Is Lake Burley Griffin Griffin's Lake?

 Ornamental Water was one of the requirements in the competition for the design of the Federal Capital City of the Commonwealth of Australia. The location of two weir sites on the Molonglo River was provided. Competitors were also given information on the catchment area, annual rainfall and evaporation. There was also the promise of the construction of two weirs above the city site on both the Molonglo and Queanbeyan Rivers. It was stated that these were to control floods, equalise the flow of the river and to maintain a constant level behind any weir within or near the city site.[1]

To any competitor this must have sounded like the requirement for a large ornamental lake on the MolongloRiver and when matched against the supplied contour plan with the extent of the highest recorded flood clearly marked, then it is not surprising that most of the entries showed a large lake in this location.

The MolongloRiver was described as ordinarily a ‘sluggish stream’ intersecting the city area flowing ‘between steep banks cut in the alluvial soil’ which dried-up during ‘prolonged dry weather’, but was ‘subject to sudden alternations in volume’. Rainfall records were provided.

For Entry 29, the submission by Walter Burley Griffin, the primary purpose of the lake is as ‘the waterway for architectural effect, recreation and climate[s[ amelioration’.

The main waterway of the “Molonglo” is left in its present state in the lowest and wildest regions, where it forms a feature of the forestry and botanical gardens continuous with Black Mountain in preservation of, or restoration to, primeval condition. Next above and at the second of the weir sites suggested in the Invitation program, a dam of very modest proportions constructed in connection with one of the roadway crossings floods the lower outlying informal lake, and the triple internal architectural basins which bound on three sides the government group for the reflection of its buildings and for improvement of the humidity conditions in the heart of the city.

This dam may be high enough to form all the lake and basin waters, but it is suggested that the waters over the large upper area subject to occasional flood may be held back at the point where the railroad and main line of traffic pass around the governmental reservation by another weir with sluices and locks to form a naturalistic lake without whose beaches may be allowed to vary somewhat with the river supply as controlled at these sluices to maintain the formal basins and lower lake throughout the year.

The most difficult problem connected with the waterway through the centre of the site is to minimise the interference with traffic, and at the same time least cut up areas. The circular pools and the connecting basin provide three water bodies, each complete  in itself, and located between the direct lines of communications from cent[re] to cent[re]. At the same time, because of their largeness of scale and severe simplicity they conform to the architectural character of the cent[re] of the City with its monumental groups and throngs of busy people.

The two irregular lakes are likewise located out of the direct lines of communication and their informal treatment corresponds with the park-like, irregular character of the City’s first suburban zone.

The relationship of the Central basin to the government group is is the only one explained in detail:

[The] central court of the government group lies some 25ft above the lowest terrace from which it is separated by the buildings along the waterway frontages and to which access is given by ramps at the ends and flights of steps between the buildings. The court terrace, however, is carried on the roof of the central buildings of the lower court jutting into the basin capped by an open colonnade toward the water surmounting a slight bank of steps to form an open forum. This building the “Water Gate” may be made use of for something more than a terrace.

The circular pools and connecting basin essentially belong to the [Recreation Group], adapted by their continuous boulevarded embankments for water pageants and the central basin, incidentally, forms a race course of just one mile between the terminal bridges.[2]

The Departmental Board appointed in 1912 to advise the minister on the winning designs developed a design of its own. Its lake was informal and followed the 1925 ft contour of the 1891 flood level. When Canberra was named on 12 March 1913, the city commenced to this design. However, following letters from Griffin explaining the conceptual nature of his competition design, professional condemnation of the Departmental Plan, and a change of government, Griffin was invited to Canberra to discuss his plan with the Departmental Board. The outcome was that in October 1913 Griffin was appointed on a 3 year contract as Federal Capital Director of Design and Construction. He presented his Preliminary Plan then took six months leave to settle his affairs. He returned in May 1914, three months before the outbreak of the First World War.

