive reuse and heritage conservation. After the initial contextualisation of adaptive reuse, the second part of chapter one will analyse and understand the history of adaptive reuse and heritage conservation. It will analyse the specific perspectives of the western world regarding heritage conservation during modernism and the contemporary period. These will be analysed through texts and articles from professions including architects, historians and urban conservationists. This part of the chapter will establish the origins of the contemporary use of adaptive reuse with its connection to the views of the western world on heritage conservation on historic buildings. The purpose of this chapter will be to establish the context and definition of adaptive reuse as well as its origins.

1.2 What is adaptive Reuse and its benefits

This section will define and contextualize the concept of adaptive reuse, as well as its benefits for surround community for the heritage site when adaptive reuse is applied. Adaptive reuse is the process of developing structurally intact historical building for contemporary and economical uses (Luther 1998: 50). The primary aim of this approach is to update the buildings support systems, materials, interiors and character while keeping the buildings frontispiece (Luther 1998, : 49). This definition suggested by Architect Joseph Luther outlines the principal ideas of adaptive reuse with its primary outcomes of restoring the architectural elements and character of heritage buildings. The process of adaptive reuse is a specialized approach, as it should source its development from the historical, aesthetic and architectural value of its site. It can stop where conjecture begins and understand the story and character of its heritage site and through this understanding adaptive reuse creates value through the respect it gives to the building (Cleempoel & Plevoets 2014: 72). As seen from Architects Plevoets and Van Cleempoel within their literature that certain qualities of the approach adaptive reuse could take such as the research of the history and character of the building, furthermore both Plevoet and Cleempoel(2014: 73) also proposed 7

within their text a focus on the experience of the building’s interiority such as approaches that are poetic and drawn upon the memory of the building’s history. This poetic approach is then represented through the new inserted interiors as they recognise and respect the original purposes of the structure. Furthermore, this creates a relationship between the past and present of the building that strives for similarity than contrast. This aspect of adaptive reuse suggested by Cleempoel and Plevoets(2014: 73) outlines the certain requirements for an adaptive reuse project to be successful with its heritage site. These outline the potential of adaptive reuse as a method that can be applied to heritage structures in the purpose of revitalising and repurposing their uses and architecture. However, in its application methodologies can be used to improve the outcome of said adaptive reuse Adaptive reuse is an appealing approach for local communities, as it becomes a means of persevering historic value of the vernacular —local — culture of the heritage building As through the change of the building’s structure and purpose it can transform the context and situation of the building itself (Luther 1998: 58). Through this process of adaptive reuse on old heritage buildings that were once valid during their time can become a viable structure that supports its local community (Luther 1998: 59). This idea is supplemented by professors Li-Yin Shen and Craig Langston, as they explain adaptive reuse as a method of breathing new life into existing historical building that carry environmental and social benefits, which ultimately helps retain that location’s national heritage (Shen and Langston, 2010: 6-7). Luther (1998: 61) furthermore suggests within his text that this repurposing for the community can occur through careful analysis of constraints and opportunities as well as the physical and cultural environment that exist beyond the heritage building’s property line. These methodologies are further supported by Shen and Langston (2010: 67) as they state within their article ‘Maximum potential for adaptive reuse intervention is reached when building age and useful life coalesce’. This statement means that adaptive reuse becomes most advantageous when the age of the building and the duration of its purpose come together, as it becomes ready to become adaptively reused. Ultimately these outline the benefits and purposes of adaptive reuse within the heritage buildings community, furthermore it outlines how these goals can be achieved by understanding the value of the building with its surrounding environment.

1.3 The rise of Heritage conservation within the Western World The previous section gave context to adaptive reuse, this section will discuss the rise of heritage conservation within the western world and its connection to adaptive reuse.

Urban heritage conservation and adaptive reuse are inextricably—impossible to separate— tied to each other, as they both work to conserve the built environment of the past and sustain its artistic and architectural achievements within the western contemporary world (Bandarin & van Oers2012: 25). Professors Francesco Bandarin and Ron Van Oers (2012: 25) suggest within their book the connection of urban heritage conservation with adaptive reuse as it contains the same purpose of sustaining the past for the contemporary world. Furthermore, within their book they explain the origins of “heritage” or “historical” preservation (Bandarin & van Oers 2012 : 13-15). They state that the concept of heritage can be traced all the way back to the French Revolution 1789 (Bandarin & van Oers 2012 : 13-15). They suggest that it was formed in response to the many destructive acts that was accompanied to the many popular uprisings. Thus, France developed many legal and administrative instruments that was focused on understanding and protecting its historic and aesthetic heritage (Bandarin & van Oers 2012 : 13-15). The literature further explains that it was during 1887 after the destruction of heritage structures, that the first law on the safeguarding of heritage sites was created. This law clarified the processes and modalities of protection of these sites. This notion is supported by purpose of ‘national interest’ as it was to be symbol of the past politics and character of France. (Bandarin and van Oers 2012 : 15-16). Through the French revolution the concept of Heritage was actualized, however it will be during the nineteenth and twentieth century that heritage conservation will become a popular concept within the western world. It was during the nineteenth and twentieth century that historic urban areas underwent transformations, these transformations was mostly caused by vast urban sanitation as well as the urban and architectural movements such of modernism. This modern movement subtly opposed the concept of heritage and urban heritage conservation, it however ultimately gave way too many heritage removal and renewal programs heritage (Bandarin & van Oers 2012 : 12). This notion is supported by Author Daunfuang Lu where he explains a brief history of Modernism. Lu explains that Modernism was a strong and influential movement that changed the architectural world and their view of historic sites in the past 50 years. Modernism was a response to the old world to the largescale changes and development of new technologies within the Western World (Lu 2011 : 2). The view of Modernism on the old was that it was over saturated with architectural expressions and ornamentations. It saw that architecture always had a question of ‘what style it should be built in thus modernism aspired create a movement that redefined the principles of architecture within the western world, with its renewed aesthetics and principles (Lu 2011 : 4-5). It idealized an emphasis on volume, asymmetrical compositions and minimal ornamentation. It diverted architects away from the ideals of harmonious movement and promoted the idea of functional design within the late 9

