Lake Margaret Power Scheme A Conservation Management Plan

Volume 1

March 2006 Paul Davies Pty Ltd Architects Heritage Consultants

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006

Contents

1 INTRODUCTION...... 1 1.1 Background ...... 1 1.1.1 How to Use the Plan...... 1 1.1.2 Limitations ...... 2 1.1.3 Authors ...... 2 1.1.4 Acknowledgments ...... 2 1.1.5 Identification of the Place ...... 3 2 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND...... 6 2.1 Preface...... 6 2.2 Summary History...... 6 2.3 Major Stages of Development of the site ...... 7 2.4 Development of the Power Station Building...... 13 2.5 Plans of the Power Scheme...... 15 3 ANALYSIS ...... 19 3.1 Introduction ...... 19 3.2 Precinct 1 – Dam and pipeline area ...... 23 3.3 Precinct 2 - Village ...... 25 3.4 Precinct 3 – Power Station Core Area ...... 29 3.5 Precinct 4 – Lower Power Station ...... 31 3.6 Precinct 5 – the Broader Site ...... 32 4 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS ...... 34 4.1 Introduction ...... 34 4.2 Overview of power generation in Australia...... 34 4.2.1 The Gara River Development 1895...... 34 4.2.2 Duck Reach ...... 34 4.2.3 Other Developments...... 35 4.2.4 The Great Lake Scheme ...... 35 4.2.5 Lake Margaret ...... 36 4.2.6 Mainland Australia ...... 36

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 i 4.2.7 Technological Context ...... 37 4.2.8 Comparative Size and Output ...... 37 4.3 Summary...... 38 4.3.1 Moorina Power Station ...... 38 4.3.2 Waddamana Power Station...... 38 4.3.3 Later Power Schemes and developments...... 38 5 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE ...... 39 5.1 Introduction ...... 39 5.2 Previous Assessments of Significance ...... 40 5.3 Tasmanian State Heritage Criteria...... 41 5.4 Statement of Significance ...... 41 5.5 Significance Assessment of Component parts of the Scheme ...... 44 5.5.1 Summary of significance of Site features and elements...... 45 6 POLICY...... 48 6.1 Introduction ...... 48 6.2 Hydro Tasmania Operational Requirements and Future Options ...... 48 6.2.1 Close the station...... 54 6.2.2 Upgrade and retain as operating station ...... 56 6.2.3 Construct a new station on the site ...... 56 6.3 General Conservation Policy...... 58 6.4 Future Use ...... 59 6.5 Conservation Work...... 63 6.6 Landscaping...... 65 6.7 Archaeology ...... 65 6.8 Movable Heritage and Site Records ...... 68 6.9 Interpretation ...... 68 6.10 Archival Recording ...... 69 6.11 Site Management and Security ...... 69 6.12 Review ...... 70

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 ii

1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background

Lake Margaret power station is set in a wilderness area a short distance to the north-east of Queenstown. It has operated continuously since its opening in 1914 providing power for the mining operations at Queenstown, as part of the supply of electricity to the locality and more recently as part of the Hydro Tasmania power network. Due principally to its private ownership and operation for most of its life the place has retained nearly all of its early infrastructure and equipment including the dams, pipelines, two power stations, the village, penstocks and a range of associated structures and features. A conservation management plan was prepared in 1994 by Godden Mackay in anticipation that the station would be closed. That plan set out a history of the site, established a basis for significance and set out policies to guide shutdown and closure. Part of the site was shut- down shortly after that plan had been prepared, including the lower station and its infrastructure but also the village was closed with the exception of three dwellings that continue to be occupied. The main station itself has, however, continued to operate. Hydro Tasmania is again considering the future of the station. The review, of which this CMP forms part, is considering in detail the stations current and future operation, the likely life of the existing equipment, the potential for new infrastructure, the heritage values of the place and the value of the station within the broader generation of power in the State. This conservation management plan builds on the work prepared in the Godden Mackay plan. The historical background from the earlier plan is used (included as Appendix 1), unedited in this document except for noting changes that have taken place over the last 11 years, and is credited to Godden Mackay (now Godden Mackay Logan). The statements of significance are upgraded to reflect more recent work on the heritage values of the Hydro system in Tasmania and to reflect changes that have taken place on the site in the last 11 years. The site analysis is prepared based on the historical information but also detailed inspection of the site in its current form and condition. The policy considers the heritage value of the place and the current and future operational needs and looks at options for the future that range from closure and mothballing to the construction of a new station. There has been extensive consultation undertaken in the preparation of this plan with site staff, Hydro Tasmania personnel and representatives of the local community. While this plan is principally concerned with heritage values and how best to retain those values for the range of options available for the future of the place, it also considers other matters such as operational options, regional tourism and occupational health and safety matters related to the place. 1.1.1 How to Use the Plan The Plan comprises six principal sections: SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION This section explains the background, the process and the context of the conservation management plan.

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 1 SECTION 2 HISTORICAL CONTEXT This section provides a historical overview of the estate, describes the place, states why it is significant, and sets out the basis for developing policies for its future management. SECTION 3 PHYSICAL ANALYSIS OF THE SITE This section looks at the various precincts and the elements contained within each to determine what remains on the site and how the various elements inter-relate. SECTION 4 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS This section looks at Lake Margaret in relation to other power schemes in Australia from the same period of construction, but also of similar heritage value to provide an understanding of how the place fits into the history of power generation in the State and country. SECTION 5 SIGNIFICANCE This section sets out why the place is significant and looks to establish relative significance for the component parts of the extensive site. Comparative significance is used to assist in understanding the place and as a basis for developing detailed policy. SECTION 6 POLICY This section is the working end of the document or “Action Plan” where the issues that affect lake Margaret are discussed, directions established, policy set out, and methods of implementation provided. The Plan provides a long-term vision for Lake Margaret. The vision is based on the statement of significance, historical and ongoing uses, and the range of cultural values that Lake Margaret possesses. 1.1.2 Limitations This plan relies on the historical analysis prepared by Godden Mackay and has not undertaken additional research related to the history of the site. Extensive site investigation has been undertaken but this has not involved physical intervention into any fabric. Reports on the condition of equipment and infrastructure provided by Hydro Tasmania are relied on for technical information related to power generation and operation of the site. 1.1.3 Authors This Plan has been prepared by Paul Davies Pty. Ltd., architects and heritage consultants. Paul Davies has undertaken the site investigations and written the plan. 1.1.4 Acknowledgments The following people and groups have assisted in the preparation of this Plan: • staff at Lake Margaret Power Station • Hydro Tasmania staff (current and former staff)

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 2

Figure 1.1 Surveying Lake Margaret. Undated photograph Lake Margaret collection.

1.1.5 Identification of the Place

Figure 1.2 The location of Lake Margaret in relation to Queenstown and the West Coast.

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 3

Figure 1.3 Lake Margaret Site Plan. The perimeter dotted line is the site boundary. Paul Davies 2005 (based on Godden Mackay).

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 4

Figure 1.4 Site Plan of Core Area. Paul Davies 2005

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 5 2 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND 2.1 Preface

The history, contained in full in Appendix 1, was prepared by Godden Mackay as part of their 1994 Conservation Management Plan. The history has not been altered since the preparation of that document except to reflect physical and operational changes that have taken place over the last 11 years. The history was based on the material supplied by Hydro Tasmania and on readily available material. No new primary research was carried out during the preparation of this plan, apart from searches for historical material relevant to the study, which were made during the fieldwork. This principally related to accessing maps, plans and photographs kept on site. Note that a number of the historical photographs are reproduced in Appendix 2. The following sections provide a brief overview history of the site with site plans showing the changes to the site over time.

2.2 Summary History The Lake Margaret Power Scheme was constructed to provide power for the My Lyell mining works. The mines had operated for some 30 years utilising timber supplies in the area before looking to provide a more permanent and renewable source of power. The site was selected due to the high rainfall and the rapid descent of the Yolande River providing a suitable head to power water turbines. The first task was to construct a tramway to the site that extended the existing network of tramways used to access timber in the area. The initial development was the power house with four machines, a dam (lower than the present dam), a woodstave pipe and tramway to access the dam area, headworks and two steel penstocks. Transmission lines were erected to connect to the mines at Queenstown and a switch house constructed at that end in matching style to the station building. The station commenced operation in 1914. A permanent village quickly replaced the temporary construction village and the station was extended in 1918 with two further generators and an additional penstock. Demand for power saw a further generator added in 1930 and a new station, pipeline, dam and headworks constructed downstream in 1932 to re-use the water passing through the main station. The connection of Queenstown to grid power in 1948 removed the need for additional power from Lake Margaret, effectively freezing the station in that configuration until the present day. Both stations remained relatively unchanged until 1964 when the tramway was replaced by an access road along with the broader removal of the tramway system around Queenstown. By 1970 the main station required upgrade and the following 10 years saw changes such as replacement of the penstock with a single new penstock with associated headworks and connections into the station, upgrade of the dam wall and the replacement of some of the outdated equipment. The final change prior to a change of ownership in 1985 was the replacement of the main control panels to the station. The new owner, the Hydro Electric Commission (HEC), further upgraded the station with safety equipment and made other changes around the site including removing several buildings. The station was seen to be approaching the end of its life and, in anticipation of

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 6 closure, the HEC commissioned a conservation management plan in 1994 to guide future decisions. That plan identified the high cultural significance of the complex. Over the last ten years the main station has continued to operate, although it now does not use all generator sets due to maintenance needs, but the lower station was closed and mothballed and the village no longer used. With the likely closure of the station, minimal staffing needs on site and issues with Occupational Heath and Safety standards, maintenance works were minimised and the site fell into disrepair with the footbridges being removed, the main timber bridge being demolished and a number of ancillary buildings being removed. Over the last few years proposals to close the site were again raised along with removing the village and other ancillary and redundant infrastructure. Hydro Tasmania, in light of the need to review the earlier conservation management plan that identified the place as significant has commissioned a revised conservation management plan to look at options for the station in the future.

2.3 Major Stages of Development of the site The following site plans illustrate the key stages of development: 1914 The construction phase - Station building and temporary accommodation installed - Dam (with lower height), pipeline, tramway, headworks built - Access tramway constructed 1914-1918 Early additions - Station building extended with 3 additional generators and new penstock - Village completed probably with hall - Construction village mostly removed - Dam raised 1918-1933 Consolidation - Replacement of pipelines - Minor works 1933-1973 Construction of the lower station and major upgrade - Lower station built with weir, pipeline, penstock, headworks and station, tramway extended for construction. - Pipeline replaced, penstock replaced, dam upgraded - House 10 added 1973-2005 Upgrade of infrastructure and Changes in Use - Upgrade of safety equipment and infrastructure - Three cottages removed - Haulage winder house demolished - Lower station closed - Village abandoned (apart from 3 houses) - Footbridges removed - Roadbridge removed - Upgrade to entry road

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 7

Figure 2.1 Lake Margaret Scheme c 1914 – showing main features at the time of opening of the station. Godden Mackay 1994. Key elements include: - Dam constructed - Headworks at Lakes Peter and Paul carried out - Temporary construction villages built at dam and station - Timber tramline constructed to dam - Woodstave pipeline built - Power station, penstocks, hilltop valves, winding house etc constructed, - Access tramway built

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 8 Figure 2.2 Lake Margaret Scheme 1918 – showing changes between 1914 and 1918. Godden Mackay 1994. Key elements include: - Village constructed - 2 turbines added to station - 3rd penstock added - Dam wall raised from 16 to 38 feet - Many construction buildings demolished but more durable ones remain

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 9

Figure 2.3 Lake Margaret Scheme 1933 – showing changes between 1918 and 1933. Godden Mackay 1994. Key elements include: - 7th turbine installed in annexe - 2 cottages added to village - Lower station and infrastructure added - Tramline connected to lower station - Salmon ponds added to site

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 10

Figure 2.4 Lake Margaret Scheme 1973 – showing changes between 1933 and 1973. Godden Mackay 1994. Key elements include: - Dam wall grouted and post tensioned - Woodstave pipeline replaced 1938 - Penstocks and surge tower replaced 1970 - New winding house and engine 1970 - 3rd transmission line added 1967 - Road replaced tramline 1964 - Residence added c1960 - Section of lower woodstave replaced - Upgrade of power house c1970 - Upper tramline refurbished 1973

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 11

Figure 2.5 Lake Margaret Scheme 1994 – showing changes between 1973 and 1994. Godden Mackay 1994. Key elements include: - 3 cottages removed 1985 - Haulage winder house demolished 1993 Changes since 1994 include: - Closure of lower station - Removal of footbridges - Demolition of roadbridge - Upgrade to station infrastructure - Upgrade to entry road

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 12 2.4 Development of the Power Station Building The station building went through several phases of growth after its completion in 1914. Initially accommodating 4 generator sets, by 1918 the building had been extended with two additional generator sets being fitted into a concrete formed addition. A final generator set was added in 1933 contained in a steel framed and corrugated iron clad addition, the temporary end wall being demolished to allow the addition to be built.

