National Trust of SA Heritage Living Autumn 2022

H E R I TAGE L I V I N G AUT U M N 2 0 2 2

Heritage FOR THE

PEOPLE

ELECTION 2022

MAKE YOUR VOTE COUNT

FOR OUR HERITAGE

Pioneer Women’s Trail Walk 2022 Sunday 15 May Join us for our annual Pioneer Women’s Trail Walk, following the route taken by German pioneer women as they trekked from Hahndorf carrying their produce to market in Adelaide.

Take in spectacular Adelaide Hills scenery and stunning city views as you wind your way to historic Beaumont House. Stay a while and enjoy the garden setting, food stalls and live music.

Get a group together and enjoy an unforgettable day out!

For more information visit www.nationaltrust.org.au/event/2022-pioneer-womens-walk/

Register your place: bit.ly/pwtw2022

ELECTION 2022 ISSUE

8

from the

CEO

22

DR DARREN PEACOCK

L

ike many National Trust members, I feel a great disappointment that the Marshall Government has failed to fulfil many of the commitments it made in regard to heritage and to the Trust prior to the last election. We all expect formal commitments made prior to an election will be fully honored after the election. Regrettably, this has not been the case. Moreover, the Government’s decision to evict the National Trust from Ayers House after 50 years shows a stunning lack of respect for the Trust and its members. It is fair to say that no government has conducted itself in that way in our 65-year history of working for and with the people of South Australia.

26

24

We continue to work to overturn this decision through the Parliament. Thank you to all of you who are supporting that campaign through our petition for legislation to place Ayers House in the permanent care and control of the National Trust.

Keep those signed petition forms coming!

This issue of the magazine provides our perspective on the state of heritage at this time and identifies current issues relevant to our purpose of protecting, preserving and sharing South Australia’s built, cultural and natural heritage. We put forward a plan for rebuilding our heritage protection system and improving the management of our built and natural heritage.

We asked seven sitting MPs - including major parties and independents- to define their priorities for heritage in the new Parliament. We hope you find it useful in considering how to use your vote at the election.

Beyond the election, this issue features news on amazing progress at Peterborough with the Silver to Sea Way project and the spectacular celebrations at Kingston for the 150th anniversary of the Cape Jaffa Lighthouse. We look forward to the 2022 South Australian Tree of the Year competition, the Pioneer Women’s Trail Walk in May and the Australian Heritage Festival.

Enjoy!

Contents 4

INTRODUCING OUR NEW PRESIDENT

5

ELECTION 2022: HERITAGE FOR THE PEOPLE

8

STATE OF OUR HERITAGE: FROM BAD TO WORSE

10

HERITAGE POLICY STATEMENTS

17

PROTECTING OUR HERITAGE

22

SILVER TO SEA WAY

24

SHINE ON KINGSTON

26

GAWLER DEVELOPMENT

Gawler development proposal highlights weakened heritage protections

28

TREE OF THE YEAR COMPETITION

30

MEMBERSHIP

31

PIONEER WOMEN’S TRAIL WALK

Heritage festival event follows in the footsteps of our remarkable pioneer women

32

WHAT’S ON

34

YOUR TRUST

H E R I TAG E L I V I NG

 page

3

 I ntrodu cing

ou r ne w Pre s i dent

Introducing our new President Paul Leadbeter was elected President of the National Trust of South Australia in Novemer 2021, succeeding Deborah Morgan, who served for four years from 2017.

T

he National Trust of South Australia is an organisation that I am both honoured and proud to have been elected to lead as President.

I am an environmental and land-use planning lawyer. I have worked as a legal officer in local government, as a lawyer in private practice and as a law academic. I have lived in South Australia since my mid teens although have family connections with South Australia extending back to the first European settlement of Adelaide. The heritage and history of South Australia and Adelaide has always fascinated me.

I have been a member of the NTSA since my late teens and joined the Council in 2018. I have also been involved in the governing bodies of a number of environmental groups including the Conservation Council of SA and the Australian Conservation Foundation.

A B OV E

Paul Leadbeter, President

We are currently living in unpredictable and challenging times. The COVID pandemic has changed the way we do many things in our society and the Trust has not been immune to those changes. Climate change is also beginning to make its presence felt on some of our day-to-day activities. Challenges also present opportunities. To survive and thrive we must adapt and grasp the opportunities. We need to look at new ways of managing the business of the Trust and our properties. Increasing the engagement and interest of younger generations in heritage and the Trust is essential. The Trust must become an adept user of all forms of social media and new technology. Our exciting Silver to Sea Way and Moonta Mines National Heritage projects will exemplify this approach. We need to encourage and promote the magnificent buildings and nature reserves under our custodianship as places people want to visit and enjoy.

I believe we also need to do more to respectfully recognise the heritage of the Aboriginal people of this magnificent state.

Under Deborah Morgan’s strong leadership the Trust continued its role as South Australia’s leading advocate for the protection of built, cultural, tangible and intangible and natural heritage. I am determined to do likewise. Changes to the State’s planning laws and policies are not presently providing the protection of built and natural heritage (including urban trees) which the community expects and deserves. We must continue to lobby for changes and improvements.

I am keen to visit as many of our properties as I can and meet our many volunteers and supporters who provide the Trust with significant support and assistance.

Paul Leadbeter President

page

4



H E R I TAG E L I V I N G

2022 ELECTION POLICY PLATFORM We propose the following policies and initiatives to restore and strengthen heritage protections, plan better for the future of our heritage, promote strategic investment and put the community at the centre of heritage conservation.

Restoring and strengthening heritage protections South Australia’s heritage is a unique, priceless and irreplaceable community asset.

It generates enormous social, cultural and economic value. For 66 years, The National Trust of South Australia has worked to ensure that our built, cultural and natural heritage is protected, preserved and accessible to all.

We advocate for robust heritage protections, forward thinking policy and strategic management of our heritage assets for the benefit of current and future generations. As a communitybased organisation, we champion the role of the public in decision making about our heritage.

Over the last four years, our heritage protection system has been undermined by new planning rules, the community’s participation in decision making has been curtailed and significant public heritage places have been lost or put at risk.

South Australia’s heritage protection system has been seriously damaged by recent policy and legislative changes, in particular, the State Government’s Planning and Design Code introduced in 2021.

50 years of work to protect South Australia’s built heritage has been undermined by the removal and weakening of protections for heritage places and areas. Despite overwhelming community opposition to policy changes that had protected our heritage places, the government proceeded with a systematic weakening of heritage protections and a dramatic curtailment of public rights within the planning system. From being a national leader in heritage protection South Australia now has arguably the weakest heritage protections in Australia. There is an urgent need to address the damage and to restore and make robust long established heritage protections. Heritage protection in South Australia needs to be strengthened and simplified through:

Heritage policy and legislation • Including all heritage matters under a single Heritage Act. • Establishing a single integrated statutory body to handle all heritage matters.

• Management of heritage protection independently of the planning system.

• Reviewing the role, governance and management of the State Heritage Council.

• Implementing the recommendations of the Environment, Resources and Development Committee report on heritage (2019).

Simplifying heritage listing • Establishing an integrated single heritage register covering all listings, managed by an independent statutory body.

• Retention of all current listings, including heritage protection zones and contributory items.

• Streamlining of listing criteria whilst having regard for local characteristics.

• Simplified and streamlined process for new listings which includes mandatory timeframes for listing (with automatic listing if timeframes are not met) and gazettal of approved listings.

• Removal of legislative requirement for property owners to vote for establishment of heritage conservation zones.

• Establishing transparency and community participation in listing decisions.

Regulating development of heritage listed places • Classification of applications for demolition of listed buildings as noncomplying and automatic rejection if the building has been neglected intentionally.

• Minor works on heritage listed places exempted from planning approval in well defined circumstances.

• Mandating of a Heritage Code of Practice for adaptation of heritage buildings.

• Increased penalties for neglect of heritage listed structures.

Protecting special places • Legislation to place Ayers House in the permanent care and control of the National Trust.

• Protecting the Adelaide Park Lands as public open space through comprehensive statutory protection, including State Heritage listing.

• Pursuing national heritage listing for Ayers House, Edmund Wright House, Fort Largs and Martindale Hall.

• Statutory protections to restrict the commercial use of protected natural areas.

H E R I TAG E L I V I NG

 page

5

 H eritage

f or the Pe ople

Planning for the future Sustaining our heritage into the future requires attention to long term challenges and risks, in particular those associated with climate change. There is a pressing need to establish and meet and emission reduction targets and to pursue long term thinking in planning for and mitigating the effects of climate change.

Setting a target for emissions • Commit to a net zero emissions target by 2035.

50 year plan • Adopt the recommendations from the National Trust’s 50 Year Plan for Metropolitan Adelaide.

Trees • Commit to law reform to protect our urban tree canopy as outlined in the 2021 Call to Action Report of South Austrailan environmental NGOs. • Bringing South Australia into line with similar jurisdictions in Victoria and New South Wales by changing the definition of a Regulated tree to one that: • has a trunk circumference of 1m or more measured 1m above the ground, or • has a height of 6m or more, or • has canopy of over 9m2.

•

•

•

•

Removing the series of exemptions to planning regulations introduced in 2011 that allow the removal of mature trees without approval, including the 10m rule and the 20m rule.

Restoring the requirement for the Department of Infrastructure and Transport and the Department for Education to conduct consultation and seek planning approval before the removal of regulated and significant trees.

Increasing offset scheme fees to match the costs that are consequently passed on to Councils to plant, establish and maintain replacement trees, and Increasing the number and size of trees required by the Planning and Design Code to be planted in new developments.

Growing Investment There is much evidence that private and public investment in heritage assets generates significant direct and indirect returns. South Australia’s built heritage has experienced insufficient investment due to outdated regulation, a lack of incentives for private owners and inadequate government leadership and investment. The National Trust believes investment in maximising the value of our heritage assets can be achieved by:

Managing government-owned heritage assets more strategically and efficiently • Reviewing the management and use of State Government-owned heritage assets.

• Adopting a strategic approach to investment in and utilisation of government-owned heritage assets.

• Providing leadership to local government on effective protection, conservation and utilisation of heritage assets.

Promoting private investment through incentives and support for private owners of heritage places • Providing incentives to assist heritage building owners to conserve their properties.

• Improving availability of heritage grants, expert advice and specialist skills.

• Flexibility in decisions on land use and land division to assist conservation.

• Flexible application of building regulations for adaptation of heritage places.

• Promoting rate rebate programs and other fee and tax concessions for private owners.

page

6



H E R I TAG E L I V I N G

Working with local government and non-government organisations to co-invest in South Australia’s heritage assets • Establishing a rolling investment fund for publicly owned heritage assets in regional South Australia.

