Powerhouse Ultimo Revitalisation

I strongly object to the Powerhouse revitalisation plans. Despite prior State Significant Development planning decisions allowing “programming of museum spaces…not [being] a matter requiring approval”, the Department of Planning should reconsider this policy. The success of a museum depends on both its exterior and site planning as well as its internal and exhibition planning, particularly if proposed plans drastically reduce exhibition space by 75%!

The demolition of the Engine House’s Steam exhibition and underlying steam infrastructure will destroy the live steam engine demonstration experience enjoyed by generations of Australians. In this era of re-use and sustainability, rebuilding the steam infrastructure makes no economic sense, and there are certainly less intrusive and destructive ways to adapt and re-use the Powerhouse Museum.

Furthermore, apart from 3 objects, museum management has refused to confirm how much of the existing exhibitions will be kept post-renovation. Combined with the estimated 75% reduction in exhibition space, extensive internal demolition of ramps, mezzanines, and the Wran building’s grand galleria windows, it appears not only could the Powerhouse’s buildings be under threat, but also NSW’s state significant heritage of the Powerhouse’s collection and exhibits.

While the current State Significant Development process may not require approval for museum programming, the Department may want to rethink it considering the current trajectory of the Powerhouse revitalisation proposal: it could be a State Significant Development for the wrong reasons.

I strongly object to the Powerhouse revitalisation plans. Despite prior State Significant Development planning decisions allowing “programming of museum spaces…not [being] a matter requiring approval”, the Department of Planning should reconsider this policy. The success of a museum depends on both its exterior and site planning as well as its internal and exhibition planning, particularly if proposed plans drastically reduce exhibition space by 75%!

The demolition of the Engine House’s Steam exhibition and underlying steam infrastructure will destroy the live steam engine demonstration experience enjoyed by generations of Australians. In this era of re-use and sustainability, rebuilding the steam infrastructure makes no economic sense, and there are certainly less intrusive and destructive ways to adapt and re-use the Powerhouse Museum.

Furthermore, apart from 3 objects, museum management has refused to confirm how much of the existing exhibitions will be kept post-renovation. Combined with the estimated 75% reduction in exhibition space, extensive internal demolition of ramps, mezzanines, and the Wran building’s grand galleria windows, it appears not only could the Powerhouse’s buildings be under threat, but also NSW’s state significant heritage of the Powerhouse’s collection and exhibits.

While the current State Significant Development process may not require approval for museum programming, the Department may want to rethink it considering the current trajectory of the Powerhouse revitalisation proposal: it could be a State Significant Development for the wrong reasons.

I have fond memories of visiting the Powerhouse as a child and was in awe of the scale and history of the exhibitions, especially the Steam and Transport exhibitions. Recently I revisited, shortly before it closed, and despite being an adult that sense of awe and childlike wonder still held true.
It would be a great tragedy to lose such a significant piece of what makes Sydney a destination to visit, and an untold loss to future generations.

I strongly object to the Powerhouse revitalisation plans. Despite prior State Significant Development planning decisions allowing “programming of museum spaces…not [being] a matter requiring approval”, the Department of Planning should reconsider this policy. The success of a museum depends on both its exterior and site planning as well as its internal and exhibition planning, particularly if proposed plans drastically reduce exhibition space by 75%!
The demolition of the Engine House’s Steam exhibition and underlying steam infrastructure will destroy the live steam engine demonstration experience enjoyed by generations of Australians. In this era of re-use and sustainability, rebuilding the steam infrastructure makes no economic sense, and there are certainly less intrusive and destructive ways to adapt and re-use the Powerhouse Museum.
Furthermore, apart from 3 objects, museum management has refused to confirm how much of the existing exhibitions will be kept post-renovation. Combined with the estimated 75% reduction in exhibition space, extensive internal demolition of ramps, mezzanines, and the Wran building’s grand galleria windows, it appears not only could the Powerhouse’s buildings be under threat, but also NSW’s state significant heritage of the Powerhouse’s collection and exhibits.
While the current State Significant Development process may not require approval for museum programming, the Department may want to rethink it considering the current trajectory of the Powerhouse revitalisation proposal: it could be a State Significant Development for the wrong reasons.

