National Trust SA Heritage Living Spring 2018

H E R I TAG E L I V I NG SPRING 2018

4 0 years of

heritage protection

W H AT W E L O S T, W H AT W E H AV E S AV E D

B E A U M O N T H O U S E G A R D E N O P E N D AY S U N D AY, 2 3 S E P T E M B E R

OPEN GARDENS SOUTH AUSTRALIA WELCOME THE BEAUMONT HOUSE GARDEN OPEN DAY AS PART OF ITS SPRING PROGRAMME SUNDAY 23 SEPTEMBER 10 AM – 4 PM Come along and discover the lovingly restored gardens. Mauve wisteria and purple wigandia in full bloom are the stars of a colourful Spring garden.

Learn about the early history of these experimental gardens and visit the heritage listed olive grove.

Join guided tours of the garden; Devonshire teas will be served on the veranda, there will be displays of garden sculptures, a working blacksmith, plant sales, garden raffle and much more...

S P R I N G 2 018

from the CEO DR DARREN PEACOCK

T

he election of the Marshall Liberal Government has been a breath of fresh air for the Trust. We have established an excellent working relationship with the new Minister for the Environment and Water, the Hon. David Speirs. The Minister is approaching his heritage responsibilities with great enthusiasm and he and the Premier have committed to forming a strategic partnership with the Trust.

This is a welcome development and one which is already bearing fruit with $500 000 funding provided in the State Budget to help the Trust undertake restoration works at Ayers House to implement our masterplan for the site.

After operating at Ayers House for more than 50 years, we will now be part of an exciting redevelopment of the city's East End as a cultural destination, including the establishment of a new Aboriginal art gallery on the old Royal Adelaide Hospital site opposite Ayers House. We look forward to working closely with the Government at Ayers House and on other initiatives.

Spring is a wonderful time to get out and enjoy our heritage places, particularly our gardens at Beaumont House and Stangate House and nature reserves across the state, as wildflowers come into bloom. It is also marmalade season, with entries in the Australian marmalade awards closing this month, before the Marmalade Festival at Beaumont House on 7 October. Our chamber music series at Ayers House commences on 27 September with the first of three concerts.

The President Deborah Morgan and I have been out and about visiting our members and properties in all corners of the state and attending local branch meetings. The NTSA Annual General Meeting of members takes place on 17 November in Adelaide. I hope to see you there or at one of our many places and events in the coming months.

Contents 4 ADVOCACY

Mount Gambier Roundhouse A unique part of our railway heritage: Saved from demolition, or not?

5 PLANNING

How not to create a planning system - Part II

6 8 9

SIGNIFICANT TREES

The politics of trees: Planning and Protection

OUR PEOPLE

Queen's Birthday Honours

TITJIKALA EXHIBITION

Tjungu Pakani – Together We Rise Celebrating Titjikala Culture through Art & Music

25 VOTE 1 FOR YOUR LOCAL HERITAGE 26 BECOME A BUSHCARE VOLUNTEER 27 CONSERVATION APPEAL The Freemasons Hall

10 LEARNING

Halloween and Heritage: Old traditions, new experiences

11 40 YEARS OF HERITAGE PROTECTION 40 years of heritage protection laws in South Australia What we have gained from 40 years of heritage protection Forty years on, there is much to celebrate, but what lies ahead for heritage protection in South Australia?

I

Busting the myths about heritage protection What we lost before there was heritage protection National Trust starts the campaign to preserve our built heritage A Snapshot of the 2016 South Australian Community Consultation on Local Heritage Strengthening our heritage protection system Parliamentary Heritage Inquiry

from the

28 MEMBERSHIP 29 IN THE KITCHEN:

Coconut Cake with Mango and Mandarin Cream

31 WHAT’S ON

Signature Series: Intimate chamber music at Ayers House

32 NTSA COUNCIL ELECTION

Editor

n this issue we celebrate and reflect on 40 years of South Australia’s heritage protection system. Born of public anger and dismay at the destruction of many heritage places in the 1960s and 1970s, the South Australian Heritage Act (1978) established formal protection for places of heritage significance. Since that time, the system has provided clarity and certainty and slowed the loss of our treasured heritage places, streetscapes and areas. However, the pressure for new developments continually questions the need for and extent of our heritage protection system. Despite overwhelming public support for maintaining and strengthening current protections, advocates of development at any cost continue to campaign for a reduction of protection. With a Parliamentary Inquiry into heritage currently underway and upcoming local council elections, heritage protection is a hot topic once again.

Here we set out the reasons why we need strong heritage protection and how to do it.

We encourage you to take a stand to defend our heritage protection system and make sure that you elect representatives who share that resolve.

H E R I TAG E L I V I NG

 page

3

 A dvo cac y

Mount Gambier Roundhouse A unique part of our railway heritage: Saved from demolition, or not?

DAVE WALSH

P I C TU R ED:

The Mount Gambier railway roundhouse was damaged by fire in 2014, but remains fundamentally sound.

Left: Inside the roundhouse showing the results of vandalism.

Right: Roundhouse with the heritage listed engine turntable in the foreground remain highly intact and ready for revitalisation as has happened in many such railway heritage sites across Australia and overseas.

Mount Gambier is the second largest city in South Australia and a hub for primary production in the state.

Its remote location posed some problems in earlier years, but its proximity to the Victorian border was a clear advantage for commerce.

I

n 1887 a narrow gauge railway was laid to connect Mt Gambier to the Adelaide-Wolseley line via Naracoorte, linking in to existing lines from Mt Gambier to Rivoli Bay (Beachport) and Millicent. As early as 1910 there were discussions about standardising the railway line gauges around Australia, but it wasn't until the 1950s that the network in the southeast of the state was progressively upgraded to broad gauge.

The broad gauge conversion had been progressing slowly through the southeast as far as Naracoorte by 1950, although freight and livestock could not be carried because the railway yard had not been completed. Finally in 1953 the line from Wolseley to Mt Gambier was finished, and it was ready to open.

In order to service the rolling stock a new roundhouse and rail yards were also erected, capable of housing the much larger and more powerful diesel locomotives that had recently been put into service.

The completion of the broad gauge line to Mount Gambier in June 1953 was marked by significant celebrations.

State Governor (Sir Robert George) and Lady George, Chief Justice (Sir Mellis Napier) and 42 members of State and Federal Parliament travelled from Adelaide to Mt Gambier on a special train for the occasion. They were met by a crowd of 6,000 people - more than

page

4



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

half of the town's population at the time. In his address to the crowd, the Governor said: “With the opening of the broad gauge to Mount Gambier, a wish has now become a reality, and it is a great satisfaction to know that this section of railway, offering as it does the required link within the State, will now bring the South East more into the life of South Australia as a whole, and give a better circulation which is so important in this young State.”

The Mt Gambier line and the roundhouse remained active and in service until the country rail network was sold to the Commonwealth Government in the 1970s. The roundhouse was later used by Limestone Coast Railways to operate a heritage railway service between 1998 and 2006.

The roundhouse has languished since then, with its importance and rarity unrecognised. It is one of only three such structures remaining in South Australia. One of those, the State Heritage listed roundhouse at Peterborough has, through the efforts of the local council and volunteers, been resurrected as the hub for the Steamtown Heritage Rail Centre, a major tourism destination for the region.

The Mount Gambier Roundhouse is ideally placed to become part of a

rejuvenated urban precinct, following the landscaping of the railway lands adjacent to the former railway station.

We believe it is not too late to restore and repurpose the roundhouse as a community space which recognises the important role of railways in the State’s development.

In 2014, a deliberately lit fire did significant damage to the roundhouse, burning supports and loosening the ironwork. Its local heritage listing was later removed and the Department of Planning, Transport & Infrastructure announced that the roundhouse would be demolished, despite the protests of hundreds of local people that it should be preserved.

Just days before the demolition was due to take place in June, the National Trust made application to have the roundhouse recognised on the State Heritage list. As a result, the roundhouse was provisionally listed to allow time for its merit to be assessed.

The South Australian Heritage Council are expected to make a decision on its future in October.

You can show your support on Facebook to protect the roundhouse and create a new community space that preserves this special piece of our state’s railway heritage.

MountGambierRoundhouse

P lanning



How not to create a planning system - Part II Development of the new planning system initiated under the former Labor Government continues to shut the community out of important decisions through a rushed and haphazard consultation process. Despite assurances to the contrary and a so-called ‘community engagement charter’, details of policies forming the new Planning and Design Code are sketchy and are released with little time for public consideration and debate. This is not only undemocratic, but will inevitably lead to poorly developed planning policy with a range of undesirable consequences.

T

he farcical approach of the Department of Planning Transport and Infrastructure (DPTI) to public consultation appears to borrow heavily from the ABC-TV series Utopia, with the ‘Communications and Engagement Plan’ for consultation on major new draft policies released after the policies themselves. Clearly public consultation is the last of their priorities.

Sixteen key draft State Planning Policies (SPPs) were released for public comment in July. Submissions on the draft SPPs were originally due on 7 September but after stakeholders objected to the brief timelines, the deadline was extended by two weeks, still a woefully inadequate period to ensure meaningful consultation on such important State-wide policies which will shape our cities, towns and environment for decades to come.

The Department and the former government made much of their so-called ‘Community Engagement Charter’ supposedly designed to direct public engagement into policy formation whilst strictly excluding it from decisions about actual developments (which is where people really expect to be involved). This first application of the charter to the policy development process has been a comic failure of Utopian proportions.

UTOPIA

There are more than twenty draft policy papers floating around at the moment covering a range of important issues including biodiversity, climate change and heritage. These will all directly inform the development of the Planning and Design Code, supposedly the future ‘rule book’ for all planning and development decisions.

Regrettably, the policies and the code will forever lack legitimacy and credibility because of this hasty and botched approach to community engagement, despite many lofty but ultimately hollow assurances made throughout the debate on the Community Engagement Charter.

Most of the draft documents produced to date comprise sketchy, ‘motherhood’ statements, which make it difficult to engage in comprehensive debate.

Perhaps that is the goal in producing such lightweight material and rushing public debate?

The new planning Act provides that the Planning and Design Code is completed

by June 2020, an arbitrary deadline set by the previous government. This is proving to be a very tight timeframe given the breadth of the planning reforms. DPTI is asking for feedback in a short amount of time on some very complex planning issues.