• Supporting heritage advisory services for home owners through local government and the National Trust.

• Supporting heritage skills trade training through the Australian Artisan Trades Academy.

Recognising and supporting heritage tourism • Demonstrating the value of investment in heritage assets as drivers of economic growth and social benefits, particularly in regional areas.

• Developing investment cases for key heritage assets such as Martindale Hall.

Investing in nature conservation • Increase investment in private and community nature conservation works through grants and heritage agreements.

H eritage f or the Pe ople



Community Participation Communities across South Australia have a strong, long standing commitment to the preservation of our heritage. In many places, non-government organisations like the National Trust have taken a leading role in advocating for, protecting and conserving the state’s heritage. Local heritage is what is valued by local people and is best identified and managed within local communities. Heritage conservation activities generate and circulate community social capital. Recent changes to planning laws have aimed to remove local communities and individuals from many of the decisions that affect heritage conservation. Instead of excluding communities from decisions about our heritage, we need to extend community participation and engagement to maximise the social, cultural economic and environmental benefits of recognising and caring for our heritage.

We need to find new ways for individuals and communities to be involved in heritage conservation and to restore community rights in respect to planning decisions which affect heritage places.

Restoring the role of local communities in local heritage listing and management • Increasing community participation in the decision-making process through an open public nomination system for local heritage listing.

• Greater transparency in decision making through the provision of reasons for listing or non-listing.

• Introducing third party appeal rights in relation to local heritage listing decisions.

• Resourcing local heritage surveys and management plans for local councils that have not completed them.

• Restricting ministerial powers to remove or disallow heritage listings.

Reinstating citizen and community rights in planning and development decisions • Amending the Planning, Development and Infrastructure Act 2016 to restore lost community consultation and appeal rights within the planning system in the assessment of development proposals.

Working with the National Trust to maximise community participation The National Trust is the State’s leading non-government heritage conservation organisation, with more than 6 000 members and volunteers across the State.

For sixty years the Trust has played a leading role in preserving South Australia’s heritage. It manages 125 built and natural heritage places across the State and has, in the past three years, raised more than $3m for heritage conservation projects in South Australia through the South Australian Heritage Foundation. The Trust plays a valuable role in property management, community engagement, fundraising and skills training. We propose the following ways for the Trust to extend its work for the state’s heritage:

•

Entrusting the management/ownership of the following publicly owned heritage places to the National Trust: • Ayers House • Martindale Hall • All Crown Land properties that have been managed and maintained by the Trust for decades.

Fundraising • Utilising tax deductible conservation fundraising appeals through the South Australian Heritage Foundation for public buildings owned by state and local government.

Skills training • Leading heritage trade training in the state through the Australian Artisan Trades Academy.

Protecting our natural heritage • Supporting volunteers and community organisations to deliver environmental conservation programs by increasing State funding for on ground conservation works by community organisations.

H E R I TAG E L I V I NG

 page

7

 State

of ou r heritage

2 01 8

SOLD

STATE OF OUR HERITAGE:

from bad to worse The future of South Australia’s heritage is at greater risk than at any time in the past 50 years.

Edmund Wright House In 1971 Premier Don Dunstan intervened to prevent the demolition of Edmund Wright House, by purchasing the building with the aid of public subscriptions. The building has sat vacant since 2016.

In 2019 the Marshall Government sold the building for $6.38m to a Sydney property developer. Three years later it remains vacant and inaccessible and looks increasingly neglected.

2 01 9

DEMOLISHED

T

he State Government’s changes to planning laws and regulations have undermined South Australia’s heritage protection system to expedite development at any cost, including the loss of our heritage. Public rights to have input into policy and decision making in planning and development have been severely curtailed. South Australia now has the least democratic planning system in the country and the nation’s weakest heritage and tree protections.

How did this happen? What can we do about it?

There is broad community consensus that our heritage should be protected for the benefit of present and future generations. Those benefits have well established economic, social, cultural and environmental dimensions. In the face of long-term climate change and the impacts of the Covid-19 pandemic, protecting and preserving our heritage becomes even more important. Our built heritage and natural environment supports and sustains human and ecological resilience in times of uncertainty and change.

As well as dismantling long established heritage protections, the state government has made a number of decisions to sell, demolish and privatise some of the state’s most important heritage places, generally ignoring the overwhelming public opposition to these decisions.

Shed 26 Shed 26, an important legacy of Port Adelaide’s industrial heritage was approved for State Heritage listing in 2019, which should afford the highest level of protection. Instead, Minister for the Environment, David Speirs, vetoed the listing by the Heritage Council the following month. Despite a vigorous public campaign to defend the shed, developer Cedar Woods demolished it in July 2019.

page

8



H E R I TAG E L I V I N G

The Marshall Government has reneged on many of the commitments it made prior to the last election in respect of our heritage. After four years, South Australia’s heritage is more vulnerable than ever to demolition, neglect or inappropriate development. Places that should be afforded the highest level of protection have been demolished, sold or privatised. Our heritage protection system is in disarray and no match for the development at any cost policies established though the Planning and Design Code.

State of ou r heritage

2020

2021

SAVED

PRIVATISATION

Ayers House In June 2021, Minister for the Environment, David Speirs issued a notice, without warning, to evict the National Trust form Ayers House after 50 years as the custodian of the building and six decades advocating for its protection.

The government has since misled the public about its plans for Ayers House which amount to further commercialisation and the creation of government offices at an exorbitant cost.

The National Trust is petitioning the Parliament for permanent care and control of Ayers House, to keep it for the people, for all time.



Waite Gatehouse In 2020 the Department of Infrastructure and Transport (DIT) announced that it would demolish the State Heritage listed Waite Gatehouse at Urrbrae for an intersection widening project. DIT is notorious for its destruction of trees, but this was the first time it had proposed the demolition of a State Heritage building, which once would have had iron-clad protection under the heritage laws. The Minister for the Environment and the Heritage Council were publicly silent on the proposed demolition. Instead, a huge public campaign secured a government commitment to relocate rather than demolish the gatehouse.

2021

PRIVATISATION

Martindale Hall Privatisation Prior to the 2018 election the Liberal Opposition pledged that it would not remove the charitable Trust that protected Martindale Hall as a gift to the people of South Australia. In May 2021, Minister for the Environment David Speirs introduced to Parliament a Bill to abolish the charitable trust and facilitate the privatisation of Martindale Hall through a lease arrangement. Although passed by the Government in the lower house, the Bill did not pass in the Legislative Council, where the Opposition and cross-benchers opposed it.

The 2022 State election is your opportunity to decide what kind of future you want for South Australia’s heritage. We offer our thoughts and suggestions and have asked 7 Members of Parliament to do the same.

H E R I TAG E L I V I NG

 page

9

 H eritage

P olic y Statement s

H E R I TAG E P OL IC Y S TAT E M E N T

Liberal Party THE HON DAVID SPEIRS MP, MINISTER FOR THE ENVRIONMENT AND WATER

The restoration and preservation of South Australia’s built heritage is an important issue to many in our community. Heritage doesn’t just tell us a story of where we have come from but it can also showcase the best of local communities and inspire future generations. This is why the Marshall Liberal Government has significantly increased our investment and focus on rejuvenating South Australia’s built heritage.

T

his started with reinstating the hugely successful Heritage Grants program which was harshly cut by the former Labor Government. The first three rounds of this program have unlocked nearly $6 million worth of conservation work across the state, getting projects off the ground which otherwise would not have occurred.

Funding of $750,000 was provided to the City of Marion for the restoration of the State Heritage Coach House at the Living Kaurna Cultural Centre at Warriparinga; we have secured the future of Glenthorne farm and its many heritage buildings as part of a new national park, and saved the façade of the Sands and McDougall Building for South Australians to enjoy in the future.

Further investment into government owned state heritage places has unlocked $3 million worth of conservation works, which has been complemented by significant investment towards the conservation and restoration of the Torrens Parade Ground and the Goodman and Tram Barn buildings at the Adelaide Botanic Gardens. Funding of $500,000 has been provided to the National Trust of South Australia for conservation works at eight of their heritage buildings, along with elevating heritage protections through recent planning reforms.

This government has released a heritage tourism strategy, highlighting the economic value in preserving and activating our built heritage. There is significant potential to unlock South Australia’s heritage places and stories to create experiences that showcase our state’s distinctive history, enhance the unique appeal of the state and encourage visitors to stay longer and spend more.

HE

RI

TA

GE

POLI

CY

20 22

S TA

page

10



TEM

T

S

N IO T EC EL EN

H E R I TAG E L I V I N G

Built heritage was a strong feature of the most recent State Budget with an $8.1 million funding boost, which included a $1.5 million to both expand and extend our Heritage Grants program, as well as $6.6 million towards the restoration and revitalisation of one of South Australia’s most historically significant properties - Ayers House. This funding will deliver one of the state’s most significant investments in a heritage building, sensitively restoring the property to its former glory with appropriate modernday amenities. Its unique setting affords Ayers House significant prominence in the CBD and this upgrade will help turn Ayers House into one of the city’s great cultural institutions, which will continue to provide access to the public.

AB OV E

The Hon David Speirs, MP

Our government has been and will continue to protect and invest in built heritage across our state and I am confident that Ayers House, along with many other important heritage sites, will thrive as a result of the dedicated conservation funding and vision that we have provided, which will continue under the Marshall Liberal Government.

H eritage P olic y Statement s



H E R I TAG E P OL IC Y S TAT E M E N T

Labor Party DR SUSAN CLOSE MP, DEPUT Y LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION, SHADOW MINISTER FOR THE ENVIRONMENT AND WATER

Our heritage tells our shared stories as a community. From the precious heritage of the First Nations people, to the early days of European Australian life and to more modern significant buildings and places, physical places tell us about our history and guide our understanding of how we came to live as we do now.

C

aring for heritage should not come second to developing our state, and that takes strong leadership. We have seen several times in the last four years that the Marshall Liberal government has chosen to destroy heritage rather than protect it: the Waite Gatehouse was listed for demolition, Shed 26 in Port Adelaide was removed from heritage listing and demolished, and the government has attempted to strip Martindale Hall of its charitable trust and conservation park status with no clarity about its future. The government has also treated the National Trust disrespectfully, leading to its eviction from its long-term home in Ayers House.

The National Trust of South Australia has worked tirelessly over decades to restore and preserve Ayers House, as well as share the history of the grounds and the period. Labor believes the National Trust’s 50-year relationship with the building - after saving it from demolition in the 1960s - should continue for the foreseeable future. That is why an elected Labor government will guarantee the tenure of the National Trust in Ayers House though an Ayers House Act, placing ongoing care, control and management of Ayers House with the National Trust.