I, and on behalf of my family, wish to Object to the decimation of the much loved Powerhouse Museum. We have been going for decades. My husband, our children, and our grandchildren. We have seen so many wonderful exhibitions, and enjoyed the artifacts. The "renovations" will destroy something of Sydney's reputation as an amazing place to visit. Please reconsider.

I strongly object to the Powerhouse revitalisation plans. Despite prior Atate Significance Development planning decisions allowing "programming of museum spaces...not [being] a matter requiring approval", the Department of Planning should reconsiderthis policy. The succes of a museum depends on both itsexterior and site planning as well as its internal and exhibition planning, particualrly if proposed plans drastically reduce exhibition space by 75%. The demolition of the Engine House's Steam exhibition and underlying steam infrastructure will destroy the live steam engine demonstration experience enjoyed by generations of Australians. In this era of re-use and sustainability, rebuilding the steam infrastructure makes no economic sense, and there are certainly less intrusive and destructive ways to adapt and re-use the Powerhouse Museum. Furthermore, apart from 3 objects, museum managment has refused to confirm how much of the existing exhibitions will be kept post renovation. Combined with the estimated 75% reduction in exhibition space, extensive internal demolition of ramps, mezzainines, and the Wran building's grand galleria windows, it appears not only could the Powerhouse's buildings be under threat, but alos NSW's state significant heritage of the Powerhouse's collection and exhibits. While the current State Significant Development process may not require approval for museum programming, the Department may want to rethink it considering the current trajectory of the Powerhouse revitalisation proposal: it could be a State Significant Development for hte wrong reasons.

I strongly object to the Powerhouse revitalisation plans. Despite prior State Significant Development planning decisions allowing “programming of museum spaces…not [being] a matter requiring approval”, the Department of Planning should reconsider this policy. The success of a museum depends on both its exterior and site planning as well as its internal and exhibition planning, particularly if proposed plans drastically reduce exhibition space by 75%!

The demolition of the Engine House’s Steam exhibition and underlying steam infrastructure will destroy the live steam engine demonstration experience enjoyed by generations of Australians. In this era of re-use and sustainability, rebuilding the steam infrastructure makes no economic sense, and there are certainly less intrusive and destructive ways to adapt and re-use the Powerhouse Museum. The live steam feature has always been one of my favourite parts of the permanent Powerhouse Museum collection and is a great exhibition that future visitors should be able to see.

Furthermore, apart from 3 objects, museum management has refused to confirm how much of the existing exhibitions will be kept post-renovation. Combined with the estimated 75% reduction in exhibition space, extensive internal demolition of ramps, mezzanines, and the Wran building’s grand galleria windows, it appears not only could the Powerhouse’s buildings be under threat, but also NSW’s state significant heritage of the Powerhouse’s collection and exhibits.

While the current State Significant Development process may not require approval for museum programming, the Department may want to rethink it considering the current trajectory of the Powerhouse revitalisation proposal: it could be a State Significant Development for the wrong reasons.

I strongly object to the Powerhouse revitalisation plans. Despite prior State Significant Development planning decisions allowing “programming of museum spaces…not [being] a matter requiring approval”, the Department of Planning should reconsider this policy. The success of a museum depends on both its exterior and site planning as well as its internal and exhibition planning, particularly if proposed plans drastically reduce exhibition space by 75%!

The demolition of the Engine House’s Steam exhibition and underlying steam infrastructure will destroy the live steam engine demonstration experience enjoyed by generations of Australians. In this era of re-use and sustainability, rebuilding the steam infrastructure makes no economic sense, and there are certainly less intrusive and destructive ways to adapt and re-use the Powerhouse Museum.

