North Arm Cove village of around 450 people lies 200kms north of Sydney on a northern shore of Port Stephens in the Mid North Coast area of NSW. The possibility of railway extension into the region mooted by the 1911 NSW Royal Commission as to Decentralisation in Railway Transit excited many observers including land developers (Fraser 2002:19). The area was considered as a possible site for the national capital before Canberra was chosen.

Although losing out to Canberra for the prestige of being a national capital, the site was still intended to be developed for another new major city and the New South Wales seaport – ‘the New York of Australia’. While still working on the Canberra design project, Walter Burley Griffin was commissioned by Austin Chapman’s company ‘Land Limited’ to prepare the masterplan for this site. The plan, centred on the area occupied by present day North Arm Cove village, was approved by resolution passed at a regular meeting of Stroud Shire Council held on 6th May 1918 (Figure 1). The new future urban settlement was given a name of Port Stephens City.

Marion Mahony Griffin credited her husband with the identification of the locality as one of only two ‘natural seaports’ in Australia. She wrote that ‘in his innocence he interested a client, who was carrying on a considerable real estate business, in the opportunity offered at Port Stephens … It was surveyed and staked out and the allotments rapidly sold’.[i]

In Marion’s opinion, the ultimate failure of Port Stephens City lay with the unimaginative foolishness of government bureaucracy in matters of regional and national development, as well as the limitation, in law, of the building and operation of railways by private enterprise: ‘If the railroads had not been nationally owned, the settlement of Port Stephens would have taken place long ago’.

Unlike the previously made plans for octagonally shaped Canberra or Griffith (1914), Port Stephen City was designed to fit into the narrow finger shaped bay peninsula. It provided for various urban city functions grouped into precincts or urban zones. The major railways and rail-water interchange (the port) was planned on the western side of the peninsula, towards the Carrington village, with nearby Custom House and Administration Centre occupying the land to the East of the rail and port links. Adjacent to the north of this governance district the land was reserved for Commercial Centre and Factory District forming an employment zone of the future city. Further North there was a retail district lining the main Boulevard with Markets square and a Wholesale district conveniently located to the east of the main railway station. A Residence District was planned to the North towards the old Pacific Highway. Within the residential zone Griffin had also reserved 3 large lots for two primary school and one high school, a church site, 2 theatre sites, library centre and public recreation reserve.

Resembling Griffin’s later urbanistic work at Castlecrag (Sydney) in 1921, the subdivision pattern of Port Stephens City reveals roads that follow the topographic contours of the peninsula. The main avenue (present day The Ridgway) runs north south, along the top of the ridge and ends at the intersection where a triangular traffic island was planned for (Figure 2). The black rectangular drawn in line with the avenue indicated the position of the landmark City Hall building. Knowing Griffin’s work at other locations in Australia, it can be assumed that the open space, green islands scattered around the settlement would be planted with native vegetation. 

The plan aimed to provide spatial connectedness between various city zones with parks and bushland reserves peppered throughout the settlement. The foreshore is kept as public open space, accessible to all residents, while the most southern tip of the peninsula is marked as Oversea Gate. It was probably a passenger vessels access to the City, encircled on the original plan and linked to the rail interchange connecting other commercial wharves (Sea Gate and Harbour Gate) along the waterfront. Recognisable in this plan are also Griffin’s attention to walkable neighbourhoods with irregularly shaped green public walkthrough running at the back of two row of houses in residential blocks.

The subdivision and sale of lots commenced in 1918, the outline of which can still be seen from the air today (Port Stephens Council 2019)(Figure 3).

In early 1919 ‘Land Limited’ went into liquidation and ownership of the subdivision passed to Henry Ferdinand Halloran (1869-1953), land developer and surveyor. Halloran known as the ‘builder of dreams’ was successful in “interlinking the worlds of planning and private land development and achieving such thorough vertical integration of the design, development and promotion of his estates” (Freestone & Nichols 2010:05.2). Halloran amended the original plan, by adding an area at least as large to its north. He also converted some open public space from the waterfront into more private lots which increased the number of parcels to more than 4000(Figure 4).