Labor will also: •

•

•

Work with the community and the National Trust to develop a shared plan for the future of Martindale Hall that will not include restricting public access and will not include sale of any part of the property.

Legislate to require any proposal to demolish a State Heritage Place to be the subject of a public report by the SA Heritage Council and full public consultation – no more back door approvals.

Legislate to increase protection of Aboriginal Heritage.

South Australian Labor thanks the National Trust of South Australia and its volunteers and supporters for the work you do to ensure the history of this state is preserved and promoted, and we will continue to support this good work into the future.

AB OV E

Together, we can ensure growth and prosperity while also protecting our collective heritage.

Dr Susan Close, MP

I TA G E P O

20 22

LI

H

ER

ST

AT

CY

EL EC TIO N EMENTS

H E R I TAG E L I V I NG

 page

11

 H eritage

P olic y Statement s

H E R I TAG E P OL IC Y S TAT E M E N T

SA Best THE HON FRANK PANGALLO, MLC

Culture isn’t a luxury but a necessity and if we are to preserve culture, we must continue to create it.

O

ur heritage is what makes the people and society we are.

Preserving it is, and always should be, a fundamental priority for any democratic government, regardless of ideology.

Because without the past, what can we possibly pass on for the future generations?

The National Trust is widely recognised in the community as the custodian of our heritage treasures. Without its zealous passion, advocacy, and intervention, just think of the treasures that would have been lost forever.

If only the Trust had been around when the visually-captivating Jubilee Exhibition Building - once the standout feature of our splendid boulevard, North Terrace - was demolished in 1962.

Or the South Australia Hotel - on the west side of North Terrace, opposite Parliament House - which was torn down in the early 1970s to be replaced with a monument of grotesque and repulsive architecture.

Thankfully there were some leaders with a vision at a time when the wrecking ball was an easy option for our prominent landmarks, like Ayers House, which the National Trust saved and managed responsibly until evicted on the whim of political pique by the current State Government last year.

HE

RI

TA

GE

POLI

CY

20 22

S TA

page

12



TEM

T

S

N IO T EC EL EN

H E R I TAG E L I V I N G

Strong advocacy by the National Trust helped spare the Waite Gatehouse at Urrbrae and although uncertainty still hangs over Martindale Hall’s future direction as a period cultural museum centrepiece near Clare, there is enough political will to ensure its legacy isn’t sold out to crass commercialism.

It wouldn’t be lost on the casual observer that the City of the Churches has experienced a dramatic and dizzying shift in its skyline with monoliths of modernism sprouting at a great rate.

It is part of the rapid renewal, or regentrification, also sweeping through metropolitan Adelaide resulting in staggering levels of infill, some coming at the expense of heritage and character styles.

The future of heritage protection remains at risk through the contentious single Planning Code reforms from the State Planning Commission last year.

Policy makers, be they in state or local government, need to be able to distinguish the difference between heritage and character - and acknowledge the importance of both.

Policies that impact on streets and neighbourhoods are a priority for SABEST and we will strive to ensure protection is accorded to matters in state heritage and local heritage places, including contributory items.

AB OV E

The Hon Frank Pangallo, MLC

My SA-BEST colleague in the Legislative Council, the Hon Connie Bonaros MLC, and I also stridently support - and will fiercely fight for - the preservation of this city’s famous world renown heritage landmark, the parklands.

We stand with the National Trust to uphold, protect, and preserve this state’s history and cultural identity.

H eritage P olic y Statement s

ST

SA Greens

EL EC TIO N AT

CY

H E R I TAG E P OL IC Y S TAT E M E N T

I TA G E P O

20 22

ER

LI

H



EMENTS

ROBERT SIMMS, MLC

Heritage brings meaning to people through places, objects and practices, and enhances community engagement and well-being. The SA Greens believe that Heritage protection is not limited to preservation of buildings and other places and objects; it also includes preservation of cultural and natural heritage, such as the memories and stories of First Nations peoples.

KEY ISSUES:

The Greens will:

Park Lands The Greens will continue the fight against planned rezoning of the Park Lands to allow for commercial development. The Park Lands are some of our most valuable public green spaces in Adelaide and they belong to all South Australians.

•

•

•

Give the public greater access to information about decisions that affect them and their communities.

Give the public the right to participate in decisions, including taking bad decisions to an independent umpire.

Prevent governments from abusing planning rules at the expense of local communities and the environment.

Ensure issues of climate change and biodiversity are properly taken into account.

Ban political donations from developers

The loss of open, green space, whether for government or private developments, is unacceptable. The Riverbank Arena would further erode the heritage and natural value of our Park Lands, and is inconsistent with its National Heritage status.

•

In November 2021, we introduced legislation that would require any rezoning of the Park Lands to have parliamentary approval, but both major parties voted against this bill.

Ayers House and Martindale Hall Ayers House and Martindale Hall are iconic buildings that must be kept in public hands.

In December 2021, we also introduced to place our iconic green spaces on the State Heritage list – no less than 13 years after its national listing – which would add weight to the campaign for World Heritage consideration.

Planning Reform Recent changes to our planning system have made it harder for the community to have its say on development proposals.

The system is skewed to the big end of town – with large property developers featuring prominently in lists of donors to the major parties.

•

The SA Greens remain firmly opposed to the Government’s decision to replace the historical museum at Ayers House with government offices and expanded private catering facilities. We are also deeply concerned by the Government’s legislation, that is yet to pass the Legislative Council, seeking to privatise Martindale Hall – a hall gifted to the government with the understanding that its heritage would be protected.

Urban Trees Adelaide is losing over 75,000 trees a year due to weak tree-protection laws.

We are seeing healthy trees chopped down for no reason other than that might be in the way of some future development.

AB OV E

The Hon Robert Simms, MLC

The Greens will seek to: • Expand the definition of “significant” and “regulated” trees to include important native species that might not grow massive trunks but are still worthy of protection.

• Ensure a qualified arborist must verify claims that trees are dangerous before removal can be authorised.

• Enable neighbours and other citizens to participate in decisions to remove large trees.

H E R I TAG E L I V I NG

 page

13

 H eritage

P olic y Statement s

H E R I TAG E P OL IC Y S TAT E M E N T

Independent FRANCES BEDFORD MP, INDEPENDENT MEMBER FOR FLOREY AND CANDIDATE FOR NEWLAND

Heritage needs to be protected. As well as attracting tourism and boosting the economy, it highlights the character and distinctiveness of each site and community, adding to our state’s social history.

Heritage is a demonstration of cultural identity and progress, illustrating the unique history of place and community – History tells the stories of the past which can inform and educate the future.

S

tate Government and the History Trust agree heritage must be preserved, yet their ideas and ways in which this might happen differs momentously. Clearly defined consultation processes and protections must be legislated, and Local Government and National Trust roles better defined, resourced and enhanced.

2021 saw startling examples where Government enforced very unpopular decisions: Martindale Hall was under attack again. Controversial legislation gave the Minister sole discretion to remove the conservation park status and its charitable trust. The Waite Gatehouse came into focus – requiring petitions and community action to ensure re-location rather than demolition. Worst of all, the National Trust was forced from Ayers House, now the new home of the History Trust. $6.6million has been found for an upgrade* - but what about public access?

HE

RI

TA

GE

POLI

CY

20 22

S TA

page

14



TEM

T

S

N IO T EC EL EN

H E R I TAG E L I V I N G

The Clare Valley could become a greater attraction showcasing its rich part of SA history - with Martindale Hall at the centre. Visitors, tourists, and school excursions could spend “a day in the olden days” - immersed in a cultural experience with staff and volunteers dressed in clothing of the period, sharing stories about daily chores and tasks, the agricultural pursuits and activities on a working farm, architecture, society, and art of the 1800s.

While visiting the UK, I was impressed by their cultural heritage as presented at National Trust UK stately homes and properties. Their National Trust ‘pass’ can be pre-purchased offshore and allows access to over 300 houses and gardens. Something like this should be investigated for the 180 sites throughout Australia.

Since 1994 the National Trust UK National Heritage Lottery Fund has distributed $16 billion on almost 50,000 projects. SA, through its own Heritage Lottery, could create a fund to preserve, maintain, and restore our heritage sites.

It can also ensure ownership of sites for the public.

We have already catastrophically lost Edmund Wright House# - surely, this cannot be the end for this particular site! Let’s make sure no more heritage is lost – either by sale or demolition as heritage is the soul of our society.

AB OV E

Frances Bedford, MP

*Upgrade caters for the re-location of 15 public servants, new office spaces and commercial facilities for catering and public events. # The Sydney investor paid $6.3 million for the site in 2019.

H eritage P olic y Statement s



H E R I TAG E P OL IC Y S TAT E M E N T

Independent DAN CREGAN MP, MEMBER FOR K AVEL

Learning from the code amendment process South Australian’s value their heritage. Moreover, they expect it to be protected in appropriate and effective ways.

A

s a first term MP, I witnessed at close quarters the ‘reform’ process over the last few years in relation to our planning code. I wish to take this opportunity to share some brief observations about that process.

In my view, the fierce debate around the planning code amendment was informed by a failure to appreciate the value and importance electors place on heritage protection and by a failure to adequately consult in the course of that process, including with the National Trust.

Importantly, in this term of parliament, the Environment, Heritage and Development Committee also conducted an inquiry into ‘Heritage Matters’. The Presiding Member said “[t]his inquiry has taken place in the midst of the most significant planning reform South Australia has undertaken in 20 years”, which I understand to be a reference to the code amendment debate. The report found, in part, that the “…community expects nominations of state and local heritage to be clear, simple, responsive and cost and time efficient.” As well, the community expects heritage decisions to be transparent and accountable. Further, and importantly in my view, the community also expects something else – a legislative process that is transparent and inclusive with respect to heritage or planning reform.

While I appreciate that the Code amendment is relevant only in part to the full spectrum of advocacy and activities undertaken by the National Trust, by sharing these observations I wanted to give your readers some confidence that Members of Parliament do reflect on past processes.

I hope that all Members of Parliament can learn important lessons from the code amendment experience and, in future parliaments, choose to more actively involve and consult with heritage advocates.

Separately, though no less significantly, as an independent Member of Parliament I am committed to the appropriate protection of our State’s heritage and to ensuring a high level of government accountability in any future reform initiatives.

AB OV E

The Hon Dan Cregan, MP

I TA G E P O

20 22

LI

H

ER

ST

AT

CY

EL EC TIO N EMENTS

H E R I TAG E L I V I NG

 page

15

 H eritage

P olic y Statement s

H E R I TAG E P OL IC Y S TAT E M E N T

Independent SAM DULUK MP, MEMBER FOR WAITE

In his 1953 novel, The Go-Between, L.P. Hartley published the lines “The past is a foreign country; they do things differently there”. While we can no longer experience the vagaries of life in the past, we have been gifted a valuable window of access to it via the heritage of our built environment and natural spaces. As a clever and progressive society, knowing and respecting our collective history is an integral part of creating a better future. Such a society values its heritage.