Furthermore, apart from 3 objects, museum management has refused to confirm how much of the existing exhibitions will be kept post-renovation. Combined with the estimated 75% reduction in exhibition space, extensive internal demolition of ramps, mezzanines, and the Wran building’s grand galleria windows, it appears not only could the Powerhouse’s buildings be under threat, but also NSW’s state significant heritage of the Powerhouse’s collection and exhibits.

While the current State Significant Development process may not require approval for museum programming, the Department may want to rethink it considering the current trajectory of the Powerhouse revitalisation proposal: it could be a State Significant Development for the wrong reasons.

The Powerhouse Museum is a vital repository of historical objects and documents that represent the culture and development of Pyrmont and Ultimo. For example, Jacksons Landing Community Association donated the scale model provided by Lend Lease to our community, for future generations to appreciate the development. This will now be consigned to a warehouse in Western Sydney indefinitely.
Since the museum’s inception it has welcomed all those interested in the cultural and industrial evolution of this area, and countless families have enjoyed visiting the museum. Very many school children from regional New South Wales have visited the Powerhouse and learned much about the development of Sydney, and especially this area, in specially designed educational programs. Removing this educational institution from inner Sydney to the western suburbs will deprive future generations of country school children and families of the opportunity to enjoy and learn from the Powerhouse in Ultimo, since most country visitors combine a visit to the Ultimo Powerhouse with other museums in Sydney. A trip to the western suburbs will be unlikely to be on the itinerary of most regional school children or families.
The existing building has been closed and is being dismantled for no apparent reason. Much less money spent on repairs and some remodelling would accommodate the needs of the buildings, while the museum could remain open for local, regional and international visitors to enjoy and benefit from.
Mary Mortimer, Chair, Jacksons Landing Community Association

I strongly object to the Powerhouse revitalisation plans. Despite prior State Significant Development planning decisions allowing “programming of museum spaces…not [being] a matter requiring approval”, the Department of Planning should reconsider this policy. The success of a museum depends on both its exterior and site planning as well as its internal and exhibition planning, particularly if proposed plans drastically reduce exhibition space by 75%!
The demolition of the Engine House’s Steam exhibition and underlying steam infrastructure will destroy the live steam engine demonstration experience enjoyed by generations of Australians. In this era of re-use and sustainability, rebuilding the steam infrastructure makes no economic sense, and there are certainly less intrusive and destructive ways to adapt and re-use the Powerhouse Museum.
Furthermore, apart from 3 objects, museum management has refused to confirm how much of the existing exhibitions will be kept post-renovation. Combined with the estimated 75% reduction in exhibition space, extensive internal demolition of ramps, mezzanines, and the Wran building’s grand galleria windows, it appears not only could the Powerhouse’s buildings be under threat, but also NSW’s state significant heritage of the Powerhouse’s collection and exhibits.
While the current State Significant Development process may not require approval for museum programming, the Department may want to rethink it considering the current trajectory of the Powerhouse revitalisation proposal: it could be a State Significant Development for the wrong reasons.

The government and department are surely aware of the massive opposition in this peninsula to the abolition of a Technology Museum in favour of a place for fashion displays – Ultimo and Pyrmont are exactly the wrong location for what you propose.
I wish to add another consideration. We are all accustomed to the previous State government evasions and deceptions – but many of us have assumed that a Labor government would behave more honestly. If you persevere with this bizarre misuse of a Technology Museum, this will confirm our suspicion that you are no more honest and no more dependable than the last government. There is frankly no case for this proposal, and nothing but ill-feeling can flow from it. Please desist while you retain some trust among residents of this peninsula.
Donald Denoon, Emeritus Professor of History, Australian National University

From information such as https://www.nsw.gov.au/media-releases/powerhouse-museum-ultimo-revitalisation-powers-along-community-feedback it is not clear that the essence of the Powerhouse Museum will be preserved & restored. Specifically, as well as the required repairs and maintenance, permanent exhibitions ( such as Boulton and Watt Engine, Loco No1, Catalina Plane, Strasbourg Clock and Steam Revolution, Transport and Space and Experimentation Exhibitions ) need to return with a reopened museum asap. These science related exhibits and the building's heritage as a Powerhouse go together.

