Content deleted Content added
mNo edit summary |
m →Decay and debate: considerable funds on renovating [City of Sydney Library|the City Library]]. |
||
Line 263:
Demolition proposals at the time were largely postponed by the continued presence of the SCC in the building. The SCC required another long lease which was granted by the City Council in 1961. The SCC was planning a new large building opposite town hall and required the existing facilities in the QVB to be retained until its completion. The City Council was in no position to refuse the SCC and thus the demolition proposals were temporarily thwarted, although opinion was always behind demolition and a reuse of the site at the time. A form of demolition actually started in 1963 with removal of the cupolas on the roof. Concern about their stability was given as the reason for their removal. The contractor paid for their removal, in fact made a larger profit out of the sale of the salvaged cupolas as souvenirs and garden decorations, than for the contract to remove them. As the new SCC building was nearing completion the question of the QVB's ultimate fate was approaching again. The debates in the late 1950s and early 1960s were largely deflated by the continued occupation of the SCC and other long term tenants, but, as this was not an issue any more, the debate was to enter another stage.<ref name=nswshr-1814/>
By 1967 calls for its preservation were being made by the [[National Trust of Australia]] declaring it should be saved because of its historical importance. Calls were also made not only for its preservation but also for its restoration by stripping away the numerous disfigurements, restoring the glass vaulted roof, ground floor arcades, tiled floors, and stone stairs. Many schemes were promoted such as linking the building by tunnels to the Town Hall and other city buildings, schemes involving constructing nightclubs or planetariums under the dome, with shops on the lower levels, art galleries, hotel rooms etc. on the upper levels. Although these plans would have to wait, the council actually spent considerable funds on renovating [[City of Sydney Library|the City Library]].<ref name=nswshr-1814/>
[[File:Whitlam dismissal 19751111 Sydney.jpg|thumb|The QVB in 1975, visible in the background of a protest]]
Demolition was still the favoured option by many in the council. Even as late as 1969 the Labor Party candidate running for mayor in the City Council elections stated that, if elected he would propose demolition of the QVB, which he said was "a firetrap to make way for a new civic square". The debate extended from whether or not the building should be demolished to what uses it could be made to serve if preserved and a campaign to preserve it ensued, supported by "public meetings, letters to editors, the National Trust and the [[Australian Institute of Architects|Royal Australian Institute of Architects]] (NSW)<ref name=shaw/>{{rp|page:18}} as well as a group called the "Friends of the Queen Victoria Building".<ref>The [http://nla.gov.au/nla.cat-vn257331 Newsletter] of the group is held in the [[National Library of Australia]].</ref> On 31 May 1971, the Lord Mayor of Sydney, Alderman [[Emmet McDermott]], leader of the Civic Reform Group, announced the building would be "preserved and restored to its original state".<ref name=shaw/>{{rp|page:92}} In 1974, it was classified by the National Trust,<ref name=Ellmoos/> which gave it an "A" classification and defined it as "urgently in need of acquisition and preservation".<ref name=shaw/>{{rp|page:90}} There was no suggestion of how that was going to take place, but such a statement became very much the turning point in the buildings history and eventual fate. The building was to be saved, but there was no plan or suggestions about where the funds were to come from. In 1979 the Town Clerk, Leon Carter stated; "The Council is determined that the high cost of rebirth of the QVB will not fall on the blistered shoulders of the weary ratepayer". Restoration proposals were held up by a combination of lack of funds and continuing disagreements between Council, potential operators and stakeholders such as the National Trust and the Royal Australian Institute of Architects.<ref name=nswshr-1814/>
| |||