I

t is Parliament’s duty to legislate to protect these irreplaceable treasures for the benefit of our community and future generations.

State assets such as Ayers House and Martindale Hall are examples of this.

They deserve to be preserved and remain accessible for all.

To do this, we must consistently assess our Heritage Protection Laws to ensure that they are fit for purpose to meet the challenges of the 21st century. Managing the need for development in the future, whilst ensuring the preservation of our historical wealth requires sensitivity, commitment and acumen. This is why last year; I introduced The Heritage Places (Protecting of Heritage Places) Amendment Bill 2021 into State Parliament.

HE

RI

TA

GE

POLI

CY

20 22

S TA

page

16



TEM

T

S

N IO T EC EL EN

H E R I TAG E L I V I N G

An example of such dedication to fight for our heritage was the work of the community to Save the Waite Gatehouse, circa 1890 – 1892.

Scheduled for demolition to make way for the Fullarton and Cross Roads upgrade, this unique piece of the State’s agricultural history was almost lost. Other monuments, buildings and natural spaces face a similar ubiquitous fate.

It is imperative that we work together to transform the way we prioritise and manage the delicate balance between the new and the old. Making a commitment to working with caretaker organisations such as the National Trust, drawing on their knowledge and skills to formulate solutions to preserving history is imperative. As is the continued and improved funding of existing, well-loved venues such as Carrick Hill, Old Government House and Belair National Park, ensuring their longevity.

We all have a history that has formed us. These connections so often unknowingly bind us as a community, a State and a Nation. The physical representations of this ancestry in landscapes, bricks and mortar provide us with windows to the past and foundations for the future.

Heritage, planning and protection of open space are significant issues for the State Election of 2022. It is an issue that I will be fighting for.

AB OV E

Sam Duluk, MP (right)



G etting heritage bac k o n trac k

Protecting our heritage Fixing our broken heritage protection system Heritage protection and management in South Australia is in a parlous and deteriorating state. The legislative, policy and administrative structures established over the last fifty years are in dire need of reform if we want to protect our built and natural heritage for the future.

The urgency of fixing our moribund heritage protection system is exacerbated by the disastrous planning ‘reforms’ enacted over a period of years spanning terms of the Marshall Liberal Government and the previous Labor Government and the larger, global issue of climate change and its impacts on our built and natural environments.

Over the last twenty years, a series of reviews and recommendations to maintain and strengthen protections have failed to take effect.

The last four years have seen a further serious decline in protections and their management. The governance and management of heritage protection in South Australia has been further undermined by the creeping politicisation and under resourcing of supposedly independent bodies such as the South Australian Heritage Council. South Australia’s Heritage Places Act has not been significantly amended since it was proclaimed almost thirty years ago.

PI CT UR ED

Top: Shed 26 at Port Adelaide prior to demolition.

Right: Waite Gatehouse rally, 2021.

Here we suggest three areas of focus to start to fix our broken heritage protection system so that it might be fit for its purpose of sustaining our built, cultural and natural heritage.

H E R I TAG E L I V I NG

 page

17

ou r heritage

Protecting our heritage

 Protecting

The community wants a robust and reliable heritage protection system It is a truism to say that heritage is important to the community. The conservation of heritage drives tourism, creates skilled jobs and opportunities for education and learning, preserves our environment, and contributes to our sense of place and well-being.

This was once again affirmed by Parliament’s Environment, Resources and Development Committee (ERDC), which found in its 2018 Inquiry that heritage is greatly valued by the community, and that there is a strong desire among South Australians to reform heritage protection and management. These findings are consistent with the extensive analysis of community views undertaken by the National Trust in 2016 in response to earlier proposed changes.

To date the recommendations of the ERDC report have not been acted upon, despite Ministerial commitments made in 2019 to provide a response back to the Committee by the end of 2020.

Many of the useful suggestions made by the Committee have been ignored and the effort and insights of the many individuals and organisations who made submissions to the inquiry appear to have been wasted.

In the absence of any constructive response to the ERDC report from government, we suggest that the key areas for improvement can be summarised as: simplification, accountability, and effectiveness.

1. Simplification South Australia’s heritage protection laws are needlessly complex, as is the system of governance for decision making about the designation of heritage places and their management.

Australia’s three-tiered system of government- national, state and local- is partly to blame as well as boundaries between competing State government agencies. The result of this overly complex, often contradictory legislative and policy environment is confusion, uncertainty and inefficiency.

Simplification is needed in three key areas: • • •

How heritage protections are defined; How and by whom decisions about heritage protection are made, and How decisions about the future management, use and alteration of designated heritage items are made.

Criteria for determining eligibility for heritage designation (i.e. ‘listing’) are applied inconsistently between and across each level of government. We need one set of integrated criteria for assessing heritage value- as defined by the community- that can be applied, not just to individual buildings, but also to areas, landscapes, trees, gardens and objects, and to intangible heritage such as traditional knowledge and practices.

An over emphasis on ‘old buildings’ fails to recognise the real value of heritage to the community. Protection for Aboriginal heritage needs to be integrated, not treated separately.

We need a single decision-making body, one that is truly independent, to represent the community’s views on what should be protected, not a myriad of unaccountable committees making decisions about what we protect and why. We need a single piece of legislation that encompasses and underpins all decisions about heritage. That Act should be the responsibility of a single Minister, to ensure clear accountability to the public and to the Parliament for the proper protection of our heritage. page

18



H E R I TAG E L I V I N G

Protecting ou r heritage

2. Accountability The credibility and integrity of the heritage protection system depends on effective transparency and accountability for decision making.

The governance of heritage decisionmaking bodies and the transparency of their decisions has been problematic for some time. Prior to the last state election, the Liberal party, from Opposition, committed to review the role of the South Australian Heritage Council. This has not happened.

The Council and the Minister are the key decision makers under the Heritage Places Act. The constitution, governance and management of the Heritage Council and the discretionary powers of the Minister under the Act need to be reviewed to improve accountability and transparency.

Section 18(7) of the Act provides the Minister with power to direct the removal of a provisional entry from the Heritage Register where the Minister is of the opinion that confirmation of the entry would be “contrary to the public interest”.

However, there is a great lack of transparency surrounding the exercise of this power. The Act does not define what is and is not in the public interest, nor are there any guidelines to assist in interpreting this provision. Moreover, the Minister is not required to make the reasons for such a decision known to the public. There is no right of appeal.

This Ministerial power has been used to veto the listing of: • • • •

The Elders Pavilion at the Adelaide Showground; Shed 26 in Port Adelaide; Traversers 1 and 2 at the Islington Railway Workshops; and Union Hall at the University of Adelaide.

In each of these cases, the veto of the provisional heritage listing by the Minister has made possible demolition of a building which, in the view of the Heritage Council, should have been afforded the greatest level of protection. Such a power undermines the integrity and credibility of the state heritage listing process.

The integrity of the heritage nomination and assessment process by the Heritage Council would be further safeguarded by instituting conflict of interest provisions as exist in other Australian jurisdictions. Council members ought to be required to declare pecuniary interests in a matter before the Council, and a failure to do so should be the subject of a financial penalty as it is under the Planning, Development and Infrastructure Act. A record of such disclosures should be kept and made accessible by the public. Membership of the Council should include significant community representation and be governed by transparent rules of appointment.

3. Effectiveness South Australia’s heritage protection system was established in response to public concern about the loss of significant places, particularly historic buildings. Since that time, new pressures for urban development, a lack of strategic investment in heritage and new challenges such as climate change make more of our heritage vulnerable to damage or loss. We need an effective heritage protection system more than ever and the public need to be informed about its value and effectiveness.

L EFT

Union Hall at the University of Adelaide demolition, 2010.



For twenty years a lack of resourcing to support heritage protection has been noted but not acted upon. In its 2003 Heritage Directions paper the Rann government observed that “adequacy of funding needs to be reviewed”.

Fifteen years later the Heritage Council reported to the 2018 ERDC Inquiry that a “reduction in funding has impaired heritage expertise, impacting understanding and goodwill.”

Resourcing is however only one of the problems. The enforcement of penalty provisions under the Heritage Places Act has been weak. Only one single prosecution has been made for neglect of a state heritage place under the Act in 30 years. Government has not taken its role in enforcement as seriously as other states which further erodes the credibility and effectiveness of heritage protection.

One of the functions of the Heritage Council is to report to the Minister on the state of heritage protection, including ‘shortcomings and opprotunities’. However, these reports are generally not made public, except, occasionally in summary forum. The latest available ‘summary’ report from 2020 identified 25 recommended actions. It appears that, 18 months later, few if any of these actions have been completed.

The Minister responsible for heritage protection should be providing a report to the Parliament on an annual basis on the state of protected places and items, identifying current and future risks and documenting the many benefits of protection. This should also include analysis of the impact and effectiveness of public and private investment and incentives.

By simplifying the heritage protection system and improving its accountability and effectiveness the public will play a greater part in preserving our heritage, recognising its value and maximising and sharing the benefits for all.

H E R I TAG E L I V I NG

 page

19

 Protecting

ou r heritage

Planning and the Heritage Protection system Planning law, policy and regulation have continued to encroach upon our heritage protection system, weakening and undermining its effectiveness. The introduction of the state-wide Planning and Design Code (‘the Code’) for South Australia has been described by the government as “the cornerstone of the most significant reform to the South Australian planning system in over 25 years”.

Among the recommendations are that the Minister for Planning and Local Government: •

The Code, which took full effect across the State in March 2021 continues the pattern of subsuming heritage protections within planning rules, creating uncertainty and confusion and ultimately diminishing their effectiveness, placing more and more of our heritage at risk.

The policies of the Code and the process by which they were created has attracted much criticism. Public dissatisfaction with the Code and its development triggered an enquiry by the Legislative Review Committee of Parliament (LRC).

In November 2021 the Legislative Review Committee of Parliament released a report making 14 recommendations for consideration by the Minister for Planning and the Parliament.

page

20



H E R I TAG E L I V I N G

establish an independent review of the Planning, Development and Infrastructure Act 2016 and the implementation of the Planning and Design Code to determine its impacts on community rights, sustainability and protection of the environment as identified in this Report. A review would also include the fees, charges and costs to councils of operating the new planning system. The Committee also recommends that the report resulting from the review be tabled in both Houses of Parliament by the close of 2022.