Hence, although as a Western Sydney resident I appreciate the investment in the new Parramatta museum, it should not be called Powerhouse; a Powerhouse museum should only be in what was a real power house!

I am happy for a design that enhances the existing Ultimo facility, such as better entrances and flow of visitors, but it needs to explicitly note that all the permanent exhibits, as noted above, that have inspired, informed and entertained generations of visitors, will be restored and returned to continue their priceless and unique role.

I strongly object to the Powerhouse revitalisation plans. Despite prior State Significant Development planning decisions allowing “programming of museum spaces…not [being] a matter requiring approval”, the Department of Planning should reconsider this policy. The success of a museum depends on both its exterior and site planning as well as its internal and exhibition planning, particularly if proposed plans drastically reduce exhibition space by 75%!

The demolition of the Engine House’s Steam exhibition and underlying steam infrastructure will destroy the live steam engine demonstration experience enjoyed by generations of Australians. In this era of re-use and sustainability, rebuilding the steam infrastructure makes no economic sense, and there are certainly less intrusive and destructive ways to adapt and re-use the Powerhouse Museum.

Furthermore, apart from 3 objects, museum management has refused to confirm how much of the existing exhibitions will be kept post-renovation. Combined with the estimated 75% reduction in exhibition space, extensive internal demolition of ramps, mezzanines, and the Wran building’s grand galleria windows, it appears not only could the Powerhouse’s buildings be under threat, but also NSW’s state significant heritage of the Powerhouse’s collection and exhibits.

While the current State Significant Development process may not require approval for museum programming, the Department may want to rethink it considering the current trajectory of the Powerhouse revitalisation proposal: it could be a State Significant Development for the wrong reasons.

I strongly object to the Powerhouse revitalisation plans. Despite prior State Significant Development planning decisions allowing “programming of museum spaces…not [being] a matter requiring approval”, the Department of Planning should reconsider this policy. The success of a museum depends on both its exterior and site planning as well as its internal and exhibition planning, particularly if proposed plans drastically reduce exhibition space by 75%!
The demolition of the Engine House’s Steam exhibition and underlying steam infrastructure will destroy the live steam engine demonstration experience enjoyed by generations of Australians. In this era of re-use and sustainability, rebuilding the steam infrastructure makes no economic sense, and there are certainly less intrusive and destructive ways to adapt and re-use the Powerhouse Museum.
Furthermore, apart from 3 objects, museum management has refused to confirm how much of the existing exhibitions will be kept post-renovation. Combined with the estimated 75% reduction in exhibition space, extensive internal demolition of ramps, mezzanines, and the Wran building’s grand galleria windows, it appears not only could the Powerhouse’s buildings be under threat, but also NSW’s state significant heritage of the Powerhouse’s collection and exhibits.
While the current State Significant Development process may not require approval for museum programming, the Department may want to rethink it considering the current trajectory of the Powerhouse revitalisation proposal: it could be a State Significant Development for the wrong reasons

Adrienne and Keith Tunnicliffe
Unit 1003 8 Distillery Drive
Pyrmont NSW 2009
Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure
Powerhouse Museum “Revitalisation” – SSD 67588459.