Figure 2.6 The power station in 1914 on completion showing two penstocks and four generator sets. Note the temporary wall at the end to allow for expansion. Godden Mackay 1994.

Figure 2.7 Layout of power station in 1918. Note the additional building, the two generator sets and the additional penstock and two take-offs. A small store was also added to the building. Godden Mackay 1994.

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 13

Figure 2.8 Layout of power station in 1933. Note the additional building constructed in corrugated iron, the generator set and the extension to the penstock. Godden Mackay 1994.

Figure 2.9 Layout of power station in 1994. Note the additions of workshops to the building. The drawing also shows the new penstocks and the 7 new takeoffs. The former intake room has been converted to staff amenities. A new switchboard is also indicated. Godden Mackay 1994.

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 14 2.5 Plans of the Power Scheme

The following plans from the archives held at the station illustrate the schematics for the upper and lower stations and some of the site arrangements of the station, the early surrounds and the village. Most of the plans are undated. The schematics graphically illustrate the fall (head) between water storage and turbines, the operation of the surge towers and pipes and the topography of the area.

Figure 2.10 Schematic Plan showing the pipeline from the weir below the power station to the lower power station, note the surge pipe aligned at the weir level and the very steep penstock fall to the station. From Lake Margaret Collection.

Figure 2.11 Part 1 of a schematic plan showing the alignment of the pipeline and penstock from Lake Margaret to the main power station. Note the surge pipe laid up the slope of the hillside. Also note the lower weir below the station. The schematic shows the dramatic fall in level in the river and the penstock, it also shows the cliff cutting. The shows the concrete dam wall to be 650 feet in length, the spillway to be 133 feet long, the surge pipe to be 226 feet long, the woodstave pipe to be 7,200 feet long and the penstock at 2,891 feet in reducing sections. From the Lake Margaret collection.

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 15

Figure 2.12 Part 2 of a schematic plan showing the main power station to the lower station. The drawing notes that the weir is 82’ long with a storage of 120,000 cubic feet, a woodstave pipe is 3’6” diameter and 6,475 feet long, the surge tower is 6’ diameter (the earlier surge tower) the penstock at 3’ diameter and the power house building with a footprint of 37’x33’. Also note the vertical concrete tailrace under the station building. From the Lake Margaret collection.

Figure 2.13 Site Plan showing station, residences, hall and other site features. This plan shows the seven original residences, the singlemen’s quarters and the two removed houses. It also shows the hall without additions, the power station building and several sheds since removed. The residences have slightly different footprints showing different rear additions, other sheds and outbuildings are not shown. From the Lake Margaret collection.

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 16

Figure 2.14 Site plan showing station, tramway and haulageway with associated buildings including the magazine, office, petrol store and camp. Note the tramway extending down the access road (current) to the station building in contrast to the earlier tramway route to the main entry. The building at the junction of the tramway with the penstock is noted as a kitchen. It was located on the leveled area now in front of the garages. From the Lake Margaret collection.

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 17

Figure 2.15 Site plan showing general arrangement and layout of earth grid. Hydro Tasmania files.

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 18 3 ANALYSIS 3.1 Introduction

The Lake Margaret site is large and contains a number of separate but related areas or precincts. For convenience in assessing the site and providing policy direction, the place is divided into the following areas: Precinct 1 - The upper penstock and dam including the tramway, hilltop valves and winch houses. Precinct 2 - The village and area to the west of the river including roads and infrastructure. Precinct 3 - The core site around the power station defined by the river and covering the penstock, entry road, lower weir, residence no 1 and the immediate setting. Precinct 4 - The lower penstock, hilltop valve house, winch house and lower power station. Precinct 5 - The entry roads and surrounding bushland areas that comprise the balance of the site. The operation of the site is, however, not confined to these precincts but extends across the site as the flow of water is controlled and managed to supply the two power stations. A brief overview of the layout and operation of the whole site is provided below by way of context for the more detailed descriptions and assessments of elements. The 1914 power station site was selected due to the location of Lake Margaret which was a deep tarn formed by glacial action and the relatively quick drop in river level that allowed a suitable water pressure to be achieved to drive generators. The water storage capacity of the lake was greatly enhanced by the construction of the dam across the valley, taking advantage of the high rainfall of the area. From the dam, water was taken by woodstave pipeline around the contours of the hillside, laid almost level, to the hilltop valve where it was transferred to a set of steel penstocks (later a single steel penstock) that dropped to the power station in the valley below. The location of the station was determined to maximise the available head of water (347 metres or 1,400 feet) from the dam. The water through the Penstock drives 7 Pelton wheel turbines which are directly coupled to alternators. The power generated was used to supply the Mt Lyell Mine, Gormanston, Queenstown and for a period the Zeehan Mines. The power continues to serve the Copper Mines of Tasmania mine at Mt Lyell and is then indirectly connected to the grid. Water from the station, on passing through the turbines discharges directly into the adjacent river, the station being constructed just above peak water level and close to the river bank. The infrastructure related to the early station comprises (as now found on the site): • The tramway formation that connected to Queenstown (now the entry road) • A bridge over the river that connected the tramway to the village (in ruins) • The village with its hall and seven houses to accommodate operating staff • The remains of construction housing and buildings on roughly levelled platforms throughout the regenerated bush area

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 19 • The entry stairs and cutting for the penstock • The site of the temporary power station • Pylons to hold the power lines connecting back to Queenstown. Over time the station was expanded with additional generation units, the penstock was replaced, additional buildings were added to the village and around the site, the woodstave pipeline was replaced and the tramway was replaced by an access road. A major change to the site was the addition in 1931 of the second power station with its infrastructure of weir, woodstave pipeline, penstock and incline. The design of this station utilised the water discharging from the existing power station, collecting it along with water from the river with a weir located approximately 100metres below the main station building that charged a second woodstave pipeline. This follows a circuitous route involving excavation and a steel bridge before the pipeline reaches the top of an incline where it descends steeply to the station which is located on a cutting into the rock bank of the river. Discharge from the station is directly into the river through a short concrete tailrace under the building. This station houses a single power unit. The lower station ceased operation around 1996 and was mothballed. The woodstave pipeline collapsed and most of the infrastructure has deteriorated over the last 10 years. The site in its present operational form utilises the main power station building (one power unit is currently not operational), the penstock, the woodstave pipeline, the dam, the upper tramway, the incline and gantry, manual valves and two of the houses. The main access road is maintained along with roads to access various parts of the site. A new road has recently been constructed to provide access to the hilltop area. The rest of the site has been maintained as required to operate the station. Disused buildings have not been maintained and in the last ten years dangerous structures (due to deterioration) such as the footbridges have been removed. In the last year considerable site maintenance has been undertaken, including clearing of the penstock slope, clearing of the hill behind the village and clearing of the areas around the main station building. This has revealed a range of footings and remains from earlier structures. The following sections describe the main components of each precinct. The site elements are set out in Site Feature Data Sheets in Appendix 3 and provide a consistent approach to assessment.

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 20

Figure 3.1a Site Precincts broad site area. Precinct 1 is the dam and upper pipeline, Precinct 2 is the village, Precinct 3 is the core site area containing the power station building, Precinct 4 is the lower station and pipeline and Precinct 5 is the broader site. Paul Davies 2005.

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 21

Figure 3.1b Site Precincts around station. Precinct 1 is the core site area containing the power station building, Precinct 2 is the village, Precinct 3 is the dam and upper pipeline, Precinct 4 is the lower station and pipeline and Precinct 5 is the broader site. Paul Davies 2005.

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 22 3.2 Precinct 1 – Dam and pipeline area

The dam and pipeline precinct retains much of its early infrastructure even though a number of elements have been altered and replaced over time. The relationship of the dam wall to the pipeline, the tramway, various sheds, walls (mostly drystone construction) and headworks reflects the planned and built infrastructure. Apart from the woodstave pipe and tramway most of the infrastructure is located at or near the dam. This part of the precinct is accessed via the tramway and boardwalk that flanks the pipeline from the headworks to the dam wall. The King Billy Pine woodstave pipe, that is now in poor condition and demonstrating considerable leakage, replaced the earlier hardwood woodstave pipe following a parallel and in some locations same route. Evidence of both construction periods remains with saddles and frames from the first pipeline seen in a number of locations. The construction of the pipeline demonstrates a range of building techniques from concrete and steel saddles and frames set into or close to the ground, elevated steel framing constructed from pipe, railway track and purpose made brackets to sections supported on dry stone walling of very fine construction detail (some sections have since been grouted). Of particular interest is the section of the alignment set around the edge of the granite escarpment where a narrow shelf was cut from the rock to accommodate both the pipeline and the tramway. Near the mid-point of the route is a small corrugated iron clad shed that appears to have been an early blacksmiths shop. It is most likely that this dates from the second pipeline construction but may have been earlier. It is a modest structure but is one of the very few such elements to remain at the complex, most having been removed as work was completed. Little record apart from photographs remains of these buildings as they were lightly constructed and ephemeral. This is perhaps the last and most important of these elements. A more recent shed is found at the dam, while its history is not known it appears to date from recent works but probably occupies the site of an earlier building as the ground is leveled. Again this building is one of a small number of utilitarian sheds that once extended widely over the site. The last building in this precinct is the very finely detailed and built winch house at the dam. Clearly built as part of the main construction work, it exhibits the same attention to detail as the main building with its steep pyramid form roof with finial. This building interestingly combines detail with a robust form housing a winch. It is sited on a stone retaining wall. The dam wall is the original construction with the now obvious addition of post tensioning blocks along its top which resemble battlements. The dam is mass concrete with an overspill spillway in one section. The wall is in two distinct sections separated by a rock outcrop. One end with the spillway and the other with the pipeline intake, trash racks and valve house. The valve house is a later addition, probably constructed with the replacement of the pipeline and comprises a simple corrugated iron clad structure built against the dam wall housing the outlet valves and their electric motors (now removed). The outlet provides water into the pipeline or to a flushing valve and outlet into a rock-lined channel below. The setting of the dam is dramatic and picturesque. The collection of features including the dam wall, the winch house, the flanking dry stone walls, the elevated pipeline and the valve house all combine to provide a precinct of engineering interest as well as scenic value. The smaller elements of the place including remnant drains and minor features add to the historic value of the location.

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 23 Consideration should be given to the following attributes of the precinct in determining upgrade or future works: • The form of construction and scale of the dam wall • The technology seen in valves, outlet arrangements, winching, control gates, etc. • The small-scale buildings that demonstrate the evolution of the precinct. • The tramway alignment and the remnants of the early tramway construction that underlie some of the route and the area in front of the dam wall. • The dry stone walls which are a feature of the pipeline construction. • The visual quality of the woodstave pipeline and its supporting structure. • The remnant supports from the earlier pipeline. • The rock excavation seen in cutting the pipeline around the face of the escarpment. • The relationship of the natural environment to the man-made site features The dam precinct provides an area of exceptional scenic value with the setting of the lake within a ring of hills and the extensive views to the west that are provided from most parts of the area. The walk from the hilltop valve to the dam is of exceptional scenic value. This precinct contains the following features and elements: • The dam wall, spillway and related structures • Outlet valve house • The dam winch house and winch • Work sheds (3) • Remains of early drains and corded tracks • Archaeological remains • The site of the former construction camp • The woodstave pipeline and its supporting structure and excavation • The tramway • The timber stair and early pathways • The weir and diversion works at Lake Mary

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 24 3.3 Precinct 2 - Village

The village retains much of its early form with the loss of only two of the early residences and the addition of a c1960-70 residence. Various garages and sheds were added to the site over time, dates unknown. The original village comprised a foreman’s house (separate and located on the knoll above the river) and 8 other houses of similar but slightly varying designs. The village hall appears to also date from or around the first period of construction. The village is a now unique element in relation to a power station site in Tasmania. While a number of villages survive in part from later power station construction, most village features have been removed as part of site remediation works at station and dam sites or have relocated to a new construction site. This is the only village site remaining in the ownership of Hydro Tasmania (even though it was not constructed by them). Other villages that have remained in part include Moorina, (where three residences remain, but only one is occupiable), Poatina (where the village has been sold but remains with approximately half of its buildings), Tarraleah (where only the staff house and several buildings remain from a once extensive complex), Wayatinah and Waddamana (where some of the village remains but not in Hydro Tasmania ownership). The Lake Margaret village is also rare as, similar to Moorina, it was built not to construct the station but to accommodate the operating staff. The village buildings were not constructed until the power station was operational. Other stations used parts of the village for this purpose, particularly later and remote stations where the staff house and a group of central more permanent buildings remained for operating staff, but at lake Margaret all of the residential buildings used during construction were removed and the village constructed to provide for the difficulties of access to the station. The village is also rare as it survives almost intact to its built form. Two early (but not original) houses have been removed and two newer buildings added, but the remaining 7 buildings present the village as built (despite their now deteriorated condition). Their strong linear arrangement with the foreman’s house sitting forward demonstrates a hierarchy and structure to the village. The village construction itself is also of interest. The buildings are constructed on a leveled platform that appears to be cut and fill from the hill behind as well as the area below and closer to the river. The leveled platform is extensive and provides a clear intent to establish a formal arrangement and presence in a remote location that contrasts starkly with the random arrangement of construction period dwellings that were randomly and conveniently (to topography) located across the site. The lower area of the village fronting the river is also set on a leveled platform that contained the swimming pool and a recreation area. There is a distinct embankment separating the two levels that is now subject to some erosion and deterioration. The village layout also provided for both pedestrian and tram access. Initially early photographs (figure A1.2 in volume 2) show the tramway extending across a bridge on the site of the later footbridge, this linked to the haulageway that, during construction, extended to the banks of the river. Later this was removed and the timber bridge upstream was constructed allowing the tramway to extend around the escarpment to the rear of the village. This in turn was converted to road use. The footpath network extended from the footbridge across the lower ground and via a set of formal concrete stairs and a long ramped walkway to the far end of the village. The second footbridge appears to have been a later addition that