The war effort, Ministerial and departmental resistance meant that work was slow. As well, all capital works over £25,000 had to be scrutinised by the Standing Committee on Public Works. In 1915 Minister Archibald required that the lake as proposed in Griffin’s 1915 Schematic Plan of Canberra be referred to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works.[3] Its recommendations would largely determine its future.

The investigation related to the proposal to construct two dams on the MolongloRiver and form a chain of five ornamental lakes through the city area. The lakes were named the EasternLake at 1845 feet, the EasternCircularBasin, the SegmentalBasin, the WesternCircularBasin and the WesternLake all at 1825 feet. A dam on the QueanbeyanRiver about 6 miles up stream from Queanbeyan would maintain the flow of the Molonglo throughout the year and would compensate for evaporation, absorption and seepage. The shores of the eastern and western lakes would be left in their natural state. The three basins would have a formal border for about half of their length and consist of five concrete steps. Around the formal basins there would be a boulevard of 100 feet comprising pathways, a roadway, and a motorway on a different level. Seven bridges were proposed as well as the eastern lake causeway and the road across the Yarralumla dam. The Federal Capital Director of Design and Construction estimated the cost at £559,109, The Department of Works estimate was £912,421.

During the presentation of evidence Griffin pointed out that with the information he had been given it was not possible to give accuracy to the estimate. Owen, Scrivener and Miller, all authors of the discredited Departmental Plan gave evidence. Owen’s evidence was in direct opposition to Griffin’s and was probably the most influential:

… The information that I am submitting discloses that I consider the Molonglo and Queanbeyan Rivers an unsatisfactory source of water supply for the whole area of the ornamental waters proposed on the city plan.

…My general objections to having artificial lakes have always been these: That even with the lower lakes it was a close thing whether we would get the amount of water that would be required to allow for evaporation, compensating flow, and seepage; that there would be too large an area combined with large areas of park and unoccupied land – an aesthetic objection; that there would be a tendency to increase the relative humidity; and that there would be a danger of mosquitoes unless great care were taken. The cost involved in making and maintaining the lakes … was also a big objection. … There is no doubt that the lakes would fill [with silt].

… I would treat the river somewhat in the way the Yarra has been treated, but avoid long straight stretches and try to retain pleasing curves. … my plan would reduce the area of water to about one-eighth or one-tenth of what Mr Griffin proposes.

…a large area of land would not be submerged. I think that is good land which … could be used for agriculture, or gardening, or might be laid out as parklands. Even if they were submerged once in twenty years, as the Botanical Gardens in Brisbane were, it would probably not damage them much.

… The intervention of the lakes will mean crossing them on bridges. That is certainly an objection to settlement on the north side

The Public Works Committee recommended that:

a)    That the eastern lake be indefinitely postponed

b)    That the provision of other ornamental waters be delayed for a period of years

c)    That the construction of the boulevards be delayed in consequence

d)    That the sanitation of the town of Queanbeyan be properly controlled

e)    That full advantage be taken of sand, soil and gravel deposits on the proposed lake area

f)     That 1,825 feet be adopted as the surface level

g)    That a strip 100 feet wide around the lake be reserved from lease or occupation

h)    That until the lakes are formed the land be utilised for agriculture or other purposes on permissive occupancy

i)     That the straight line forming the base of the segmental basin be restricted to 1600 feet on each side of the Ainslie Axis

j)     That the lake should be formed generally following the natural contours

k)    That a definite programme be drawn up outlining successive stages of necessary works.[4]

These findings did not dissuade Griffin from continuing with his commitment to his larger lake which was clearly there in his final 1918 plan. Although Griffin’s contract ceased at the end of 1920, what to do with the broad floodplain that flooded at irregular intervals and separated the north and south of city as it developed remained. Owen, first as a member of the Federal Capital Advisory Committee in 1921 and then as the Federal Capital Commission’s Chief Engineer in 1925 continued with his belief in the inadequacy of Griffin’s lake scheme and the suitability of his ‘ribbon of water’ scheme. In 1929 he produced the Owen Peake Report outlining his proposal for a series of low weirs along the Molonglo. Fortunately the layout of the city based on Griffin’s 1918 plan was enshrined in the 1925 Gazetted Plan of Canberra and so the full extent of Griffin’s lake proposal remained – on paper. This did not prevent change and Owen’s 1929 report resurfaced many years later in support of the removal of EastLake in 1950 and WestLake in 1953 from the plan.