The Powerhouse Museum Website states that Powerhouse Parramatta will be a place where “Community, industry and collection will intersect to create a dynamic culturally engaged program” and Powerhouse Ultimo will “present exclusive international exhibitions” and “enable Powerhouse to expand education programming that supports the applied arts and sciences, and creative industries”.
If Powerhouse Ultimo vision is to be central to its education programme and central to its hosting major and exclusive international exhibitions. This design proposal fails in both endeavours!
Regarding the role of the museum as an educational institution. The number of children choosing to study STEM subjects (Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics) is decreasing every year.
The latest National Assessment Program report in science literacy, shows the proportion of students meeting the expected standard for science has flat-lined over the past two decades with only 57 per cent of year 6 students hitting the science proficiency benchmark (SMH 29/5/24).
The NSW Creative Communities Policy makes no mention of STEM engagement.
The role of the Powerhouse Museum in turning this around cannot be underestimated.
This design proposal pays very little attention to spaces designed for children. The theatres that currently exist are being removed in favour of a huge high ceilinged, flat floored auditorium with moveable furniture. This cannot provide a conducive space for children to learn, focus and remain engaged, however it is temporarily divided. Children need a purpose-built, contained, tiered learning area that meets the particular needs of children, teachers and museum educators.
The design document states that “dedicated spaces designed for the museums learning programs would be provided, along with community spaces.” There are no appropriate spaces in the proposed design.
The programs provided by the museum must be related to the NSW curriculum, which operates over two years, changing each year, for children from Kindergarten through to Year 12.
The proposed cavernous spaces of Exhibition Halls 1 and 2 do not provide the adaptive potential to provide semi-permanent (biennial) vibrant, interactive, immersive exhibitions that encourage and support children of all ages to engage with STEM subjects and take up professions in STEM in adulthood. They need contained indoor and outdoor spaces where they can make noise and mess and play without interfering with other visitors to the museum. The existing forecourt could be part of fulfilling this role.
The museum needs both large volume and small volume exhibition spaces. The huge height of the proposed large volume exhibition spaces makes adaptive use of intimate small spaces very difficult (and expensive). The removal of the mezzanines also removes all ‘line of sight’ from above the huge permanent exhibits that are a signature part of the museum’s collection.
The redesign of the Wran building Galleria diminishes the cultural heritage of visiting the Powerhouse. The creative wayfaring of the museum which draws guests into the various areas and exposes the construction of part of the buildings will be destroyed. Surely, as our premier Museum of Applied Sciences the architecture of the revitalisation could be more innovative and pay attention to how visitors experience the building, as well as the exhibitions within.
Removing the main entrance from Harris St and removing the forecourt will not prioritise the visitor experience. Harris Street is a major thoroughfare and public transport route linking central station UTS and Sydney University to the site and providing easy well signposted access for the general public. The forecourt should be renewed. It is a great meeting place and provides much needed open space for the residents of Ultimo. It also opens up and improves the street frontage of Harris Street.
It could incorporate outdoor interactive models of moveable technology.
A secondary entry that caters for tour buses school groups and a few pedestrians from the Goods Line is a good idea, but it does not “connect the museum to the Sydney CBD and adjacent ‘cultural’ precincts”. The proposed entrance is not near the closest light rail at Exhibition, close to the northwest corner of the museum. It provides views to but does not provide clear easy wayfaring from Chinatown, Darling Quarter or Darling Harbour or the CBD.
Regarding the Ultimo Powerhouse’s role in hosting exclusive international exhibitions in the voluminous exhibition halls proposed, this will simply not be possible for any exhibition which requires a controlled environment to protect any valuable fragile exhibits.
It has been ascertained and confirmed by Andrej Stevanovic, Project Director, Infrastructure NSW that the environmental quality of Exhibition Spaces 1 and 2 can only be achieved at an ICOM standard of Level 2. An ICOM environmental quality standard of Level 4 is required for any fragile items.
This begs the question as to whether the design brief which is ‘cabinet in confidence’ required exhibition space or venue/ entertainment space. The lack of transparency regarding who contributed to the Design Brief and what it contains is a betrayal of public trust and destroys trust in the process of revitalisation. The public has a right to know.
The proposed design does not represent the revitalisation of the Powerhouse Museum of Applied Arts and Sciences in Ultimo.
Not only is it a beloved institution, but it also has huge national and international importance as an educational, cultural, technological and historical treasure.
We desperately need to promote Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics. We are failing. We need to engage our students, to encourage and help them see the career opportunities in these areas. We are presently not doing this.
Australia’s new industries in these areas are built on these foundations and should be promoted by government not destroyed.
We strongly object to these plans and wish to see them abandoned and replaced with plans that are based on the importance of revitalizing The Powerhouse as a world class museum.
Sydney has repurposed industrial event and art centres at White Bay Power Station and Carriage Works, and at Darling Harbour Exhibition Centre next door. We do not need another one.
We do need Powerhouse. This plan destroys the integrity of the museum.
We strongly object to the very basis of it. It has been promoted politically regardless and ignoring the advice of museum and architectural experts and the views of thousands of Australians. It promotes art and entertainment while sidelining the educational and economic imperatives of promoting Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics.
Yours Sincerely
Adrienne Tunnicliffe
[email protected]
MOB: 0410 620 643
Keith Tunnicliffe
[email protected]
MOB:0414620641