nineteenth century and the early twentieth century (Lu 2011 :7). Furthermore, Lu(2011: 7) explains that the architects of the Modernism movement such as Le Corbusier (1887-1965) and Mies Van Der Rohe (1886-1969) took part in this movement and supported its spread within the western world .This was further supported by Bandarin and Van Oers(2012: 35) as they explain the effects of major world events such as World War 2 (1939-1945) on the movement of Modernism. Lu(2011 :3) stated that after the second world war most of Europe’ urban structures and cities were completely demolished. Most cities were barely recognisable and many of their citizens were displaced due their destroyed homes. This was the period where modernism was recognized as a necessity rather than just a style (Bandarin & van Oers 2012 : 35). It became a popular movement in the hopes of restoring Europe’s urban cities instantaneously. The movement suppressed the understanding and the appreciation of urban historic sites, as the rationale for heritage conservation and that of new developments had severe impact on heritage cities. Although most famous buildings within Europe was protected by specialised national legislations in the nineteenth and early twentieth century, many urban or suburban heritage sites were not considered ‘heritage’. (Bandarin & van Oers 2012 : 36). The modern movement and events such as WW2 had a negative effect on the concept of heritage conservation as the architectural world focused more on rebuilding rather restoring and repurposing.

1.4 The rise of awareness for heritage conservation and creation of the “Vienna” legislation This section will explain the rise of awareness for heritage conservation until the creation of legislations that made heritage conservation an official concept within the western world. After the decay of heritage conservation, a new sense of awareness began to rise during the midtwentieth century until the contemporary age. This awareness would eventually lead to the creation of a legislation that would form the groundwork where the contemporary application of adaptive reuse would emerge from. Professors Hoda Zaeyter and Ashraf Mansour Habib Mansour(2018: 344) suggested within their article that architects from middle to late twentieth century sensed the popularity of re using the old heritage buildings as a raw base of starting ground for their many projects. This trend grew even more popular as the twentieth century ended and awareness for sustainability reached its peak within the western world (Hoda & Ashraf 2018 : 345). This notion of awareness is further supported by Bandarin and Van Oers (2012: 49)as they explain within their book that through this awareness spurred the emergence of policies and legislations that sole purpose was to ensure the future of the historic buildings in time of great economic and social change. Some example of these legislations was the law of protection of historic centres of 1973 in 10

Italy and the Act of Civic Amenities 1967 in the United Kingdom. The main objective of these legislations was to conserve the physical fabric and structures of the historic sites, in recognition of their continuing relevance to their community as well as to maintain the link to the identity of that said community (Bandarin & Oers 2012 : 47 - 52). These new legislations ultimately lead to a UNESCO (The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) conference was held during 2005 called â&#x20AC;&#x153;Vienna Memorandumâ&#x20AC;? it was a debate regarding heritage strategies during the twenty first century with the constraints and opportunities with the handling of heritage buildings (Versaci 2016 : 5-10). In the conclusion of the debate new legislations and rules were made into the perquisites and guidelines for architects and interior architects to follow when re using a heritage site. Such as they must have a deep understanding of the history, culture and architecture of the place, as opposed to object buildings only. This will give the architects a framework on how they would approach on conservation and re use projects (Versaci 2016 : 5-10). For through these new laws the concept of contemporary adaptive reuse eventually emerged as a popular method of approaching these structures (Bandarin & Oers ,2012 : 51). These legislations and the emergence of adaptive reuse eventually became a popular notion within the architectural world as it still guides many architects and interior architects to this very day.

1.5 Conclusion To conclude adaptive reuse has become a popular method for approaching heritage buildings and urban heritage conservation. As it has obvious positive affects within the local community of the heritage building, such as the revitalization of its vernacular culture, history and purposes. It can also help reach the full potential of said heritage building as it can understand its previous purpose and life as a guide for the new insertion. However, the history of the western world was not always supportive of adaptive reuse. As contemporary adaptive reuse only emerged after the decline and rise heritage conservation. For heritage conservation is directly linked adaptive reuse as the approach was formed after heritage conservation was cemented by legislation as a requirement when working with heritage structures (Bandarin & Oers ,2012: 56). The global context of this chapter will inform the second and third chapter as they focus on Sydneyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s History and its approach to its heritage sites.

Chapter Two: The history of Sydney’s urban landscape to the rise of contemporary adaptive reuse and its benefits

2.1 Introduction Chapter two will begin with an explanation of the overarching history of urban Sydney, with a focus on the demolition and restoration of structures within the city. Predominately using Professor Robert Freestone and Professor Renee Wirth texts with their accompanied research and statements to support the historical analysis. It will begin with the initial construction of Sydney’s urban landscape and where it took inspiration from to design the city. It will discuss the views of authorities about Sydney’s further improvement during the 18th and 19th century, as they proceed to demolish certain structures in the name of progress and newness. Understanding Sydney’s authorities attempt to create a modern Sydney with the implementation of new features such as trams and moto car roads. Furthermore, Sydney’s transformation from a mercantile city to an urban city will be outlined as one of the main causes of Sydney’s demolition of historical buildings. The second section of this chapter will outline the change of perspective during Sydney’s contemporary age. Conservation and reuse became a popular approach concerning heritage buildings, thus adaptive reuse became a popular notion within Sydney. The purpose of this chapter is to understand the origins of adaptive reuse within Sydney to how it is considered within the contemporary age.