If the Department wishes to foster constructive dialogue and debate on these very important planning policies, the community needs much more time and a more genuine and considered consultation process.

We await -with trepidation- the next sorry episode in DPTI’s planning Utopia.

R I GH T :

The cast from ABC-TV’s Utopia television series.

H E R I TAG E L I V I NG

 page

5

 S igni f icant T rees

The politics of trees:

Planning and Protection MICHAEL HEATH

Herodotus (484BC - c.525BC), called the ‘father of history’ says: “The purpose (of recording historical occasions or places) is to prevent the traces of human events from being erased by time and to preserve the fame of... important and remarkable achievements.”

Who disagrees with such a sensible, long-standing sentiment?

I

n South Australia, trees are among the items we conserve. Twenty-one tree sites are listed in appendix XIII, State Heritage Register, (Government of South Australia, 2000). The National Trust of South Australia has some 7600 culturally significant trees on its State Register, to identify and record their heritage value. The record also aims to encourage circumstances for future value, thereby establishing a continuous link between past, present and future.

The ethos behind the National Trust’s concern for culturally and historically important buildings - and landscapes, is that it believes three things: • •

•

holding onto foundational history has essential value for future generations; a better match between present-andfuture outcomes depends on past experience; protecting trees in our midst increases the welfare of all living things.

PI C T UR E D

Atlantic Cedar, Highercombe Golf Club. Photo: Michael Heath

page

6



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

S igni f icant T rees



R I G HT

Moreton Bay Fig, Hardy’s Winery, McLaren Vale. Photo: Michael Heath

We deem some buildings, landscapes and trees, more important than others.

The National Trusts across Australia agree that their version of Significant Trees, and those within heritage legislation, should be retained for their natural lifespan unthreatened and uncontested by human activities, especially owner-convenience.

Why should we retain trees in our cities and towns? The most usual primary categories for deriving benefit from community tree presence include: • • • • • •

core function; wildlife habitat; psychological benefit; economic activity; visual enrichment; heritage value;

Either singly, or in combination, these attributes enhance local character, improve health and wealth, and increase our emotional satisfaction with the places we call ‘home’.

Why should we remove trees?

They have a high risk factor by associating people with built-form and infrastructure. Tree owners have a responsibility to examine and maintain their trees in reasonable condition, thus precluding property damage, death, and personal injury. Tree behaviour is unpredictable; even with due diligence applied to them, they may need to be removed. Sample reasons for acceptable tree removal include: • • •

•

death of the tree; or reasonable suspicion that it is dying; reasonable expectation that the tree will die within 5 years; visible history of major limb loss; extensive visible canopy death <50%; trunk leaning more than 60° from vertical; extensive fungal decay.

There are some occasions when tree removal is not warranted, including: •

• •

personal gain at the community’s cost; developer gain causing community loss; while a tree is still safely doing what it was meant to do; when a tree has more than 5 years safe value remaining.

If the community were to make the rules by which trees and development co-exist collaboratively, some sample advantages would be: •

•

•

•

• •

planning, development and infrastructure works best when in the public interest; planning should achieve safe comfortable settings that are ‘environmentally mature’; trees provide environmental maturity while their community values endure; tree values can be identified and quantified; they increase property value; their benefits and limitations can be advantageously managed; historical communities are a special case; their trees have high foundational values.

Local government classes trees as ‘liabilities’ because they cost money to care for. This accounting methodology is incapable of seeing trees as ‘assets’ that actually create wealth and wellbeing. It has no capacity to embrace heritage values. This needs to change.

A ‘willingness to retain trees’ accepts the ethos that they have enduring community benefits (more than 10 years beyond the present). Practical longevity may mean choosing trees known to live for 100-200 years in the urban environment. Four benefits are: • •

•

•

trees should be planted to create community value; a place with trees has greater community value than one without trees; valuable tree species need a robust, long-term performance history; nowadays better practices are available for deciding how and where to plant trees.

To achieve the pro-tree stance encouraged in this story, there are a number of political support

mechanisms to improve urban tree presence, including: •

•

•

•

•

an attitudinal change within government to view trees as value-adding investments that also provide better health and welfare, and raise property prices; an attitudinal change within the development industry to view trees as value-adding investments; legislative encouragement to incorporate trees into the development process; legislative discouragement for removing trees from development proposals; publishing tree-inclusive design guidelines;

In summary, we should invite politicians to become familiar with this topic. Trees are undeniably part of the State’s planning system, but are poorly served by it. They concomitantly enhance environmental well-being, increase property values, and provide an identifiable character that people’s emotions sense as ‘home’, but they are not supported in these roles.

South Australia and its trees would benefit from laws that: •

•

•

•

support trees as community assets, and ingeniously manage their failings; recognise that long-term tree benefits outrank short-term speculative gains; protect trees from being a tradeable/expendable/unvalued commodity; facilitate tree retention via treeinclusive feasibility studies and designs.

Hopefully, this narrative shows we can do better with trees. When we know how to do better, we should do better, surely? If not us...who? If not now... when?

H E R I TAG E L I V I NG

 page

7

 Our P e o ple

C O N G R AT U L AT I O N S

Queen's Birthday Honours Three National Trust volunteers have been recognised in this year's Queen's Birthday honour awards.

MRS MERILYN DORA KUCHEL OAM

MR STEPHEN COLIN STOCK OAM

Merilyn Kuchel was awarded the Order of Australia Medal for her service to horticultural and botanical organisations in South Australia.

Stephen Stock was awarded the Order of Australia Medal for his service to the community of Moonta in a range of organisations.

Merilyn has been the horticultural advisor for the National Trust at Beaumont House since 2009 and is the Volunteer Coordinator leading a team of volunteer gardeners in the rejuvenation of the three-acre garden.

Stephen has held the position of Chair of the National Trust of South Australia Moonta Branch since 2004 and has been a volunteer for more than 40 years. Stephen has also been past Chair and Committee Member for the Moonta and District Progress Association for over 30 years. He is a current member of the Kernewek Lowender Cornish Festival Moonta Sub-Committee, and past Committee Member. Stephen is Fair Co-Founder Committee member, Moonta Antique and Collectibles Life Member and a member of Moonta Apex. Stephen has been a member of Moonta Lions, for over 15 years and Chairperson of the Yorke Peninsula Collectors Club and also a board member of the Moonta Health and Aged Care.

Merilyn has been a volunteer for 30 years with the Open Gardens National and State schemes and Coordinator for SA/NT, she also taught horticulture and garden design part time, worked as a project officer for the Adelaide Botanic Gardens and the State Herbarium and served on the committees of the Australian Garden History Society and the Mediterranean Garden Society. She is currently a Trustee of the Pioneer Women’s Memorial Garden and President of the Friends of the Botanic Gardens of Adelaide.

MS MARGARET ANN FORD OAM

Margaret Ann Ford was awarded the Order of Australia Medal for service to education and to the community.

Since retiring Margaret has provided committee service to National Trust of South Australia, including guiding at Beaumont House.

Within the South Australian Department of Education, Margaret held the position of Project Manager and Advisor 1993-2000. During this time, she represented education on state-wide committees. Margaret’s career as a teacher, Deputy Principal, and Principal spanned the period 1966 to 1993.

Margaret’s extensive service to the community involved her association with Zonta International Combined Status of Women Committee, and member of the Zonta Club of Adelaide-Torrens. She is Regional Executive for South Australia for the Penguin Club of Australia, and is a current member of the Campbelltown Group, Historical Society SA and the Burnside Historical Society.

Congratulations to each of you on receiving well-deserved recognition for your dedicated community service.

page

8



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

T it j ikala E x hibiti o n



PI C T UR E D :

Left: There was standing room only in the State Dining Room during the Titjikala Women’s Choir performance.

Above: Jack Buckskin (right) delivered the Kaurna Welcome to Country at the exhibition opening.

Below: The Titjikala Women’s Choir.

Tjungu Pakani – Together We Rise Celebrating Titjikala Culture through Art & Music JILL MACKENZIE

As part of this year’s South Australian Living Artists (SALA) Festival, Ayers House museum was pleased to host Tjungu Pakani (Together We Rise). This exquisite exhibition features the unique Batik silk practices and artistic works of the Titjikala Women’s Choir of the Northern Territory.

T

The exhibition launch was held on 8 August with a special performance by the Titjikala Women’s Choir in the State Dining Room at Ayers House.

Accompanied by pianist Gabriella Smart, saxophonist Derek Pascoe and oboist Celia Craig, the choir performed to an enthusiastic full house.

he community of Titjikala, 130 kilometres south of Alice Springs, is highly regarded for their artistic works across a number of media including paintings, pottery, and Batik silks.

An ancient tradition originally from Indonesia, ‘Batik’ is a method of decorating cloth by applying dye and wax.

The Titjikala Women’s Choir are one of six communities represented in the Central Australian Aboriginal Women’s Choir. Recently featured in the television documentary The Song Keepers, the Central Australian Aboriginal Women’s Choir have achieved international fame touring Australia and Germany sharing their traditional and Lutheran heritage through their choral performances.

Tjungu Pakani is the culmination of a series of art and music workshops held in early August at the former Royal Adelaide Hospital site. The Batik works displayed in the State Dining Room at Ayers House were created by the women of the Titjikala community

along with South Australian artists, Helen Fuller, Angelica Harris Faull, Miranda Harris and Claire Harris during these workshops. Gabriella Smart, the Artistic Director of Sound Stream and the National Trust of South Australia’s inaugural Composer in Residence, also presented a series of music workshops with the Titjikala women to share songs from the Lutheran tradition in the Pitjantjatjara language with local musicians. Pitjantjatjara is the most commonly spoken language in the Titjikala community.

We are thrilled to have the opportunity to host such a prestigious and talented group of female artists and their works during the SALA Festival. The Batik silk installations, which fill the State Dining Room windows, are particularly spectacular to view during the day when the sunlight fills the room.

Visitors to the exhibition also have the opportunity to see other artworks made by the Titjikala community including woven baskets, beads, ceramic bowls and paintings.