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 25 more directly connected the foreman’s house to the station. The access stairs to this bridge are informal and reflect later construction. It is suggested in the historical research that the buildings were at least in part pre-fabricated and brought to the site in sections. This is possible but is not clear from physical inspection. Given the amount of construction work that took place on the site, the construction of timber dwellings would have been a relatively straightforward process as the construction team completed the power station infrastructure. Early photographs of the village reveal a number of attributes and features of the area. • Each house had a rectangular skillion roof section at the rear housing the kitchen. • Each house had a rear brick chimney that has now been removed. • It appears that the buildings had a consistent colour scheme including red painted roofs (although this may have been added later over natural finish corrugated iron). • Each house was set in a fenced garden enclosure with formal paths, plantings and a clear distinction between front and rear areas, there was some use of hedging as evidenced in photographs. • The front fences were rustic pickets as illustrated in various photographs • The rear yards contained a range of outbuildings and structures of consistent form with the use of skillion roofs. The base structures appear to have been built with the houses and would have housed laundry and probably bathroom facilities. • A rear road was constructed (presumably after the closure of the tramway) and some garages provided but pedestrian access only was provided to the front entrances. • The landscape was planned as and remains a combination of some retained native trees and mostly introduced exotic plantings. The exotic plants are confined to the formal cleared areas on the leveled ground. • The hill behind the houses was cleared, presumably as a fire break and remained cleared for most of its history. This matched much of the surrounding site that was heavily cleared during the construction phases and has regrown from that time. • The hall did not have a porch or rear kitchen when first built. • The residence built on the opposite side of the river, was visually connected to the village as seen in several photographs. Important future considerations in managing and developing this precinct are: • Retention of the seven original residences with their original and planned exterior form but incorporating later additions as noted for each item. • Retention of the single men’s quarters • Retention of the hall • Retention of outbuildings • The establishment of fencing between residences and the establishment of gardens and paths following the illustrated historical precedents • Retention of exotic plantings throughout the precinct • Re-establishing the pattern of clearing during the main phases of use of the village • Recovery of the lower recreation area • Recovery of the tramway formation and former building sites

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 26 • Re-establishment of the pedestrian links to the core precinct. • Consideration of replacement buildings for those removed. • Consideration of the retention or replacement of the temporary house The components of Precinct 2 are: • seven cottages from the original construction of the village • Community hall • Single men’s quarters • c1960 residence • Miscellaneous garages and sheds associated with houses • Steps and paths • Remains of swimming pool • Roads and paths • The former tramway formation • Building foundations and ruins • The cleared hillside behind the buildings • Mature landscape elements

Figure 3.3a Plan of typical house with original layout. Paul Davies 2005.

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 27

Figure 3.3b Plan of residence 9 with current layout including garage. Paul Davies 2005.

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 28

Figure 3.4 House plan of manager’s residence (residence 2) with return verandah and additions. Note the wall removed and the side addition. Paul Davies 2005.

3.4 Precinct 3 – Power Station Core Area

Precinct 3 is the core operational area of the site. Most of the infrastructure for the station was constructed around the same period in 1914 with only a few elements being added at later periods. The most significant changes to this area from its constructed form are the removal of the tramway and its replacement with the access road, noting that it uses much of the same formation, the realignment of the access road from the former tramway to the station entry, the construction of the concrete road bridge near the station replacing the timber bridge and the general regrowth over the site of vegetation. The elements lost from the early phases of use are the timber rail bridge, the two footbridges, a residence near the haulageway and a powder magazine. There is also photographic evidence of extensive temporary housing and other structures on the hillside above the station building during the construction phase. The hillside is now revegetated and while there may be some evidence of this occupation in land form such as embankments for tracks and building platforms, it is unlikely that other material remains. This part of the site is now heavily vegetated and is largely inaccessible.

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 29 Of particular interest in this area is the remaining relationship between the surviving elements. The 1914 construction is demonstrated with the power station building, the foundations of the temporary power station, remaining early penstock, entry stairs, bridge abutments, pylons and road alignments. This is overlaid with the upgrade work and the new penstock with its inlets, altered road works, the construction related to the lower station at the weir and commencement of the pipeline and the last residence to be built. The alignment of the tramway is clear and the strong cut line around the cliff face extending to the former rail bridge is a strong reminder of that form of transport. The garage and store buildings fronting that former alignment also contribute to the understanding of the changes from rail to road transport. The key element of the precinct is however the movement of water through the penstock to the station, into the river and to the lower weir where it was again used for the lower station. This is paralleled by the river and its relationship to the power station and the way it separates the village precinct from the operational area of the site. The core area also provides important visual connections through the site. The entry road provides the first overview of the station as one views across the station building to the village beyond. The junction of the entry road and the haulageway is a key location that provides a broad overview of the complex down the valley and allows the penstock and haulageway to be related to it. The only later introduced element that breaks the early site arrangement is the concrete road bridge adjacent to the station that marks the change from rail to road transport to the site and which removed the separation of village and power station that resulted from the river alignment. More recent changes in the visual setting have arisen from the regrowth seen along the river alignment particularly in the once cleared areas of the village. Management of the ‘maintained’ areas around the buildings will be important to recover some of the visual openness of the core site within the heavily forested surrounding area. This defined maintained core area provides much of the character of the site as a place carved out of the wilderness and controlled for the production of power. Important future considerations in managing and developing this precinct are: • Retaining the current physical arrangement and connections between the power station building, its formal entry area and the village beyond • Retaining the power station building as an essentially isolated feature within its setting • Retaining the road infrastructure without major change or realignment • The location of future plant to protect the visual and historic relationship of elements • Retention of significant elements of the place in future work including the station building and its fitout, penstock and inlets, entry stairs and construction, footbridges (potentially reconstructed) ancillary buildings, the hilltop assembly of elements and structures including remaining redundant pipework and features, tracks (to the lower weir) and the lower weir and its outlet. The remaining components of Precinct 3 are: • The power station building with its machinery and fitout • The penstocks, both original and the replacement penstock • Haulageway and carriage

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 30 • The entry stairs and construction • The former garages and shed at the base of the incline • House No 1 • The entry road system • Concrete road bridge • The lower weir • Remains of the former bridge and footbridges • Remains of the former valves, manifold and surge pipe • The corded tracks • Miscellaneous equipment • Archaeological sites including the former air raid shelter, tank and woodstave pipe and miscellaneous former building sites

3.5 Precinct 4 – Lower Power Station

The lower station precinct extends from the lower weir near the main station to the outlet from the station building into the Yolande River. The lower station was shutdown and mothballed in the early 1990’s in accordance with the previous heritage study and is no longer operational. Due to the mothballing, the generating equipment and control equipment was not viewable during the preparation of this report. Generally the lower station infrastructure (apart from the mothballed machinery which was not assessed) has deteriorated to the point of the failure of most elements outside the power station building itself and the winding house. Most of the immediate setting and infrastructure is now overgrown and difficult to access. In summary, the woodstave pipeline, the penstock, the haulageway and the power supply have completely failed and the steel framed bridge, the winding house and its mechanism and the power station building require significant maintenance work. The features of the precinct include: • The woodstave pipeline that extends from the lower weir to the hilltop valve house. While the pipe collapsed after the water supply was terminated, the route of the pipeline with its cuttings, embankments the crossing of the creek with the high steel bridge provides an interesting route through the bushland. • The access road follows the alignment of an earlier access tramway used to provide equipment and materials for the construction of the station. • The hilltop area contains the valve house with its valves intact, the remains of the surge tower and the thrust blocks and start of the penstock. • The hilltop area also contains a simple corrugated iron clad shed containing a large winding engine used to haul the carriage providing access to the station. • The haulageway is a steep rail line descending to the station with an unusual sharp curve at the base of the incline directing the line past the station where a set of points allows materials to be moved into the rear of the station through a set of access doors. An unusual feature of the line is a large rock gabion wall used to protect the station building from possible impact of break-away carriages.

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 31 • Pedestrian access to the station is via a steep zig-zag track descending the hill to the side of the incline. • The station building is a simple timber framed corrugated iron shed with a gabled roof form and a skillion section to one side accommodating the control equipment. The station has a mass concrete floor with a single generator with a direct tailrace from the base of the station into the side of the river. The station building is the simplest form of construction with an overhead crane. All of the equipment was brought onto the site by tramway and haulageway. The setting of the lower station is dramatic with the diminutive station building set far below the hilltop valve in a remote location. The place is evocative of the difficulties in the construction of power stations and the movement of water undertaken to maximize the benefit from water collected. In this case the lower station utilises the water already collected and passing through the main station. The complete assembly of supply, hilltop setting and power station at the base of the incline provides a small-scale but complete power installation. The lower power station site comprises the following elements: • The remains of the timber penstock • The cutting, embankments and bridge related to the penstock • The steel penstock, valves, valve house and vent stack • The winch house and inclined tramway • The power house and equipment • Access roads and tracks • Power lines and supports

3.6 Precinct 5 – the Broader Site

The broader site, as defined by the site boundaries, is mostly natural or regenerated bushland that contains a number of linear features such as roads and power lines. The natural landscape is contiguous with the adjoining Crown Land and forms part of the overall setting of wilderness that surrounds the site. It has values that extend the wilderness area. It is noted that the site boundaries are identified on paper but are not easily recognized on the ground. The man-made features are the existing access road which in part follows the original tramway route and alignment but also the abandoned tramway route. Easily accessible parts of the route were incorporated into the roadworks, but sections such as the zig-zag were obviously abandoned. Their formation remains seen in the bush as cuttings and embankments that reflect the early access to the site. The other stringing element is the route of the overhead power lines and the supports with their access tracks. Most of the route of the power transmission lines is outside the site boundary. The balance of the site contains the following features: • The existing roadway that is in part the former tramway • Cuttings and embankments from the former tramway formation • Transmission Towers

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 32 • Walking and vehicle tracks • The Fish hatchery

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 33 4 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS 4.1 Introduction

Lake Margaret Power Scheme is a unique site within the context of power generation in Australia and Tasmania. It represents the last of the privately constructed and operated power schemes in Tasmania and it has operated continuously since 1914. It is also a station of some size with seven generating units in the main station and one in the lower station. The station retains almost its entire original infrastructure and continues to provide power. The following comparative analysis is taken largely from the 1994 Godden Mackay report. It is of relevance as it relates the station to the Australian context, Godden Mackay having undertaken at that time a broad study of power generation across Australia. The final section is a summary section relating Lake Margaret to the two most comparable stations in Tasmania, that is Moorina and Waddamana. 4.2 Overview of power generation in Australia

Hydro-electricity had been in use overseas since the early 1880s. In Australia it had been used only on a small scale up until 1895 when both Tasmania and New South Wales adopted the technology on a substantial scale. In 1895 four Pelton wheels were installed to harness water power on the Gara River to supply power to the mining town and mine works at Hillgrove, near Armidale in NSW ten months later the Duck Reach Power Development was built and operated by the Launceston City Council in Tasmania. Prior to these undertakings water had only been used on a very small scale to supply electricity, examples being at Waverley Woolen Mills Tasmania (1872), at Waratah by the Mt Bischoff Tin Mining Company in Tasmania which installed five water wheels to generate power for lighting in 1883, at Jenolan Caves NSW (a single Leffel wheel) in 1889 and at Thargomindah in Queensland (a single Pelton wheel) in 1895. 4.2.1 The Gara River Development 1895 In October 1892 a petition for a Bill was placed before the New South Wales Parliament, requesting an Act of Parliament to enable the water rights of the Gara River to be exploited for the purpose of power generation. It is most likely that the Australasian Rights Purchase Association, who had earlier (1892) proposed a hydro-electric scheme on the Colo and Grose Rivers to supply power to Sydney, were the sponsors of the move to establish a power station on the Gara River. The Bill was passed on March 10 and the station consisting of 4 pelton wheel turbines was completed in late February 1895. The power station was described in 1899 as "... one of the finest electrical plants in Australia with four pelton wheels and motors capable of supplying up to l000hp (745 kW)”. The station ceased operation around 1907. Only minor remnants now remain at the site. 4.2.2 Duck Reach The Duck Reach Power Development was built and operated by the Launceston City Corporation on the south Esk River approximately two miles from Launceston in1895. The layout consisted of a low masonry weir and five, 21hp Thompson-Vonex type turbines by Gilbert, Gilkes and Co. Ltd of Kendell, coupled to 3 x lOOkV ac and 5 x dc dynamos made by Siemen Brothers of London. William Corin, was appointed Launceston’s City Electrical Engineer in November, 1895 and the works at Duck Reach were extended. Corin was later to play a crucial role in the development of hydro power throughout Australia.