Peter Harrison, Australian town planner and a champion of the Griffin Plan for Canberra, described the Griffin section as ‘one of his most elegant essays in site planning’(Harrison 1995:58). Halloran’s extension expressed his dramatic wheel-spoke style rather than the more sensuous Griffin mix of grid and curvilinear planning (Freestone & Nichols 2010: 05.11).

The city never eventuated. In 1924, the State Government decided that only Newcastle was to be developed as a port and not Port Stephens, ending all speculation in the area (Russell 2016:25).

In 1963, the then Great Lakes Council closed most of the roads planned in Griffin’s subdivision, setting aside a small area for residential development, while the rest of the area was proclaimed to be non-urban.

Today, most of the land planned for Port Stephen City by Griffin is zoned RU2 Rural Landscape without dwelling entitlements (landowners have no rights to build a house on their land – Figure 6). Within the existing NSW planning system, the land is classified as ‘paper subdivisions’ which means that it consists of lots that have recognition only on paper, have no built roads nor other urban infrastructure.

Castlecrag neighbourhood in Sydney with its urbanistic uniqueness and beauty is a garden suburb of world significance. At the time it was “a new vision of suburbia – one that celebrated the natural Australian environment rather than being embarrassed by its non-Europeanness” (Watson 2015: vi). Hundred- and one-year old Griffin’s plan for Port Stephen City has not lost any of its relevance for modern sustainable living in harmony with nature. Long forgotten and disregarded plans can be modified to resurrect another wonder of the modern urbanism. A village can be built with tucked away houses orientated towards views rather than aligned with street frontages, no fencing among the reserves and kerbless street. Griffin’s ‘poetry’ of the gum trees and architecture that appeal directly to the soul can be brought to life with the adoption of proper development standards and heritage conservation controls for the village.

The Gooreenggai on Baromee Hill, in the middle of North Arm Cove peninsula has been registered as an item in the State Heritage Inventory. In pre-1788 times, Gooreenggai was used for male initiation ceremonies. Today, it covers approximately 5.35ha and remains an important place for local Aboriginal people. Griffin plan reserved the area for the government administrative centre with 2 free standing buildings within the kidney shape open space. Halloran’s plan marked the same area as ‘site for park’ which makes existing subdivision pattern suitable for protection of this important heritage site.  

North Arm Cove will not rival Canberra, rather, if built, it will be an opportunity to preserve Griffin’s legacy and prove that ingenious urban plans do not lose their value and human dimensions over time. Griffin’s ideas of a habitat with specific environmental, spiritual and social qualities reflect aspirations of contemporary Australia.

“As the world grapples today with the problems of climate change, unsustainable urban growth, social alienation and the despoilment of nature, the Griffins’ visionary convictions and their expression through the legacy of the Griffin heritage, are of even greater consequence than in their own time” (Watson, 2015: 18).

ENDNOTES

[1] Griffin, Marion Mahony. Magic Of America. Unpublished manuscript. Vol. II, Microfilm 5449, Matheson Library, Monash University: 376 (top right-hand numbering).

REFERENCES

• Fraser, Yvonne. 2002. Henry F. Halloran in Port Stephens: The Legacy. Tanilba Bay, New South Wales: Port Stephens Family History Society.

• Freestone, Robert; Nichols, David. 2010. Town planning and private enterprise in early twentieth century Australia: Henry F Halloran, ‘builder of dreams’. History Australia 7(1): pp.5.1 to 5.24.

• Harrison, Peter (Freestone, Robert, editor). 1995. Walter Burley Griffin: Landscape Architect Canberra:National Library of Australia.

• Kohlhoff, Doug. compiler (2017) North Arm Cove: celebrating 50 years of community achievement. North Arm cove Residents Association.

• Port Stephens Council. Landmark and villages. accessed May 2019. https://www.portstephens.nsw.gov.au/play/culture-and-history/landmarks-and-village

• Russell, Kevin. 2016. Port Stephens Narrative. Port Stephens Historical Society Inc.

• Watson, Anne. editor. 2015. Visionaries in Suburbia, Griffin houses in the Sydney Landscape, Walter Burley Griffin Society Inc