Thank you to all our partner organisations for making this possible, and a very special thanks to Julie Meruntju, Janie Campbell, Stephanie Campbell, June Wilyuka and Margaret Campbell for sharing your rich cultural heritage and artistic talents with us.

Tjungu Pakani is on display at Ayers House museum until 23 September 2018.

For more information, visit www.ayershousemuseum.org.au or call 8223 1234.

H E R I TAG E L I V I NG

 page

9

 L earning

Halloween and Heritage:

Old traditions, new experiences

M

HELEN LAWRY

A holiday heavily associated with the United States, ‘All Hallows Eve’ places its origins in ancient pagan Celtic traditions in Britain.

Surprisingly, Halloween has a long history in South Australia and today provides children and families with a unique opportunity to connect with heritage places.

P I C TUR ED

Top: Young South Australians have participated in Halloween celebrations for more than 100 years.

Above: Participants young and old are encouraged to dress up for the occasion.

entioning the word “Halloween” will elicit a strong response from South Australians, with as many in favour of celebrating the holiday as those who dismiss it as an ‘American’ tradition. In fact, a review of early colonial newspapers provides evidence that Halloween has been a feature of South Australia’s social calendar since the earliest years of European settlement. One 1912 article published in the Chronicle noted that a Halloween event hosted by the South Australian Caledonian Society in the Adelaide Town Hall that year had been attended by more than 100 “young folks of Scottish descent” who spent the evening dancing and singing along with a bagpipe band.

Recently, marking the holiday has undeniably grown again in popularity.

For the custodians of heritage places, Halloween provides an opportunity to showcase these special spaces in new experience-driven ways through theatre, performance and hands-on activities. In 2017, Ayers

House museum hosted its inaugural Halloween family program, “A Very Victorian Halloween”. Open to children ages 8 years and older, the event invited families to the museum to learn about the history and traditions of the holiday in the Victorian period.

Scheduled in the evening, the program created a sense of excitement for the children, many of whom had not had the opportunity to visit a heritage house at night. An evening activity also encouraged the participation of families with working parents who would not normally be able to visit during regular opening hours.

The program was designed to be thrilling but not scary. Participants took a torch-lit tour through the museum.

They sang traditional Celtic songs, listened to spooky and humorous traditional Scottish stories, and made scary noises under the table in the Butler’s pantry. The program finished with bobbing for apples on the verandah, a simple and light-hearted activity designed to shake off any residual suspense or fear. Participants were encouraged to dress up, and the program’s presenters also donned Victorian era costumes to create a sense of atmosphere.

The program was a huge success and each of the sessions held were completely booked out. A wonderful outcome of the program was repeat visitation by several participants who expressed an interest in seeing Ayers House during the day!

This year A Very Victorian Halloween will take place at Ayers House on Wednesday 31 October at 6.30 pm For more information and to book visit www.trybooking.com/RGQH.

page

10



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

4 0 Years o f H eritage P ro tecti o n



40 years of

Heritage Protection laws in South Australia

Heritage protection laws recognise the economic and social value of our built heritage.

Historic and culturally significant places embody and sustain community values, add amenity to our streets, neighbourhoods, towns and cities and provide a highly valuable opportunity for investment in their ongoing conservation and use.

2018

marks the 40th anniversary of statutory protection for heritage places in South Australia. Before the South Australian Heritage Act 1978 there were no laws to recognise or protect places with heritage significance from damaging modifications, neglect or demolition. A decade earlier, South Australia had led the nation in legislating to protect Aboriginal heritage through the Aboriginal and Historic Relics Preservation Act (1967). The 1978 Act had a much wider purview.

The South Australian Heritage Act followed similar legislation in Victoria (1974) and New South Wales (1977).

The purpose of the Act was to “preserve, protect and enhance the environmental, social and cultural heritage of the State”. It established the Register of State Heritage items, for items of “significant aesthetic, historical, cultural, archaeological, technological or scientific interest”.

This language strongly echoes the National Trust’s 1955 legislative mandate to preserve and maintain “lands and buildings of beauty, or historic, scientific, artistic, or architectural interest”.

Items listed on the State Heritage Register would now be protected from inappropriate modification and from demolition. The Trust had been compiling its list of significant places since 1961, and it was that list, underpinned by decades of research work by National Trust volunteers, which formed the basis for the original State Heritage Register. By 1979, when the State Heritage Register was first proclaimed, it included 569 ‘items’ or places.

The Heritage Act established the South Australian Heritage Committee which later became the South Australian Heritage Council. It also introduced the idea of heritage agreements with owners of listed places and established The Trustee of the State Heritage as a body corporate and the State Heritage Fund to fund conservation works.

The Act, therefore, enshrined three approaches to heritage protection: regulation of modification and demolition of listed places, creating an advisory body for the Minister, and introducing a balance of incentives and controls for owners through heritage agreements and investment funds for heritage conservation.

Statutory protection for local heritage came somewhat later, managed through the planning system. The City of Adelaide initiated the identification of local heritage through the Lord Mayor's Heritage Advisory Committee in 1981. The Development Act (1993) entrusted local councils with the task of identifying individual places of local heritage significance and identifying Historic Conservation zones for areas with significant heritage value.

By 2007 there were 2199 places on the State Heritage Register and 6 383 local heritage places. Ten years later those numbers stood at 2 290 and 7 058 respectively, reflecting relatively slow growth in the past decade. Arguably, further additions to the State Heritage Register are less likely as the research and survey work to identify them is more likely to have taken place. In the case of local heritage places, much research on the significance of places is incomplete or has not been acted on by local councils due to lack of resources and bureaucratic obstructions imposed by the State Government.

South Australia’s heritage protection system is at a cross-road. This special feature explores where we are, how we got here and some new ways forward to ensure that the work of the last 40 years to protect and preserve our heritage is sustained into the future.

H E R I TAG E L I V I NG

 page

11

 4 0 Years o f H eritage P ro tecti o n

What we have gained from

40 years of Heritage Protection

W

PROFESSOR NORMAN ETHERINGTON AM

South Australia’s system of State and Local Heritage protection has by and large served us well, providing certainty both for property owners and communities who value the irreplaceable legacy of historic buildings and sites that are so abundant in this state but so rare in the world.

e owe so much to the enthusiasm for history and heritage preservation that swept the nation in the 1970s.

I well remember the groundswell of anger that gripped Adelaide when Edmund Wright House appeared likely to fall beneath the wrecker’s ball – as well as the community celebration that ensued when the state stepped in to save it in 1971. I had the pleasure of speaking informally with members of Hope Committee of Enquiry into the National Estate in 1973 that persuaded the Commonwealth Government to play a leading role in the heritage movement. I continue to be inspired by noble aspirations embodied in the Burra Charter of 1979.

The architects, artisans and historians involved in implementing the pioneering state heritage legislation in New South Wales, Victoria and South Australia possessed amazing energy and enthusiasm. Not all of them came with much prior experience of heritage work but they learned fast.

Few doubted that they would very quickly spread a protective net around thousands of historic places.

A B OV E

Old Parliament House, North Terrace, Adelaide.

page

12



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

It was thrilling for me as Chair of the Constitutional Museum in 1978-81 to watch a team of heritage architects and craftsmen oversee the renovation of our Old Parliament House. And it was great experience to serve on the Lord Mayor’s Heritage Advisory Committee,

which compiled the City of Adelaide’s first register of local heritage in the 1980s.

In later years I fear we have become complaisant, assuming that the protection afforded by state and local government heritage legislation guarantees the future of the places we love. Recent changes to planning policy and practice are a wakeup call, threatening the monumental achievement with death by a thousand cuts. Diminished resources for the State Heritage Council, cavalier rejection of places recommended for Local Heritage Listing, and Development Plan Amendments that make it easier to demolish heritage places have all played their part.

We need to recapture the vision and energy of the enthusiasts of forty years ago. Our existing framework of heritage protection is much like the places it seeks to preserve: needing constant care, maintenance and vigilant oversight.

4 0 Years o f H eritage P ro tecti o n



Forty years on, there is much to celebrate,

but what lies ahead for Heritage Protection in South Australia?

KEITH CONLON OAM CHAIR, SA HERITAGE COUNCIL

Heritage is both our past and our future, and so we are but its guardians. It is certainly not about freezing the past. It is about preserving and enhancing our own special sense of place.

T

here is much to celebrate in this 40th anniversary year of Heritage Protection legislation in South Australia. For example, there are now about 2300 heritage places which enjoy the substantial protection that a State Heritage Register listing brings. The high benchmarks set in legislation have nevertheless produced a rich and surprising diversity among them. On a recent anniversary bike ride, we discovered an industrial chimney, an old grandstand, a pioneer power station, a modest morgue now used as a gardeners’ shed and a tram barn turned herbarium to complement the more predictable grand houses and ornate old hotels.

An anniversary should also cause us to pause and survey the state of play. How has heritage protection and nurturing fared in the 21st century in South Australia? What are the next ten years likely to bring?

The most recent era has not been a happy one, on balance. A Heritage Directions document in the early 2000s advocated more funding for face-toface assistance for owners of heritage places. It has gone. More money for local government heritage surveys and a regional heritage advisory service came... and went. A Heritage competition in schools has also been scrapped. Heritage South Australia – the government unit that administers Heritage policy and supports the Heritage Council – lost several staff in the last decade.

On the other hand, many private owners of heritage listed places have seen that as an honour and sensitively restored their homes and buildings, enhancing them for the benefit of those who are still to come. The City of Adelaide is celebrating 30 years of its Heritage Incentive Scheme, and many buildings that we admire have benefited from it. Electra House, opposite the Adelaide Town Hall, for instance, is an outstanding example of adaptive reuse.

Photo: Bension Siebert, In Daily.

There is predictable frustration that not all developers are of that ilk, of course.

A cluster of ‘frozen’ buildings on North Terrace sit with development approvals in hand, waiting for ‘better economic conditions’. More ‘carrots’ for Heritage owners would be wonderful. Perhaps we could borrow from overseas and add some ‘sticks’ to the system as well.

There is a lot happening in the policy arena. Established last year, the State Planning Commission is undertaking the formation and implementation of a completely new planning system.

It is now consulting widely on its draft planning policies, which include protection of cultural and built Heritage.

The Heritage Council and Heritage South Australia are actively involved.

What of the road ahead? Despite the perennial potholes, I think there is room for optimism.