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 34 4.2.3 Other Developments In 1906 a Hydro station was established on the Styx River near Armidale, NSW but no information regarding scale is known. Around 1907, the Mt Bischoff Tin Mining Company extended its Waratah Power Station adding two Encher-Wyss Pelton turbines coupled to Westinghouse alternators, each of 150kW. Two additional sets of Voith turbines and AEG 3765 kVA alternators were added in 1909 and 1912 respectively. The year 1907 also saw the construction of a small hydro power station at Deloraine in Tasmania. This station operated two turbines, one of which still survives in a museum at Deloraine, and produced power on a similar scale to the Latrobe station which was built one year later. The Latrobe Electric Company began supplying power in 1908 from a small hydro station with two vertical shaft turbines. In terms of scale both these stations (Strobe and Deloraine) do not rate beside the 1907 extension at Mt Bischoff or the 1909 undertaking at Derby (Moorina). Pioneer Tin Mines Moorina Power Station situated near Derby in north east Tasmania opened in 1909. It consisted of three Pelton type turbines, coupled to AEG 37 kVA alternators. The scheme included Australia's first rockfill dam which is also one of the first in the world to be built with an upstream waterproof concrete membrane. Moorina Power Station is today the oldest operating hydro power station in Australia. The Lake Cumberland Power scheme near Mt Agnew north-west of Zeehan, was typical of a speculative mining field. It developed based on tin mining. The mining field was discovered in 1879 and extensive mine development occurred in the 1880s. Water turbines were reportedly used on the field prior to 1900 but their capacity and role is not known. A small battery and treatment plant driven by a Pelton wheel was set up in 1914 on the old Kelvin mine11 The Federation Tin No Liability Co. floated in 1919 planned a power station at Wakefield Creek in 1919 but the Company ceased operations in 1922 prior to its construction. Federation Tin Mines Ltd commenced operations in 1927 and instigated the Cumberland Lake Power Scheme. The scheme as constructed comprised Lake Cumberland, the previous Company's raceline suitably repaired, a concrete forebay boldly perched on a huge granite outcrop and nearly two thousand feet of pipe to a power station 232m (/60 ft) below on Wakefield Creek. The power unit comprised a 700 hp Boving Pelton Turbine and a BTH generator (522 kW). The scheme was completed in September 1928 but due to the Company's financial difficulties, the plant lay idle for seven years. The mine and hydro plant operated between 1935 and 1938. The mine reopened briefly in 1942. The Federation hydro electric generating set was purchased by the Bega Valley County Council NSW and modified by Boving and Co. to operate under nearly twice the lead and put in service in the Bembolia Power Station in March 1944. It was taken over by the Electricity Commission of NSW in 1966 and is thought to be still in operation. 4.2.4 The Great Lake Scheme Whilst private schemes such as Moorina and other mining ventures had started up, the scheme that can be said to be the father of all the large HEC schemes that exist today in Tasmania is the Great Lake Scheme. In 1908 the Complex Ores Company of Melbourne, under the leadership of Mr J.H. Gillies, approached the Tasmanian Government with a request for cheap electric power for the purpose of manufacturing electrolytic zinc. For financial reasons the Government was unable to embark upon the project but granted a concession to the company in 1909 to undertake the harnessing of the water power itself. A separate company, the Hydro Electric Power and Metallurgical Company Ltd was fanned by

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 35 Gillies and constructional work on the Waddamana Scheme commenced in 1911. However, financial difficulties occurred and the company lost its concession from the Government in 1914. The Government took over the scheme, forming the State Hydro Electric Department and the first power was transmitted to Hobart in 1916. The occasion marks the first time power was transmitted at 11kv in Tasmania which allowed transmission over large distances and set the stage for future Government hydro electric schemes. After this the HEC built other hydro stations and increased the capacity of Waddamana, which by 1929, had doubled its original capacity. In 1934 Shannon power station was built followed by Tarraleah in 1938. Tasmania's Hydro Electric Commission constructed nine additional hydro electric generation schemes in the thirty years following the end of World War II, being Tungatinah, Liapootah, Wayatinah and Catagunya in the Upper Derwent catchment, the Lower Derwent Scheme comprising three dams and power stations, the Great Lake Scheme with two power stations, the Trevallyn Power Station, the Mersey Forth Scheme with seven dams and power stations and the Gordon River Scheme with one large power station. The construction of the Great Lakes Scheme brought the retirement of the Commissions earliest stations, Waddamana "A" and Shannon, by 1965. The Duck Reach Power Station was superseded by the opening of Trevallyn Power Station nearby in 1955. 4.2.5 Lake Margaret Whilst the financial difficulties of the Waddamana Scheme were occurring, R. Sticht, mine manager at The Mt Lyell Mining and Railway Company limited had decided to replace the steam plant the mine was using for power with a power station at Lake Margaret. The station began operating in 1914 making it the fourth major hydro station in Tasmania (fifth in Australia) after Duck Reach in 1895, Mt Bischoff (after extension) in 1908 and Moorina in 1909. These stations were all supplying a small demand and transmitting power at low voltages over short distances. Lake Margaret was the largest of this type of station and was the last of this type as government owned schemes soon followed. It is the second oldest operating hydro station in Australia. The major development for Tasmania's government-owned hydro electric schemes came in 1916 with the opening of Waddamana Power Station and the transmission of power to Hobart at 11kV. The lower Lake Margaret station constructed in 1931 was a single turbine station intended to be automatic and controlled from the main station. However, since installation, the machinery has required manual start up which requires two operators. This 1.5MW station was the first remote controlled station in Tasmania, second in Australia to the much smaller 0.3MW Rubicon Falls station constructed in 1926 in Victoria. 4.2.6 Mainland Australia Early developments in electrical production in mainland Australia were almost entirely thermal based. Tasmania's topography is particularly suited for hydro-electric development, especially on the West Coast and this encouraged early mining companies (such as The Mt Lyell Mining and Railway Company Limited) to capitalise on it. Development of hydro-electrical infrastructure in NSW and Victoria, on the scale that had already been achieved in Tasmania, did not occur until the 1920s. A development at Gara River, NSW, does not appear to have been followed by any major schemes until the 1920s. During the 1920s three hydro stations were constructed in NSW that were of a similar scale to developments in Tasmania. In 1923 a relatively large hydro-electric power station was constructed at Nymboida with 7 Francis type turbines giving an output of 4.8MW. Following

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 36 this in 1926 2 Pelton turbines (output of 144kW each) were installed at Mullimbimby whilst in 1927 2-5mw turbines were installed at Burrinjuck. In Victoria a similar story occurred with four hydro-electric stations being built in the 1920s. Rubicon Falls Power Station was constructed in 1926 with one 0.3MW turbine. This station is of particular interest because it is the first remote controlled, automatic station in Australia. Following this Royston (1928, 1 x .8MW turbine), Rubicon (1928 2 x 4.6MW turbines) and Lower Rubicon (1928 1 x 2.7MW) power stations were constructed. All the above stations are still operational. Queensland, N.T, W.A and S.A were not as suited to hydro-electric development and therefore have no early examples for comparison. The development at Lake Margaret marks the last of the private sized hydro-electrical developments in Australia. Following its construction hydro technology was adopted on a wider scale to service a much wider need. This trend began in Tasmania with the construction of the Waddamana Power Station and was followed in the 1920s in NSW and Victoria and again in the 1940s in NSW with the construction of the Snowy Mountains Scheme. 4.2.7 Technological Context The following information was supplied by the Hydro Electric Commission (HEC) to the Australian Electrical Supply Industry Research Board (AESIRB) Research Project being carried out by Godden Mackay Pty Ltd in 1994. 4.2.8 Comparative Size and Output Moorina (1909), Lake Margaret (1914), Waddamana "A" (1916) and Tarraleah Power Stations (1938) are the oldest power stations in existence in Tasmania. Waddamana "A" is the only one that is not operated but it has been kept intact as it was made into a static museum by the HEC in 1988, 23 years after it ceased generating electricity in 1965. A comparison of machinery and output between these power stations shows the difference in scale between early private hydro developments and the later, government funded undertakings. Both Moorina and Lake Margaret Power Stations represent the endeavours of early mining companies to provide a cheap source of electric power to their works and small townships. The stations respective outputs, .9MW and 9.9MW are quite small in comparison with the outputs of the later station, Waddamana "A" and Tarraleah which are 49MW and 90MW respectively. This is because Waddamana "A" and Tarraleah stations represent the beginning of Tasmania's integrated power supply system which relies almost solely on hydro power and the formation and early operation of the Hydro Electric Commission. These differences are reflected also in the size of the generators installed at each station. Whilst nearly all generators installed in these four stations are Pelton type water turbines (Lake Margaret lower station has one Francis type turbine), the size of turbines vary. The three turbines at Moorina each have an output of 300kw (0.3MW) whilst Lake Margaret has seven turbines with an output of 1.2MW each and one 1.5MW turbine. In comparison Waddamana "A" station has two 3.5MW and seven 6MW turbines whilst the later Tarraleah station has six turbines with an output of 15MW each. Another difference that can be noted from the following tables is the voltage at which power was initially transmitted from both Lake Margaret and Waddamana "A". As mentioned in Section 2 Lake Margaret initially transmitted power at 6.6kV over a relatively small distance and experienced losses of 8.3. This was acceptable for the station as transmission over larger distances was not necessary in terms of the needs of The Mount Lyell Mining and Railway Company Limited. This is contrasted by the transmission voltages of both Waddamana and Tarraleah. These stations transmitted at 11kV (which became standard from c.1916) because

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 37 they were supplying a much greater demand over larger distances and therefore could not operate with the losses experienced by Lake Margaret Power Station. 4.3 Summary 4.3.1 Moorina Power Station Within Tasmania the only other station comparable to Lake Margaret is Moorina Power Station in the north-east of the State. Moorina is a small single-machine station also built to power a mining operation and it has operated continuously since 1912. That station also retains early infrastructure but of a lesser scale. It includes the dam, a canal and flume, simple headworks, penstock, the station, a tailrace and a secondary channel that supplies water to the adjacent township. The other buildings on the site comprise the remains of two early residences, a c. 1940 residence and a shed. Moorina is also a station of high significance and is the oldest operating power station in Australia. However the infrastructure of Moorina does not compare with the completeness and scale of Lake Margaret. Both of these stations are of very high significance in the evolution of power generation in Tasmania. 4.3.2 Waddamana Power Station Waddamana is in many respects the antithesis of both Moorina and Lake Margaret. Started as a private station it quickly became a State project and the first of the Hydro system. The whole scheme was ambitious and marked a coming of age of Tasmania in terms of infrastructure. The complex is large, on a scale that dwarfs both Moorina and Lake Margaret and was built to provide power for Hobart in contrast to power for relatively small local mining activities and their communities. Waddamana is also a place of very high significance in the development of power generation in the State and, although no longer operating, retains a place of importance within the Hydro scheme. The continued operation of Lake Margaret (and Moorina) sets it apart from Waddamana as a place of exceptional heritage significance. 4.3.3 Later Power Schemes and developments Within the ambit of power generation in Tasmania a number of stations and schemes are of importance in marking major changes in technology or approaches to generation. Places such as Tarraleah and Poatina for example are important places in the overall development of the power generation industry. However, there is no station that equates with the values of Lake Margaret in terms of the complete infrastructure, the supporting infrastructure, continuity of use of early machinery and equipment, innovativeness in design and development and the overall intactness of the place from earliest development to the present day. The place contrasts with most Hydro sites where remediation and removal of earlier phases takes place leaving only the last period of development evident. The Lake Margaret power scheme is unique and stands alone in terms of significance to the industrial and power history of Tasmania.

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 38 5 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE 5.1 Introduction

Cultural significance is defined in The Burra Charter (see below), published by Australia ICOMOS, as: aesthetic, historic, scientific, social or spiritual value for past, present and future generations.