"Revitalisation" is a poor name for this plan. In fact it's a death warrant for an excellent museum, and a broken promise to the people of NSW. It's an expensive fig leaf drawn over the former government's unwarranted plan to disperse an outstanding collection, ruin the award-winning custom-built museum design and turn Ultimo from providing a great introduction to the wonders of technology, for young and old alike, to being yet another corporate entertainment venue. It is the worst act of vandalism in the cultural sector that I have seen in my 76 years and I am appalled that it is being carried out by a Labor government. I object in the strongest possible term to a plan that shames the State government and betrays the people of NSW.

The museum is such a vital, exciting and informative place. It should be supported to be the draw it is for visitors to Sydney.
The plans are incomplete and don't clearly articulate what will happen to the priceless items held within the museum, or how the work of the museum will be continued.
This money would be far better spent in maintaining and promoting the current museum.

Dear Heritage NSW,

I strongly support that the whole Powerhouse Museum Complex should be heritage listed for its historic and cultural significance to the people of New South Wales.

While a portion of the Powerhouse Museum is heritage-listed (the Ultimo Power House), most of the museum is not protected. The new heritage listing will extend protection to the 1988 award-winning extension as well as the Harwood Building across the main museum (crucial to museum storage and conservation), ensuring the whole Complex will be protected. The Powerhouse’s 1988 industrial-to-museum adaptive reuse inspired iconic industrial museum adaptations such as London’s Tate Modern, with its Bankside Power Station conversion designed in 1996 and opened in 2000.

In addition to inspiring international audiences, the Powerhouse Museum has also inspired generations of Australians in science, design, fashion, technology, and decorative arts. But if current plans go ahead, the Museum’s Steam Revolution and Space exhibitions could be dismantled, with museum management still not giving a clear answer on how much of the existing exhibitions will be kept post-renovation. Management recently listed many of the Museum’s iconic interactive exhibits as well as parts of the Transport exhibition as part of a giveaway, which is alarming as the proposed renovation is meant to increase exhibition space but all actions point to exhibition space likely being reduced or demolished. In fact, the Powerhouse Museum Alliance’s calculations estimate the museum’s exhibition space could be reduced to a third of its current size. (less than 7,000m2 vs current 21,800m2)

A renovation of the Powerhouse Museum is welcome, but if current plans go ahead, not only could the Powerhouse’s buildings be under threat, but also NSW’s shared cultural heritage of the Powerhouse’s collection and exhibits.

While heritage listing will not be a silver bullet to the problems listed above, listing the Powerhouse Museum Complex on the Stage Heritage Register will likely make it harder to dismantle exhibitions and demolish floors without solid reasoning. Hopefully, it will also create a better Powerhouse Museum that will be enjoyed by the public for years to come.