In addition, everyone interested in Heritage now faces the challenge of presenting strong arguments, facts and policy directions to the Environment, Resources and Development Committee of Parliament in its deliberations on the Heritage system in South Australia. We should seize the opportunity and help re-ignite the Heritage debate in our community and make this decade a winner – not just for ourselves, but for future generations.

South Australia has a new Minister for Heritage who is demonstrating his clear commitment. David Speirs’ door is open for consultation with the National Trust. He intends to conduct a review of the Heritage Council and its work and resources – which we welcome.

That fits well with the desirability of one piece of legislation to cover all Heritage listing, both state and local, being looked at again. Small it may be to start with, but a State Heritage Grants scheme is definitely coming shortly. The Minister is also keen to undertake a boost to Heritage Tourism – an already proven economic winner, particularly in our regions. It was already on our priority list, too.

Our precious and irreplaceable Heritage needs our loud and clear help, just as much as the old Bank of South Australia - Edmund Wright House - did, when 67,000 people signed the petition back in 1971.

H E R I TAG E L I V I NG

 page

13

 4 0 Years o f H eritage P ro tecti o n

Busting the myths about heritage protection

Despite the well-established evidence for the many benefits of heritage protection and conservation, a number of negative myths persist that call into question the value and effectiveness of heritage protection.

S

ome people argue that heritage protection reduces the rights of property owners, that it ‘freezes’ buildings and places in time, or that it is a hindrance to economic development. In promoting the benefits of heritage protection, it is important to understand where these myths come from and the evidence that disproves them. Here we consider five of the most common myths used to argue against heritage protection.

MYTH 1 HERITAGE LISTING REDUCES THE VALUE OF MY HOME OR NEIGHBOURHOOD

A

faster rate than new builds. Far from reducing value, heritage listing operates to protect and enhance the value of individual properties, streets and neighbourhoods.

common misconception is that a heritage listing may reduce the value of a property, by placing conditions on development and use. This idea is not supported by available evidence. Numerous studies, in Australia and internationally, show that, if there is any impact at all, the effect of heritage listing is most likely to be a positive one, increasing property values, individually and in street and neighbourhood clusters.

Heritage buildings are highly sought after for their reliable resale value, with buyers placing a premium on their special and often irreplaceable features. As the supply of heritage buildings is limited, their rarity and authenticity ensure that they grow in value over time, usually at a

Where heritage listing is inadequate, uneven or uncertain in a street or neighbourhood, those benefits may be reduced or lost as the heritage values may be diluted through ad hoc demolition or redevelopment. The greatest increases in value are seen in areas of group listing, where a protected streetscape, precinct or neighbourhood creates additional benefits and a 'halo' effect for surrounding areas. Historic Conservation Zones were established in South Australia as one form of heritage protection in recognition of these significant benefits.

MYTH 2

O

HERITAGE LISTING MEANS I CANNOT ALTER MY HOME

nce again, this myth is born of misconceptions and confusion about what can be done to modify a heritage listed place. The purpose of listing is to protect heritage values for property owners and the community. Generally, listing prevents demolition, but unsympathetic additions or alterations usually removed to preserve the integrity and authenticity of a building.

Modifications for heritage listed buildings do usually require some additional development approvals, from local or state government authorities. Some do not.

page

14



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

Many local councils try to assist with this process by providing specialist heritage advice and support. The State Government has well established processes for handling proposed modifications to State Heritage listed places.

Generally, for a listed place, sympathetic additions and alterations can be will be approved to provide more space or to accommodate modern amenities.

The regulation of modifications to listed places serves to protect their value and integrity and to maintain consistency in streets, neighbourhoods, suburbs and towns with heritage significance.

4 0 Years o f H eritage P ro tecti o n



MYTH 3

H

ONLY GRAND PLACES ARE WORTHY OF HERITAGE LISTING

eritage protection extends from the grandest to the most humble places, reflecting the full diversity of our economic, social, cultural and architectural heritage. The use of graded measures of significance defined by specific criteria means that physical, cultural, historical and aesthetic features may be used to determine whether a place is heritage listed.

Often, significance relates to quite particular aspects or associations such as who lived or worked in a place, or special technical or design innovations. Grand or small,

beautiful or industrial, heritage places come in all shapes and sizes, all equally worthy of some form of protection for their unique and irreplaceable characteristics.

With the growth in innovative adaptation of heritage places, new residential, commercial and public uses mean that buildings may take on many different purposes from that for which they were first designed. New and sometimes surprising uses ensure that the heritage values of all kinds of places can be preserved in different ways.

MYTH 4

A

HERITAGE PROTECTION STIFLES ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

myth often heard from members of the property development industry advocating for reduced heritage protections or the demolition of heritage places is that heritage protection acts as an unnecessary 'handbrake' on development. This argument is not supported by credible evidence. In fact, recent research and data show the exact opposite.

Investment in heritage protection and conservation can be one of the greatest drivers of economic growth and development through increased property values, skilled jobs and urban revitalisation. Short term developer profits do not match the long term benefits accruing to property owners and the community from preserving and investing in our heritage places. In many cases the short term benefits of construction activity for new developments accrue to investors outside the local economy. Investment in preserving and repurposing heritage assets produces long term sustained benefits for the local economy.

We know from international research that every dollar spent on heritage conservation has a significant multiplier effect within the economy. Research undertaken for Adelaide City Council indicates a return of $1.68 for every dollar invested through its Heritage Incentives Scheme, the largest such program in the country, which invests $1m a year in heritage conservation by owners of heritage listed properties. We know also of the direct and indirect benefits of heritage-related tourism, which in the City of Adelaide alone exceed more than $375m per annum.

We can only hope that the growing body of evidence regarding the economic boost delivered through heritage protection and conservation will be recognised as one of the primary and enduring benefits of a robust and effective heritage protection system.

MYTH 5

L

HERITAGE LISTING IS BUREAUCRATIC RED TAPE

isting serves many purposes and it has been clearly established that the benefits of heritage protection outweigh the costs. However, as with any system of regulation, the efficiency of administration can be improved through simplification and better organisation.

An awkward split between local and state government roles in South Australia has made our listing system needlessly confusing and inefficient. On pages 22-23 we outline our suggestions for simplifying and streamlining that system.

Heritage protections cover a relatively small proportion of all buildings - less than five percent in most localities meaning most places are not directly affected by listing.

However the positive benefits of listing can extend to the surrounding locality, city or region, adding economic, social, cultural and environmental value.

H E R I TAG E L I V I NG

 page

15

 4 0 Years o f H eritage P ro tecti o n

What we lost before there was Heritage Protection National Trust starts the campaign to preserve our built heritage WALTER MARSH

The origins of the heritage preservation movement go back to the nineteenth century.

Concern about the loss of cherished historic places and encroachments on public open space inspired the first National Trust organisation in England.

Inspired by their example and increasingly concerned by indiscriminate losses of historic buildings and threats to natural places, the National Trust of South Australia emerged in response to rapid post-war growth in the state – and the wave of development that followed.

P I C TU R E D

Brookman Buildings, Grenfell Street, c 1920. Built 1896, demolished 1970s.

Photo courtesy Michael Burden.

page

16



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

T

hese boom years brought economic prosperity and a swelling population, but also demolition and redevelopment with little oversight. In an urban setting this saw many of South Australia’s colonial and Victorian era buildings, then underappreciated as key pieces of our heritage razed to accommodate Adelaide’s upwards growth into a modern city. It grew outwards too, as the urban expansion of the Playford era saw vast tracts of land from the coast to the hills transformed by housing and industrial estates, further diminishing the natural heritage and biodiversity of a part of the world already reshaped by decades of European settlement.

sites like the Mounted Police Barracks, Destitute Asylum, and Austral (Ayers) House, now key parts of our North Terrace cultural precinct, formed the centre of their campaigning.

Formed by an Act of Parliament in 1955, South Australia’s National Trust quickly set to work to record and preserve the State’s built heritage. In 1961, an Early Buildings Committee was convened to document and classify buildings completed before 1886, in order to build a case for conservation to Government and private owners seeking to demolish them. A massive undertaking, this volunteer committee graded structures based on their architectural, historical or general significance. Not all of the first 250 they surveyed were deemed essential, of course, but important

Being separate from government gave the Trust the independence needed to fight for community interests, but a lack of statutory power meant public lobbying and fundraising to acquire key sites were its main avenues for preservation. One such early win was the Robe Customs House, earmarked for demolition for new Council Chambers before local National Trust activists launched a successful campaign to save it in 1968. However, it was clear that a more stable, legally enforceable system of protection was needed.

During the 1960s and 1970s the shifting political tide also brought the first legislation in Australia to protect heritage, with South Australia’s Aboriginal and Historic Relics Preservation Act in 1967. But by the late 1960s the demolition of iconic Adelaide buildings like the ES&A Bank in 1965 and the South Australian Hotel in 1971, it was clear that a legislative framework to better preserve the history of European settlement was also required – and fast!

4 0 Years o f H eritage P ro tecti o n



Decades of Destruction

M

ichael Burden’s remarkable Lost Adelaide: A Photographic Record (1983) captures the scale of what was lost in the City of Adelaide from the early twentieth century to the 1980s.

From gothic churches to stately homes, important government buildings to densely built workers' cottages, a great variety of built heritage was flattened in an unregulated development freefor-all. Once home to a handsome boulevard of mansions, the grand city residences of North Terrace fell one by one until only Austral (Ayers) House remained – with its fate still uncertain and contested into the 1970s.

Adelaide retains many of its historic churches, but throughout the 1950s, 60s and 70s spire after spire disappeared from its skyline, as longstanding and imposing structures like Pulteney Street’s 1865 Zion Chapel, the unusual 1860s octagonal tower of the Unitarian Christian Church on Wakefield Street, or the handsome twin domes of the 1865 Congregational Church on Hindmarsh Square were demolished.

PI C T UR E D

Top: Background image: Demolition of Jubilee Exhibition Building in 1962, and above in its full glory when completed in 1887.

Left: Zion Chapel, built 1865 demolished 1955.

Below:The Tavistock Hotel, built 1884, demolished 1962.

Photos courtesy Michael Burden.