Setting out the cultural significance of a place assists in identifying what aspects of the place contribute to that significance and the relative contribution of the various elements of the place to that significance. This understanding is essential to allow management of the place that can guide future work in a way that retains its significance. The following section sets out the nature of the significance of Lake Margaret by looking at what has been assessed in existing studies and statements, by looking at the criteria established under the Tasmanian Historic Cultural Heritage Act 1995 and setting out the significance of the place to address those criteria and by looking at the various attributes of the place and how they contribute to significance. The cultural significance of Lake Margaret can be succinctly summarised as:

The Lake Margaret power station complex is a place of outstanding cultural heritage value. It encapsulates the early development of power generation in Australia and Tasmania and the pioneering enterprise of the West Coast of Tasmania that was integrally linked to mining development on a site of great natural beauty and value. The development of the Mt Lyell Mining and Railway Company mines (an icon mining venture in Australia) and Queenstown was dependant on the operation of the station. The place is one of the earliest power schemes in Australia whose value is enhanced by its continued operation. It is the last privately built and operated scheme in Tasmania and marks a major change from private to public power generation in the State. The site is a rare and intact example of not only the power generating plant with its rare set of early generating and control equipment but the associated infrastructure of dam, pipelines, headworks, the village and the very rare second station added in 1931. Lake Margaret has the ability, more than any other hydro power station in Tasmania, to demonstrate all aspects of its history and operation within an accessible wilderness area. It is a place that has very high interpretative value.

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 39 5.2 Previous Assessments of Significance

The cultural significance of the Lake Margaret has been previously addressed in the 1994 Heritage Study undertaken by Godden Mackay. Much of that material is included in this plan, particularly in the historical background and information set out in the element data sheets. Lake Margaret has also been recognised as a significant place even though it is not currently included on any registers or schedules of heritage places outside Hydro Tasmania’s Heritage list. It is presently included in the Hydro Tasmania Cultural Heritage Study as a place of high to very high cultural heritage significance. An earlier report prepared under that program (by the current author) attributed the following statement of heritage significance to the place: In terms of Hydro Tasmanian heritage, Lake Margaret is one of the most significant sites in the State. It represents the last and most substantial, also the most intact, of the ‘pre-Hydro’ power schemes built under private ownership. It marks a major change in power generation in the state. It is also linked to a major west coast industrial activity at Queenstown. Waddamana, built around the same time marks the beginning of Hydro or public power generation. These two stations are pivotal in interpreting and understanding the history of power generation in Tasmania. The next major station of significance is Tarraleah with its impressive interwar forms and larger scale with its complete and complex upstream infrastructure. After the Second World War a new era of station design commenced with modernist forms, several stations from this era are also of high significance. Lake Margaret is also of particular interest because of the very low loss of early material from the site. It retains its original power generating units, main building, dam, woodstave pipeline, village (almost intact), the unusual and rare lower station with its infrastructure, evidence of earlier pipelines etc and a considerable amount of moveable and small scale heritage related to the place. It is the only early station to retain accommodation in a purpose built village setting. The station is also close to a major town and tourist route making it a highly accessible station. Overall it places the whole site as one of the four or five most significant hydro sites in Tasmania and is a place of National heritage significance. The 1994 Godden Mackay study also provided detailed statements of heritage significance. They were based on the National Estate criteria as the Tasmanian Historic Cultural Heritage Act 1995 had not been enacted at that time. Consequently these statements do not closely align with the criteria under that Act. The summary statement from that study is: The Lake Margaret Power Station is an item of outstanding heritage significance. It is exemplar of the pioneering period of hydro electric development in Australia and contains rare, state of the art, early twentieth century power generating equipment. The complex has high interpretative value as it remains operational today. The Scheme was a milestone in the development of the Mount Lyell copper mine and had a significant effect on domestic lifestyles in the region. The complex cultural landscape of the Scheme overlies a dramatic natural landscape and the whole is a rare substantially intact expression of West Coast pioneering ventures. The Godden Mackay full assessment of significance is contained in Appendix 4.

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 40 5.3 Tasmanian State Heritage Criteria

The Tasmanian Historic Cultural Heritage Act 1995 provides the basis for assessment of the heritage significance of an item for it to be considered for listing on the register of places established under the that Act, by evaluating its significance against the following criteria: (a) it is important in demonstrating the evolution or pattern of Tasmania’s history (b) it demonstrates rare, uncommon or endangered aspects of Tasmania’s history (c) it has potential to yield information that will contribute to an understanding of Tasmania’s history (d) it is important as a representative in demonstrating the characteristics of a broader class of places (e) it is important in demonstrating a high degree of creative or technical achievement (f) it has strong or special meaning for any group or community because of social, cultural or spiritual associations (g) it has a special association with the life or work of a person, a group or an organisation that was important in Tasmania’s history

5.4 Statement of Significance

Criterion A: It is important in demonstrating the evolution or pattern of Tasmania’s history. • The development of Hydro-Electric Power in Tasmania is a very important theme in Tasmania’s twentieth century history. Unlike the mainland states, it dominated Tasmanian industry from the beginning and the Hydro Electric Commission became Tasmania’s biggest single employer. This station although pre-dating the Hydro Electric Commission marked an important stage in power generation with the change from private to public control. The continued operation of this station by the Mt Lyell Mining Company demonstrates the importance of that industry and its isolation that required private power generation. Lake Margaret was the fourth hydro scheme to be constructed in Australia and the third in Tasmania, the others being Mt Bischoff at Waratah, Duck Reach at Launceston and Moorina in the north-east of the State. Only Lake Margaret and Moorina remain in operation. However, Lake Margaret is a significantly larger station than Moorina with largely intact infrastructure that sets it apart. Tasmania took an important role in the early development of Hydro power in Australia and Lake Margaret is a key site in demonstrating that development. • The station developed as a result of a need to provide power for mining operations at Queenstown for the Mt Lyell Company. Their history is one of the key themes in the pattern of Tasmanian history, particularly in relation to the west coast and mining development. Lake Margaret is integrally linked to the history of the West Coast and has an icon status in the local community. • The Lake Margaret Power Scheme can also be seen as an outcome of changing industrial practices that were initially based on clearing and providing power by wood burning (that resulted in the devastation of the Queenstown landscape) and which by necessity changed to more technologically appropriate forms of power generation. • The Lake Margaret Power Scheme is unique in being able to be understood and interpreted in terms of how the site developed, how it operated including the pivotal role

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 41 of the village in the management of the place, the tramway access, the use of innovative technology such a woodstave pipelines (locally available and easily transported materials), the innovation of using new technology in power generation, the re-use of equipment from mining sites, etc. • The rapid escalation of generation capacity initially through additional machines, building extensions and after with a new station demonstrates both the need for power and the success of the operation of the station. Its continuing use to this day with its original infrastructure testifies to the success and quality of the infrastructure provided. • The lower station is in itself a rare example of a secondary station with the unusual use of a single machine. This combined with its early use of remote control, its high output capacity, the unusual arrangement of equipment within the station, the innovation seen in providing access to the station and the very considerable effort required to construct the station in a very remote location set this modest structure with its surrounding features as a place of very high significance within the history of power generation in the State and Australia. • The almost intact village is a very rare example of support infrastructure related to power generation and early remote mining activity. It is the only substantial collection of early residences remaining related to a power station. The buildings themselves show innovation in construction and materials handling due to the access restrictions to the site. They demonstrate confidence in their design and siting and permanence in their arrangement and the use of materials and building forms. The village is an impressive and very rare example of a small remote village complex. • The main power station building and related structures such as the hilltop valve house are very fine examples of purpose designed and built industrial buildings that exceed design expectations for a remote and difficult location. The use of poured concrete, the free Classical design elements, the formal use of these design elements to create an impressive classical building in a remote location where the use of steel and corrugated iron would be expected, indicate the importance of the venture and the confidence of the Mt Lyell Company in undertaking the project. The use of poured concrete also relates to the construction of other elements on site such as the dam wall. The building is a very fine example of early industrial design that belies its location and setting. • The site also has the potential to contain archaeological material at a wide range of locations related to early construction and later improvements to the site. These deposits have the potential to reveal information about early life in construction camps and the pioneering period of the site.

Criterion B: It demonstrates rare, uncommon or endangered aspects of Tasmania’s heritage. • Examples of early power generation, particularly in operating condition and ongoing use are rare. Lake Margaret is an exceptional and rare example that represents the pinnacle of private power generation in the State and marks the change to public power generation seen at Waddamana. • The site layout, the infrastructure, the intact generating and control equipment, the use of woodstave pipes, the construction of the second station, the survival of the early village for staff, the remnant tramways, the high standard of construction seen in the buildings, the dam and also site features such as the stone walls are all very rare and important elements in Tasmania’s history.

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 42

Criterion C: It has the potential to yield information that will contribute to an understanding of Tasmania’s history. • The Lake Margaret Scheme provides an exceptional opportunity to experience and understand the development of the West Coast, mining, power generation and living in remote communities. The largely intact infrastructure and setting, with its layers of development, provides a rare and complete opportunity to learn about Tasmanian history. This is found not only in the extant buildings and features but in the archive and records held on the site, potential oral histories that relate to the place and the associations with the Mt Lyell Mining and Railway Company and Queenstown. • As the last privately built and owned power schemes in the State (and the largest) it provides a rare insight into the development of power generation and life related to a remote power station. • The largely unrecorded social history of the site has the potential to provide a rare insight into life in a remote community in a pioneering area.

Criterion D: It is important as a representative in demonstrating the characteristics of a broader class of places • The Lake Margaret Power Scheme is a key site in the development of power generation in the State. It provides on one site most aspects of power generation history and technology (to that point in time). • It is one of the power station few sites where the whole process of power generation, construction, staffing and community life at a station can be easily accessed and understood. Lake Margaret is possibly the site of greatest potential to tell the story of hydro power in Tasmania.

Criterion E: It is important in demonstrating a high degree of creative or technical achievement. • The Lake Margaret Power Scheme encapsulates early twentieth century power generation technology perhaps better than any other site in Australia. Its continued use, its high level of intactness, the exceptional sets of equipment and controls in both stations and the site setting of both the main and lower station, the use of innovative technology such as early use of remote controlled machinery, all combined with the audacity of constructing a private power station in a remote location allow this place to demonstrate exceptional creative and technical achievement. • The infrastructure demonstrates the ability and capacity of the Mt Lyell workshops to fabricate and construct the various parts of the infrastructure and transport them via tramway to the site. The high quality of the early infrastructure in particular is testimony to the ability of that company.

Criterion F: It has a strong or special meaning for any group or community because of social, cultural or spiritual associations. • The Lake Margaret Power Scheme has evoked strong responses from the local community including previous operators and staff as a place of value and of significance. With the notice of potential closure of the station there has been

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 43 considerable local public reaction and a strong desire to see the infrastructure of the place remain with a public use. The site is also visited (this is particularly the case in the past but now is less due to Hydro Tasmania restrictions on public access) by a considerable number of tourists, despite it not being advertised, with a keen interest in power generation and the technology of the place. The natural setting and features of the site have also attracted considerable local interest and use over the years with fishing and walking. The lake, in particular, has been a destination for Queenstown families and mine workers as a place of recreation. The Lake Margaret Scheme brings together innovation, pioneering technology, a high level of integrity and engineering excellence that typifies the West Coast of Tasmania.

Criterion G: It has a special association with the life or work of a person, a group or an organisation that was important in Tasmania’s history. • Lake Margaret Power Scheme has been integrally linked to the development of the Mt Lyell Mining and Railway Company, who built and operated the station for most of its life. It is also integrally linked to the development of Queenstown and the West Coast of Tasmania. Constructing the power station was a bold act that demonstrated confidence in the future of copper mining in the area The station provided power for the mines and the township and ensured the success of the operation and the locality. Mt Lyell Mining company is one of the icon Tasmanian ventures which has evoked the frontier spirit of Tasmania evidenced in literature, tourism and the valued, if austere, landscape that surrounds Queenstown. The company was at one time the largest copper producer in the British Empire and the longest operating mining venture in Australia. The power scheme is particularly related to Robert Sticht, the Mt Lyell mine manager at the time of the Station’s construction, who had the vision to embrace new technology such as the power station which ensured the future of the mining venture.

5.5 Significance Assessment of Component parts of the Scheme

The following schedule sets out the relative significance of the component parts of the site in terms of the graded significance criteria established in the Godden Mackay report of 1994. This study attributed relative significance to each aspect of the place based on a scale of 0-5 with the following relative heritage values: 5 very high 4 high 3 medium 2 low 1 neutral 0 intrusive These values have been used in completing the comparative assessment of Hydro Tasmania owned and managed assets under the Hydro Tasmania Cultural Heritage Program. The relative values are used in this study to allow a comparative understanding of the various component elements of the place. However, it is important to understand that the overall

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 44 value of this site and all of its component parts is very high. It is the completeness of the Lake Margaret Power Scheme that gives it much of its cultural heritage value. While graded significance is often used to determine appropriate actions in relation to a particular element, the grading used on this site is not intended, and must not be used, as a “cut-off” or threshold to determine which parts of the site can be removed. Due to the very high overall level of significance of the place, it is the intent of this assessment that most aspects of the place will be retained and conserved and that only items that are intrusive should be removed. Other changes may be made to accommodate new uses or required upgrades provided their impact is considered in the context of the whole site’s value. This is discussed further in the policy section of the report. The following list sets out the graded levels of significance for the component parts of the site. Items in bold are of high or very high significance.