2.2 Sydney’s Heritage History 18th to 19th Century This section will explain the story of Sydney during the 18th and 18th century, focusing on where Sydney took inspiration from to design its city Sydney’s urban history is an expansive story that contains many chapters of destruction, restoration and re-use. All these aspects are performed under the purpose of bettering Sydney’s urban landscape and heritage buildings (Freestone 1995. p80). Professor Robert Freestone (1995: 81) states within his articles that Sydney was once a facsimile of a Georgian town. As most of these early buildings were constructed evinced a strong inspiration from British Imperialism. Where the initial expressions of colony history came in the form of monuments and statues that commemorated colonial hero–explorers and notable events that accompanied them. Freestone (1995) suggests that Sydney at its initial design was inspired from its British roots. Furthermore, Freestone (1995) analysed that early colonial architects desired to cement their position within Australia. This continued inspiration occurred till the late 18th century. For during the early 19th century Sydney was at an age of improvement. It was a time of a Victorian boom where city values such as newness and 12

quality of life were directly linked to the progress of economic growth (Freestone, 1995: 80). This is further supported by Professor Renee Wirth (1999: 49) as the text stated that ‘prosperity was aligned with newness’. Wirth (1999: 49) outlines that Sydney continuously developed its buildings as in their perspective the constant development was tied with newness and economic improvement. This early history of Sydney was heavily inspired from their British roots but as Sydney developed, its architects and authorities alike sought to further improve the city through many clearings and demolitions of previous sites.

2.3 Sydney’s Heritage History 20thcentury and the rise of awareness of historical building The section will analyse the Sydney during the 20th century until the eventual rise of awareness for historical buildings. The early 20th century to the contemporary age was phase of urban development in Sydney. As the city would go through many demolitions and restorations until it reached the point of preservation for its historical site ultimately leading to the development of the concept of heritage buildings (Freestone 1995 : 86). Freestone (1995: 86) stated within the text that the early 20th century for Sydney was a significant phase of urban development. Furthermore, the text explains three main reasons for this phase: first was a structural shift from an urban economy, second there was a rise of popularity about town planning and finally popular wanted to clear the slums and shift away from mercantile to office (Freestone 1995 : 86). He explain that Sydney wanted to move away from its colonial roots to become more like an urban city with developed town planning (Freestone, 1995, : 87). Wirth added on to this as she explains. ‘The unifying vision was a bourgeois aesthetic based on regularity, control and spatial order. Other voices were not denied but only fleetingly heard’ (Wirth, 1999 p .50). She suggests that during this time of urban development urban planners and city commissioners decided to remove the old-world charm of Sydney’s crooked streets (Wirth, 1999 : 51). Wirth(1999: 51) further added that planners and commissioner’s plan was to transform the city through the removal of slum areas, the central parts of the city and inner suburbs, as seen in Figure 1 O’Hears Stairs and Frog Hollows.

Fig 1: O’Hears Stairs and Frog Hollows slum demolition 1930s, Mitchell Library http://sydneyeye.blogspot.com/2012/11/frog-hollow-slum-clearance.html <accessed 1st May 2019><image only>

This is further supported by Freestone (1995: 81) stated, ‘There came a realisation that re development however desirable was also erasing traces of the colonial city’. Explaining that through this constant development and planning, architectural colonial features would soon diminish as a new city was made. Ultimately through the desire of development for progress many colonial and derelict — poor condition — sites were demolished to create space. It was also during early twentieth century, new technologies were being implemented into Sydney’s urban infrastructure, these advancements included trams, carts and growing vehicular transports within city. To accommodate these new advancements new lands and areas had to be created, leading to the destruction of many more heritage buildings with the city. As they were still identified as relicts of the past. Wirth explains this notion by stating ‘the idea of better accommodating tram, cart and growing vehicular traffic on the city’s most important southern gateway was unremarkable save for it involving the demolition of a wall of The Victoria Barracks, a Georgian style sandstone compound built in 1841 and designed by Lieutenant-Colonel George Barney’ (Wirth 1999 : 50). This suggests that Wirth’s text opposed the idea of the destruction of historical sites. Freestone also sustained this notion that the destruction of historical buildings was a determent to Sydney’s 14

historical identity as he outlines the awareness of the destruction of history within the Sydney populous (Freestone 1999. p81). His example of this awareness is the Government act “Local Government Act 1919”, it became a significant instrument of reform as it ‘empowered which councils to acquire sites of scientific. Aesthetic and historic interest’ (Freestone 1999. p82). Furthermore, Freestone supplements this example by suggesting ‘A new historical awareness of the built fabric was expressed several ways: public expression of melancholy of the old buildings, a rise in popular literature chronicling local urban history and disappearing landmarks’ (Freestone 1995. p84). Ultimately it was during this new implementation of transport and new technology within Sydney that many historical sites were demolished. However, this from this demolition new popular movements rose. It was during the 1960’s and 1970’s heritage significance slowly became a popular movement within Sydney’s urban development and architecture (Wirth 1999 : 51). The concept of demolishing and restructuring of heritage sites was slowly becoming less popular as a new social demographic was rising within the community (Freestone 1999, : 82). It was a break from old attitudes and perspectives of just removing and demolishing. ‘There was growing disenchantment with large scale re development insensitive to homes, neighbour hoods and the past’ (Freestone 1999 : 84). Freestone highlighted this change of perspective, as the appreciation and usage of historical buildings. As the appreciation and conservation starting to become the common consensus within Sydney’s communities, however it was still limited to façade re cladding and the emptying of historical interiors (Freestone, 1999 : 86). This new found interest with these surviving buildings became new opportunities for architects and urban planners alike to create structures that expressed this sympathy and appreciation for their chosen heritage site. Dr Kirsten Orr an architectural Historian states within her text ‘The surviving nineteenth century buildings in Sydney are important tangible expressions of local identity and experience; culturally significant because they embody the aesthetic, scientific and social values of a particular period of history’ (Orr, K , 2007). This supports the notions of respecting heritage buildings; Orr (2007)focuses on the specific values and benefits of preserving historical sites. Ultimately through continuous development and demolition the inhabitants gained a new opinion on historical sites, a perspective of conservation and preservation emerged until eventually the rise of contemporary adaptive reuse within Sydney’s heritage buildings.