The decision by the City of Adelaide in 1962 to carve a corridor through the historic East End to create what is now Frome Street saw the wholesale destruction of an entire precinct.

Treasured landmarks fell, from the once-bustling, three storey 1884 Tavistock Hotel to Frome House, the final building designed by prolific colonial architect George Strickland Kingston. Its stark rectangular 1880 windows are a curious departure from the abundant arches typical of his work, offering a fascinating end note to an architectural legacy bred into the city’s DNA. Perhaps the most egregious loss however, was the Jubilee Exhibition Building on North Terrace. Built at the height of the Victorian era in 1887 to celebrate the achievements and vision of the booming South Australian colony, it ultimately fell victim to a lack of forward thinking shown 80 years later. It was demolished by the University of Adelaide in 1962 to be replaced by a carpark, barren concrete forecourt and the unloved Napier building, now themselves flagged for demolition to make way for nothing less than a “ceremonial and conference facilities combining with a new arts precinct”. A grand exhibition building, in modern parlance – if only they had cause to think twice the first time.

H E R I TAG E L I V I NG

 page

17

 4 0 Years o f H eritage P ro tecti o n

People stand up for Heritage

A

lthough established through Parliament, the National Trust’s heritage activism has always relied on the support of the community, and as the 1970s progressed it was people power that helped drive home the message that our heritage had value beyond the land it stood on, and deserved protection.

The ANZ Bank building on King William Street, now known as Edmund Wright House, was one of the best-known battles of 1970s heritage activism, and a hard-earned success story. Plans by a Sydney developer to demolish the 1878 building to make way for a 19 storey office block hit the news in 1971, shocking many. Designed by architect and Edmund Wright and Lloyd Tayler, the building had already received an ‘A’ classification by the Trust’s Early Buildings Committee and, on that basis had been added to a Government list of important sites protected under the Planning and Development Act. The Steele Hall Government proved that list to be worth little more than the paper it was printed on when it removed the building at the request of its developer owners.

P I C TUR ED

Edmund Wright House, built 1878, saved from demolition in 1971.

Community action in response to the proposed development was swift, with a ‘Save The Bank’ citizens’ group working side by side with National Trust members to lobby to save the building from demolition and persuade the newly elected Premier Don Dunstan to purchase it on behalf of the State Government, using funds donated to a public appeal and backed by a petition signed by more than 60 000.

In a booklet published during the campaign for its preservation the building is described as, “an architectural masterpiece equal to any in Australia. The pillars are delicate things, finely proportioned, each hand carved. The entrance leads through a corridor, flanked with fluted polished columns in richly figured marble, to the superb banking chamber.”

John Dowie, the acclaimed sculptor, observed, "The building is of course irreplaceable. Even supposing that one could assemble the craftsmen and artists capable of such work, the cost today would be quite prohibitive. Its familiarity and nearness to us in time tend to blind us to the true value of this building. It is the product of a philosophy and tradition which were responsible for the finest ornaments of the great cities, a tradition now dead. It is the equivalent to us of a work

by Palladio or Wren, and we can assume that never again will such things be made here.”

South Australians had at last recognised the value of the built heritage of their capital city and started to insist on its preservation.

In the time since its preservation, Edmund Wright House has had a mixed history in government ownership. For the past two years it has sat empty and closed tight, a wasted asset. It is now for sale by the State Government. Perhaps the proceeds of that sale, if it takes place, could be returned to support greater investment in the many other heritage buildings in need of a new lease of life.

page

18



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

4 0 Years o f H eritage P ro tecti o n



PI C T UR E D

Above: South Australian Hotel on North Terrace, built 1894, demolished 1971.

Far Left: Frome House, designed by George Strickland Kingston, demolished 1962.

Left: Pirie Street Methodist Church, built 1850, demolished 1976.

Photos courtesy Michael Burden Below: Before and After. Heritage protection laws arrived too late to prevent the loss of magnificent structures like the former Grand Central Hotel at the corner of Pulteney and Rundle Streets. Built in 1910, it was demolished by the State Government in 1975-76 to make way for the Rundle Car Park.

B

ut not all of the 1970s campaigns were successful, with wrecking crews ripping down two beloved pieces of South Australia’s history in the South Australian Hotel on North Terrace, and the Grand Central Hotel on Rundle Street, the latter all the more galling for its replacement. Gone were the ornate details and Victorian era grandeur of the hotel once visited

by Arthur Conan Doyle and the Prince of Wales, replaced by the concrete and steel of a multi-storey carpark.

Such disappointments underlined the need for substantive measures to protect our heritage buildings. After all, the Government or other well-financed beneficiaries cannot always be relied upon to intervene and save a building already slated for demolition. Real heritage protection must to be preventative, systematic and independent, with the needs and values of the community at its core. We needed legislation.

That came in 1978 when the South Australian Heritage Act was passed 40 years ago, establishing the foundations of our current heritage protection system.

H E R I TAG E L I V I NG

 page

19

 4 0 Years o f H eritage P ro tecti o n

A Snapshot of the 2016

South Australian Community Consultation on Local Heritage In 2016, former Labor Government Planning Minister John Rau proposed drastic changes to local heritage protections, creating a large public outcry. Although the Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure (DPTI) never bothered to respond to the 183 written submissions made in response to those proposals, the National Trust did undertake a detailed examination of those submissions and released it as public report in 2017. What that report shows is that the community are generally satisfied with the heritage protection system we have and want to see heritage protections enhanced rather than diminished.

Some of the key findings are highlighted below and opposite.

‘There is strong evidence to demonstrate that heritage has a strong employment multiplier and creates jobs. The State Government must fully understand, appreciate and take into account the strong economic benefits of heritage in any further thinking about reforms.’

Local Government Association of South Australia

T

here is general agreement that local heritage is best identified and managed at the community level through locally elected councils.

E

nthusiasm for heritage varies among councils, with many rural and regional local governments neglecting it altogether. Some submissions think more should be done to encourage their participation.

P

eople blame the state government for imposing cumbersome processes, delays and roadblocks to heritage listings – rather than simply accepting the recommendations put forward by councils after close analysis of professionally conducted local heritage surveys. They want these obstacles removed.

M

ost submissions reject the notion that local heritage is less worthy of protection than places on state and national registers.

page

20



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

N

ine inner suburban metropolitan councils have made identification and limited protection for ‘Contributory Items’ the mainstay of their local heritage protection. Most submissions that mention Contributory Items want existing protections for them continued under whatever reforms may be implemented. Submissions from two planning professionals and property industry groups want them removed.

C

ouncils and community organisations deny that credible evidence exists to show that heritage preservation hinders investment and development in any way.

S

ubmissions from the property and development industry tend to support that contention. The three principal lobby groups make very brief statements (eleven pages in all) offering unsubstantiated assertions rather than the carefully argued, evidence-based analysis these wellresourced organisations might have been expected to deliver.

4 0 Years o f H eritage P ro tecti o n

A

part from the property and development lobby groups – and a few disgruntled home owners – no one wants current constraints on demolition of heritage places relaxed.

Interim protection of places nominated for listing is almost universally recommended to guard against preemptive demolition.

C

ouncils and government agencies with experience of the system would prefer that heritage advice come from an integrated authority operating independently of the planning and development approval system. This is the recommendation of the 2014 Expert Panel on Planning Reform most often endorsed in these submissions.



S

ome individual proposals for simplifying heritage protection deserve wider discussion and debate.

One is that the state government step aside from local heritage altogether, leaving it entirely in the hands of local councils. Another is that all buildings and historic fabric dating from before World War I or the 1930s be treated as prima facie heritage whose destruction requires detailed justification. Both proposals would relieve state and local governments from expenses currently associated with heritage protection.

O

nly two proposals set out in the DPTI discussion paper that generated the public consultation are generally endorsed: early engagement with owners of nominated heritage places, and the development of a single online portal giving access to all existing documentation on heritage – local, state, national and world.

‘Heritage places and precincts are important for the economic, cultural, social and spiritual health of a community and a State. This seems obvious but it also seems that it needs to be pointed out again and again.’

South East City Residents Association

You can download the full report from www.nationaltrust.org/au/localheritageprotection Facebook/LoveYourLocalHeritage

H E R I TAG E L I V I NG

 page

21

 4 0 Years o f H eritage P ro tecti o n

Strengthening

our heritage protection system For more than 40 years South Australia’s heritage protection system has served us well.

We continue to enjoy some of the best preserved buildings, streetscapes and heritage areas in the nation, a fact often remarked upon by visitors to the state. It is worth remembering why our protection system was established, after decades of significant and irreplaceable losses. We can be proud of what has been achieved, what we have preserved and the potential losses we have avoided.

B

ut there is work to do.

The current protection system has become more complex and confusing than it needs to be, creating uncertainty, frustration and much wasted effort. Policy uncertainty arising from recent changes in planning legislation is adding to confusion and reducing the quality, consistency and transparency of decision making.

Any system can always be improved to ensure better outcomes in terms of the economic, social and cultural benefits derived from effective heritage conservation. As we learn more about those benefits, the arguments in favour of a robust and comprehensive system of heritage protection grow ever stronger. Now is the time to strengthen and simplify our State's heritage protection system.

We need a system that is simple and efficient to administer and which provides reliability, consistency and transparency. Aspects of the current system, particularly the messy split between state and local heritage can be simplified and better integrated to increase certainty and consistency in decision making. Terminology can be clarified and streamlined to avoid confusion and ambiguity.

We believe a well-designed heritage protection system should deliver: • A clear, simple, open and transparent listing system for all types of heritage • Good governance and efficient administration • Certainty and consistency to promote investment

In responding to the current Heritage Inquiry by the Environment, Resources and Development Committee of Parliament, the National Trust advocates for the following reforms and enhancements:

A single integrated listing system Include all heritage listing provisions within a single integrated heritage statute under the Minister for the Environment.

Management of all heritage listings by the South Australian Heritage Council.

Re-establish the heritage register committee of the Heritage Council, with simple, transparent and open processes for nomination of all types of heritage.

Simplifying local heritage listing In the interests of consistency, fairness and equity it is vital that the forthcoming Planning and Design Code explicitly recognise the heritage significance of both locally listed places and Contributory Items. Removing Contributory Items from council lists would practically denude some historic neighbourhoods of heritage buildings. Rebadging all Contributory Items as Local Heritage would create invidious distinctions among areas of equal heritage value. The National Trust’s suggested solution to this dilemma is to create a graded system of local heritage conservation similar to that used in England and Scotland.