5.5.1 Summary of significance of Site features and elements Precinct 1 - Dam and Pipeline Area Dam 5 Dam infrastructure 4 Dam winch house 4 Dam winch 4 Boatshed 3 Drain on path 4 Early village site 3 Evidence of early walkway 4 Woodstave pipe 4 Drystone walls 4 Workshed 1 Halfway house 4 Tramline 5 Reconstructed tramline 3

Precinct 2 - Village Area Village layout and overall value 5 1914 houses (7 buildings) 4 Hall 4 Single men’s housing 3 Later demountable house 2 Mature tree plantings 4 Swimming pool remains 3 Footbridge remnants 3 Road bridge 1 Former roadbridge (collapsed) 3 Remnant steps and paths 3 Exotic plantings 4 Tramway Formation 4 Sites of former buildings 3

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 45 Precinct 3 - Station Area Power station building 5 Generator sets and turbines 5 Main crane 4 Main inlet valves 3 Main isolating valves 3 Exciters 5 Rectifiers 2 Surge Diverters 2 Switch gear and transmission 2 Oil circuit breakers 2 Fuse switches 2 Service transformers 2 Auto transformers 3 Tripping unit 2 Standby charger 2 Control panels old 5 Control panels 1965 2 Enclosure of control room 1 Workshop equipment 3 Later fitout of amenities area with kitchen etc 2 Station archive 5 11kv transmission lines 3 Concrete entry stair and structures 4 Old haulageway and stonewalls 4 Tramway formation + alignment around station 5 Mature and exotic tree plantings 4 Wood working machine 4 Concrete slab of former buildings 3 Air raid shelter 3 Garage/store buildings 4 Open shed at base of incline 3 Woodstave machine 4 Sites of former buildings – residence, magazine, Temporary Power house, other buildings sites 3 Residence 9 4 Access road to former road bridge 4 Sample of woodstave pipe 4 Old Haulage engine 3 New winder 3 Corded track 3 Surge tower new 2 Surge tower old 3 Valve House 4 New penstock 3

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 46 Haulage way over penstock 4 1914 penstock 3 Hilltop butterfly valves 3 Manifold and takeoff 3

Precinct 4 - Lower Station Weir 5 Trashrack and intake 3 Woodstave pipeline remains 4 Winding House 3 Steel bridge 4 Winch 4 Haulageway 4 Valve House 3 Valves 4 Surge Tower 4 Penstock 4 Power Station building 5 Francis Turbine 5 Transformers 5 Control panel 5 Buffer 3 Tool Board 4

Precinct 5 - Broader Site Main Access Road 3 Tramway formation 4 Access roads and tracks 3 Fish Rearing ponds 3 Transmission Towers 3

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 47 6 POLICY 6.1 Introduction

The development of policy to guide the future of the Lake Margaret Power Scheme is predicated on a number of factors including: • The heritage significance of the various components of the place, • The overall very high heritage value of the assemblage or the whole place in terms of its State and National heritage significance, • The requirements of the owner (Hydro Tasmania) as they look to operate a modern generation system to supply power to the State and beyond, • The potential of the place to accommodate ongoing power generation, as well as • The potential for other associated and complimentary uses. Often the requirements of ongoing use of an industrial site may be seen to conflict with the heritage or conservation values of the place. How is significance retained when it is integral to the operation of the place and affects the specific elements that may need to be upgraded, changed or replaced to provide for viable operation? Lake Margaret is unique not only in its cultural significance but in its ability to accommodate a range of uses. The location and layout of the site has the potential to provide for new power generation infrastructure, to incorporate tourism and public access to the heritage features of the place, to provide access to the scenic attractions of the area and to allow the place to be managed safely and efficiently. Lake Margaret has the ability to combine power generation, cultural heritage values as found in the buildings, features, landscape and use with scenic attractions. This is in part achieved by the extent of the site and the way the site has been laid out with clear and separable zones of activity. The following policy seeks to accommodate the various operational and cultural heritage needs of the site. It proposes ways to combine these activities, however these proposals should be seen as indicative and broad. This plan does not propose specific or detailed design solutions to specific problems on the site. These solutions should arise from the principles and guidelines set out in the following sections.

6.2 Hydro Tasmania Operational Requirements and Future Options

The following policy sections are developed on the basis of Hydro Tasmania’s operational requirements and the heritage values of the place. To understand the needs of Hydro Tasmania this section sets out the background to the various studies (of which this CMP forms part) that have been undertaken to assess the potential and viability of the Lake Margaret Scheme and provides a brief overview of the three possible options that arise from that broad review. The future of Lake Margaret has been considered for at least the last 10 years without a clear resolution. The Godden Mackay study was undertaken in 1994 to assist in that process. The only outcome from that was the closure of the lower station and its successful mothballing. Since that time the station has had maintenance and some upgrade work carried out but the

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 48 overall state of the infrastructure is such that the operation of the place into the future without major upgrade is not an acceptable option to Hydro Tasmania.

Figure 6.1 Key Plan identifying major features of core site area. Paul Davies 2005

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 49 Hydro Tasmania has undertaken a series of studies over the last few years looking at options for the site. In summary there are three options that are achievable, with varying impacts on the cultural heritage values of the place. Other options exist but they are not viable to Hydro Tasmania in terms of operation of the site or they have unacceptable impacts on heritage values. These options are not considered in detail. The achievable options for Hydro Tasmania for the place are: 1 Close the whole station 2 Upgrade the current main station and its infrastructure to allow ongoing use 3 De-commission the present station and construct a new station on the site. For any options for the future of the place by Hydro Tasmania or otherwise, there are minimum requirements to address the heritage significance of the site. These arise from the high level of significance of the place and the need to retain most of the extant infrastructure. The minimum requirements to be met are set out in the following table. This table uses the list of elements set out in the assessment of significance (with several additional site elements including the broader landscape) noting which elements must be retained and maintained in at least a moth-balled and stable condition to provide for retention of heritage values.

Precinct 1 - Dam and Pipeline Area Site Feature Significance Management guidelines and minimum requirements

Dam 5 Retain dam wall, repair and grout as required. Undertake heritage analysis if major works are required in the future. Design any new elements to be compatible with the heritage values of the dam structure. Dam infrastructure 4 Retain while working, allow to upgrade for future use incorporating as much of the existing elements as feasible. Record any items to be removed. Retain valve house, reconstruct in matching materials as required. Reinstate stairs and clear out area generally. Dam winch house 4 Retain in present form. Dam winch 4 Retain in working condition. Boatshed (store building) 3 Retain as store building, repair and upgrade as required. Drains on path (in various locations) 4 Retain, protect and conserve the timberwork Early village site 3 Retain and record in situ any discovered items for archaeological potential, generally retain vegetation cover,. Evidence of early walkway 4 Retain evidence of corded and other track construction, clear tracks to allow ongoing use. Retain surviving materials. Woodstave pipe 4 Pipe to be replaced in future works, retain sample section in situ, record pipeline in detail prior to removal. Retain as much of the support structure as possible either for re-use with new pipeline or as structure in the landscape. Drystone walls 4 Retain all dry stone walls in situ. Design future works around walls. Workshed 1 Adapt, reconfigure or replace to suit operational needs.

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 50

Site Feature Significance Management guidelines and minimum requirements

Timber staircase 4 Retain in situ, conserve as required. Clear area around stair. Halfway house 4 Retain in current form Tramline 5 Retain evidence of earlier track under present construction. Retain alignment including elevated sections, if new tramline is required upgrade of supports could be undertaken. Reconstructed tramline 3 Retain as tramway, upgrade current track as required

Precinct 2 - Village Area Village layout and overall value 5 Retain the village layout with fences, roads, pathways etc. to its main period of use. Retain the landscaped setting, the cleared backdrop and the character as demonstrated in the various photos of the village area. 1914 houses (7) 4 Retain and conserve the residences, largely in their present form but in particular the original room configuration with the current additions. Changes to services, and service areas are appropriate. Minor additions to the rear skillion areas are possible within the overall pattern and form of the buildings. Retain all remaining outbuildings, garages, sheds etc. Conserve and use for built purpose or adapt for compatible uses. Reconstruct fencing , paths and gardens to residences. Retain evidence of earlier structures such as walls, slabs and footings. Hall 4 Retain as hall with present finishes and linings. Retain kitchen addition, a further small addition could be appropriate. Single men’s housing 3 Retain the form of the building, provide for internal adaptation to future uses. Small additions are appropriate. Later demountable house 2 Retain or remove as required. Mature tree plantings 4 Retain, undertake arborist assessment and undertake any required work Swimming pool remains 3 Locate, excavate and retain for interpretation. Footbridge remnants 3 Retain abutments, if bridges are to be reconstructed, provide new abutments. Road bridge 1 Retain Former roadbridge (collapsed) 3 Either stabilise the remains in situ or if the bridge is to be replaced, reconstruct a bridge to a future design and remove remnant timberwork from the earlier bridge. Tramline formation to bridge 3 Clear route of new growth and maintain in current form. Building remains near tramline 3 Clear growth from built elements and retain in situ. Remnant steps and paths 3 Retain and conserve as part of any future use of the place. Exotic plantings 4 Retain where part of the gardens for the houses.

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 51

Site Feature Significance Management guidelines and minimum requirements

Precinct 3 - Station Area Power station building 5 Retain the building generally in its current form or where possible with reinstated earlier detailing and elements. Generally do not alter the building further except in relation to possible new power generation requirements. Generator sets and turbines 5 Retain all generators in situ, where possible in working condition. Main crane 4 Retain in situ and maintain in working condition. Main inlet valves 3 Retain while feasible, minimum requirement to retain one example for interpretation. Main isolating valves 3 Retain while feasible, minimum requirement to retain one example for interpretation. Exciters 5 Retain in situ. Rectifiers 2 Retain while feasible, minimum requirement to retain one example for interpretation. Surge Diverters 2 Retain while feasible, minimum requirement to retain one example for interpretation. Switch gear and transmission 2 Retain while feasible, minimum requirement to retain one example for interpretation. Oil circuit breakers 2 Retain while feasible, minimum requirement to retain one example for interpretation. Fuse switches 2 Retain while feasible, minimum requirement to retain one example for interpretation. Service transformers 2 Retain while feasible, minimum requirement to retain one example for interpretation. Auto transformers 3 Retain while feasible, locate new transformers in location if required. Tripping unit 2 Retain while feasible. Standby charger 2 Retain while feasible. Control panels old 5 Retain in situ in original form. Control panels 1965 2 Remove or retain as required. Enclosure of control room 1 Remove or retain as required for operational needs. Workshop equipment 3 Retain in situ and undertake heritage inventory. Later fitout of amenities area with Retain or alter to suit future uses as required. walls and kitchen etc 2 Station archive 5 Retain on site, ensure that the collection is secure, undertake cataloguing in the longer-term. Establish ownership and recognise itmes on loan to the collection. 11kv transmission lines 3 Retain in situ while practicable. Concrete entry stair and structures 4 Retain in situ and maintain. Old haulageway and stonewalls 4 Retain in situ and undertake works as necessary to prevent further deterioration. Tramway formation and alignment around station 5 Retain, clear where required to prevent deterioration.

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 52 Site Feature Significance Management guidelines and minimum requirements Mature and exotic tree plantings 4 Retain, undertake arborist assessment and undertake any required work Concrete slab of former buildings 3 Retain in situ, clear growth from edges and clear immediate area. Air raid shelter 3 Retain in current form and condition. Garage/store buildings 4 Retain and maintain to ensure watertightness and security, undertake routine maintenance. Open shed at base of incline 3 Retain and maintain to ensure watertightness undertake routine maintenance. Woodstave machine 4 Retain under cover on site. Sites of former buildings – residence, Clear building remains of undergrowth in the immediate magazine, temporary Power house, area to prevent further deterioration due to regrowth, reservoir and pipe and other remove dangerous loose materials such as sheet iron buildings sites 3 and clear the immediate setting of the item. Undertake routine clearing and maintenance. Residence 1 4 Retain with fenced enclosure and gardens and sheds. Maintain as required. Small additions are appropriate. Access road to former road bridge 4 Clear of undergrowth, stabilise to prevent deterioration as required, remove stored material and retain as walking access route. Sample of woodstave (in carpark) 4 Retain, may be relocated to suit future use. Old Haulage engine 3 Retain in situ, conserve to prevent deterioration, cover if required. New winder 3 Retain as working part of the station. Corded track 3 Retain elements of track, clear track to allow ongoing use. Surge tower new 2 Retain in situ. Surge tower old 3 Retain in situ. Valve House 4 Retain and maintain, allow for new uses compatible with building form. New penstock 3 Retain and maintain in situ while serviceable, retain if new penstock is required in future. Haulage way over penstock 4 Retain in working condition to satisfy access requirements. 1914 penstock 3 Retain remaining pipe lengths in situ, maintain in cleared state. Hilltop butterfly valves 3 Retain while serviceable, replace if required. Retain existing valve adjacent if replaced. Manifold and takeoff 3 Retain in situ with dismantled elements, clear around area and remove intrusive growth, clear outlet channel.