2.4 Contemporary application of adaptive reuse on Sydney’s Heritage Sites and its benefits After the previous sections about history, this section will then discuss the application of adaptive reuse within Sydney’s heritage sites during the contemporary age. It will also analyse the guidelines and benefits that accompany the approach of adaptive reuse. The Sydney built environment provides a footnote to the city’s history as it helps identify the progression of Sydney from the past to the contemporary age (Australian Government Department of the Environment and Heritage 2004: 1). Furthermore, the Australian Government, Department of the Environment and Heritage (AGDEH) (2004) , explains that heritage sites give context on the past characteristics and stories that have shaped Sydney today. Thus, in the pursuit of development and progress adaptive re using buildings can become a bypass for the demolition of valued heritage sites ultimately conserving and reinvigorating the heritage of Sydney (AGDEH 2004: 2). However, for adaptive reuse to become successful within Sydney’s heritage buildings architects and interior architects must follow a set a rule, more specifically the BCA (Building Codes of Australia) (University of Sydney 2006: 8). The BCA is part of the national construction code which was designed to provide a set of rules regarding the construction of building within Australia (University of Sydney 2006: 8). Regarding adaptive reuse on heritage sites the BCA ensures the model of ‘best practice’ is implemented. An example of this would be the differing construction standards when adaptive reusing heritage sites to create a shopping centre and a warehouse (University of Sydney 2006: 9). This creates a guideline for Sydney interior architects and architects when approaching heritage sites with adaptive reuse. This is further supplemented by architects S.J. Wilkinson and H. Remoy (2017) as they stated that the BCA covers all new builds and adaptions however, conversions are required to always comply with latest minimum standards. This means that the regulations within the BCA are subject to change depending on latest standards thus the guidelines for adaptive reuse can have minor exceptions and changes. While adaptive reuse has become a part of Sydney’s architecture regarding heritage conservation, it will always have rules and guidelines that direct on how it can be applied. From adaptive reuse and its following guidelines come benefits for Sydney’s heritage sites regarding both its history and sustainability. Applying adaptive reuse to Sydney’s heritage sites have many benefits, nonetheless two major benefits stand out. These are its direct link to environmental sustainability and the preservation of history within Sydney (AGDEH 2004: 2). Adaptive reuse has always been linked to environmental sustainability as through its implementation landfills are lessened and a focus on developing existing the built environment is created (Wilkinson and Remoy 2017: 1). This makes adaptive reuse an attractive approach for Sydney as it can become a solution for population growth and increasing urbanisation. Furthermore reusing existing building is pragmatic by providing faster build time in 16

comparison to demolitions and new build (Wilkinson and Remoy 2017: 1). Wilkinson and Remoy (2017: 2) further suggest within their text the potential of delivering sustainability within blighted urban areas by using adaptive reuse. They explain that social and environmental sustainability are enhanced by introducing new functions through adaptive reuse within vacant or direct sites. The other benefit of adaptive reuse is the preservation of history within Sydney. During this contemporary age adaptive reusing heritage buildings creates long term benefits for Sydney. For when it is done well it can restore and maintain the historical significance of buildings (AGDEH 2004: 2). Rather than becoming a derelict site it can become a place of application and will ultimately renew the vernacular stories and history within that area. To further ensure that these stories are properly showcased within the reuse of the heritage building AGDEH (2004) has created a criteria for architects to follow. These include the discourage of “facadism” – the decimation of the building’s interior while keeping its façade, the requirement of differentiation for the contemporary insertion rather than a poor imitation of the original historic style and finally an implementation of a new purpose for the building that is compatible with its original typology.

Fig 2: The Mint courtyard 2004, Nicolas Watt https://sydneylivingmuseums.com.au/stories/minttransformed <accessed 1st May 2019><image only>

Figure 2 is The Mint built between 1816 and 1816 by Captain F.C. Ward & Joseph Trickett, it is a prime example of when an adaptive reuse projects has followed the criteria and has respected the original history of the site, while implementing a new purpose. For it is through the criteria that ensures the approach of adaptive reuse will be a benefit for the history of the local area of the heritage building. Ultimately adaptive reuse has been a benefit to Sydney as it can become a solution to many of Sydney’s rising problems such as environmental sustainability and the conservation of heritage buildings.

2.5 Conclusion To conclude, Sydney has always sought to progress and transform itself, from its initial beginnings taking inspiration from its British imperialistic roots. To its Victorian Boom that were once again inspired by the British, until the shift in perspective of tying progress with economic growth and the systematic demolition of colonial architecture within the city. For through the demolition of derelict and old sites such as the Sydney slums to make space new progression within technology and transport could be implemented. These progressions included motor car roads and trams, furthermore Sydney was shifting from being a mercantile city to an urban city. This progression continued until 1960s and 1970s where a rise of awareness for the demolition of Sydney’s heritage buildings was raised. Till eventually leading to the rise of contemporary adaptive reuse, however this contemporary application of adaptive reuse comes with certain guidelines and rules such as the BCA to ensure the reuse reaches it full potential. Ultimately, this benefits Sydney as through the method of reuse the city’s history can be preserved and environmental sustainability can be achieved. The Sydney context of this chapter explained the general application of adaptive reuse within Sydney. The next chapter will explore three different typology case studies to further support the notion of adaptive reuse within Sydney.