•

implement each of the recommendations made by the Environment, Resources and Development Committee in its Inquiry into Heritage Reform (2019) as a matter of priority.

•

add to the terms of reference for the Heritage Reform Advisory Panel’s Heritage Reform Review, a review into demolition controls under the Planning and Design Code to advise on the impact of the Code on approvals for demolition of heritage assets and

•

add to the terms of reference for the Heritage Reform Advisory Panel’s Heritage Reform Review, a review into the outcomes for ‘Representative Buildings’ and whether the protections provided under the Planning and Design Code and its supporting instruments are sufficient to protect Representative Buildings and retain the character of neighbourhoods.

In compiling their report the Committee “heard extensive evidence that the consultation process [for the Code] did not meet community expectations, nor the principles set out in the [Community Engagement Charter]” established by the Planning, Development and Infrastructure Act. One of the fundamental failures of the consultation process was the disparity in the engagement of stakeholders, with community interests sidelined and development interests given a privileged seat at the table.

Similarly, the processes for amending the Code lack transparency and accountability to the community.

This was dramatically demonstrated late in 2021 with a proposed Code Amendment, initiated somewhere with the planning department, to rezone for commercial development some 70 hectares of the Adelaide Park Lands, an area that had been recognised on the National Heritage List and recommended for State Heritage listing by the Heritage Council three years.

The huge public backlash against this amendment led to a tactical retreat by the Government, but demonstrated how the Code-based assessment of development proposals will run roughshod over established heritage protections. Future Code amendments clearly have the ability to further compromise heritage protection.

The Adelaide Park Lands example and other developments in the past year show that one of the main outcomes of the Planning and Design Code will be a further loss of our heritage, greenspace and trees, contrary to the stated objectives of the Planning, Development and Infrastructure (PDI) Act that spawned the Code. The next government will need to act with urgency on the recommendations of the LRC Report to start to address the detrimental effects of the Code and the PDI Act more broadly on our heritage and the systems that are meant to protect it.

Protecting ou r heritage

Trees play a vital part in our natural and urban environments. As shelter and food supporting biodiversity and as shade and beautification for our streets, towns and cities, trees add significantly to our amenity and wellbeing. They give character to many neighbourhoods and increase property values. Trees play an important part in the relationship of Aboriginal people to country, and help all of us to live longer, happier and healthier lives by improving air quality, cooling our built environment and contributing to mental wellbeing. Trees, especially mature trees, also play an important role in capturing and storing carbon.

The value and benefits of trees, particularly mature trees are well known. In recognition of the myriad benefits provided by trees, the State Government’s 30-Year Plan for Greater Adelaide first released in 2010 set a goal of increasing urban green cover by 20% by 2045. However, Adelaide is not meeting this target, largely due to the loss of its mature trees, estimated at more than 75,000 each year.

Between 2013 and 2020, urban tree cover in South Australia declined by 9% from 21.37% cover to 19.45%.

In Adelaide, changes have been variable. Some councils, such as the City of Playford, have borne the brunt of this decline. Since 2009, Playford has experienced a 5.4% decrease in canopy cover. The loss of tree canopy contributes to the urban heat island effect, and so it is not surprising that Playford, as one of the councils with the lowest canopy cover, is the hottest local government area in metropolitan Adelaide.

The problem arises primarily from the loss of trees on private land, typically for new housing development. A 2020 study has revealed that in the western suburbs, although people’s gardens only make up 20% of land, they contain 40% of the tree canopy. Although many Councils do plant trees on public land, the sustained net loss of trees on private land is driving the overall loss of tree canopy.

Offset schemes which increase tree planting on public land cannot adequately compensate for tree loss occurring on private land as a result of poor planning decisions and inadequate tree protection. Residential land accounts for 80% of metropolitan Adelaide, and so further canopy loss on this land can only contribute to the urban heat island effect, disrupt nature corridors, reduce carbon capture and reduce the liveability of our city.

In the last two years the National Trust has worked with other environmental non-government organisations to document the problem and propose solutions. The first two of these reports is entitled: What’s Happening to Adelaide’s Trees? followed by A Call to Action: Protecting Adelaide’s Tree Canopy. Most recently, the Comparison of Australia’s Tree Laws demonstrates that tree protections on private land in South Australia are the worst in the nation.

Urgent reforms are needed to reduce further declines in tree canopy and green cover, which have been further exacerbated by the failure of the Planning and Design Code to provide adequate protections and incentives to address the loss of mature trees across metropolitan Adelaide.

Protecting our heritage

Saving our Trees



For more information visit: www.saveourtrees.org.au

Urgent reforms are needed to reduce further declines in tree canopy and green cover, which have been further exacerbated by the failure of the Planning and Design Code to provide adequate protections and incentives to address the loss of mature trees across metropolitan Adelaide.

H E R I TAG E L I V I NG

 page

21

 Silver

to Sea Way

Raising the roof at Peterborough DEBORAH MORGAN, SILVER TO SEA WAY STEERING GROUP CHAIR

Work is well in hand at the first site to benefit from the National Trust’s transformative Silver to Sea Way heritage regeneration project – an exciting initiative creating a major new touring route stretching from Silverton in New South Wales to Port Pirie.

page

22



H E R I TAG E L I V I N G

Silver to Sea Way

T

he Silver to Sea Way project is a regional regeneration project to generate economic and social benefits through the use of heritage assets in regional and remote areas. The Trust has been funded by the Australian Government for $6.5m under its Building Better Regions Fund (BBRF) for Stage 1 of the project.

Stage 1 follows the original railway line from the Trust’s magnificent Port Pirie Railway Museum and Customs House, to Gladstone Gaol and the Peterborough Roundhouse.

A State Heritage Place completed in the early 1920s, the roundhouse comprises a half circle with 23 train stalls and a central turntable. Today, it is the largest and most intact of the roundhouses built by the South Australian Railways.

Already a much-visited icon, the building is the first site along the Silver to Sea Way to undergo regeneration works using BBRF funds.

In December the Trust marked the commencement of works with an event at Peterborough’s Steamtown Railway Centre.

Quenten Agius, Chair of the Ngadjuri Nation Aboriginal Corporation, welcomed guests before Federal Member for Grey, Rowan Ramsey, entertained them with stories of his own experiences along the Silver to Sea Way and spoke to the many benefits this project offers the region.

The following additional aspects of the National Trust’s endeavours at Peterborough also deserve mentioning.

smells, sights, sounds and emotions of events depicted in the images.

Recycling and regeneration – a good news story Demolished a few years ago, despite objections from the National Trust and others, the Mount Gambier Roundhouse was constructed according to a plan similar to that of the Peterborough Roundhouse. In June 2021, the Trust approached the City Council of Mount Gambier for permission to use some of the salvaged timber beams.

Much to our delight, the council agreed and most generously donated us as much timber as we wanted for the project. Some of the Mount Gambier Roundhouse timber has already been milled and installed to replace some of the Roundhouse’s ageing beams.

Engaging schools – “Places in Cases” The Silver to Sea Way project team has been collaborating with St Joseph’s Primary School in Peterborough to produce mini museum displays to encourage students to think about change in their town over time.

Working in small groups, students filled repurposed travellers’ briefcases with items related to historic images of Peterborough. The items were selected by the students to represent the



Feedback from students about the program was overwhelmingly positive, with many enjoying the chance to learn more about how their town has evolved. Displayed at the works commencement celebration, the “Places in cases” were much admired by guests too.

Community Engagement – Site Tours In early February Steamtown staff and volunteers were invited to join a roundhouse site tour. The tour gave them an opportunity to learn more about the regeneration works being undertaken, ensuring that they can share Silver to Sea Way success stories with future visitors to both the site and region. There are also future plans to offer tours to secondary school students from the region, with a focus on career paths linked to the initiative.

Peterborough Town Whistle to blast again!

The role of the whistle was to advise railway workers when shift times were commencing and ending. The Silver to Sea Way project plans to re-install the original steam operated whistle for use on the roundhouse site.

McMahon Services Australia Pty Ltd has been working onsite at the roundhouse since November. The works on the roof include removing some 45 tonnes of asbestos from the site to enhance public safety. A number of steel sleeve joints have also been fabricated by Jamestown Engineering and installed to strengthen the structure.

Since that time, the replacement of the roof has progressed quickly, as well as some of the timber columns, knee braces and beams in both the roundhouse and other sheds. At this stage, it is anticipated that the work will be completed by late March.

This restoration effort will ensure that the Peterborough Roundhouse remains an important and safe site for generations to come. It will also provide a much-needed boost to the town’s economy, through heritage tourism.

AB OV E:

L - R: Rowan Ramsey MP, Federal Member for Grey, Mike Adler, Project Manager McMahons and Peter Fosdike, Manager Conservation works, discuss the works at the Roundhouse.

H E R I TAG E L I V I NG

 page

23

 150 th

B irth day Part y

PI CT UR E D :

The illuminated Cape Jaffa Lighthouse at Kingston was a stunning visual beacon.

Bottom right: The magnificent Chance Brothers prism lens shone like a jewel.

Shine On Kingston!

A brilliant success ALISON STILLWELL OAM, NTSA COUNCILLOR

Kingston really did shine in January when the Limestone Coast town celebrated the 150th anniversary of the National Trust’s iconic Cape Jaffa Lighthouse.

page

24



H E R I TAG E L I V I N G

150 th B irth day Part y

F

rom an exhibition of logbook pages dating back to 1872 to a memorable interview with the last lightkeeper and launching the LIGHTHOUSE Art Prize, Shine On Kingston! delivered a feeling of joy in the midst of a pandemic.

The pièce de résistance and climax of the celebrations was stunning illumination of the lighthouse by Adelaide sound and lighting company, Osmond Electronics. Lights of several types were placed in and around the skeletal structure, giving it a commanding presence and drawing out elements normally overlooked.

The magnificent First Order dioptric revolving lens used to exhibit light for the first time on January 15 1872, shone out like a jewel atop the structure which was bathed in bold, changing colours. People spread out on the foreshore lawns and watched from their homes or any vantage point they could find.

Strong community involvement ensured a comprehensive and diverse approach to celebrating the lighthouse’s anniversary. Musical highlights included sea shanties and other maritimerelated songs courtesy of the Kingston Community Choir and the Mosquito Plains Strummers (ukuleles); and a performance by noted country singer Graeme Hugo.

Kingston Community School students created a lantern parade, the Lacepede Bay Sailing Club staged a regatta, Adelaide Kite Flyers flew kites during the day and illuminated at night, and Mt Benson vignerons poured wine to drink with locally-made crayfish pate.