Precinct 4 - Lower Station Weir 5 Retain in situ in operational condition, repair as required to allow retention. Trashrack and intake 3 Maintain in situ, maintain valve in operational condition, clean regularly

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 53 Site Feature Significance Management guidelines and minimum requirements

Woodstave pipeline remains 4 Remove pipeline, retain sample section for interpretation, and retain formation in generally cleared form to allow for walking access along the formation. Winding House 3 Retain in basic maintained condition, secure building, undertake repairs to keep watertight and clean interior on programmed basis. Steel bridge 4 Retain bridge, undertake basic repairs to ensure it remains intact. Look to upgrade walkway with new planking and rails to allow access.

Winch 4 Maintain winding equipment in operational form with routine maintenance or shutdown and mothball equipment to allow future operation. Haulageway 4 Clear growth from haulageway and tracks and retain in current form. Generally clear undergrowth from slope around penstock and haulageway including hilltop valves and winch house. Valve House 3 Retain building, undertake routine maintenance and keep secure. Valves 4 Retain in situ. Surge Tower 4 Retain in situ, stabilise as required. Penstock 4 Retain in situ. Power Station building 5 Retain and undertake routine maintenance to keep the building watertight and secure. Francis Turbine 5 Check and record condition and maintain in mothballed form. Transformers 5 Check and record condition and maintain in mothballed form. Control panel 5 Check and record condition and maintain in mothballed form. Buffer 3 Retain in situ. Tool Board 4 Retain in situ

Precinct 5 - Broader Site Main Access Road 3 Retain in maintained condition, upgrade generally as required but maintain alignment. Tramway formation 4 Retain all evidence of the former tramway formation where it does not form part of the access road. Access roads and tracks 3 Generally maintain tracks and roads to a minimum standard, do not create additional roads unless approved as part of an heritage impact assessment. Fish Rearing ponds 3 Retain and undertake conservation works to prevent further deterioration. Transmission towers 3 Retain in situ irrespective of transmission requirements.

The following brief analysis looks at the impact of the three options. 6.2.1 Close the station There are two options possible under the heading of closing the station, one is to de- commission it and retain the site as a museum/tourist site the second is to close the site, remove the infrastructure and remediate the site. The second option is consistent with works

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 54 undertaken by Hydro Tasmania on other sites when no longer required. It is, however, not an acceptable option in relation to the heritage value of the place.

Option Comment Conclusions 1A Could be owned and operated by Hydro Less preferred option as a working station is Mothball and use Tasmania or another party and would an important aspect of its significance. as static museum operate as a museum. The village However it would retain the place with much of would need to be used as part of the its significance. museum, probably linked to It would be necessary to include the whole of accommodation. the site with the dam and its infrastructure and the lower station. The costs of ongoing maintenance as a static museum may preclude all parts of the site being conserved. Would require de-commissioning with Given the high heritage value of the place, associated costs. proper de-commissioning would be essential. The effects of de-commissioning will adversely impact on the dam and other infrastructure where risk management will require alterations to elements. OH+S issues need to be addressed De-commissioning would also result in the loss related to dam, access, etc of elements such as the woodstave pipeline which will collapse when no longer used. Would need as a minimum to retain Due to the level of significance of the place, elements of level 4 or 5 rating and most of the plant and infrastructure would effectively elements of level 2 and 3 need to be retained and have at least some rating to make sense of the place and conservation work undertaken. retain the overall broad heritage values of the place. Could be linked to local and regional This would be a critical element of the potential tourism. success of any museum or tourism related activity. Future site management The site may either need to be sold or leased so that Hydro Tasmania did not have an ongoing role 1B Would require full recording and May be preferred option for Hydro Tasmania in Demolish and associated costs. terms of management of the site. remove all or part of the site Would require substantial work and cost Removes future options for the place to remediate site. Would not be an acceptable action in Is a non-acceptable option in relation to the relation to heritage values of the site. high heritage values of the site. This action would not be approved by the Tasmanian Heritage Council and is not consistent with the values set out in this and the earlier CMP.

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 55 6.2.2 Upgrade and retain as operating station

Option Comment Conclusions 2 Upgrade and For the station to continue in Hydro Tasmania has concluded that cost benefit retain as operation in any form into after 2005 does not warrant funding due to operating station the future it would require a decrease in potential earning capacity related to significant upgrade including: broader power generation issues in the State - replacement of pipeline (not related to the actual change in viability of Lake Margaret). - repair of dam - repair and/or upgrade of Such an upgrade would have a dramatic impact equipment on the heritage significance of many of the component operating parts of the site. It would - upgrade of transmission lines see a fundamental change that would reduce heritage values overall. However, it would retain - OH+S upgrade a key aspect of significance in that the station would continue to operate. A low-key upgrade of equipment by undertaking routine, catch-up and essential maintenance in combination with the upgrade of the pipeline, penstock, automation of remote valves and other required operational upgrade work would allow the station to continue in its present form into the future. This is not a preferred option as Hydro Tasmania wish to upgrade all of their operating stations to minimise future maintenance and site personnel. Ancillary benefits of continuing operation may be the provision of a second power supply to Queenstown and local industry which cannot be achieved from the main grid and retention of heritage values by maintaining an operating station. The use of other parts of the There is a stated and perceived conflict of site such as the village and access and use between Hydro Tasmania’s the lower station for operation and any form of public or tourist interpretative or ancillary access to Hydro Tasmania sites. While this uses may be difficult with could be managed by securing parts of the site ongoing power generation from general access, should the existing station use of the core part of the continue to generate power, access to the village site. and generally around the site could present operational, liability and OH+S issues for Hydro Tasmania.

6.2.3 Construct a new station on the site There are two options within this, one is to construct a new independent station (attached to, within or separate from the existing station) and the second is to build a new station but also to continue operating the present station is some form. The latter option is not preferred by Hydro Tasmania due to ongoing operational costs. It would however be feasible and highly desirable to retain the existing station in part operation even as part of a museum use.

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 56

Option Comment Conclusions 3 Construct new Would allow current station A preferred option to minimise Hydro Tasmania's station and associated works to exposure and provide an ongoing role for the remain provided new station site. was suitably located and Options for locating a new station are discussed separated. in the following sections. Retains power generation on the site which is a key part of the place’s significance. Existing station could Allows relatively low cost continued use of continue to operate in the station. interim. Works could be staged to Provides tourism opportunities for the site, allow upgrade of pipeline provides for some ongoing use of the present and headworks with minor station as an operating museum site. existing station upgrade Careful selection of a new site for the station providing continuous power would allow existing infrastructure to be retained generation during in situ as further layering of the development of construction of new plant. the site. Existing station could continue to run commercially to end of 2005 or beyond, temporarily close for upgrade of pipeline and then continue operation during the construction phase for the new station. In time it could operate at a reduced tourism level with say a single machine operating from a take off from the new infrastructure. The existing station could also operate as a back-up. The existing site could be This would require clear separation of functions, developed for a tourism type but with a new remotely controlled small station, use parallel to the new access requirements will be minimal and the station. new works can be secured. The location of the site is ideal for tourism with its close proximity to a main road and to a major town (Queenstown). The place would allow for Hydro Tasmania to provide interpretation of power generation in a controlled, accessible and separately operated facility. Additional cost of Shared cost (that is shared between Hydro maintaining the existing Tasmania for infrastructure upgrades and station within the framework maintenance and a separate operator for the of a new station would be museum or tourist operation) would be a more minor and potential viable option that a single party attempting to additional power generation manage and undertake maintenance and

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 57 could offset costs long-term. conservation work of the whole place. Responsibility for the existing facilities could pass by lease to a new operator. Initially stabilisation works would be required.

6.3 General Conservation Policy

Arising from the requirements of Hydro Tasmania and the assessment of options in Section 6.2, the preferred outcome to achieve a high level of heritage conservation and interpretation is to maintain an operational power station on the site in conjunction with cultural tourism activities. The following broad policy acknowledges the very high significance of the place, looks to continue power generation as an aspect of the future of the place and sets out broad parameters for the conservation of the heritage values of the place. Policy 1 The Lake Margaret Power Scheme, with all its aspects and significant components, should be conserved as a place of high cultural heritage significance. Policy 2 The facility should be retained, preferably in use, with an operating power station as a component of the site. Policy 3 The site should be conserved and managed in accordance with the guidelines and philosophy of the ICOMOS Burra Charter. Policy 4 The buildings and plant are largely in original or as-built form. Elements and features of the place identified as significant should be retained in their significant form. Policy 5 The introduction of new materials, plant or machinery into the existing buildings should be undertaken only where it is essential for the conservation of cultural significance or to maintain the functionality of the place. Policy 6 The context and setting of the Station should be conserved; this includes the landscaping, views and visual catchment. Policy 7 All identified significant structural remains (ruins etc), superceded plant and movable items should be retained in situ unless it is unavoidable for operational reasons. Any such items that must be removed should be retained and appropriately re-located to another part of the site. Reason for Policies This policy applies to the whole site including the power station, dam area, pipelines, village, lower station, penstocks and valve house and surrounds of each including the immediate and broader cultural landscape. It also includes any in situ remnant structural fabric from the construction phase and/or superceded plant or equipment. Functionality, and the ability to continue the use of the power station, are seen as the key to the survival and maintenance of the station’s heritage values into the future.

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 58 Strategies and actions • Endorse this conservation plan and in particular the key policies as the guiding document for future management and conservation of the place. • Ensure that copies of this document are lodged with the Tasmanian Heritage Council and seek its endorsement of the conservation policies and management guidelines. • Ensure that the policies in this CMP are known and understood by relevant Hydro Tasmania staff, the relevant planning authorities and any contractors or others engaged to undertake any works at the site. 6.4 Future Use

The following policies relate to future uses and the consequential works arising from continuing existing uses or implementing new uses on the site. The preferred option to maximize the heritage values of the place is to combine ongoing power generation (in a form to be determined) with cultural heritage uses. The policies reflect this approach. It is however noted that should power generation not continue at the site that the other policies relating to retention of cultural heritage values remain.

Policy 8 Retain a power station, preferably operational, on the site. The preferred option is to provide a new power station on the site. The less preferred option is to upgrade the existing station for ongoing use. Reason for Policy To retain ongoing power generation on the site as a key component of the significance of the place as an operational and active facility. Strategies and actions 1 For heritage conservation a new station should be sited preferably in an easily separable part of the site noting that good access is required and the location is governed by the operational needs of head and alignment of the penstock. Figure 6.2 identifies preferred locations with regard to heritage values on the site. These options do not necessarily reflect Hydro Tasmania’s current proposals for upgrade.

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 59 Figure 6.2 Site plan showing preferred locations for a new station within the core site to best conserve heritage values. Locations are marked by preference. Site 1 is adjacent to the station on the site of the current penstock intakes, site 2 is within the present amenities structure and site 3 is on vacant land above the current penstock near the bank of the river. Paul Davies 2005.

If a new station is located adjacent to or adjoining the current station building, the following design parameters should be incorporated: - The form of construction should reflect that of the station – poured concrete walls and simple roof forms of the same pitch as the present building. - The structure could be attached as a continuation of the present skillion wing and be attached to the side of the building. - The present take-offs for the first two generator sets should be retained to allow continued operation. - The detailed design of the building should be considered and approved by Hydro Tasmania’s Cultural Heritage Program as part of an heritage impact assessment. If the building is free standing it should also relate in form and materials and should be designed to relate to the existing station building without copying the historic form.

Policy 9 Provide for infrastructure upgrade to supply a new station including replacement of pipeline, penstock and associated minor works at the dam. Ensure that key heritage values are not compromised by upgrade works. Reason for Policy To retain an ongoing power generation on the site and to protect identified heritage values. Strategies and actions

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 60 The following elements are to be retained in the provision of a new station (these are items that could be directly affected by the works, it is not a comprehensive list of features of the site): - The existing penstocks (both current and earlier penstocks) and for a new penstock (if required) to be located adjacent to the current penstock - The haulageway - The current hilltop valve houses, surge pipes and manifolds - The woodstave pipeline is to remain in situ, full of water, until the new pipeline is to be put in place - At least one section of the woodstave pipeline is to be retained in situ - As much of the support structures for the current woodstave pipeline as feasible - All of the dry stone walling and site works related to the pipeline - The entry stair arrangement into the main station building - The potential to reconstruct the footbridges across the river - The visual setting of the main station building and its relationship to the village

Policy 10 Provide for a publicly accessible use for the balance of the site (separate from the new station facility if provided), preferably related to tourism. The balance of the site should be accessible for controlled public access as part of an interpretative proposal that could provide accommodation in the village, museum facilities in the two stations and access to the wilderness aspects of the site. Reason for Policy To allow the important heritage values of the power station and its surrounding site to be interpreted and experienced by the public. Public access and the development of cultural heritage uses for the site will in part be determined by the operational needs of ongoing power generation, but will also be considered in relation to the precincts set out in this plan. On the basis that some form of ongoing power generation will take place that utilizes the dam and headworks and a new separable generation plant, the site will fall into three broad zones: a restructured zone directly related to power generation and distribution that will have no public access; a shared zone between power generation and public access including for example the current main power station building, use of roads, use of the upper tramway and dam area; and parts of the site that are not affected by ongoing generation such as the village, the lower power station and the wilderness parts of the site. Strategies and actions The policy does not propose an actual scheme for implementation. The principles that would apply to any public access/tourism type activity on the site include: General Principals 1 As much of the site as possible should be incorporated into the proposal and be accessible to the users. 2 There should be clear separation between electricity generation and other use on the site.