Chapter 3: The analysis of three case studies of adaptive reuse

3.1 Introduction This chapter will contain three case studies regarding three different typologies within Sydney’s urban heritage landscape. It will analyse the history and original morphology of these three heritage sites. It will then understand what caused adaptive reuse to be implemented on them and what changes occurred within their typology and morphology. The Queen Victoria Building as a heritage site adaptively reused to become a retail hub. Then Carriage Works will be analysed as an adaptively reused performance space and finally the Primus Hotel will be investigated as a re-used heritage building converted into a hotel. The purpose of this chapter is to understand application of adaptive reuse within Sydney’s Heritage sites.

3.2 Adaptive re use within the Queen Victoria Building in Sydney This section will explore the history of the Queen Victoria Building, how and why adaptive reuse was implemented to it. The Queen Victoria building (QVB) designed by Scottish Architect George McRae was constructed during 1889 as a replacement for the original Sydney market places which were originally located there. Ellmoos(2008) a historian stated ‘A series of market buildings was erected on the site by 1813, although they were intended to be temporary. In 1820, the convict architect Francis Greenway (1777-1837) designed a distinctive market building south of the temporary sheds, to replace them’ (Ellmoos 2008) . This statement explained how Sydney previously contained small market stalls called the Sydney Central markets and shops until temporary sheds and small constructions were erected to create a more permanent position within the Sydney city.

Fig 3 Old George Street Market bounded by George, Druitt, York and Market Street 1898, City of Sydney archives https://i.pinimg.com/originals/e9/0a/4d/e90a4ded61ad46578cac424fdb07db48.jpg <accessed 2nd May 2019><image only>

Fig 4 Detail of Doves Plan of Sydney showing Market Row 1880 , H Percy Dove https://dictionaryofsydney.org/media/3473 <accessed 2nd May 2019><image only>

Figures 3 and 4 show what the central markets became to be, as during the 1830s under Governor Richard Burke (1777 – 1831) the temporary market buildings were demolished. Instead it was replaced by four simple two story sheds that housed multiple small shops that sold livestock, grain, butchered meat and vegetables (Ellmoos 2008). However, during the late 19th century the QVB was constructed. The QVB that could house at least 200 shops stalls as well as contain small arcades and other public spaces. ‘The Queen Victoria Building is a grandiose, high-Victorian sandstone building which occupies the entire city block bounded by George, York, Druitt and Market streets’ (Ellmoos 2008) the QVB was considered as an oriental bazaar with its earliest tenants conducting a mix of commerce, crafts and skills (Ellmoos 2008). Furthermore, Ellmoos explained the specification of its the structure and its spatial programs ‘QVB was a three-storey arcade, with 200 shops under one roof. The completed building was light and spacious, with a colonnaded arcade on the ground floor and two upper gallery levels. The interiors were grand and ornately decorated, and were intended as much for promenading as for shopping’ (Ellmoos 2008). The completed building was light and spacious, with a colonnaded arcade on the ground floor and two upper gallery levels. The interiors were grand and ornately decorated, and were intended as much for promenading as for shopping (Ellmoos 2008). Another author Graham Brooks wrote sections within the Queen Victoria Building conservation management plan (CMP) about the significant changes the erection the QVB and its architectural features brought about within the Sydney culture. ‘The building expresses an ambitious use of building technology, excellent craftsmanship and decorative detailing. Both the building exteriors and interiors are remarkable and outstanding for their quality, workmanship, materials, richness, imagery and style’ (Brooks 2003: 10-15). The text by Brooks explained the specific morphological characteristics the QVB included that formed it to be a unique addition within Sydney’s original historical building landscape. He furthermore defines its morphologies A landmark grand Victorian retail arcade of three storeys, with sandstone clad walls and copper domes, designed in the Federation Romanesque style, dating from 1893-1898 (Brooks 2003: 10-15). Apart from the ground floor the facade is unaltered, being composite Romanesque and Byzantine style on a grand scale to a large city block” (Brooks 2003: 10-15). This was what the original design and use of QVB was until the middle of the twentieth century. During the middle of twentieth century the QVB was forgotten place was in disrepair (Ellmoos, 2008) as such ‘In 1959, the Lord Mayor of Sydney, Harry Jensen, announced a plan to demolish the Queen Victoria Building and to replace it with a civic square and car park. A debate sparked about the fate of the building continued throughout the 1960s, and by 1971 the council demonstrated its 21

appreciation of the building's heritage value by agreeing to preserve it’ (Ellmoos 2008). Ellmoos(2008) explained that the QVB was nearly demolished even though the building symbolised an important shift within Sydney’s history. This is mentioned in Brooks (2003: 10-15) article ‘The Queen Victoria Building represents an important shift in heritage consciousness in Sydney during the 1980s because of the public outcry that brought about its conservation and the historical restoration approach taken for its refurbishment’. Ellmoos(2008) states also the shift in the perspective of Sydney regarding its heritage preservation and adaptive reuse of historical buildings. Thus after the near demolishment of the QVB it was then funded to be restored and was to be re used to become a new commercial retail shopping centre as mentioned by Brooks(2003: 13) ‘The 1986 "restoration" by the Malaysian company Ipoh Ltd intended to recreate the imagery of a grand Victorian style arcade with considerable concessions made to ensure the place was commercially viable as a retail shopping centre’ (Brooks, 2003).It was to reimagine the Victorian imagery towards a more contemporary use within Sydney. Brooks explains more of the specific morphological adaptive reuse applied within the interior ‘The interior has been modified with the installation of contemporary shopfronts, new interior signage, a new contemporary internal colour scheme, new internal lighting, BCA compliant glass and metal balustrades, new floor finishes, reconstruction of ground floor’ (Brooks 2003: 10-15). This outlined the changes to interior morphology, furthermore he also explains how the interior circulation had to be re structed to the contemporary age such as the additions of escalators and lifts. ‘A new vertical escalator and lift system in both the north and south galleries has also been installed’ (Brooks, 2003: 12), this is further supplemented by figure 5 as it shows the new plan on where the stores are placed in conjunction to the main pathways.