Keynote presentations on fascinating topics intimately connected with the lighthouse and its history kept

audiences glued to their seats throughout the day. Speakers covered the work of the Lighthouses of Australia organisation, the illumination process in lighthouses with First Order lenses, the experiences of a lightkeeper on the Cape Jaffa Light Station, how the lighthouse platform was saved from demolition, the bravery of lightkeepers in rescuing victims of a shipwreck, and modern-day rescues in dangerous marine environments. There was also a display of marine rescue vehicles.

One of five exhibitions staged in the District Hall helped people imagine the lives led by lightkeepers and their families. Photographs taken at sea level and by drones impressed visitors with clear depictions of the light station’s isolated location on Margaret Brock Reef, and ruins of the lightkeepers’ cottages on a wind-swept point south of Cape Jaffa.

Another exhibition showcased 25 images from the 1802 expedition to map the coastline, led by French explorer Nicolas Baudin; and a touring banner exhibition from the Australian National Maritime Museum – Remarkable – focused on remarkable stories of Australians and their boats.



Another display featured knitted artwork depicting global warming data – The Tempestry Project. Local knitters selected a specific year and knitted rows in specified colours to represent a certain range of maximum daily temperatures. Ten knitters produced 17 ‘banners’, each the width of a scarf.

Memorable lighthouse moments in the selected years linked this project firmly to the Cape Jaffa Lighthouse story.

Every facet of the story continues to amaze both visitors and guides alike, from construction of the lighthouse in the early 1870s after 48 shipwrecks in area, to its relocation after 101 years of operation when it became the first offshore lighthouse in Australia to be dismantled and rebuilt onshore. Its future was secured when the Federal Minister for Transport, the Hon. C. K. Jones, agreed to give the structure to the National Trust. The official hand over was made on 24 January 1976.

Regrettably, there are many people who are unable to access the lighthouse and would love to learn about its history, however the National Trust plans to remedy this situation.

An interpretive centre is planned for the lighthouse grounds to provide a more accessible and extensive visitor experience.

The new facility will include a replica of the galley which originally stood adjacent to the tower to provide a flexible space for displays and community meetings; and interpretive trails featuring First Nations stories associated with the coastline and hinterland.

Left: Children’s lantern parade.

Below: Kites on the foreshore.

H E R I TAG E L I V I NG

 page

25

 H eritage

at R i s k

GAWLER DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL P ICTURED:

Above: Streetscape view of site along Cameron Street to St George’s Church.

highlights weakened heritage protections

Bottom left: Tennis courts and adjacent houses, c 1903.

Bottom right: View of Church Hill State Heritage Area with open space in centre.

page

26



H E R I TAG E L I V I N G

Even South Australia’s seventeen State Heritage Areas are not safe from inappropriate development and vagaries under the state’s new planning regulations despite their accepted outstanding natural or cultural significance, as an ongoing battle on Gawler’s Church Hill makes clear.

H eritage at R i s k

W

hen Colonel William Light planned the private township of Gawler in 1839, he chose a natural spur of land rising ten metres above the surrounding river flats as the axis for his design.

Three main squares linked by Cowan Street were allocated free of charge to the Anglican, Catholic and Presbyterian denominations. Another site was set aside for the Methodists.

Known as Church Hill, in 1985 this precinct became one of South Australia’s first State Heritage areas.

Recognised for its distinctive character, it is today the residential area in Gawler that best retains its nineteenth century atmosphere. Now developers have set their sights on two of the original halfacre lots, owned by the Anglican Synod of Adelaide.

Opposite St. George’s Anglican Church in Orleana Square, the land currently forms a park with tennis courts, trees and a stone shelter shed, at the corner of Cowan and Cameron streets. One lot at the site was originally allocated to the church for a clergy residence but St George’s Anglican school was built there instead. The school was demolished in 1891, leaving a stone “pony shed” shelter on the boundary.

In 1902, two asphalt tennis courts were constructed. Later on netball was played there regularly, and a playground installed. A commemorative water fountain was erected in 1954 to celebrate the first Australian Royal tour

by Queen Elizabeth II; several hundred Gawler Primary School students marched to the park for the opening ceremony.

The playground was removed about fifteen years ago, but the stone shed and tennis courts remain as do commemorative plaques for the fountain and school. Used for coaching sessions and games, the courts are maintained by community members.

A proposal for residential development on the site was first put forward by the Anglican church in 2006. It was withdrawn after significant public opposition.

Then in March 2021 application was made by a private developer to demolish the tennis courts and remove trees on the Cameron Street boundary, some being “de facto” street trees. No details of further development were given. Third party appeal rights would have applied. After public submissions opposed the application, it was withdrawn without going to the Gawler council assessment panel.

In June 2021 an identical application was submitted under the new Planning Development and Infrastructure Act. It was opposed by local residents and the Gawler Environment and Heritage Association, concerned about the loss of open space, absence of detail for future development, removal of the trees, the impact on the historic character of the area, and fears that it would set an “undesirable precedent”.

The application went before the assessment panel in September 2021 and was unanimously rejected, despite a brief supporting statement from Heritage SA that the proposal would not diminish the area’s true heritage, backed by similar views from council planners.



The applicant appealed. A nearby resident applied to be “joined” as a party to the development application so community objections could be heard under the new planning rules.

This application was rejected by the ERD Court, mainly on the basis that the person lived more than 60 metres from the site. Another application was made by an adjacent resident and accepted by the ERD Court in January 2022.

Meanwhile, the developer went back to the panel arguing for a reversal of its decision, backed by a submission from a prominent firm of heritage architects.

The panel reversed its decision at a confidential meeting in December 2021, by a 4:1 vote. In a move most likely designed to avoid an appeal hearing, the developer recently lodged a third application to be considered by the panel in coming months.

The new State Heritage Overlay and Planning Code has removed previous policies for the area under the Gawler Development Plan. “We now seem to just have some not to be enforced guidelines,” said long time Church Hill resident, Adrian Shackley.

“No one is too sure what weight is given to the current “guidelines” for Church Hill published a few years ago

by Heritage SA or the Management Plan [signed off by the Gawler council and State Heritage in 1998],” Mr Shackley said.

“To make matters worse, if the applicant gets their “demolition” approval, future development is unlikely to be advertised for community comment and may be decided by Council planners under delegation.

No input from the panel, none from community. We may not even know it is happening.”

Sadly, this is another demonstration of the loss of community rights and a weakening of heritage protections under the Liberal Government’s retrograde Planning and Design Code.

L EFT:

Church Hill residents group, Christmas party, 2021.

H E R I TAG E L I V I NG

 page

27

 T ree s

South Australian Tree of the Year competition Voting is now open to select the winner of a state-wide award designed to highlight the importance of protecting our trees, another area where a major report recently confirmed South Australian planning policies are sadly lacking.

T

he South Australian Tree of the Year Award was established in 2021 by 20 Metre Trees, a Facebook page started by Glenalta environmental advocate Tom Morrison to highlight the importance of large trees in urban environments.

Named the City of Mitcham’s 2021 Young Australian of the Year, Tom was lead author of a study released in December by the Conservation Council of South Australia, in partnership with the National Trust, the Australian Institute of Landscape Architects, the Nature Conservation Society, Trees for Life and Treenet.

Comparing tree regulations in metropolitan areas across Australia, the study found “astounding disparity” between South Australia and the vast majority of other jurisdictions assessed, with metropolitan Adelaide having the worst tree protections in Australia.

In every other state or territory, apart from the ACT, local governments set the rules relating to the protection and removal of trees. Unlike South Australia, most of the jurisdictions assessed protect trees based on their canopy and height, and permission is required to remove trees even within close proximity to dwellings. Every other jurisdiction that protects trees based on trunk circumference also protects trees of a significantly smaller size than South Australia.

page

28



H E R I TAG E L I V I N G

Despite being named the world’s second National Park City in December 2021, metropolitan Adelaide has some of the lowest levels of tree canopy coverage of any major city in Australia, and the lowest percentage of parkland (approximately 10%), compared with Sydney (57%), Perth (40%) and Melbourne (20%).

Critically, while many councils have comprehensive tree planting strategies, they do not have enough room to offset canopy loss on private land, never mind increase tree canopy in line with the 30-Year Plan for Greater Adelaide.

Unsurprisingly, the most recent official report card assessing progress against the plan, found metropolitan Adelaide was not on track to meet its tree canopy goals.

The Tree of the Year Award is a strong and timely reminder of the importance of trees and their priceless value to our natural heritage. After nominations for this year’s competition opened in late January, Tom Morrison told ABC Adelaide that many people also had a very personal and emotional connection to trees. They might interact with their favourite tree on a daily basis, walking past it, sitting and watching the birds in the evening, and even giving them hugs.

Reflecting this sense of connection, last year’s entries included many trees that stood in their nominators’ own backyards and were accompanied by personal stories. Entries also came from across urban and rural areas.

P I C T U RED :

South Australia’s 2021 Tree of the Year, a Dingley Dell gum at Port MacDonnell (photo by Ockert Le Roux).



T ree s

Significant tree register Over a period of some forty years, National Trusts in Australia have developed a National Register of Significant Trees, recognised for their botanical, cultural and historical significance. These records are continually updated by volunteers, with more than 2500 trees listed Australia-wide.

They include more than 800 South Australian trees, nominated by the public and assessed by an expert panel. These trees form an invaluable part of South Australia’s history, through connections to traditional owners and to European arrivals.

Want to nominate a tree?

For information about making nominations visit: nationaltrust.org.au/ services/significant-tree-register/

The inaugural winner was a stunning Dingley Dell gum (Eucalyptus leucoxylon subspecies megalocarpa) located near Port MacDonnell. Featured on the cover of the Autumn 2021 edition of Heritage Living, this beautiful specimen stands in the vicinity of the 1860s home of famous poet, Adam Lindsay Gordon, which inspired its preferred local common name.

Also known as the large-fruited blue gum in South Australia, the sub species is mainly found in a narrow coastal strip stretching from the Lower South East of the State across to the Glenelg River, just over the Victorian border.

The nominator proposed it because “there aren’t many mature examples of this tree left, due to the development of farmland in the area. The species is also South Australia’s southernmost gum.

She’s twisted and beautiful, especially in the mottled light of a setting sun!”

A short list of 24 nominated trees will be selected by an expert panel comprising Darren Peacock, CEO National Trust, Natasha Davis, CEO Trees for Life, and Craig Wilkins, CEO Conservation SA.

The winner is selected by public vote online, with voting open until the end of March. The winner is due to be announced on 2 April.

Visit www.20metretrees.org to vote for your favourite tree today.

H E R I TAG E L I V I NG

 page

29

 M ember s hip Our members are the lifeblood of the National Trust. We need your support more than ever.

