The Heritage of Goulburn

'From the Goulburn Desk 'by William Oxley

I’d like to discuss a topic that is particularly relevant to Goulburn, which is heritage. As a local government planner heritage is an important issue that consistently influences the decisions we make.

Heritage is such a deep and diverse aspect of planning that I could write pages and pages on the topic, however at this point I would like to focus on the main issue that heritage presents to a planner: conservation versus progression; essentially what are the advantages and disadvantages of preserving heritage sites? 

This is a particularly relevant issue in Goulburn, being the first inland city. We have over 250 listed heritage buildings ranging from the 1830’s to the 1940’s. Conservation of our history in heritage buildings is an integral part of our towns’ culture. Heritage buildings provide us with examples of our history, where we have come from and an idea of what life may have been like 100 years ago. We can show the next generation of children what marvellous pieces of architectural design that existed from a lifetime ago, but besides the historical value, what do we get out of these buildings?

In Goulburn, for instance, many heritage buildings are falling apart, materials deteriorating, and the owners of these buildings are unable or unwilling to invest the required funds and time to restore these beautiful buildings to their former glory. So the buildings just sit there, too dangerous to use, too expensive to retain and too important to demolish. A stale mate occurs wherein nothing ever happens. This brings me back to my original point, besides historical value, what purpose are these buildings serving?

In most cases it is cheaper to demolish and start again, which would often be the preference of a developer, if the planning laws didn’t forbid it. The question must be asked should we be preventing progression where active conservation is lacking? Is the new less valid than the old? To what extent do we let conservation hinder progression? And whose responsibility is it to preserve and maintain heritage sites?

Heritage undoubtedly gives Goulburn its character, it’s who we are, it’s where we came from but is it worth keeping if Goulburn cannot evolve into an economical, practicable and modern city? Where does one draw the line? Can we strike the right balance between conservation and progression? What is your own personal ideology as a town planner? What do you value? I think this topic needs to be discussed further…

[edited for Connections, article originally appeared in the ACT Young Planners Newsletter]