•

• •

page

22



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

Grade I buildings would comprise places of outstanding individual heritage significance. Only a small number in each council area are likely to qualify for this designation, which would require development approval for any changes to the exterior – front, rear and sides.

Grade II buildings would comprise all other places currently listed as Local Heritage, which would continue to enjoy the present level of protection.

Grade III buildings would comprise all places currently listed as Contributory Items.

â&#x20AC;&#x201A; 4 0 Years o f H eritage P ro tecti o n

ď&#x201A;Ą

Two places proposed by the Adelaide City Council for local heritage protection were among dozens rejected arbitrarily by State Government in 2013 leaving them without protection and at risk of demolition. Local councils are best placed to work with their communities to determine what should have local heritage protection.

PI C T UR E D

Left: Bluestone cottage, Adelaide.

Right: Art Deco Sands and McDougall building, King William Street.

Simplifying the nomination process The process for nominating places for local protection is made needlessly slow and inefficient by being undertaken through the mechanism of development plan amendments.

The delays, multiple decision points and lack of transparency and accountability in this convoluted process makes for inconsistent and arbitrary decision making. A simple integrated nomination system for both state and local listings, overseen by the State Heritage Council, should make it easy for anyone to make a nomination for listing.

Making it difficult to remove listed items Heritage listing provides clarity and certainty for property owners about their rights and responsibilities. Changes to current listings should only be made in narrowly defined circumstances, if at all, to avoid uncertainty, confusion and contention.

Ending demolition of local heritage buildings Protection of historic conservation zones needs to be strengthened by ending demolition of local heritage buildings in order to conserve irreplaceable assets and advance the objectives of the 30-Year Plan for metropolitan Adelaide.

The identification of Historic Conservation zones should be overseen by the State Heritage Council.

Keeping local heritage decisions in local government hands Primary responsibility for initiating assessments and recommending listings should remain with local councils, because they alone among existing agencies have the expertise and experience to do the job. They are also accountable through the electoral process to the people whose homes and businesses are most directly affected by local heritage listings.

Greater support for local councils to establish heritage protection, particularly in regional areas Incentives should be provided to encourage Councils which have not made local heritage surveys to carry them out, including the 20+ regional councils which have not done so.

Councils that have made surveys but not followed them up with listings should be required to put recommendations forward.

Reinstate an integrated state-wide heritage advisory service, accessible by all Councils

More incentives for heritage investment by property owners Greater support and incentives for heritage home owners, in the form of grants, training, fee waivers and tax incentives to encourage owners to invest in heritage conservation.

Research undertaken for Adelaide City Council indicates a return of $1.68 for every dollar invested through its Heritage Incentives Scheme.

What are your ideas and suggestions for strengthening our heritage protection system? email: heritagewatch@nationaltrustsa.org.au

H E R I TAG E L I V I NG

ď&#x201A;Ą page

23

 4 0 Years o f H eritage P ro tecti o n

Heritage Inquiry:

Protecting our heritage protection system The achievements and the value of our heritage protection system are well established. The system established 40 years ago has created some form of protection for more than 20 000 places across South Australia through State and Local heritage listings of individual buildings and through the protection of groups forming valuable streetscapes and heritage areas. It has enabled the community and individual owners to preserve and enjoy the value of our unique built environment and impressed many visitors to our state with the quality of what exists here and how it has been preserved.

A

nd yet, despite the remarkable legacy of our built heritage and the well documented benefits- economic, social and cultural – of heritage conservation, there are always some people who will argue for reductions in heritage protection.

Governments are continually lobbied to remove protections for individual sites and to dilute the overall strength of our heritage protection system, by those who believe that heritage protection has more costs than benefits.

Those of us who value our heritage and the benefits it creates need to remind governments continually of the value of our heritage protection system and to resist the spurious arguments made by some to relax or remove heritage protection to make it easier to demolish or otherwise destroy our irreplaceable heritage assets for short term gain.

At the end of July the Environment, Resources and Development Committee (ERDC) of State Parliament, called an inquiry into heritage.

Submissions were called with little prior notice, and with just six weeks to make written submissions to the following terms of reference to investigate and report on the existing arrangements and desirable reforms for local, state and national heritage listings, with particular reference to: 1. Highlighting the differences in, and consistency of, processes and criteria between listing and assessing local, state and national heritage.

2. How heritage should be managed in the future; including, but not limited to investigating: a.

How should the process for listings (from initiation to final placement on the appropriate register) be managed, and by whom;

b. Who should have the right to be heard in relation to listings;

Committee Member Mr Adrian Pederick MP, Presiding Member Hon John Dawkins MLC Mr Nick McBride MP Hon Tung Ngo MLC Hon Mark Parnell MLC Hon John Rau MP

Electorate Hammond Legislative Council MacKillop Legislative Council Legislative Council Enfield

c.

d. What processes should be in place for the review of listings.

3. What is the relationship and distinction between ‘character’ and ‘heritage’; 4. Have there been unexpected or perverse outcomes; and 5. Any other relevant matter.

The Committee will hear representations through October and aims to make a report to Parliament in the new year. Written submissions were due on 14 September. The National Trust is advocating for improvements in the administration of the system through greater efficiency, transparency and independence in decision making and for more direct community participation.

You can also contact individual members on the Committee to let them know how much you value South Australia’s heritage and how you support greater heritage protection, not less.

Email address hammond@parliament.sa.gov.au john.dawkins@parliament.sa.gov.au mackillop@parliament.sa.gov.au tung.mlc@parliament.sa.gov.au parnell@parliament.sa.gov.au enfield@parliament.sa.gov.au

You can also contact the Committee Secretary Ms Joanne Fleer, for more information via email to: ERDC.Assembly@parliament.sa.gov.au

page

24



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

Who should be the decision maker for listings and review; and

4 0 Years o f H eritage P ro tecti o n



Vote 1 for your local heritage

S

It’s election time for South Australia’s 67 metropolitan and regional councils.

The chance comes but once every four years to choose your local council members.

ince the last council elections in 2014 there have been some significant changes to the role of local government in planning, development and management of local heritage.

We suggest you ask candidates standing for election some of the following questions to ascertain their views on planning, development and the protection of heritage.

A massive centralisation of planning decision-making within the state government and the stripping away of powers and rights from local councils and communities are having a dramatic impact on our streets, suburbs, towns and cities. South Australians now have the least rights to notification and appeal against new developments that affect them of anywhere in Australia.

 In your opinion has the current system of local heritage protection served

The development free for all unleashed by the previous government and its rubber-stamp State Planning Commission is causing concern across the metropolitan area. Poorly designed and badly built “urban infill” is being approved without proper consultation or review. The result is overcrowding, strained infrastructure and a mess of uncoordinated, opportunistic development that reduces amenity and property values.

The people who were elected to represent the interests of local communities have been sidelined by these changes, greatly diminishing your say in what happens in your local area.

If you are concerned about restoring your voice and that of your local council in the planning and development of your area and the protection of local heritage, we urge you to support candidates in the upcoming local council elections who support our heritage.

Voting opens in late October and closes on 9 November.

 Do you agree that the identification and protection of local heritage places is best done by local councils rather than DPTI (Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure)? your community well?

 Do you agree that total demolition of registered local heritage places should not be allowed in development applications?

 Should councils reject proposals to list local places of historic merit simply because an owner objects?

 Should neighbours of local heritage listed buildings have a right of appeal on development applications that propose demolition?

 Should buildings listed as Contributory Items in your council area receive better protection?

 Do you agree that places proposed for listing by your council as Local Heritage or Contributory Items should be subject to review by DPTI? Or would reviews be more appropriately conducted by an independent source of expert advice?

 Would you like to see your council work more closely with the National Trust of SA in protecting heritage, for example by signing up as one of the Trust’s Civic Partners?

 What are your personal suggestions for improving the way your council handles heritage policy and planning?

 Should councils actively encourage individuals to nominate places for consideration as local heritage?

The National Trust will be sending an online survey to all council candidates seeking their views on these issues and will publish their responses on our Heritage Watch website early in November. www.heritagewatch.net.au

Share your support for local heritage on our Love your local heritage Facebook page Facebook/LoveYourLocalHeritage

H E R I TAG E L I V I NG

 page

25

 Vo lunteering

Become a National Trust

Bushcare volunteer today Have you been to one of our beautiful National Trust nature reserves lately?

Spring is on the way and it is time to get out and smell the flowers! One good way to start is to come along as a volunteer! You can meet like-minded people on-the-job and over a cup of tea.You can get to know about the plants and animals on our reserves, and see much more than casual visitors. Plus you can personally make a big difference to the environment.

Volunteering on a National Trust nature reserve is easy and fun.

Our volunteers find their work fulfilling and satisfying. They enjoy the chance for quiet contemplations and seeing the reserves change over the seasons. Contact us to discuss what your interests and abilities are. We can arrange for you to meet our friendly Natural Heritage Manager at a nature reserve and you can see what we do.

We can arrange for some on-the-job training and get you started with a National Trust bushcare group.

Not very fit?

You don’t have to be fit to make a contribution, and some healthy exercise in the fresh air might be just what you need.

Much of our work on nature reserves is meticulous bushcare. An eye for detail is sometimes more important than strength.

Want to see results?

There is plenty of busting big weeds, track building and lifting rocks for those who want to use their biceps!

Can’t make an ongoing commitment?

That’s ok. We have a working bee timetable for the year and you can pick and choose which ones to go to.

Don’t know anything about bushcare?

You will be trained and equipment is provided. You will learn all about our precious native plants and the invasive weeds that threaten them and how to do sensitive bush regeneration.

Have a group of friends who are keen?

We can arrange a bush-blitz on a date that suits you and provide all the equipment and a project that suits your skills.

Indoor skills not outdoor skills?

Bush care also involves writing up species lists, publicity and communications.

Want to find out more?