The benefits of membership include free entry and discounts to National Trust properties across Australia and around the world. We encourage you to sign up a new member and extend your membership to support the National Trust at Ayers House.

MEMBERSHIP APPLICATION FORM

1 year 3 years MEMBERSHIP CATEGORIES (save 10%) Individual (One Adult) Individual Senior (One Adult aged over 60 years) Individual Concession (One concession card holder or full time student) Household (Two adults and up to 4 children under 18 years) Household Senior (Two Adults aged over 60 years and up to 4 children under 18 years) Household Concession (Two concession card holders or full time students and up to 4 children under 18 years)

$65 $60 $45 $95 $85 $75

$176 $162 $122 $257 $230 $203

Name of individual or first household member Mr/Mrs/Ms/Other: First name: Address: Phone (Home): (Work): Email:

Name of second household member

Mr/Mrs/Ms/Other: First name: Email: Full Time Student or Pension Card Number (if applicable) 1 2

Surname: (Mobile): Date of birth

/

/

Surname: Date of birth

/

/

Gift membership Only: Tick this box if you would like the gift membership gift pack to be posted to you at your address.

Please provide details below.

Mr/Mrs/Ms/Other: First name: Surname: Address: Phone (Home): (Work): (Mobile): Email: If you would like your membership to be affiliated with a ‘Local Branch’ please tick Conditions of membership Concession memberships apply to Australian Pensioner, Concession Card holders, Healthcare Card holders, Disability Concession and full-time students. Memberships are not transferrable. Only the person named on the card may use it.

Your current membership card must be presented to gain free or discounted entry.

COMPLETE SECTION BELOW IF RETURNING BY MAIL OR EMAIL Enclose a cheque payable to National Trust of South Australia or complete the credit card details below.

Card Holder Name

Card Holder Signature

Visa

Debit my credit card:

Mastercard

Expiry Date

Credit Card Number Cost of membership/s:

JOIN TODAY!

Post completed membership form to: National Trust of South Australia Memberships PO Box 290 North Adelaide SA 5006

$

Or scan and email to: members@nationaltrustsa,org.au Or call (08) 8223 1234

JOIN OR RENEW ONLINE AT: www.nationaltrust.org.au/membership-sa page

30



H E R I TAG E L I V I N G

M ember s hip



Heritage festival event follows in the footsteps of our remarkable pioneer women More than 180 years ago, women from the German pioneer settlement of Hahndorf regularly made the long trek to Adelaide so they could sell their family’s produce. Each year a growing number of people join the National Trust to celebrate their achievements by following a 26-kilometre trail inspired by their journey and joining special celebrations at Beaumont House.

The Pioneer Women’s Trail Walk celebrates the endurance and history of our early European settlers, particularly the women and girls who bundled up their butter, eggs and vegetables, then set off barefoot for Adelaide. Following paths used for millennia by the local Kaurna and Peramangk people, they walked some 30 kilometres through old Stringybark forest and the Beaumont foothills to the Adelaide markets. After selling their produce, the women made the return journey carrying two bricks each for the construction of St Michael’s Lutheran Church in Hahndorf.

The trail was resurrected by a team of National Trust members in April 1980.

A map from 1841 was recovered and the original route adapted to take into account building developments and modern boundaries.

According to Hahndorf National Trust branch committee member Lyndell Allen the event has come a long way since the first walk with some 150 participants. The past few years has seen a big growth in the number of participants. After being postponed in 2020 due to COVID-19, the event reached a milestone of 1000 walkers — a goal organisers had been striving towards for many years.

Interest and participation in the walk continues to grow, with Lyndell crediting the interest to the sense of connection it provides between the present and the past. More and more walkers, both young and old, are also taking on the challenge of the full distance of 26 kilometres from Hahndorf to Beaumont.

When asked what they enjoy most about the event, highlights mentioned by walker include the scenery, history and the sense of accomplishment. One walker particularly liked “the history, the camaraderie, the organisation, the sheer joy of walking in the footsteps of those amazing women”, while another commented that it was a “great day to be a part of.“ Participants can start the walk at Hahndorf, Bridgewater or Stirling before winding their way down the scenic route to Beaumont House where they can buy local produce, and celebrate with food, wine and entertainment.

This year the event takes place as part of the National Trust’s Australian Heritage Festival, the country’s largest festival celebrating built, natural and cultural heritage.

Places are limited due to COVID-19 restrictions so walkers are urged to register early. Registrations open 1 March.

Are you up for the challenge?

Join us on Sunday, May 15, for the Pioneer Women’s Trail Walk 2022.

Register for the walk at: bit.ly/pwtw2022 For more information visit: www.nationaltrust.org.au/event/2022-pioneer-womens-walk/ search for Pioneer Women’s Trail Walk 22 on Facebook.

H E R I TAG E L I V I NG

 page

31

 EVENTS

What’s on Old Treasury & Tunnels Journey through winding hallways and underground chambers to meet the colourful characters and deep history behind one of Adelaide’s oldest colonial buildings. From riots to floods to historic reforms the Treasury sat at the heart of South Australia’s political life - come and explore its secrets and forgotten stories!

Sundays, 1pm & 3pm Time: 1.00pm & 3.00pm Cost: Adults: $15 Concession: $13 NT Members & children aged 5 –15: $10 *not recommended for children under 12 Place: Adina Treasury Hotel, 2 Flinders Street Adelaide Enquiries: bookings@nationaltrustsa.org.au or 8202 9200 Book online at: bit.ly/TreasuryTours

Z Ward: Behind the Walls Neither prison nor hospital, the “criminal ward” of the former Glenside Mental Hospital occupies a unique place in South Australia’s past. From the rare ‘Ha Ha Wall’ encircling the building to its striking 1880s polychromatic brickwork, explore the breathtaking architecture and sobering history of this important site.

Sunday 20 February Saturday 5 March Saturday 19 March Saturday 2 April Time: 2.00pm Cost: Adults: $15 Concession: $13 NT Members & children aged 5 –15: $10 *not recommended for children under 12 Place: Z Ward, Via 63 Conyngham St, Glenside Enquiries: bookings@nationaltrustsa.org.au or 8202 9200 Book online at: bit.ly/zward

Pennington Terrace: Colonial Gems From St. Peter’s Cathedral to the iconic ‘Light’s Vision’ lookout at Montefiore Hill, Pennington Terrace is a jewel in North Adelaide’s crown. Join us for a gentle stroll past stately homes, striking architecture and stunning views of the city.

Saturday 26 March Time: 10am Cost: Adults: $15 Concession: $13 NT Members & children aged 5 –15: $10

page

32



H E R I TAG E L I V I N G

Starting point: St. Peter’s Cathedral, 27 King William Road, North Adelaide Enquiries: bookings@nationaltrustsa.org.au or 8202 9200 Book online at: bit.ly/penningtonterrace

Open Days at Stangate Discover Stangate Garden, one of the Hill’s best kept secrets.

Bring along provisions for a picnic and spend the day enjoying the tranquil garden setting.

Sunday February 27 Sunday March 27 Sunday April 24* Open Gardens South Australia Sunday May 22 Sunday June 26 Time: 10am – 2pm Cost: $8 Adults FREE for National Trust members, Children under 15 FREE, Group, up to 4 $20 Place: Stangate House and Garden, 3 Edgeware Road, Aldgate Enquiries: bookings@nationaltrustsa.org.au or 8202 9200 Pay at the gate or book online at: bit.ly/stangateopengarden

Beaumont House Open Garden The garden and grounds at Beaumont House provide a fascinating glimpse into colonial life in SA. The land was purchased

by Samuel Davenport in 1846 but leased to Augustus Short, the first Anglican bishop of Adelaide, who in 1849 built a small cottage and lived there until 1856 when Davenport and his wife Margaret moved in. Davenport was an enthusiastic and enterprising farmer and experimented with growing olives, wine grapes, fragrant plants to make perfume, and mulberry trees to raise silkworms. Many of the trees Davenport planted are still standing - the heritagelisted olive grove, huge stone pines, pencil pines, palms, almonds, pears and fig trees.

Guided walks at 11.30am & 1.30pm Sunday 10 April Time: 10am – 4.30pm Cost: Adults: $8 Concession: $6 Children under 18 FREE Place: 631 Glynburn Road, Beaumont More information: www.opengardensa. org.au/current-season/details/18/415

AUSTRALIAN HERITAGE FESTIVAL Stangate Open Garden The garden contains a wonderful collection of mature ornamental trees, planted in the 1940s including oaks, beeches, tilias, maples, elms, liquidambar and dogwoods, which present a spectacular display of autumn leaves every April. The garden is well known for its extensive collection of more than 700 camellias, planted and cared for by the Camellia Society of SA over the past 40 years. In 2012 it was awarded the distinction of being a Camellia Garden of International Significance, one of only three in Australia.

Guided walks at 11.30am & 1.30pm Sunday 24 April Time: 10am – 4.30pm Cost: Adults: $8 Concession: $6 Children under 18 FREE Place: Stangate House & Garden, 3 Edgeware Road, Aldgate More information: www.opengardensa. org.au/current-season/details/18/419

Pioneer Women’s Trail Walk Take in the spectacular Adelaide Hills scenery as you wind your way to Beaumont House.

The annual Pioneer Women’s Trail Walk retraces their steps over 26km from Hahndorf to Beaumont.

An unforgettable challenge and fitting tribute to the women who helped build South Australia.

Sunday 15 May Time: from 8am Cost: Adult: $25 NT Members: $15 Children 15 & under: FREE Group Booking: $20pp (min of 5) Starting point: Hahndorf, Stirling or Bridgewater Enquiries: pioneerwomenstrail@ nationaltrustsa.org.au or 8202 9200 Register online at: bit.ly/pwtw2022

Continued next page.

EVENTS



AUSTRALIAN HERITAGE FESTIVAL continued GUIDED TOURS

GUIDED WALKS

Z Ward: Behind the Walls

Somerton Man Mystery

Neither prison nor hospital, the “criminal ward” of the former Glenside Mental Hospital occupies a unique place in South Australia’s history. From the rare ‘Ha Ha Wall’ encircling the building to its striking 1880s polychromatic brickwork, explore the breathtaking architecture and sobering history of this important site.

Sunday 17 April Time: 2.00pm Cost: Adults: $15 Concession: $13 NT Members & children aged 5 –15: $10 *not recommended for children under 12 Place: Z Ward, Via 63 Conyngham St, Glenside Enquiries: bookings@nationaltrustsa.org.au or 8202 9200 Book online at: bit.ly/zward

On 1 December 1948 an unknown man was found dead on Somerton Beach, sparking international intrigue at the dawn of the Cold War. More than70 years later, the ‘Somerton Man’ remains one of the state’s enduring mysteries. Retrace his final movements and revisit the clues that captured imaginations around the world.