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 61 3 It will require conservation and/or maintenance of all significant aspects of the place (not directly controlled by Hydro Tasmania as part of ongoing use) to a high standard. 4 It should be guided by this CMP and an interpretation plan. 5 It should incorporate the use of the village, the lower station, interpretation of the power generation history and activity on the site and its links to the Mt Lyell Mining Company and Queenstown, the history of Hydro Tasmania, the future of power generation in the State and the natural values of the area. Core Station Area 6 Public access, cultural heritage tourism and interpretation should be available to: • The interior of the main station, preferably with operational machinery • The core station precinct apart from operational areas related to power generation 7 Some new buildings could be constructed in relation to cultural tourism uses provided they are small-scale and located to avoid conflicts with heritage values. Village 8 Public access, cultural heritage tourism and interpretation should be available to all of the buildings noting that accommodation use is the most likely use for the residences. 9 There is the ability to add limited new buildings into this precinct to assist in generating a viable site use, particularly at the rear of the village on the site of former houses and on the site of the demountable house. New buildings should be reflective of the scale and general form of existing buildings but should not copy existing buildings. It would be desirable to locate new facilities such as a commercial kitchen or the like in new buildings. 10 It is acceptable to sub-divide the existing residences to accommodate new uses provided that their overall integrity is not lost. Lower Station 11 Public access, cultural heritage tourism and interpretation should be available to: • The lower station area including the interior of the lower station building and • The pipeline to the lower station area. 12 The lower station complex would ideally be developed for interpretation. Dam and Headworks Precinct 13 Public Access and interpretation should be available to: • The headworks, particularly the disused features of the area • The tramway providing access to the dam area • The dam • The corduroy track • Walking tracks around the upper lakes etc. established to form defined walks. 14 Access should be limited to infrastructure that is safe but which enables visitors to experience the extent of the power scheme. It may be necessary to close public access at times of maintenance for power generation needs.

Policy 11 Link any future use or management decisions to a fully costed plan for the conservation and maintenance of the significant elements of the site.

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 62 Reason for Policy To ensure that conservation work is integrally linked to any future use either by Hydro Tasmania or an independent operator. This policy ensures that any actions related to the place are linked to heritage values. It is not acceptable to provide a new facility and to undertake no or inadequate conservation work on the place. In achieving this it is noted that preservation and restoration are the most appropriate actions as these will generally apply to the machinery and components as well as the built elements of the site. Adaptations should adhere to the philosophy of ‘as much as necessary and as little as possible’. Changes should be designed to be sympathetic to the identified heritage values (ie, they should be non-intrusive). Where there is no prudent and feasible alternative to redundancy of original machinery and/or components, these should be retained ‘in situ’ and maintained. Preparation of a Heritage Impact Assessment will ensure that any heritage values put at risk from proposed changes are identified early. This will allow either modification of the proposed change or development of another strategy to accommodate heritage requirements. The primary purpose of an Heritage Impact Assessment is to explain how the heritage value of any given place, site, item or feature of significance is to be conserved by any proposal. An Heritage Impact Assessment will generally not be required for routine and or cyclical maintenance activities (provided these are carried out in accordance with stated conservation policies). Strategies and actions • All proposed upgrades, changes or alterations will be subject to a Heritage Impact Assessment prior to implementation. • Develop a conservation and maintenance strategy and program with any proposals for future works to the place.

Policy 12 Develop a management strategy that accommodates the future combined uses of power generation and public access. Reason for Policy To ensure that the operational requirements of Hydro Tasmania and the heritage values of the site can be accommodated and understood. Strategies and actions • Determine a management model for the site that allows the above actions to take place. It is most likely that this will be a shared model between Hydro Tasmania’s needs related to their operation of the site and the cultural heritage needs related to public access or tourism. While these documents may operate separately they will require an overall co-ordination to ensure an ordered and consistent approach to management of the site.

6.5 Conservation Work

Policy 13 Undertake conservation work to all significant aspects of the site including built elements, landscape, broader site setting, equipment, archives and movable heritage. Reason for Policy

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 63 To ensure that the important heritage values of the place are protected, conserved and maintained in good condition for the future. This policy requires an organised and structured approach to conservation and maintenance. Strategies and actions • Maintain all significant buildings, plant and equipment to a high standard to ensure they remain sound and viable into the future. • Where changes, alterations or upgrading is required, ensure that an Assessment of Heritage Impact is prepared. Sufficient lead time should be built in to implementation schedules to enable heritage impact evaluations to take place and to avoid critical path complications. • Where it is essential (ie no prudent and feasible alternative) to update plant or equipment to maintain viability or efficiency (especially control panels, meters and instruments), retain any redundant items in situ. Design and locate any new infrastructure sensitively and sympathetically ie in a non-intrusive fashion. • Ensure that upgrades of fire and/or alarm systems are of appropriate and sympathetic design and that installation is carried out sensitively (ie with respect to the existing fabric and systems). • Prepare detailed conservation and maintenance works schedules once a new use is established. Provide a time frame and costing and link these activities to other site activity. • General maintenance policies to be implemented include: - Clean the interiors of buildings - Keep timberwork and metalwork in good painted condition - Clean gutters and downpipes and ensure that water is removed from and around buildings - Maintain any original colour schemes throughout the site - Replace any damaged or missing fabric on a like-for-like basis - Do not introduce any new fabric or finishes unless it is required to maintain the functionality of the place or there is no prudent or feasible alternative. • Existing plant and machinery should be retained in situ and in use and the station should continue to operate (or be presented) in its existing form. Alterations to plant and machinery should only be considered where they are vital to the ongoing viability of the station. Any superceded plant and movable items should be retained in situ. Any such items that must be removed from their original location should be retained and appropriately re-located to another part of the site. • Maintain plant and equipment to a high standard to ensure they remain in sound condition into the future. • Retain all of the original control panels in the control room. • All infrastructure external to the main power station should be retained except where noted to be replaced by upgraded infrastructure. All remnant evidence of the construction phase should be retained in situ.

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 64 6.6 Landscaping

Policy 14 Retain the immediate landscape setting of the station, the village, the lower station and the modified landscape across the site in its built and maintained form. Reason for Policy To ensure that the modified and culturally significant landscape is conserved and managed to demonstrate the imposition of a man-made landscape within a remote and relatively hostile environment. Mature exotic trees and garden plantings characterize the village and core site and set it apart form the wilderness that surrounds it. The imposition of these values by the early residents is an important aspect of the significance of the place. Strategies and actions • Maintain the introduced landscape by undertaking assessments of mature plantings, carrying out maintenance of the various specimens, removing unwanted regrowth from the core area and re-establishing the garden settings of the site. • Clear nominated areas within the core area of native re-growth to recover the open character of the site.

Policy 15 Establish a clear edge to the maintained and natural landscape marked by the extent of clearing on the hill behind the village, the clearing beside the penstocks, the alignment of the pipelines and the core site defined by access roads and structures. Reason for Policy To ensure that the native vegetation does not encroach on and obscure the introduced village and core site plantings and to allow regrowth to surround the site to both recover the wilderness setting but also to protect early occupation sites. Strategies and actions • Maintain the cleared areas of the site including paths and tracks but do not extend clearing into other areas.

6.7 Archaeology

Policy 16 Undertake appropriate archaeological investigation of areas noted within the areas of potential archaeological value. Observe Practice Note 2 issued by the Tasmanian Heritage Council in regard to archaeological material. Policy 17 Engage a qualified archaeologist to undertake required archaeological works. Reason for Policies To ensure that the important archaeological heritage values of the place are protected, conserved and maintained in good condition for the future. This policy provides for archaeological input should areas of archaeological potential be affected or if materials are discovered generally on the site related to earlier phases of use. Areas of archaeological potential are as listed below and on Figure 6.3: • Former Construction Camp Area

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 65 • Village Precinct • Former building or feature sites • Upper tramway and footway formations • Main access tramway formation • Corduroy Track • Penstock cutting and embankments to front of station • Lower pipeline formation • Lower station building surrounds • Fish breeding pond area Strategies and actions • Where work is to take place in areas of known potential, as part of an Heritage Impact Assessment, obtain archaeological input prior to proceeding with work. • As part of future use and work prepare an archaeological management plan of the site. • Record all archaeological finds and retain evidence on site.

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 66 Figure 6.3 Areas of archaeological potential plan. Paul Davies 2005.

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 67 6.8 Movable Heritage and Site Records

Policy 18 Items of movable heritage (including plant, equipment, furniture and fittings) should be retained at the station with due regard to their security. Where possible, items that have been removed from the site should be returned to their original locations. Policy 19 Secure and conserve the site records including written records and photographs and plans. Reason for Policies The site as a whole contains a significant amount of movable heritage, mostly related to the industrial aspects of the station. These items include tools and plant but also larger objects around the site. The movable heritage contributes to the completeness of the site and is an important aspect of future site interpretation. The presence of plant, equipment, furniture and fittings make the place whole and more easily understood. The site records form an excellent collection that relates to the long-term operation of the site. While some records are located off-site, all extant records should be catalogued and managed on site. Strategies and actions • Identify and catalogue all movable heritage on the site • Establish a management procedure to monitor and maintain the movable heritage • Retain all existing movable heritage at the site. • Endeavour to determine that movable heritage is located in its original or most valid location. • Do not move items around the site unless there is adequate justification to do so. • Maintain a register that documents any movement of movable heritage items and the reason for their relocation. Assign a person to maintain records. • Endeavour to relocate missing items and return them to the site. • Collect site records and prepare an inventory or catalogue for future management. • Undertake any conservation works necessary to site records and archives.

6.9 Interpretation

Policy 20 The whole of the Lake Margaret site should be interpreted to the public through a range of activities and uses of the site. Reason for Policy Lake Margaret is a place that presents excellent opportunities for interpretation. The place can be interpreted for its natural values, its history of power generation, its role in the development of the West Coast, in relation to the development of the Hydro Tasmania developments as well as more intimate areas such as the life of early staff and workers. The location of the site with easy access to Queenstown and the main road make the place an obvious and easy access site for tourists and visitors.

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 68

Strategies and actions • Prior to any alternative use for the place being determined an interpretation plan should be prepared that addresses the range of uses and themes of the site and the region. • The interpretation plan should form part of any future proposal for the place irrespective of future use.

6.10 Archival Recording

Policy 21 Prior to any upgrade, new works or closure the whole station should be recorded to an archival standard to demonstrate the operational aspects of the place. Reason for Policy An archival recording of the station will ensure that its operational aspects are recorded in contrast to simply retaining parts of the place potentially as static museum elements. The recording should involve a range of activities including detailed photographic recording, video recording of the operation, oral history of current and former workers and tenants of the place and measured drawings. Presently there is no accurate overall plan of the place, the recording should include a base plan of the whole site setting out all features. Archival recording is also required in advance of any change of use or adaptation of parts of the place to provide a record of the site and features prior to that change taking place. Strategies and actions • Archival recording should be undertaken in advance of closure, adaptation or upgrade. • The archival recording should be carried out to current best industry standards and should involve all methods necessary to record the history of the place. • Copies of the completed recording should be lodged with Hydro Tasmania archives, the Tasmanian Heritage Council and the West Coast Council. • The recording could be linked to work on the movable heritage collection at the site.

6.11 Site Management and Security

Policy 22 The whole of the site should be maintained in a secure form until a clear future direction is implemented. Reason for Policy While the station is undergoing change including possible closure (either temporary or longer term) the buildings and site features are at higher risk of vandalism and damage than when there is a regular presence for operational requirements. A minimum level of security will require one or more permanent caretakers to live on site and for a security program including alarms, external lighting, locked gates etc to be maintained to prevent unwanted access to the site. Security should extend to the lower station and all of the built elements of the place.

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 69 Security should be maintained until a new use or upgrade has been implemented. In the longer term, ongoing security will need to be maintained. Strategies and actions • Provide for continued security on the site on a 24 hour a day basis. • Implement a security plan for the site with procedures for securing all aspects of the place.

6.12 Review

Policy 23 This conservation plan will be periodically reviewed 5 years after its endorsement. Reason for Policy Conservation Management Plans should not be static documents but be regularly reviewed to ensure they remain relevant. Reviews are generally undertaken between five and ten years after adoption. Strategies and actions • This CMP should initially be reviewed after five years. • This CMP should be reviewed after major works or changes are made to the place.

Lake Margaret Power Scheme Paul Davies Pty Ltd Conservation Management Plan March 2006 70