To find out more about becoming a National Trust bushcare volunteer you can: Call: 8202 9216 or 0400 294125 Email: volunteer@nationaltrustsa.org.au Visit: www.nationaltrust.org.au/volunteers-sa

page

26



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

C o nservati o n A ppeal



Conservation Appeal:

The Freemasons Hall MICHAEL OLIVE

The National Trust has launched a fundraising appeal to support conservation works for one of the most remarkable buildings on North Terrace.

C

ompleted in 1927, this unique structure at 254 North Terrace is the headquarters of Freemasonry in South Australia and the Northern Territory. The design, created by Mr W.H. Harral of the Firm of Messrs Bruce and Harral, Architects, was selected from a number of entries submitted by competing architects in South Australia in 1922.

Of the vast numbers of people who pass by this building each year, few pause to take in its splendour or ponder its history.

When approaching the building, one cannot fail to be impressed by its imposing appearance emphasised specially by the four great Ionic columns at the Main Entrance with the flight of granite steps leading up to it. The intricacy of the craftsmanship of the era adorning the facade is worthy of closer study.

PI C T UR E D:

Top: The Freemasons Hall, North Terrace.

Centre Left: Marble Staircase.

Centre Right: Grand Master, Dr Neil Jensen and National Trust CEO Dr Darren Peacock sign deed of agreement for National Trust Freemasons Hall Conservation Appeal.

Bottom: Magnificent Great (Concert) Hall.

On passing through the main entrance doors an outer vestibule is entered, on the walls of which is emblazoned a bronze “Roll of Honour” in commemoration of the Freemasons who served on active duty during The Great European War, 1914-1918. Passing through either of the next three pairs of swing doors, one enters the Hall of Fame with its Colonnade, Marble Floor and Staircase. The Hall is enhanced by being carried through two storeys, the upper portion having a balcony all round.

The treatment of this Hall, as well as throughout the whole building, is based on the Three Traditional Orders of Greek Architecture (viz: Doric, Ionic, and Corinthian). The lower columns, with their Cornice, Frieze and Architrave, are treated in the Doric style and the upper columns round the balcony follow the Ionic style.

At the rear of the Hall of Fame is the Great (Concert) Hall which has been used since 1927 for many purposes by the general public, such as Concerts, Balls, Art Shows, Seminars, and also as an Examination and Lecture venue for the University of Adelaide.

Following the Centenary of the Grand Lodge of South Australia and The Northern Territory (the oldest Grand Lodge in Australia) in 1984, major upgrades were carried out within the building, but great care was taken to preserve the character of the structure while making it more suitable for present needs and requirements.

The Freemasons Hall, which has been recorded on the National Trust Heritage Register and holds a State Heritage listing, is a reminder of the important part Freemasonry has played in the community since the establishment of a Province in South Australia, and the ongoing support of the Craft in the future development of this State.

As with many of our historic buildings continued maintenance and repair is required to prevent loss of our heritage. Dr Neil Jensen, Grand Master, has appointed a Task Force to oversee a major restoration project. Whilst heritage grants assistance will be sought further fundraising will be necessary. The National Trust Grand Lodge Conservation Appeal is now open for donations. All donations are tax deductible.

For more information on how to donate visit: www.saheritagefoundation.com.au or contact michael@santfreemasons.org.au H E R I TAG E L I V I NG

 page

27

 M embership

By becoming a member of the National Trust you will enjoy a range of discounts and other benefits, including free entry and discounts to many National Trust properties in Australia and around the world, as well as supporting our ongoing work to protect and preserve our heritage.

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 $176 $60 $162 $45 $122 $95 $257 $85 $230 $75 $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

Debit my credit card:

Visa

Mastercard

Card Holder Signature

Expiry Date

Credit Card Number

Cost of membership/s:

JOIN TODAY!

page

28



Post completed membership form to: National Trust of South Australia Beaumont House 631 Glynburn Rd Beaumont SA 5066

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

$

Or scan and email to: admin@nationaltrustsa.org.au Or call (08) 8202 9200

I n the K itchen



FROM THE BEERENBERG FAMILY FARM

Coconut Cake

with Mango and Mandarin Cream PREPARATION TIME: 20 MINUTES INGREDIENTS

METHOD Preheat the oven to 170°C and line three 20cm cake tins with non-stick paper.

In a large mixing bowl, add the butter and caster sugar. Using an electric beater, whip until pale and fluffy. Add the eggs, one at a time, beating well after each addition. Add the sour cream and lemon juice and beat to combine.

Fold through the self-raising flour and desiccated coconut to combine.

|

COOKING TIME: 30 MINUTES

For the cake: 250g butter, softened 300g caster sugar 5 eggs 300g sour cream Juice of 1 lemon 350g self-raising flour 120g desiccated coconut

|

SERVES 12-14

For the cream: 600ml thickened cream 1 jar Beerenberg Mango & Mandarin Curd For the glaze: 100ml coconut cream 100g icing sugar 1 mango, sliced 1 mandarin, segmented

Divide evenly between the pans and place in the oven.

Cook for 25-30 minutes, or until a skewer inserted into the centre of the cake comes out clean.

Cool completely.

In a large bowl, whip the thickened cream using electric beaters. Add the Beerenberg Mango & Mandarin Curd and whip until combined.

In a small bowl, add the coconut cream and icing sugar.

Mix to combine.

Once the cakes have cooled place one cake on a cake stand and spread with half the mango & mandarin cream. Repeat with one more cake and the remaining cream. Top with the final cake, drizzle with coconut glaze and finish with sliced mango and mandarin segments.

H E R I TAG E L I V I NG

 page

29

Signature Series Aye r s Hou s e M u s e u m

Experience world class music in Adelaideâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s finest Victorian era home.

An intimate concert series certain to delight all the senses.

e

The Divine Image

Rosalind Martin, soprano, Joshua Van Konkelenburg, organ, and Celia Craig,oboe

Bound for South Australia Julian Ferraretto,violin, with his band Date: Thursday 25 October Time: 6.00 for 6.30 pm

Date: Thursday 27 September Time: 6.00 for 6.30 pm

Mozart the Master

Celia Craig, oboe, Dr Helen Ayres, Linda Garrett and Simon Cobcroft, strings Date: Sunday 25 November Time: 3.30 for 4.00 pm

WHERE

TICKETS

State Dining Room, Ayers House Museum 288 North Terrace, Adelaide

Single Performance: $40 pp | Entire Series: $110 pp (refreshments included)

For more information about the Signature Series at Ayers House Museum and to book your tickets please visit: www.ayershousemuseum.org.au or phone (08) 8223 1234 or email ayershouse@nationaltrustsa.org.au

S E P T E M B E R - NOV E M B E R 2018 Proudly presented by the National Trust of South Australia in partnership with Celia Craig

ayershousemuseum.org.au

W hat ' s On



Signature Series:

Intimate chamber music at Ayers House

T

he Signature Series, established in 2017, was intended to reignite a tradition that Ayers House itself was designed for: exquisite, intimate soiree events where the audience can really interact with musicians within a wonderful and accessible historic setting.

After an overwhelmingly successful program featuring some of South Australia’s most talented musicians, I am delighted to once again curate this year’s series. The 2018 Signature Series promises not to disappoint, with an equally exciting and diverse offering of performances in the acoustically and aesthetically beautiful surrounds of the State Dining Room.

Our opening concert is a delicious feast of mostly baroque music for voice and oboe, featuring the versatile and talented Rosalind Martin and Dr. Joshua Van Konkelenburg, performing on a specially sourced small chamber organ, with obligato oboe. Expect glittering arias by Bach, Handel and Purcell, including excerpts from ‘Come Ye Sons of Art’, ‘The Fairie Queen’, and two of Handel’s German language settings.

Poetry by his compatriot Barthold Brockes, ‘Earthly Pleasure in God’, inspired from Handel music of great intensity and beauty. Enjoy this rare chance to hear these almost operatic religious works alongside Vaughan Williams’ charming, poignant and rare ‘Ten Blake Songs’ for voice and oboe, almost transparent in its watercolour reminiscent word painting.

CELIA CRAIG

For a better work/life balance, I enjoy a good day off work too and some time in the audience. In our midst here we enjoy top quality jazz performers- where I can appreciate the musicianship and skill of the performers in a genre that I can only admire rather than participate. So with great pleasure I’ve invited world-class violinist Julian Ferraretto, recently returned to his origins in Adelaide after a decade of globetrotting, exploring world music and jazz, based in London with the Wigmore Hall ‘Ignite’ Ensemble.

Enjoy an evening exploring some jazz history and local connections with the violinist described by Real Time Arts as “sinuous and dynamic (with) phenomenal skills” in our second concert on 25 October.

Our final concert is of pure Classical music, entitled Mozart the Master, with guests Dr. Helen Ayres, violin, Linda Garrett, viola and returning to the Signature Series after his acclaimed solo performances of Bach last year, distinguished cellist Simon Cobcroft.

I’m delighted to be able to invite another world-class ensemble made up of worldclass players who have settled in South Australia.

Founder of Seraphim Trio, Australian violinist Dr. Helen Ayres has returned to her home state after time spent in Sydney, Melbourne and London.

Together we will present a delightful program of true chamber music- the music of friends, music for a palace chamber or large room. Mozart’s evergreen Oboe Quartet, full of jokes and effervescence, was written for his favourite oboist, Friedrich Ramm. We’re presenting Mozart in context with two of his interesting contemporaries: German/Czech composer and violin virtuoso Carl Stamitz, and music teacher and composer to the Viennese Countess von Schaffgotsch, (one of the oldest and most notable Silesian family dynasties)- Johann Baptist Vanhal.

Please join us in the State Dining Room.

H E R I TAG E L I V I NG

 page

31

 W hat ' s On

NTSA 2018 Council Election Following a call for nominations, ten (10) candidates are standing for seven (7) vacant positions on the Council of The National Trust of South Australia.

Ayers House museum

Beaumont House

Signature Series

Open Garden Day

September to November

Come along and discover the lovingly restored gardens, enjoy the Spring colour, and learn about the early history of these experimental gardens and the remnant olive grove. Guided tours of the garden will be available.

Devonshire teas will be served on the veranda, there will be displays of garden sculptures, a working blacksmith, plant sales, garden raffle and much more.

Sunday 23 September Time: 10am - 4pm.

Cost: Entry at the gate is $8, concession $6, and young people 15 and under are free.