New lifts implemented New escalators implemented Fig 5 QVB Mezzanine Level 2019, Queen Victoria Building Website https://www.australiashoppings.com/malls-centres/new-south-wales/sydney/queen-victoria-building-qvb/jigsaw <accessed 2nd May 2019><image only> The appearances of these new inserted circulations areas were intended to have light appearance as well as changes for signage and services had to be included, as mentioned by David Gole a heritage conservationist (2016) ‘refurbishment as retail space including introduction of new services such as escalators detailed to have a light weight appearance . New signage, lighting and services introduced to upgraded retail space’ this can be seen in figure 6.

Fig 6 Escalators in the QVB 2019, Conrad Gargett http://www.conradgargett.com.au/project/queenvictoria-building-2/ <accessed 2nd May 2019><image only>

This adaptive reuse was a monumental change for its morphology and typology as it was transformed and reused into becoming a powerful heritage symbol within Syndey’s Urban landscape as stated by Ellmoos(2008) ‘Restoration was a major undertaking, requiring the demolition of internal accretions including offices, floors and partitions, to restore it to its former glory. The Queen Victoria Building was reopened in 1986, and finally became one of Sydney's most popular shopping arcades and tourist attractions’(Ellmoos, 2008). Ultimately the QVB has become an iconic site within Sydney’s urban landscape as it has become a symbol of adaptive reuse through the choice of the Sydney’s populous. This section analysed the effects of adaptive reuse on a retail project, the next section will analyse adaptive reuse with a performance space.

3.3 Adaptive re use within Carriage Works

This section will explore the history Eveleigh Railyards until its change of morphology and typology through adaptive reuse to become Carriageworks.

The Eveleigh Railyards were designed during 1897 by the Engineer in charge John Witton(18201898). It was constructed to house maintenance and repair of NSW’s locomotives, wagons and passenger wagons (O’Rourke 2003). It continued its service as a trainyard until 1988 when it was closed after the main rail workshops were moved away for Eveleigh to Enfield. Until 2008 the railyards were occasionally used for temporary shops and other services (O’Rourke 2003). It was eventually adapted into a perfromace space and renamed Carriageworks. The primary reason why this site was maintained was that it was a good example of the strong industrial character Sydney during the 19th century. This statement is further reinforced with the conservation management plan written by heritage conservationist Clair O’Rourke (2003). ‘The Eveleigh Railway Yards are some of the finest historic railway engineering workshops in the world and Eveleigh contains one of the most complete late 19th century and early 20th century forge installations, collection of cranes and power systems, the hydraulic system’. It had typology and morphology of warehouses, thus it contained large open spaces and tall ceilings which were typical of late 19th century and early 20th century warehouses this can be seen in figure 7.

Fig 7 Original plans and sections of Eveleigh 1884, Eveleigh Stories http://eveleighstories.com.au/stories/evolving-eveleigh/evolution-eveleigh-railway-workshops <accessed 2nd May 2019><image only> 24

From this preserved industrial rail yard, a new centre was formed with the purpose of restoring it by using adaptive reuse. The new centre called CarriageWorks is a typology that hosts public exhibitions and performances as explained by Manincor (2007) ‘CarriageWorks is a new centre for physical theatre and contemporary dance within the Eveleigh Railway Workshops precinct in Sydney’s Redfern’. The new insertion was designed by an architectural firm called Tokin Zulaikha Greer Arhitects in 2007. The focus was to interweave the history of the site into the morphology within the new typology they were designing. ‘The embedded history of the space was seen to be as important as the fabric itself’ (De Manincor 2007). The architects hoped to achieve a interweaving within the site and occasionally bursting through the existing building fabric are a series of gusty new interventions by Tonkin Zulaikha Greer (TZG)’(De Manincor, 2007). As through these interventions and interweaving’s of morphological aspects, they envisioned it as the raw and inventive approach of adaptive reuse within the site. (De Manincor, 2007). TZG desired to design a space that was interweaved with the Eveleigh trainyards, their goal was to ensure the adaptive reuse of the old tram shed. To create this inventive approach Manincor(2007) outlines the specific architectural interventions TZG designed within the interior. Such as their design of the entry ‘Entry into the complex itself is via an original opening through which countless thousands of carriages once passed. Now glazed and embellished with bold interpretative graphics, it denotes a new threshold to a new era of occupation’ this can be seen in figure 8.

Fig 8 Front of Carraigeworks 2016, Lauren Zeigler http://howlandechoes.com/2016/03/sydneyvenue-expand-rival-opera-house/ <accessed 2nd May 2019><image only>

He outlines how TZG had kept the original opening in respect to its history while simultaneously intervening contemporary aspects such as new graphics and glazing, to denote the new from the old. He also states ‘A new plaza has been created at the upper level, housing a major signage structure composed of concrete blades and recycled roof trusses’ (De Manincor, 2007). (De Manincor, 2007)Furthermore, he also outlines how these additions have some semblance to the original morphology of the space ‘The rawness of the new structures echoes the industrial qualities of the 1880s fabric’, justifying the raw aspects of the new interior applications this is further supplemented with figure 9 as it showcases the strong shapes and forms chosen to echo said industrial qualities.

Fig 9 Carriage works interior 2006, Tonkin Zulakha Greer Architects https://www.tzg.com.au/project/carriageworks/ <accessed 2nd May 2019><image only>

Furthermore, he outlines the conditions of the existing aspects of the warehouse such as its trusses and support columns ‘Where original fabric has been removed to make way for new work it has been relocated and reused. Columns from one bay now support a mezzanine within the main auditorium and a series of roof trusses for a playful structure that denotes entry to the entire precinct’(De Manincor, 2007). Ultimately the Carriageworks project is a prime example on how adaptive reuse can be used on a performance space and how the approach can respect its heritage site by denoting the contemporary from the heritage. The next section will explain how adaptive reuse is applied on hotel typology.