Wednesday 13 April Saturday 30 April Time: 10am Cost: Adults: $15 Concession: $13 NT Members & children aged 5 –15: $10 Starting point: Entrance to lot 14, across the road from Ayers House Enquiries: bookings@nationaltrustsa.org.au or 8202 9200 Book online at: SomertonMystery

Old Treasury & Tunnels Journey through winding hallways and underground chambers to meet the colourful characters and deep history behind one of Adelaide’s oldest colonial buildings. From riots to floods to historic reforms the Treasury sat at the heart of South Australia’s political life - come explore its secrets and forgotten stories!

Sundays Time: 1.00pm & 3.00pm Cost: Adults: $15 Concession: $13 NT Members & children aged 5 –15: $10 *not recommended for children under 12 Place: Adina Treasury Hotel 2 Flinders Street Adelaide Enquiries: bookings@nationaltrustsa.org.au or 8202 9200 Book online at: bit.ly/TreasuryTours

Heritage Reborn This tour explores where heritage places have been carefully adapted to new purposes, often with a funky twist.

Discover some remarkable transformations including a former bank, a rogue department store and a building that survived not one but two fires!

Whether it’s the dazzling transformation of Electra House or the quirky artists inhabiting the Gothic Revivalist Epworth Building, you’ll be struck with a new appreciation for classic architecture and the ways it can be reimagined.

Saturday 23 April Time: 10.00am Cost: Adults: $15 Concession: $13 NT Members & children aged 5 –15: $10, Starting point: Electra House, 131-139 King William St, Adelaide Enquiries: bookings@nationaltrustsa.org.au or 8202 9200 Book online at: bit.ly/heritagereborn

East End Discovery Discover the unique cultural and historical features of Adelaide’s East End! A highlight of this tour is an opportunity to view the original1850 stone facade of the first synagogue in Adelaide.

Famous for its markets, food, fashion and hotels, cafes and restaurants, this leisurely guided tour explores the hidden treasures and heritage icons of this iconic precinct.

Saturday 7 May Time: 10am Cost: Adults: $15 Concession: $13 NT Members & children aged 5 –15: $10 *not recommended for children under 12 Starting point: Gates of Ayers House Museum, 288 North Tce, Adelaide Enquiries: bookings@nationaltrustsa.org.au or 8202 9200 Book online at: bit.ly/EastEndDisc

Hidden Stories, Small Details Sometimes the smallest details offer clues to the most engaging stories from the past. Heritage buildings can be imposing sights, but look closer and you’ll find that sometimes the most intriguing stories from the past lie in the smaller details.

This tour highlights the hidden elements that tell the real story behind some iconic city structures.

Explore some of the most intriguing elements of the city’s buildings.

Sunday 15 May Time: 10am Cost: Adults: $15 Concession: $13 NT Members & children aged 5 –15: $10 *not recommended for children under 12 Starting point: Outside of Brookman Hall, near the corner of North Terrace and Frome Road, Adelaide Enquiries: bookings@nationaltrustsa.org.au or 8202 9200 Book online at: bit.ly/ hiddenstoriesmalldetails

LOCAL BRANCH EVENTS Burnside Branch

Kingston SE Branch

Beaumont House Open Day Beaumont House is a State Heritage listed property built in 1849 for Augustus Short, the first Anglican Bishop of Adelaide, and after, the home of Sir Samuel Davenport, politician, horticulturist & pioneer of the olive oil industry in SA. The house has a distinctive Mediterranean character with an open brickwork parapet in soft terracotta colours and a central flat roof originally accessed by a staircase.

Tour the house, wander through the beautiful gardens and olive grove, enjoy afternoon tea on the veranda overlooking the garden, city and gulf.

Sunday 6 March Sunday 3 April Sunday 1 May Sunday 5 June Time: 2.00pm - 4:30pm Tours every 20 minutes Cost: Adult: $15 Concession: $12 NTSA member: $7 (incl a/n tea) A/n teas: $7 Payment upon entry Place: Beaumont House 631 Glynburn Road, Beaumont Enquiries: burnside@nationaltrustsa.org.au or 0468 866 492

Cape Jaffa Lighthouse Tours Originally situated on the Margaret Brock Reef, 8kms out to sea from Cape Jaffa, this lighthouse became Australia’s first lighthouse to be dismantled and re-located onshore. The historic lighthouse was 41 m high and known as a Wells’ Screw Pile designed to ideally suit the local conditions.

Daily Tours Time: Available on the hour, 10am to 3pm April 15 - May 1. At all other times, please phone 0427 854 175 to book a tour.

Cost: Adult: $11 Child (aged 5-17): $3 Under 4: Free Family (2+2): $25, addition children $3 NT Members: FREE Place: 32 Marine Parade, Kingston SE Enquiries: 0427 854 175 More information and bookings: https:// www.capejaffalighthouse.org.au/tours/ Light On and Night Tours See the lighthouse’s First Order Holophotal Dioptric lens shining brightly from sunset, with NIGHT TOURS available to the Lantern Room.

Sunday 17 April Monday 25 April Sunday 12 June Cost: Adult: $11 Child (aged 5-17): $3

Under 4: Free Family (2+2): $25, addition children $3 NT Members: FREE Place: 32 Marine Parade, Kingston SE More information and bookings: www.capejaffalighthouse.org.au/tours Phone 0427 854 175 to book a tour

Tea Tree Gully Branch Heritage on Sunday Enjoy the afternoon as you visit 12 rooms in the Museum, 4 pavilions, blacksmith, police cell and laundry, all in a charming garden setting. Sausage sizzle is available, visit our Gift Shop with unique craft, Sunday 20 March: Strawberry Fair Sunday 24 April: Who, What, Where Cost: Adults: $5 Concession: $4 Children under 16 FREE Location: Tea Tree Gully Museum, 3 Perseverance Road, Tea Tree Gully Enquiries: 0431 080 062 or www.ttgmuseum.on.net

H E R I TAG E L I V I NG

 page

33

 EVENTS

your Trust PUBLISHER

National Trust of South Australia Beaumont House 631 Glynburn Road Beaumont SA 5066 T: 08 8202 9200 F: 08 8202 9201 E: publications@nationaltrustsa.org.au W: www.nationaltrust.org.au/sa DESIGN

Dessein T: 08 9228 0661 E: tracy@dessein.com.au DISTRIBUTION

Heritage Living is published four times a year.

PP 536155/0036 ISSN 0815-7871 FRONT COVER:

PRESIDENT

NTSA LOCAL BRANCHES (44)

Mr Paul Leadbeter

Ardrossan, Burnside, Coromandel Valley, Gawler, Port of Adelaide, Tea Tree Gully, Ceduna, Cleve, Koppio, Streaky Bay, Tumby Bay, Whyalla, Auburn, Burra, Clare, Jamestown, Port Pirie, Barmera, Overland Corner, Renmark, Waikerie, Beachport, Glencoe, Keith, Kingston SE, Millicent, Mount Gambier, Naracoorte, Penola, Robe, Goolwa, Hahndorf, Kingscote KI, Mount Barker, Penneshaw, Port Elliot, Strathalbyn, Victor Harbor, Willunga, Central Yorke Peninsula, Kadina, Minlaton, Moonta, Wallaroo.

Telephone (08) 8202 9200 or visit nationaltrust.org.au/sa for contact information.

VICE PRESIDENT

Ms Millie Nicholls COUNCILLORS

Mr Tully Brookes Ms Elaine Davies Ms Alice Fitch Mr James Harvey Ms Gabrielle Iwanow Mr Steve Larkins OAM Mrs Caren Martin Ms Alison Stillwell OAM Ms Di Wilkins NTSA STATE OFFICE TEAM

Dr Darren Peacock Chief Executive Officer Alison De Backer Australian Artisan Trades Academy Peter Fosdike Conservation Manager, Silver to Sea Way Catherine Gawrysiuk Membership and Communications Chris Grant Natural Heritage Manager James Guy Regeneration projects architect Helen Lawry School and family programs Courtney Pasfield Venue hire Co-ordinator

Photo: Martindale Hall.

Credit: Marnie Hawson.

Allison Russell Director, Silver to Sea Way Project Bridgette Walmesley-Cotham Silver to Sea Way project Cheryl Williss Finance Manager COUNCIL COMMITTEES

Audit, Finance and Governance Cultural Heritage Advisory Natural Heritage Advisory 897kg

CO2 saved on this project

page

34



H E R I TAG E L I V I N G

PATRON IN CHIEF

Her Excellency the Honourable Frances Adamson AC Governor of South Australia

Supporters

The National Trust of South Australia acknowledges its partners and supporters.

CIVIC PARTNERS

Adelaide City Council CORPORATE PARTNERS

Beerenberg Farm Bickfords Coopers Laucke Flour Mills Piper Alderman Stoneideas Wines by Geoff Hardy GOVERNMENT RELATIONSHIPS

Australian Government – Department of the Environment and Energy – National Library of Australia South Australian Government – Department of the Environment and Water – SA Water – History Trust of South Australia

18 April – 31 May

Stangate Open Garden The garden contains a wonderful collection of mature ornamental trees, planted in the 1940s including oaks, beeches, tilias, maples, elms, liquidambar and dogwoods, which present a spectacular display of autumn leaves every April.

The garden is well known for its extensive collection of more than 700 camellias, planted and cared for by the Camellia Society of SA over the past 40 years.

In 2012 it was awarded the distinction of being a Camellia Garden of International Significance, one of only three in Australia.

Sunday 24 April 10am – 4.30pm

Guided walks at 11.30am & 1.30pm Cost: Adults: $8 Concession: $6 Children under 18 FREE Stangate House & Garden, 3 Edgeware Road, Aldgate

MORE INFORMATION:

www.opengardensa.org.au/current-season/details/18/419 SEE PAGE 32 FOR A FULL LIST OF AUSTR ALIAN HERITAGE FESTIVAL EVENTS OR VISIT

www.nationaltrust.org.au/ahf/

KEEP AYERS HOUSE FOR THE PEOPLE

HOW YOU CAN HELP Time is running out to save Ayers House and to keep it for the people We ask that you: 1 Sign and share the two petitions, particularly the petition to Parliament. > bit.ly/ayershousepetition (Petition to Parliament) > www.change.org/KeepAyersHouseforthepeople

2 Spread the word. Talk to your family and friends, write to your MP, support us on social media >

Facebook.com/KeepAyersHouseforthePeople

3 Donate to our Ayers House fighting fund at My Cause > bit.ly/AyersHouseFightingFund

www.nationaltrust.org.au/keepayershouseforthepeople facebook.com/keepayershouseforthepeople