Why have shortsighted councils, public works authorities and self-interested groups been allowed to dismantle the cultural heritage of the Parkes community, building by fine building and space by lovely space?
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Any examination of the photographic record of the built heritage of Parkes shows that until the 1960s its style and amenity was gradually built up in a positive and progressive manner.
Graceful public, commercial and religious buildings were combined with elegant streetscapes and gardens.
Over the past 50 years the community is gradually being left with a hotchpotch of disconnected remnants.
A number of quality elements have been lost.
They have been replaced with bland presentations that make no particular contribution to the built and cultural character of the community.
In some cases all that presents is a plaque to tell the passer-by that a beautiful or significant building once occupied this site.
It was demolished however for the sake of pull-up concrete walls and retail interiors reminiscent of aircraft hangers.
As is well evidenced in many country communities, such lesser quality replacements eventually become neutral or dead spaces.
Once established, this pattern is very difficult to redress.
Now, a particularly fine, art deco former bank building in Clarinda Street is scheduled for demolition.
What for?
Not for something more grand or beautiful, but rather to create a car park, which will further mar the chief commercial streetscape.
Nowadays, in many communities, this style of inter-war, commercial building has become a valued heritage asset.
Not so for some it seems, when it is in the way of the bitumen.
The arguments they present are simply about short-term retail advantage and the non-heritage-listed status of the building.
Surely good civic planning should be about offering something better to a community.
It should aim to improve visual presentation and amenity.
It is not about offering something worse.
I would urge Council and all involved in this matter towards a more creative approach in the retention of this fine building and its adaptive re-use for community benefit.
It may take some imagination and even some dialogue with local groups.
The loss of such beautiful buildings has an often-unforeseen finality.
They are rarely replaced with something that elevates the pride of the community.
Paul O’Donnell BTh MA MEd MHeritCons (Hons)
Senior Heritage Consultant and Principal, Care for Cultural Patrimony
Available culturalpatrimony.com
