In a submission on the most recent plans, the organisation’s skin cancer prevention manager Elizabeth King “strongly” urged the council to “reconsider the deletion of the shade structure”.
“Whilst we recognise the need to balance elements such as heritage, design and budget, failure to provide appropriate shade is a core issue,” Ms King said.
The council’s general manager Ken Gouldthorp previously said a shade cover could be added once plans for the project get development approval.
But Ms King said the organisation held “strong concerns that if the shade structure is only considered as an addition to the facility in the future it will not be built, and will continue to leave users exposed”.
“Council has a duty of care to protect the health and safety of the end user – its children and wider community.” she said.
An independent report, prepared by consultants GML Heritage, found the steel-framed shade structure designed to protect the children and families’ pool would “dominate the original structures of the pool complex in a highly visible location”.
This would have “an adverse impact on the pool complex and the setting of [nearby] Luna Park”.
The concerns prompted the project’s independent planners to request changes to the pool’s design.
Council papers, published in April, said it had become “clear that including [the sun-shade] with the current development application adds substantially to the risk of refusal on heritage grounds”.
“Unfortunately, all attempts by the architect to find a design solution to meet heritage requests and provide shade, have been unsuccessful.” the paper stated.
Mayor Jilly Gibson – who wants work on the redevelopment to start this year – said she was disappointed the structure had to be removed.
“We’ll have to address the issue, of course. It’s quite a dilemma. The children’s pool will sit under [the complex’s sun-deck], so the sun-deck will actually provide some shade for the pool below.”
Councillors Zoe Baker, MaryAnn Beregi and Tony Carr – who are not part of the council’s majority voting bloc – have objected to the revised development plans, arguing they would have a “severe, adverse and detrimental impact on the heritage significance” of the pool site and should be rejected.
Megan Gorrey is the Urban Affairs reporter at The Sydney Morning Herald.