Place: Beaumont House, 631 Glynburn Road Beaumont.

Enquiries: Visit the website www.nationaltrust.org.au/sa or email email: events@nationaltrustsa.org.au or on (08) 8202 9200.

All current adult members are encouraged to vote through the online voting system.

Instructions on how to cast your vote will be sent by email to your nominated email address, or by post if we don’t have an email address for you. Voting is open from 24 September to 19 October.

If you do not receive a voting instruction email or letter by 30 September, please contact support@govote.com.au or call 1800 919 553.

All ballots must be received by 5pm on 19 October.

We encourage you to take the time to cast your vote for the NTSA Council.

Please email any other questions about the election to executiveadmin@nationaltrustsa.org.au or call Helen Cartmel on 8202 9213.

NTSA Annual General Meeting 2018 Notice is hereby given that the 63rd Annual General Meeting of the National Trust of South Australia will be held at the North Adelaide Community Centre, 176 Tynte Street, North Adelaide, on Saturday 17 November 2018 from 10am to 2pm. All members are invited to attend.

Please pre-register for catering purposes executiveadmin@nationaltrustsa.org.au Agenda Introduction and Welcome.

Minutes of the 62nd Annual General meeting.

Business arising from the minutes.

General Business.

President’s Report.

CEO's Report.

Financial Report.

NTSA Awards Presentation.

Any Other Business.

Break for lunch.

Learning Forum: Heritage Tourism

page

32



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

Experience world class music in Adelaide’s finest Victorian era home. An intimate concert series certain to delight all the senses. Proudly presented by the National Trust of South Australia in partnership with Celia Craig.

The Divine Image Rosalind Martin, soprano; Joshua Van Konkelenburg, organ and Celia Craig, oboe.

Thursday 27 September Time: 6 for 6.30pm.

Bound for South Australia Julian Farraretto, violin.

Thursday 25 October Time: 6 for 6.30pm.

Mozart the Master Simon Cobcroft, cello; Celia Craig, oboe; Dr Helen Ayres and Caleb Wright, strings.

Sunday 25 November Time: 6.00 for 6.30 pm Cost: Single Performance: $40 pp, Entire Series: $110 pp (refreshments included).

Place: Ayers House museum, 288 North Terrace Adelaide.

Enquiries: For more information about the Signature Series at Ayers House museum and to book your tickets please visit our website: www.ayershousemuseum.org.au, telephone (08) 8223 1234, email ayershouse@nationaltrustsa.org.au or book directly at www.trybooking.com/ XQYE

The 2018 Australian Festival of Marmalade The 2018 Australian Festival of Marmalade will celebrate the winners of the Australian Marmalade Awards and all things citrus.

Come and enjoy Spring in the beautiful grounds of Beaumont House, which will be transformed into a citrus paradise, offering citrus plants for sale, information on Riverland citrus, how to grow citrus and practical demonstrations of cooking with citrus.

Visit the dining room of Beaumont House and see the amazing range of marmalades entered into this year’s competition and attend the presentation of the 2018 Australian Marmalade Awards by Jane Hasell-McCosh, of Dalemain Estate, Cumbria, in the United Kingdom, inventor and presenter of the incredibly successful World’s Original Marmalade Awards and Festival UK for over twelve years.

W hat ' s On

Under marquee cover Riverland citrus guru, Ian Tolley OAM, will talk on how to grow citrus in our own backyards, including some unusual varieties, and will answer all your citrus questions. Culinary Historian Allison Reynolds will give a presentation on Top Tips for marmalade making. There will also be a demonstration of the marmalade making process.

Red Robin Coffee, Retro Refresh foodtruck and Beaumont Devonshire Teas will provide all your refreshment needs. Music and a variety of craft and marmaladethemed stalls (including marmalade for sale) will keep you entertained in this beautiful garden.

Sunday 7 October Time: 11am - 5pm.

Cost: Adults $10, Concession $8, NTSA members $7, competition entrants and children 15 and under free.

Place: Beaumont House, 631 Glynburn Road Beaumont.

Enquiries: (08) 8202 9200. For more information about the Marmalade Awards visit www.nationaltrust.org.au/marmalade or email: marmalade@nationaltrustsa.org.au



Adelaide Tours Discover Adelaide’s secrets, mysteries and treasures with our range of guided walking tours. Explore beloved and hidden places great and small as you uncover the colourful and sometimes strange stories of our city’s heritage. Visit the website www.adelaidetours.net.au for more.

Old Treasury & Tunnels Journey above and below ground to explore the secrets of one of Adelaide’s most fascinating colonial buildings! From the founding of the colony, through the gold rush era, Federation and two World Wars, the old Treasury building sat at the heart of South Australia’s political life. The tour includes the former Cabinet Room and underground passages where gold from Victoria was stored to be smelted into the Adelaide Pound.

Saturdays and/or Sundays.

New dates added regularly Time: 11am & 1pm.

Starting: from Adina Treasury Hotel, 2 Flinders Street Adelaide.

Cost: Adults $15, Concession $13, NT Members $10, Child $10.​ Enquiries: Ayers House museum (08) 8223 1234 or email: bookings@nationaltrustsa.org.au

Z Ward -Behind the Walls Go behind the walls of the notorious Z Ward at the former Glenside Mental Hospital. For almost 90 years it was home to those classified as “criminally insane” on the overlapping edges of criminality and mental illness. This guided tour explores the architecture and social history of this remarkable building.

Saturdays and/or Sundays.

New dates added regularly Time: 2pm.

Place: Z Ward, access to Z Ward is via 63 Conyngham Street, Glenside.

Cost: Adults $15, Concession $12, NT Members $10, Child $8.

Enquiries: Ayers House museum (08) 8223 1234 or email: bookings@nationaltrustsa.org.au

Local events Burnside Branch

Stangate House and Garden Open Day

Beaumont House Open Day Beaumont House is a State Heritage listed property built in 1849 by Augustus Short, the first Anglican Bishop of Adelaide, then the home of Sir Samuel Davenport, politician, horticulturist & pioneer of the olive oil industry in SA. Guided house tours.

Sunday 4 November and 2 December Time: 2 - 4.30pm.

Cost: Adults $10, including afternoon tea.

Stangate House is in the heart of Aldgate.

Designed by Adelaide architect Eric McMichael, the 1940’s house is set in four acres and overlooks one of the most beautiful camellia gardens in Australia. Last chance to see the camellias! Open fires and Cornish tea available.

Sunday 30 September Time: 1 - 4pm.

Place: Stangate House, 3 Edgeware Road Aldgate.

Cost: $5 entry, children under 14 free.

Enquiries: m 0408 081 124, email: enquiries@stangatehouse.org.au

Mount Barker Branch Talk Visit Paech Farm and enjoy a lunch followed by tours of all collections and buildings.

Tuesday 13 November Time: 12 - 2.30 pm.

All Mount Barker Branch enquiries: telephone (08) 8388 7133

Tea Tree Gully Branch Heritage on Sunday. Enjoy the afternoon as you visit 13 rooms in the building, 4 pavilions, working blacksmith, police cell and laundry. Surrounded in a beautiful garden setting take time to wander, explore and be entertained. Devonshire tea is available and the Gift Shop.

One Day Only: Spring in the Garden Spring is in the air, a lovely time of the year to visit our beautiful gardens. Plants for sale, live music and sausage sizzle.

Sunday 21 October Time: 11am - 4pm.

Cost: Adult $5, Conc $4, Children Free.

One Day Only: The Great War & Its Ending The surrender of Germany 100 years ago – on 11th November, 1918 is recognised as the end of the Great War. We remember and share memories of the impact the war and its aftermath had on families and individuals here at home. View extensive memorabilia from the war years.

For this special event the Tea Tree Gully & District Historical Society Inc has researched and collated information for the display.

Sunday 18 November Time: 1 - 4pm.

Cost: Adult $5, Conc $4, Children Free.

Place: Tea Tree Gully Heritage Museum, 3 Perseverance Road Tea Tree Gully.

All Tea Tree Gully Branch enquiries: (08) 8251 3499, www.ttgmuseum.on.net

H E R I TAG E L I V I NG

 page

33

 T he N ati o nal T rust o f S o uth Australia

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

PATRON IN CHIEF

Ms Deborah Morgan

His Excellency the Honourable

VICE PRESIDENT

COUNCILLORS

Dr Liz Burge Mr Bob Cornwell Dr Walter Dollman Mr James Harvey Ms Melanie Kiriacou Mr Brian McMillan Mrs Caren Martin Mr John Northwood Ms Kath Rayner Mrs Sue Scheiffers Mrs Robyn Wight NTSA STATE OFFICE STAFF

Dr Darren Peacock Chief Executive Officer

Ms Ellen Martin Finance Manager Mr Christopher Grant Natural Heritage Manager Dr Jill MacKenzie Public Programs Manager Mr Mario Russo Assets Manager Ms Joseanne Visentin Senior Administration Officer

Images: Walter Marsh and Michael Burden.

COUNCIL COMMITTEES

Audit, Finance and Governance Collections, Regions and Branches Cultural Heritage Advisory Natural Heritage Advisory NTSA BRANCHES (46)

page

34



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

Governor of South Australia

Mr George Hobbs

Ms Helen Cartmel Executive Administrator

Grand Central Hotel and Rundle carpark.

Hieu Van Le AC

Adelaide Metropolitan, 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, Mount Lofty, Penneshaw, Port Elliot, Strathalbyn, Victor Harbor, Willunga, Central Yorke Peninsula, Kadina, Minlaton, Moonta, Wallaroo.

Telephone (08) 8202 9200 for contact / information details on the website.

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

CIVIC PARTNERS

Adelaide City Council CORPORATE PARTNERS

Beerenberg Farms Bickfords Coopers Laucke Flour Mills Piper Alderman Tech-Dry Theodore Bruce 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

H E R I TAG E L I V I NG

ï&#x201A;§ page

35

P RESEN T ED BY T HE N AT ION A L T RUS T OF SOU T H AUS T R A L I A IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE DALEMAIN WORLD’S O RIGIN A L M A R M A L A DE AWA R DS & F E S T I VA L UK

Sunday 7 October 11am – 5pm Beaumont House 631 Glynburn Rd, Beaumont

nationaltrust.org.au/marmalade