3.5 Adaptive re use with the Primus Hotel in Sydney Similarly, the previous sections this section will explore the transformation of Sydney Water Head Office into the Primus hotel. Primus Hotel was once a heritage listed Art Deco building, built in 1939, it was designed by architect by Henry Budden (1871-1944) who also was responsible for the David Jones store in Elizabeth Street. Its purpose was to be the Sydney Water Head Office, it was also known as the Water board Building and was the headquarters of Sydney water. This building was one of the last buildings constructed before world war 2, after the war the building became a symbol of decadence and art due to the economic effects of the war (Modern Heritage Matters 2016). After which in 2008 the building was sold to Greenland International Hotels group who spent two years restoring the site. They appointed Woods Bagot a global architectural and design firm to reuse the site (Modern Heritage Matters 2016). It was transformed into Primus Hotel, which is a luxury, heritage-listed hotel located on Pitt Street in the midtown city. Placing it close to several of the city’s public transport options and attractions (Primus Sydney Hotel 2019). The hotel was redesigned with inspiration from its Art deco heritage, major changes with its typology was implemented as it was converted from office spaces into a hotel (Caitlan, 2016). Heritage Architects Graham Brooks and Associates did the renovation while Woods Bagot fitted out the interior. Woods Bagot took inspiration from the building with its public areas, rooms and suites, as there was no artifice or contemporary add-on implemented within its morphology (Charis, 2017). However it was just solid spaces that were finished with the patina of 20th century history (Charis, 2017). Jonathan Bryant, an associate director of heritage architects Graham Brooks and Associates stated ‘I would call it functionalist with art deco overtones’(Charis, 2017). This further supports the inspiration the architects took as they adaptively reused the old offices.

Fig 10 Primus Hotel Lobby 2019, Primus Sydney Hotel http://www.sydneyhotelconferences.com/sydney-cbd-venues/primus-hotel-sydney.htm <accessed 2nd May 2019><image only>

As seen in figure 10 the lobby was created to welcome visitors with a wide-open vista with services and seatings placed on the sides. The hotel lobby was designed to be a striking space that would capture visitors, it was accompanied by eight scarlet scagliola â&#x20AC;&#x201D; an artificial marbleâ&#x20AC;&#x201D; columns handcrafted from Italy (Caitlan, 2016). The 1960s roof was kept intact, with the addition of a skylight that illuminated the bar and 120 seat fine dinner as seen in figure 11.

Fig 11 Hotel Lobby 2019, Primus Sydney Hotel https://sydneylivingmuseums.com.au/sydneyopen/2018/primus-hotel#gallery-1 <accessed 2nd May 2019> <image only>

The guest rooms occupied the former offices and were reimagined with new interior features such as navy carpets, oak joinery, marble bathrooms and Art Deco inspired touches that complemented the overall look as shown in figures 12 and 13.

Fig 12 Executive Suite 2019, Primus Sydney Hotel https://www.primushotelsydney.com/ <accessed 2nd May 2019><image only>

Fig 13 Executive Suite bathroom 2019, Primus Sydney Hotel https://www.primushotelsydney.com/ <accessed 2nd May 2019><image only>

The hotel then has a chic rooftop terrace, this a guests only entrance that ensures privacy while including cabanas, a pool and a long marble bar (Caitlan, 2016). Ultimately the Primus hotel is a prime example on how adaptive reuse has converted a building of differing typology into a new purpose. It was done successfully by taking inspiration from the building historical morphological and architectural features.

3.4 Conclusion

To conclude adaptive reuse has been applied to different heritage buildings with different typologies within Sydney. For through adaptive reuse previous heritage typologies and morphologies are transformed or re purposed to become a new typology and morphology. This chapter explored the typologies of retails, hotels and performance spaces. It explored how these typologies has been applied to Sydneyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s heritage buildings with the different nuances of adaptive reuse within each site.

Conclusion

The main premise of this dissertation was to analyse the effect of adaptive reuse within Sydney, as well as to give adaptive reuse context and definition on what the approach means. The dissertation explained the nuances of adaptive reuse with its many applications within heritage buildings, furthermore the paper explained the specific benefits and outcomes of adaptive reuse for communities. For adaptive reuse allows communities’ heritage buildings stories to flourish and become relevant within the contemporary age. However, for this to occur the paper explains the certain rules and guidelines that can be followed to achieve the best outcome for that adaptive reuse. The concept of adaptive reuse and its application on Sydney was divided into three chapters. The purpose of the first chapter was to form the context and definition of adaptive reuse with its different applications. Its benefits and advantages for communities were described as a method of preserving and commemorating community’s heritage sites and stories. The rise of heritage conservation was discussed as through the emergence of heritage conservation contemporary adaptive reuse became prevalent. It explained the different periods of heritage conservation until the creation of legislations that made heritage conservation a popular notion within the western world. Throughout this chapter it established that heritage conservation has had a long history and has been tied with adaptive reuse. In light of chapter two the dissertation focused on Sydney’ history and its relationship with adaptive reuse. The chapter explored Sydney’s vast urban history, from its British imperialistic roots, to the eventual desire for progression into the contemporary age. This progression of Sydney was highlighted within the chapter was tied with systematic demolition of many historical sites within Sydney. The chapter explained the urban shift from mercantile to urban and the implementation of new technology within the city, such as trams and motor cars. However due to these demolitions a new movement was formed within the cities populous. As the city slowly raised awareness for its lack of historical buildings. Due to this shift in perspective new legislations and laws were placed to protect heritage site, furthermore the concept of adaptive reuse began to rise as the need to convert heritage buildings to contemporary standards rose. This chapter explained the application of this adaptive reuse on heritage sites as well as the certain rules and regulations that follow, furthermore the benefits of environmental sustainability and heritage conservation was discussed. Throughout this chapter Sydney’s history was explained to inform the reason on why adaptive reuse is implemented within Sydney and how it has benefited the city.