I agree with and endorse the below:

I strongly object to the Powerhouse revitalisation plans. Despite prior State Significant Development planning decisions allowing “programming of museum spaces…not [being] a matter requiring approval”, the Department of Planning should reconsider this policy. The success of a museum depends on both its exterior and site planning as well as its internal and exhibition planning, particularly if proposed plans drastically reduce exhibition space by 75%!
The demolition of the Engine House’s Steam exhibition and underlying steam infrastructure will destroy the live steam engine demonstration experience enjoyed by generations of Australians. In this era of re-use and sustainability, rebuilding the steam infrastructure makes no economic sense, and there are certainly less intrusive and destructive ways to adapt and re-use the Powerhouse Museum.
Furthermore, apart from 3 objects, museum management has refused to confirm how much of the existing exhibitions will be kept post-renovation. Combined with the estimated 75% reduction in exhibition space, extensive internal demolition of ramps, mezzanines, and the Wran building’s grand galleria windows, it appears not only could the Powerhouse’s buildings be under threat, but also NSW’s state significant heritage of the Powerhouse’s collection and exhibits.
While the current State Significant Development process may not require approval for museum programming, the Department may want to rethink it considering the current trajectory of the Powerhouse revitalisation proposal: it could be a State Significant Development for the wrong reasons.

…

Also, just on a personal level, the Powerhouse has meant a lot to me throughout my life. My Grandma used to take me there as a kid, and all the machinery, scientific knowledge, and practical/interact-able exhibits really sparked my brain and were a big inspiration for my life long love of learning. I always hoped to take my kids there one day, and show them the exact same trains and engines I saw as a kid.

The Powerhouse also hosts wonderful rotating exhibitions. Free exhibitions like that are invaluable to the community. The Powerhouse is a Sydney icon. It would be an absolute shame to downsize it.

I strongly object to the Powerhouse revitalisation plans. Despite prior State Significant Development planning decisions allowing “programming of museum spaces…not [being] a matter requiring approval”, the Department of Planning should reconsider this policy. The success of a museum depends on both its exterior and site planning as well as its internal and exhibition planning, particularly if proposed plans drastically reduce exhibition space by 75%!
The demolition of the Engine House’s Steam exhibition and underlying steam infrastructure will destroy the live steam engine demonstration experience enjoyed by generations of Australians. In this era of re-use and sustainability, rebuilding the steam infrastructure makes no economic sense, and there are certainly less intrusive and destructive ways to adapt and re-use the Powerhouse Museum.
Furthermore, apart from 3 objects, museum management has refused to confirm how much of the existing exhibitions will be kept post-renovation. Combined with the estimated 75% reduction in exhibition space, extensive internal demolition of ramps, mezzanines, and the Wran building’s grand galleria windows, it appears not only could the Powerhouse’s buildings be under threat, but also NSW’s state significant heritage of the Powerhouse’s collection and exhibits.
While the current State Significant Development process may not require approval for museum programming, the Department may want to rethink it considering the current trajectory of the Powerhouse revitalisation proposal: it could be a State Significant Development for the wrong reasons.

I strongly object to the Powerhouse revitalisation plans. Despite prior State Significant Development planning decisions allowing “programming of museum spaces…not [being] a matter requiring approval”, the Department of Planning should reconsider this policy. The success of a museum depends on both its exterior and site planning as well as its internal and exhibition planning, particularly if proposed plans drastically reduce exhibition space by 75%!
The demolition of the Engine House’s Steam exhibition and underlying steam infrastructure will destroy the live steam engine demonstration experience enjoyed by generations of Australians. In this era of re-use and sustainability, rebuilding the steam infrastructure makes no economic sense, and there are certainly less intrusive and destructive ways to adapt and re-use the Powerhouse Museum.
Furthermore, apart from 3 objects, museum management has refused to confirm how much of the existing exhibitions will be kept post-renovation. Combined with the estimated 75% reduction in exhibition space, extensive internal demolition of ramps, mezzanines, and the Wran building’s grand galleria windows, it appears not only could the Powerhouse’s buildings be under threat, but also NSW’s state significant heritage of the Powerhouse’s collection and exhibits.
While the current State Significant Development process may not require approval for museum programming, the Department may want to rethink it considering the current trajectory of the Powerhouse revitalisation proposal: it could be a State Significant Development for the wrong reasons.