This was enough to spur concerned politicians to action. From 1954 to 1955 a Senate Select Committee inquired into the Development of Canberra in relation to the original plan and subsequent modifications. It recommended ‘that the examination of the question of the lakes be proceeded with immediately; and that the final decision be implemented as soon as possible: but that the provision of the three central basins be regarded as obligatory’[5] and 1956 floods on 13 March, 10 June and 25 June confirmed the potential of a large lake to transform the city. It also recommended that a single Authority be appointed to oversee the development of Canberra as the Seat of Government. This became the National Capital Development Commission (NCDC).

The Government commissioned the high-profile British planner Sir William Holford to provide observations on the future development of Canberra. He regarded a lake as essential in unifying the city. Perhaps as a consequence of having access to the Owen-Peake report he did not even consider East Lake as a possibility, and so carried on the concern regarding sufficient water despite seeing images of the 1956 floods. Nor did he consider the necessity of regulating weirs on the Molonglo and QueanbeyanRivers. As a consequence his plan cut EastBasin in half and he left West Lake as only a possibility following further investigation.[6]

It took the NCDC to review water statistics, engage a range of consultants, including those with expertise from the Snowy Mountain Authority, to reinstate West Lake and build the lake which finally at the end of April 1964. It was finally inaugurated as Lake Burley Griffin by Prime Minister Sir Robert Menzies on 17 October 1964. Eventually a dam, Googong Dam, was built on the QueanbeyanRiver in the 1970s to assist with the supply of water for Lake Burley Griffin.

So, is the lake built by the NCDC Griffin’s lake? Yes and No. In terms of Griffin’s general principles as ‘the waterway for architectural effect, recreation and climate amelioration’ and in terms of the overall landscape character of the various parts of the lake, then it has succeeded. The lake helps define the land axis and the CentralBasin is comparatively formal. WestLake has certainly taken on an informal and park-like character and integrated forestry, botanical gardens and a ‘primeval condition’ has been partially restored.

Where it has missed Griffin’s vision derives from the omission of the Causeway weir. Not only would this have helped resolve some of the traffic problems that Griffin anticipated and which we experience now, it would have enabled East Lake to form and the water axis that connected Black Mountain to Lake Park, now the industrial suburb of Fyshwich but then planned as a premier suburb, to have been realised.

Griffin made many changes to the shape of the lake between his competition design in 1911 and his final design in 1918. Although the precise shape of the lake varies somewhat from that proposed by Griffin in the 1918 plan, I would expect that if he had overseen the construction of the lake then he would have continued to made changes, essentially of a pragmatic nature. As Griffin asserted after he visited Canberra in 1913 ‘Unity essential to the city, requires for so complex a problem a simple organism’.[7] Lake Burley Griffin gives expression to this unity although Griffin’s lake would have made it clearer

ENDNOTE

 

[1] Commonwealth of Australia (1911) Information, conditions and particulars for the guidance in the preparation of competitive designs for the federal capital city of the commonwealth of Australia. Department of Home Affairs

[2] Commonwealth of Australia (1912) Copy of federal Capital Design No. 29 by W.B.Griffin.

[3] Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works (1916) Report: Dams for Ornamental Waters at Canberra, Commonwealth of Australia.

[4] Ibid.

[5] Commonwealth of Australia (1955) Report from the Senate Committee upo the Development of Canberra, Commonwealth Government Printer, Canberra.

[6] Holford W. (1958 Observations on the future development of Canberra, ACT, Commonwealth Government Printer, Canberra.

[7] Griffin W.B. (1913) The Federal Capital Preliminary General Plan, Commonwealth of Australia.