The third chapter is to give three different case studies of different typologies within Sydney as an example on how adaptive re use has benefitted the city. The first case study was the QVB, the next case study was the performance space Carriage Works and the final case study was The Primus Hotel. Throughout this chapter different applications of adaptive reuse were described and explored, to supplement the benefits of adaptive reuse within Sydney. In conclusion it can be stated that adaptive reuse has been a benefit to Sydney, this mainly due to Sydney’s desire to progress, but now with an awareness of the value of heritage buildings. Which is why Sydney’s Architects and Interior architects implement adaptive reuse as it allows Sydney’s heritage buildings to be repurposed and be preserved.

References Austin, R. L. et al. (1988) Preservation, Adaptive reuse : issues and case studies in building. New York : Van Nostrand Reinhold.

Bandarin, F. and van Oers, R. (2012) The Historic Urban Landscape, The Historic Urban Landscape. doi: 10.1002/9781119968115.

Barrett, J. V. (1987) ‘Restoration of the queen victoria building’, Urban Policy and Research, 5(2), pp. 91–92. doi: 10.1080/08111148708551298.

Belinda Berito (2017) ‘Compare and contrast’, Architecture Australia, 93(April), pp. 1–3.

Brooks, G. (2003) Conservation Management Plan-Queen Victoria Building.

Charis, P. (2016) ‘Primus Hotel , Sydney’, pp. 1–3.

Charis, P. (2017) ‘PRIMUS HOTEL | SYDNEY’, pp. 2017–2019.

Claire O’Rourke (2003) Eveleigh Railway Workshops. Available at: https://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/heritageapp/ViewHeritageItemDetails.aspx?id=5045103.

De Manincor, J. (2007) ‘Carriage Works [Carriage Works, by Tonkin Zulaikha Greer, is a new centre for physical theatre and contemporary dance within the Eveleigh Railway Workshops precinct in Sydney’s Redfern.]’, 96(4), pp. 64–75.

Eccles, J. (2008) ‘Adaptive Reuse Goes West: Casula Powerhouse and Carriageworks, Sydney’, Art Monthly Australia, (15), pp. 12–15. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-6606.2010.01170.x.

Ellmoos, L. (2008) Queen Victoria Building. Available at: https://dictionaryofsydney.org/entry/queen_victoria_building#ref-uuid=8763d72b-ba4a-7ade-23f9ae1f09f4efc7 (Accessed: 25 April 2019).

Freestone, R. (1995) ‘From icons to institutions: Heritage conservation in Sydney’, International Journal of Heritage Studies, 1(2), pp. 79–90. doi: 10.1080/13527259508722135.

Gole, D. (2016) Re-identifying use and retaining the significance of heritage buildings. Available at: https://www.architectureanddesign.com.au/features/features-articles/re-identifying-use-andretaining-the-significance#.

Hertiage, A. G. D. of the E. and (2004) ‘Adaptive Reuse’, Sustainaspeak, pp. 14–16. doi: 10.4324/9781315270326-5.

Hotel, P. S. (2019) About. Available at: https://www.primushotelsydney.com/about (Accessed: 7 May 2019).

Lu, D. (2010) ‘Introduction: Architecture, modernity and identity in the Third World’, Third World Modernism: Architecture, Development and Identity, pp. 1–28. doi: 10.4324/9780203840993.

Matters, M. H. (2016) Primus Hotel, Sydney. Available at: http://modernheritage.com.au/mhm/heritage_travel/primus-hotel-sydney/ (Accessed: 6 May 2019).

N, C. (16AD) Places & Faces, Primus Hotel Sydney, Coco Republic. Available at: https://www.cocorepublic.com.au/design-field-notes/primus-hotel-sydney/.

Orr, K. (2012) ‘The Realisation of the Sydney Technical College and Technological Museum, 1878– 92’, Fabrications, 17(1), pp. 46–67. doi: 10.1080/10331867.2007.10539599.

Plevoets, B. and Van Cleempoel, K. (2014) ‘Aemulatio and the Interior Approach of Adaptive Reuse ’, Interiors, 5(1), pp. 71–88. doi: 10.2752/204191214x13944457108758.

Santander, A. A., Garai-Olaun, A. A. and Arana, A. de la F. (2018) ‘Historic urban landscapes: A review on trends and methodologies in the urban context of the 21st century’, Sustainability (Switzerland), 10(8). doi: 10.3390/su10082603.

Shen, L. and Langston, C. (2010) ‘Adaptive reuse potential’, Facilities, 28(1/2), pp. 6–16. doi: 10.1108/02632771011011369.

Sydney, U. of (2016) ‘New Ideas for Old Information’, Information Management, 19(March), p. 8. Available at: http://www.ezproxy.dsu.edu:2048/login?url=http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=1891636681&F mt=7&clientId=18865&RQT=309&VName=PQD.

Wells, J. C. (2010) ‘Our history is not false: Perspectives from the revitalisation culture’, International Journal of Heritage Studies, 16(6), pp. 464–485. doi: 10.1080/13527258.2010.505043.

Wilkinson, S. J. and Remoy, H. (2017) ‘Adaptive reuse of Sydney offices and sustainability’, Sustainable Buildings, 2, p. 6. doi: 10.1051/sbuild/2017002.

Zeayter, H. and Mansour, A. M. H. (2017) ‘Heritage conservation ideologies analysis – Historic urban Landscape approach for a Mediterranean historic city case study’, HBRC Journal. Housing and Building National Research Center, 14(3), pp. 345–356. doi: 10.1016/j.hbrcj.2017.06.001.